Re: {OT:} How about that? A scientist says...

"Jeff" <news@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:aNl0i.9275$pW5.8121@xxxxxxxxxxx

"Hachiroku ????" <Trueno@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:yjl0i.4390$rk5.2397@xxxxxxxxxxx
<...>

He's right, you know. Although Reagan was gung-ho about the space
program.
But in retrospect, I think he was more interested in the Military aspects
of the Shuttle even more than the Scientific, but he also did provide
funding for other long-term probes and projects as well.

Actually, it much easier and cheaper to send unmanned space craft into
space
than manned spacecraft. And much more rewarding scientifically.

Nixon, Ford and Carter gutted the system. Clinton didn't do it a whole
lot
of good, either. Eisenhower similarly was interested in the Military
aspects. Kennedy was the only one who really believed in the Space
program
more for Scientific Understanding than anything else. (Although the Cold
War and the Russians besting us was a big incentive in that, too...)

Actually, I think it had more to do with the cold war and proving we could
do it than with scientific understanding. It was an engineering problem,
not
a scientific one.

What science was done that couldn't be done more easily and cheaply with
unmanned space craft?


It's my opinion that getting to the moon helped jumpstart our other robotic
exploration efforts. In particular, we had to develop the technology to
soft-land on the moon and look around before we risked an Apollo mission
there. I forget the name of the probes that did that. The first few were
simply deliberately crashed into the lunar surface but the later ones
soft-landed and sent back photos. And I'd like to stress the opinion aspect
of this, too.

However, what JFK did do was the visionary thing and got us thinking about
what could be done in space and moved us along. Sure, we've got lots of
satellites of prosaic purpose (communications satellites dating back to
Telstar, spy satellites, etc), but the vision thing is what moved us to
launch the Pioneers and Mariners.

It did help to warm up the cold war, at least for a while, with the
Apollo-Soyuz mission. And the International Space Station help bring
international cooperation to space.

Personally, I think the $1,000,000,000,000

Sayyyyy... that's a lotta zeroes!

program to put man on Mars is a
big waste of money. It would be much better to spend the money elsewhere,
like reducing the national deficit and paying back the national debt. And
some of the money could better be spent on space exploration by unmanned
craft was well as understanding the Earth.

Did you notice how the current administrator who proposed the plan pushed
back most of the funding of the program until after he leaves office and
heads back to his environmentally-friendly ranch in Crawford, TX?

Jeff

I hadn't considered that, but you're right. I have mostly dismissed this as
just dead-in-the-water. Going to the moon was technologically feasible and,
in that day and age, prestige mattered. Using the same technology to go to
Mars strikes me as a waste of time and there's no super-rival to impress.
Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see a Mars landing in my lifetime but we
need a better way of getting around the solar system first and have to look
beyond a one-or-two-shot approach.

First, go back to the Moon and develop it as a habitable place.
Then, use it to jump elsewhere.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Moon Landing a Hoax??!! Real Evidence here>>>
    ... > | America's Moon Expedition a Fake? ... > good sources on what that technology can and cannot do. ... > NASA administrator Jim Webb into the Oval Office and reminded him to keep ... Here the conspiracy theorists try to manufacture a discrepancy. ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Re: National Space Intelligence Center proposed
    ... NOT WALKED UPON THAT NASTY GAMMA AND HARD-X-RAY NASTY MOON, ... Mining Technology can be realized, ... where much of the actual construction of an Asteroid cargo vessel ... steel framing surrounding the core. ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: The Cold Equations
    ... Going to the surface of the moon isn't worth 0.0001% of whomever ... the otherwise typically big and complex multi-tonne sorts of satellites ... nasty surface of such a moon-dust covered terrain. ... suggest a 10 kg satellite that's taking up a cubic meter by volume just ...
    (sci.space.shuttle)
  • Re: Moon Landing a Hoax??!! Real Evidence here>>>
    ... | America's Moon Expedition a Fake? ... good sources on what that technology can and cannot do. ... NASA administrator Jim Webb into the Oval Office and reminded him to keep ... Here the conspiracy theorists try to manufacture a discrepancy. ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Re: An alternative to Orion/Constellation?
    ... while the Shuttle carries it's destination on its own back. ... First to the moon, then maybe Venus, and eventually Mars. ... where he said he had studied how much Rockwell has reused technology inside ... the top of my head since abandonment of a system is not an incremental improvement. ...
    (sci.space.policy)