The W
Views: 97604673
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
23.7.14 1114
The W - Current Events & Politics - To the Moon and Mars...
This thread has 44 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 5.51
Pages: 1 2 3 Next
(1568 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (42 total)
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1177 days
Last activity: 974 days
#1 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
Hopefully, this will actually turn into a comprehensive, efficient modern day space program....

* * * * * * * * * *
Missions to moon, Mars enter Bush's view
In announcement next week, a strategy for America in space
From Staff And Wire Reports
January 9, 2004

WASHINGTON -- Three decades after America last put a man on the moon, President Bush is poised to announce a bold new plan to send humans back to Earth's satellite -- and beyond to Mars, senior administration officials said last night.

Bush will announce his long-rumored plan, which will include a permanent presence on the moon, in the middle of next week, a White House official said. The moon base would allow American astronauts to develop the expertise to send people toward Mars and elsewhere in the solar system, officials said.

The United States put a dozen men on the moon between July 1969 and December 1972, but then turned its efforts to building the space shuttle, a winged vehicle capable of repeated flights into space.

Many space insiders had speculated that the president might set forth goals to reach the moon and Mars at the 100th anniversary of the Wright brothers famed flight last month in North Carolina. Instead, he said only that America would continue to lead the world in aviation.

At the Wright centennial, former Sen. John Glenn -- the first American to orbit the earth -- said that with a $500 billion federal deficit, the country needs to focus its attention on re-launching the space shuttle and completing the International Space Station, which remains only two-thirds built. Glenn, a Democrat who first flew in a Mercury capsule in 1962 and later rode on the space shuttle, said the research of the space station has not been fully realized.

He said he did not disagree with the notion of NASA laying out a long-term plan investigating the engineering challenges of sending people to Mars. The only sensible reason for going to the moon first, he said, would be to test the technology for a Mars trip.

Bush's announcement is also expected to set a timetable for retiring the aging space shuttle fleet and the future use of the international space station.

Glenn Mahone, NASA's chief spokesman, said last night that Bush's commitment to space exploration -- reinforced by the landing of the robotic rover Spirit on Mars last weekend -- is finally ready to take the form of a concrete proposal.

"We anticipate a message from the president about the future of the American space program next week," Mahone said.

The NASA blueprint to be announced next week was crafted by an administration group that includes Vice President Dick Cheney, NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe and representatives from several other government agencies, including the Department of Defense.

According to NASA sources, the space shuttle would be retired by 2010, the date the fleet would have to be recertified as safe to continue flying. The international space station would be completed by then and American involvement in the project would begin to be scaled back by 2013 or so. Manned lunar missions could resume shortly thereafter, around the middle of that decade.

NASA is developing an orbital space plane that would carry crew and cargo to the station. Space plane prototypes could be ready for testing by 2008. An operational version of the vehicle eventually might be adapted to travel to the moon and beyond.

After the shuttle is phased out, there might be a brief period when NASA lacks the capability to fly manned missions. Russian Soyuz vehicles could be used to temporarily fill the gap for flights to the station.

Sources said the plans would require additional funding beyond the $15.5 billion 2004 budget passed by the House late last year. But it's unclear just how much more money would be needed, immediately and over the life of the program.

The president's plan is by far the most ambitious for NASA since Bush's father, George Bush, proposed a manned Mars mission in 1989. That idea -- which carried a price tag of several hundred billion dollars -- faded quickly in the face of its huge cost.

Since then, NASA has focused on unmanned research missions -- such as Spirit and its twin, Opportunity, which is scheduled to reach the martian surface Jan. 25 -- and putting people into low-Earth orbit on the shuttle and the space station.

But the Feb. 1, 2003, loss of the shuttle Columbia and its seven-member crew highlighted anew the risks associated with the aging shuttles. The independent board that investigated the causes of the accident recommended major safety upgrades for the remaining three shuttles and called for a clear objective for the space program.

If Bush can get Congress to buy into his agenda, the space program will have its clearest marching orders since President John F. Kennedy's 1961 promise to put men on the moon by the end of that decade. Several prominent members of Congress, including House Speaker Tom DeLay, a Texas Republican, have called for a bolder mission for NASA.

U.S. Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, a California Democrat who leads the House Science Committee's space and aeronautics subcommittee, said he has only heard rumors about Bush's plans but that he finds them encouraging.

"My own view has always been that the moon is a doable goal and that we should set our sights high, but that we should set our sights on something that is within reach otherwise break our bank and end up not accomplishing anything," Rohrabacher said. "From what I understand, going back to the moon is a serious proposal being considered."

Bush has been expected to propose a bold new space mission in an effort to rally Americans around a unifying theme as he campaigns for re-election.



Promote this thread!
A-MOL
Frankfurter








Since: 26.6.02
From: York, England

Since last post: 3782 days
Last activity: 3724 days
#2 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.56
Last time a Bush mentioned going to Mars, didn't he lose the election to an unfancied Democrat?

Ignore me, I'm just in a bad mood because the British space program can't even land a small probe on Mars properly.



...full of energy. Multi-orgasmic, if you will, in a cosmic sort of way."

Nate The Snake
Liverwurst








Since: 9.1.02
From: Wichita, Ks

Since last post: 3656 days
Last activity: 3126 days
AIM:  
#3 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.68
That'd be a heck of a lot more exciting if it weren't such an obvious attempt to snow people into thinking Junior's a visionary. There're wayyyy too many irons in the fire for a program that ambitious to get past the rhetoric stage.

It took years after JFK made his proclamation for us to put a man on the moon, and that was with the Cold War turning the space race into a matter of national pride AND years of heavy NASA funding. The only way GW could get that kind of support would be to claim that Bin Laden had been spotted on Mars with a map of the White House.



Kansas-born and deeply ashamed
The last living La Parka Marka

"They that can give up essential liberty to gain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1177 days
Last activity: 974 days
#4 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
    Originally posted by Nate The Snake
    It took years after JFK made his proclamation for us to put a man on the moon, and that was with the Cold War turning the space race into a matter of national pride AND years of heavy NASA funding. The only way GW could get that kind of support would be to claim that Bin Laden had been spotted on Mars with a map of the White House.
Remember; China has designs on the moon. Don't think that won't play a factor.



DrDirt
Banger








Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 57 min.
#5 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.59
    Originally posted by Nate The Snake
    That'd be a heck of a lot more exciting if it weren't such an obvious attempt to snow people into thinking Junior's a visionary. There're wayyyy too many irons in the fire for a program that ambitious to get past the rhetoric stage.

    It took years after JFK made his proclamation for us to put a man on the moon, and that was with the Cold War turning the space race into a matter of national pride AND years of heavy NASA funding. The only way GW could get that kind of support would be to claim that Bin Laden had been spotted on Mars with a map of the White House.


It took us less than a decade to essentially start from scratch and land on the moon, one of the most amazing feats in the history of mankind. At the time many thought JFK was nuts.

It would be great for what he proposes to take place but I don't see it getting through Congress. They are small thinkers and mostly mundane people. What's worse is the American people don't seem to have the vision and dynamism any more for such an endeavor.

The problem with the space program forever is the need to tie everything into the military. Until we are able to go back to exploration for the glory and discovery it provides, we will go no where.

Two troubles with the shuttle. One it was done with efficiencies in mind. Exploration is not efficient. Two, it was done to make the military happy. I agree with defense, even in space, but exploration space research also needs to be done just for the sake of the exploration.

(edited by DrDirt on 9.1.04 1405)


Perception is reality
Nate The Snake
Liverwurst








Since: 9.1.02
From: Wichita, Ks

Since last post: 3656 days
Last activity: 3126 days
AIM:  
#6 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.68
    Originally posted by Grimis
    Remember; China has designs on the moon. Don't think that won't play a factor.


I'm sure it will. However, China isn't the USSR. The space race was a safe way to "fight" the Cold War, a way in which we could compete with an enemy that was as great (or greater) than we were without blowing the world up. Unless Bush and company radically change their stance on China and turn them into The Evil Empire V2.0 it won't be anywhere close to the same situation, and even then China's not in that league. It just wouldn't be believable.

And remember, the moon's supposed to just be a dry run for a manned mission to Mars... something nobody but us has brought up yet.

    Originally posted by DrDirt
    It took us less than a decade to essentially start from scratch and land on the moon, one of the most amazing feats in the history of mankind.


NASA had been in full-on "competition" mode since Sputnik was launched in '57. Twelve years is still a pretty impressive timespan, but that was twelve years of continuous support and heavy funding. Can you see today's congress backing something that ambitious and massive for that long? It'd never make it past the Democrats, just because the current version of the rhetoric came out of Bush's mouth.



Kansas-born and deeply ashamed
The last living La Parka Marka

"They that can give up essential liberty to gain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin
ThreepMe
Morcilla








Since: 15.2.02
From: Dallas

Since last post: 3609 days
Last activity: 3268 days
#7 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.54
    Originally posted by Nate The Snake
    Twelve years is still a pretty impressive timespan, but that was twelve years of continuous support and heavy funding. Can you see today's congress backing something that ambitious and massive for that long? It'd never make it past the Democrats, just because the current version of the rhetoric came out of Bush's mouth.


Yeah, wasn't NASA getting like 5% of the total budget back then?



"Are you kidding me? A soda with MY name on it? Now more than ever, SODAS RULE!" - Edge to Christian Smackdown Sept 7th 2000
Nate The Snake
Liverwurst








Since: 9.1.02
From: Wichita, Ks

Since last post: 3656 days
Last activity: 3126 days
AIM:  
#8 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.68
A quick search turned up a figure of 4.4 percent of the budget in 1966, compared to .75 of one percent in 2002.



Kansas-born and deeply ashamed
The last living La Parka Marka

"They that can give up essential liberty to gain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin
eviljonhunt81
Pepperoni








Since: 6.1.02
From: not Japan

Since last post: 2895 days
Last activity: 2892 days
#9 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.25
Weren't conservatives calling for the privatization of NASA like 10 years ago? Or was this something Gary Bauer or someone just as marginal said and I'm mistakenly attributing it to the Gingrich Revolution group?



Weekly Visitor - PSSSSHAW!

Jersey Is Dead - New Stuff! Unemployment is your friend!
StaggerLee
Scrapple








Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 7 hours
AIM:  
Y!:
#10 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.26
Seems like a waste of money and time. Suprised nobody has really mentioned that yet. What do we have to gain from going BACK to the moon? What do we have to gain by going to Mars? Absolutely nothing.


Save the money!
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1177 days
Last activity: 974 days
#11 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
    Originally posted by eviljonhunt81
    Weren't conservatives calling for the privatization of NASA like 10 years ago? Or was this something Gary Bauer or someone just as marginal said and I'm mistakenly attributing it to the Gingrich Revolution group?
I don't think so, but it wouldn't surprise me either.

Of course, it would probably be money better spent to create a public-private partnership to accelarate things and create a better product.



Downtown Bookie
Morcilla








Since: 7.4.02
From: The Inner City, Now Living In The Country

Since last post: 42 days
Last activity: 11 days
#12 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.36
Of course, President Bush could just be promising, in an election year, to create a program that would insure that a whole lot of federal tax dollars get spent in Florida (home of the Kennedy Space Center).

Of course, I could just be getting overly cynical in my old age.




Patiently waiting to be Stratusfied.
Spaceman Spiff
Knackwurst








Since: 2.1.02
From: Philly Suburbs

Since last post: 20 days
Last activity: 3 hours
AIM:  
#13 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.05
    Originally posted by StaggerLee
    Seems like a waste of money and time. Suprised nobody has really mentioned that yet. What do we have to gain from going BACK to the moon? What do we have to gain by going to Mars? Absolutely nothing.


    Save the money!

Really, what has the space program ever done to benefit everyday life? (fas.org)
Not to mention the money used to develop the necessary technology is spent primarily on companies in the US, helping the economy and US citizens. The technology will eventually flow into the private sector, benefitting everyone.



drjayphd
Scrapple
Moderator








Since: 22.4.02
From: Long Island

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 9 hours
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#14 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.94
YOUR Out-Of-Context Quote of Whenever (thanks, MoeGates!): "I wish MY countrymen weren't so uptight about stuff like outdoor marajuana use and casual man-on-man anal love."
    Originally posted by Spaceman Spiff
      Originally posted by StaggerLee
      Seems like a waste of money and time. Suprised nobody has really mentioned that yet. What do we have to gain from going BACK to the moon? What do we have to gain by going to Mars? Absolutely nothing.


      Save the money!

    Really, what has the space program ever done to benefit everyday life? (fas.org)
    Not to mention the money used to develop the necessary technology is spent primarily on companies in the US, helping the economy and US citizens. The technology will eventually flow into the private sector, benefitting everyone.


Well, yes, but can we can the lunar portion of it? Aside from a pissing contest with China, I don't know what good will come out of it. The only reason to care, really, about this is that we'll get all kinds of Cool Shit (tm) out of their research.



DEAN's Nuggets of Wisdom:

"A-Train could wear a Vampirella outfit and I would toast a load to it."
rockdotcom_2.0
Frankfurter








Since: 9.1.02
From: Virginia Beach Va

Since last post: 489 days
Last activity: 105 days
AIM:  
#15 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.67
I hate when people ask "why should we go to the moon? what will it benefit, blah bla blah." Im sorry but I think thats so small minded.


How about because we can?


maybe its the Star Wars/ BG geek inside me, but I think Space exploration is a worthwhile endeavor. Whats wrong with expanding what we know about the universe?
A-MOL
Frankfurter








Since: 26.6.02
From: York, England

Since last post: 3782 days
Last activity: 3724 days
#16 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.56
    Originally posted by rockdotcom_2.0
    I hate when people ask "why should we go to the moon? what will it benefit, blah bla blah." Im sorry but I think thats so small minded.


    How about because we can?


    maybe its the Star Wars/ BG geek inside me, but I think Space exploration is a worthwhile endeavor. Whats wrong with expanding what we know about the universe?


But what does sending someone to the Moon actually tell us about the Universe that a probe couldn't?



...full of energy. Multi-orgasmic, if you will, in a cosmic sort of way."

DrDirt
Banger








Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 57 min.
#17 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.58
    Originally posted by A-MOL
      Originally posted by rockdotcom_2.0
      I hate when people ask "why should we go to the moon? what will it benefit, blah bla blah." Im sorry but I think thats so small minded.


      How about because we can?


      maybe its the Star Wars/ BG geek inside me, but I think Space exploration is a worthwhile endeavor. Whats wrong with expanding what we know about the universe?


    But what does sending someone to the Moon actually tell us about the Universe that a probe couldn't?


There is an intrinsic value to humanity that is very difficult to explain. Humanity must constantly move forward and challenge its abilities or it stagnates and starts to retreat. And there are values in terms of technology and evryday life that appear which we do not now know.



Perception is reality
rockdotcom_2.0
Frankfurter








Since: 9.1.02
From: Virginia Beach Va

Since last post: 489 days
Last activity: 105 days
AIM:  
#18 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.67
    Originally posted by A-MOL
      Originally posted by rockdotcom_2.0
      I hate when people ask "why should we go to the moon? what will it benefit, blah bla blah." Im sorry but I think thats so small minded.


      How about because we can?


      maybe its the Star Wars/ BG geek inside me, but I think Space exploration is a worthwhile endeavor. Whats wrong with expanding what we know about the universe?


    But what does sending someone to the Moon actually tell us about the Universe that a probe couldn't?



How it feels.

Am I the only one that thinks it would be cool to be the first man on Mars? I would KILL to be that guy.
StaggerLee
Scrapple








Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 7 hours
AIM:  
Y!:
#19 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.57


Yes, thats all and well, but, that is all talking about research done by astronaughts on the space shuttle, which never actually went to the moon. So, like I said before, what do we have to GAIN from going there? And, none of that which is listed shows any one thing that was found BECAUSE WE PUT PEOPLE IN SPACE, yet, it was all a result of commercial uses of technology. Silly putty and saran wrap are great, but should we go around saying "LETS GO TO WAR! IT GIVES US SO MUCH USEFULL, EVERY DAY STUFF!"? Of course not.

(edited by CRZ on 12.1.04 1234)
evilwaldo
Lap cheong








Since: 7.2.02
From: New York, NY

Since last post: 3316 days
Last activity: 3096 days
AIM:  
#20 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00
    Originally posted by rockdotcom_2.0
      Originally posted by A-MOL
        Originally posted by rockdotcom_2.0
        I hate when people ask "why should we go to the moon? what will it benefit, blah bla blah." Im sorry but I think thats so small minded.


        How about because we can?


        maybe its the Star Wars/ BG geek inside me, but I think Space exploration is a worthwhile endeavor. Whats wrong with expanding what we know about the universe?


      But what does sending someone to the Moon actually tell us about the Universe that a probe couldn't?



    How it feels.

    Am I the only one that thinks it would be cool to be the first man on Mars? I would KILL to be that guy.


If you were fairly young, just think of the babes you could be with.





mmmmmm, Breakfast (x-entertainment.com)
Pages: 1 2 3 Next
Thread rated: 5.51
Pages: 1 2 3 Next
Thread ahead: The Ice Age is Coming! The Ice Age is Coming!
Next thread: Two down (or bye bye Dick)
Previous thread: You know... it's like he WANTS to lose
(1568 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Yikes.
- PalpatineW, Hot Robert Reich Nude Pics (2003)
The W - Current Events & Politics - To the Moon and Mars...Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.143 seconds.