Buzz Aldrin: "get your ass to Mars"

[AceRothstein]

So anyway, WTF is on Mars that we could possibly want or need?

There is tribinium in the pyramid mine.

 

[jillian]

What would be the purpose of a manned mission to Mars? The time, life support, size, expense of such a mission would be astronomical, pardon the pun. Buzz comes from an era of simple electronics, today is a different day and robotics would be much more efficient. Sorry, but we don't have a bottomless tit to offer NASA.

yes, we should no longer lead or do scientific exploration because rightwingnuts don't believe in science.

reality: the space program netted us huge scientific advancement.

 

[Kondor3]

What would be the purpose of a manned mission to Mars? The time, life support, size, expense of such a mission would be astronomical, pardon the pun. Buzz comes from an era of simple electronics, today is a different day and robotics would be much more efficient. Sorry, but we don't have a bottomless tit to offer NASA.

The research and engineering needed to accomplish such a mission pushes the boundaries of science and engineering in general, which leads to more technological improvements in general.

Plus there is the simple fact that humans have always felt the need to go into the unknown. Robots are nice, but don't have the feel of boots on the ground.

Agreed.

Man must grow and expand.

He is now ready to go beyond the boundaries of his planet of origin.

The first baby steps in that direction will be taken within our own solar system.

We need to begin pushing ourselves to do more, and to do better, with respect to space exploration, and space exploitation.

The future of the species probably depends upon it.

The only thing that has changed since the 1960s and 1970s is the Will and Resolve of Man, to push himself further into that new domain.

A weakening of the will and resolve, and a myopic self-absorbtion that has kept us planet-bound for decades, except for an endless stream of boring orbital sorties.

And now we can't even do that.

Where the hell is American Imagination and Willpower?

It's there - as vigorous as ever - it's just that we (as a People) have allowed our political leaders to put such exploration on the back burner.

The experience gained through such adventures positions us closer to the day when we can actually begin to colonize other parts of the solar system.

Except for orbital stuff - useful for purposes of research & development - and keeping needed future skillsets alive, awaiting better times...

We've been sitting on our asses for far too long now... time to give ourselves a treat... time to muster-up that next round of courage... and let the next generation show us the next steps towards a brave new era for Man.

We need only let our Imaginations loose sufficiently in order to envision ourselves doing it, then scrounge-up the resources, and muster the courage, to actually do it.

The sooner the better.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

We need to terraform it first. Might make sense to send an unmanned payload of SUV's there first and leave them running 24/7 (Martian day is also 24 hours. Weird coincidence, no?) so the CO2 will raise the temperature 7 degrees like it does here on earth.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

What would be the purpose of a manned mission to Mars? The time, life support, size, expense of such a mission would be astronomical, pardon the pun. Buzz comes from an era of simple electronics, today is a different day and robotics would be much more efficient. Sorry, but we don't have a bottomless tit to offer NASA.

yes, we should no longer lead or do scientific exploration because rightwingnuts don't believe in science.

reality: the space program netted us huge scientific advancement.

Obama killed the US manned space program so NASA can focus on "Manmade Global Warming". We have to beg a ride from the Russians

 

[AceRothstein]

We need to terraform it first. Might make sense to send an unmanned payload of SUV's there first and leave them running 24/7 (Martian day is also 24 hours. Weird coincidence, no?) so the CO2 will raise the temperature 7 degrees like it does here on earth.

We should nuke Mars.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

We need to terraform it first. Might make sense to send an unmanned payload of SUV's there first and leave them running 24/7 (Martian day is also 24 hours. Weird coincidence, no?) so the CO2 will raise the temperature 7 degrees like it does here on earth.

We should nuke Mars.

No! a Wisp of CO2 will do the trick! Just ask the AGWCult

 

[CrusaderFrank]

OMFG!!! Alka Seltzer! All we have to do is send Alka Selter to Mars! When the CO2 fizzes off it will make the planet perfect for humans

 

[BullKurtz]

Let me tell what "great advances" I've gotten from the space program....a Coleman Scanoe (square transom for a small outboard"....15'7? I believe. Great bass-attack craft for the impound lakes around Phoenix. I could literally fish in a foot of water up in the coves. And I could car-top it or take my boat trailer. Sounds good right? Here's the twist; the thing was made from a "space age plastic" called RamX. Pretty tough I suppose because I never cut it on the bottom rocks at the lakes. But not much for the desert heat....after a couple years the gunwales started to detach. So I got out my trusting all purpose glue to fix them. Nope. Tried another kind of glue. Nope. So I get ahold of Coleman and they tell me only their glue will adhere to RamX and it wasn't cheap. So they had me, right? Nope. The crap would melt so I used my paint striping gun and sealed the thing up that way.....killed the resale value. Thanks spacemen.

 

[martybegan]

What would be the purpose of a manned mission to Mars? The time, life support, size, expense of such a mission would be astronomical, pardon the pun. Buzz comes from an era of simple electronics, today is a different day and robotics would be much more efficient. Sorry, but we don't have a bottomless tit to offer NASA.

yes, we should no longer lead or do scientific exploration because rightwingnuts don't believe in science.

reality: the space program netted us huge scientific advancement.

From 2008

Let's look at this a little more closely. Yes, Sen. Obama (D-IL) has indeed talked of drastic and unwarranted cuts to Project Constellation - and has said rather negative things about human spaceflight. But that's about the only specificity we've heard from him. By stark contrast, Sen. Clinton (D-NY) seems to be outright supportive of NASA.

Who s Worse For NASA Democrats or Republicans - NASA Watch

Republicans don't like it when NASA is used for political purposes, such as AGW. And Progressives think NASA money would be better spent on social services, i.e. butter before blastoff.

 

[jillian]

What would be the purpose of a manned mission to Mars? The time, life support, size, expense of such a mission would be astronomical, pardon the pun. Buzz comes from an era of simple electronics, today is a different day and robotics would be much more efficient. Sorry, but we don't have a bottomless tit to offer NASA.

yes, we should no longer lead or do scientific exploration because rightwingnuts don't believe in science.

reality: the space program netted us huge scientific advancement.

From 2008

Let's look at this a little more closely. Yes, Sen. Obama (D-IL) has indeed talked of drastic and unwarranted cuts to Project Constellation - and has said rather negative things about human spaceflight. But that's about the only specificity we've heard from him. By stark contrast, Sen. Clinton (D-NY) seems to be outright supportive of NASA.

Who s Worse For NASA Democrats or Republicans - NASA Watch

Republicans don't like it when NASA is used for political purposes, such as AGW. And Progressives think NASA money would be better spent on social services, i.e. butter before blastoff.

What would be the purpose of a manned mission to Mars? The time, life support, size, expense of such a mission would be astronomical, pardon the pun. Buzz comes from an era of simple electronics, today is a different day and robotics would be much more efficient. Sorry, but we don't have a bottomless tit to offer NASA.

yes, we should no longer lead or do scientific exploration because rightwingnuts don't believe in science.

reality: the space program netted us huge scientific advancement.

From 2008

Let's look at this a little more closely. Yes, Sen. Obama (D-IL) has indeed talked of drastic and unwarranted cuts to Project Constellation - and has said rather negative things about human spaceflight. But that's about the only specificity we've heard from him. By stark contrast, Sen. Clinton (D-NY) seems to be outright supportive of NASA.

Who s Worse For NASA Democrats or Republicans - NASA Watch

Republicans don't like it when NASA is used for political purposes, such as AGW. And Progressives think NASA money would be better spent on social services, i.e. butter before blastoff.

your link is from 2008 and says that Hillary Clinton was supportive of NASA and that then sen Obama said there needed to be cuts if we were cutting the budget.

you can't have it both ways.... you need to raise revenue. i'm ok with raising revenue in appropriate ways. you?

 

[martybegan]

What would be the purpose of a manned mission to Mars? The time, life support, size, expense of such a mission would be astronomical, pardon the pun. Buzz comes from an era of simple electronics, today is a different day and robotics would be much more efficient. Sorry, but we don't have a bottomless tit to offer NASA.

yes, we should no longer lead or do scientific exploration because rightwingnuts don't believe in science.

reality: the space program netted us huge scientific advancement.

From 2008

Let's look at this a little more closely. Yes, Sen. Obama (D-IL) has indeed talked of drastic and unwarranted cuts to Project Constellation - and has said rather negative things about human spaceflight. But that's about the only specificity we've heard from him. By stark contrast, Sen. Clinton (D-NY) seems to be outright supportive of NASA.

Who s Worse For NASA Democrats or Republicans - NASA Watch

Republicans don't like it when NASA is used for political purposes, such as AGW. And Progressives think NASA money would be better spent on social services, i.e. butter before blastoff.

What would be the purpose of a manned mission to Mars? The time, life support, size, expense of such a mission would be astronomical, pardon the pun. Buzz comes from an era of simple electronics, today is a different day and robotics would be much more efficient. Sorry, but we don't have a bottomless tit to offer NASA.

yes, we should no longer lead or do scientific exploration because rightwingnuts don't believe in science.

reality: the space program netted us huge scientific advancement.

From 2008

Let's look at this a little more closely. Yes, Sen. Obama (D-IL) has indeed talked of drastic and unwarranted cuts to Project Constellation - and has said rather negative things about human spaceflight. But that's about the only specificity we've heard from him. By stark contrast, Sen. Clinton (D-NY) seems to be outright supportive of NASA.

Who s Worse For NASA Democrats or Republicans - NASA Watch

Republicans don't like it when NASA is used for political purposes, such as AGW. And Progressives think NASA money would be better spent on social services, i.e. butter before blastoff.

your link is from 2008 and says that Hillary Clinton was supportive of NASA and that then sen Obama said there needed to be cuts if we were cutting the budget.

you can't have it both ways.... you need to raise revenue. i'm ok with raising revenue in appropriate ways. you?

We have enough revenue, cut crap that the feds shouldn't be involved in. Now. not later, now.

 

[jillian]

What would be the purpose of a manned mission to Mars? The time, life support, size, expense of such a mission would be astronomical, pardon the pun. Buzz comes from an era of simple electronics, today is a different day and robotics would be much more efficient. Sorry, but we don't have a bottomless tit to offer NASA.

yes, we should no longer lead or do scientific exploration because rightwingnuts don't believe in science.

reality: the space program netted us huge scientific advancement.

From 2008

Let's look at this a little more closely. Yes, Sen. Obama (D-IL) has indeed talked of drastic and unwarranted cuts to Project Constellation - and has said rather negative things about human spaceflight. But that's about the only specificity we've heard from him. By stark contrast, Sen. Clinton (D-NY) seems to be outright supportive of NASA.

Who s Worse For NASA Democrats or Republicans - NASA Watch

Republicans don't like it when NASA is used for political purposes, such as AGW. And Progressives think NASA money would be better spent on social services, i.e. butter before blastoff.

What would be the purpose of a manned mission to Mars? The time, life support, size, expense of such a mission would be astronomical, pardon the pun. Buzz comes from an era of simple electronics, today is a different day and robotics would be much more efficient. Sorry, but we don't have a bottomless tit to offer NASA.

yes, we should no longer lead or do scientific exploration because rightwingnuts don't believe in science.

reality: the space program netted us huge scientific advancement.

From 2008

Let's look at this a little more closely. Yes, Sen. Obama (D-IL) has indeed talked of drastic and unwarranted cuts to Project Constellation - and has said rather negative things about human spaceflight. But that's about the only specificity we've heard from him. By stark contrast, Sen. Clinton (D-NY) seems to be outright supportive of NASA.

Who s Worse For NASA Democrats or Republicans - NASA Watch

Republicans don't like it when NASA is used for political purposes, such as AGW. And Progressives think NASA money would be better spent on social services, i.e. butter before blastoff.

your link is from 2008 and says that Hillary Clinton was supportive of NASA and that then sen Obama said there needed to be cuts if we were cutting the budget.

you can't have it both ways.... you need to raise revenue. i'm ok with raising revenue in appropriate ways. you?

We have enough revenue, cut crap that the feds shouldn't be involved in. Now. not later, now.

ah... the starve government til you can drown it in a bathtup rightie....

government should be involved in these things. your own pov notwithstanding.

 

[martybegan]

What would be the purpose of a manned mission to Mars? The time, life support, size, expense of such a mission would be astronomical, pardon the pun. Buzz comes from an era of simple electronics, today is a different day and robotics would be much more efficient. Sorry, but we don't have a bottomless tit to offer NASA.

yes, we should no longer lead or do scientific exploration because rightwingnuts don't believe in science.

reality: the space program netted us huge scientific advancement.

From 2008

Let's look at this a little more closely. Yes, Sen. Obama (D-IL) has indeed talked of drastic and unwarranted cuts to Project Constellation - and has said rather negative things about human spaceflight. But that's about the only specificity we've heard from him. By stark contrast, Sen. Clinton (D-NY) seems to be outright supportive of NASA.

Who s Worse For NASA Democrats or Republicans - NASA Watch

Republicans don't like it when NASA is used for political purposes, such as AGW. And Progressives think NASA money would be better spent on social services, i.e. butter before blastoff.

What would be the purpose of a manned mission to Mars? The time, life support, size, expense of such a mission would be astronomical, pardon the pun. Buzz comes from an era of simple electronics, today is a different day and robotics would be much more efficient. Sorry, but we don't have a bottomless tit to offer NASA.

yes, we should no longer lead or do scientific exploration because rightwingnuts don't believe in science.

reality: the space program netted us huge scientific advancement.

From 2008

Let's look at this a little more closely. Yes, Sen. Obama (D-IL) has indeed talked of drastic and unwarranted cuts to Project Constellation - and has said rather negative things about human spaceflight. But that's about the only specificity we've heard from him. By stark contrast, Sen. Clinton (D-NY) seems to be outright supportive of NASA.

Who s Worse For NASA Democrats or Republicans - NASA Watch

Republicans don't like it when NASA is used for political purposes, such as AGW. And Progressives think NASA money would be better spent on social services, i.e. butter before blastoff.

your link is from 2008 and says that Hillary Clinton was supportive of NASA and that then sen Obama said there needed to be cuts if we were cutting the budget.

you can't have it both ways.... you need to raise revenue. i'm ok with raising revenue in appropriate ways. you?

We have enough revenue, cut crap that the feds shouldn't be involved in. Now. not later, now.

ah... the starve government til you can drown it in a bathtup rightie....

government should be involved in these things. your own pov notwithstanding.

Its not starving it, its putting it on a diet, maybe a lap band because it so fucking obese and useless.

Argumentum ab asurdum again from a progressive, surprise surprise.