U.S. Space program was always a waste of money.

[Dr.Traveler]

Just because innovations came from research about one thing does not mean that one is the ONLY way it can be done. It's faulty logic.

No one is saying that.

What people are saying is that NASA has been a fruitful source of innovation in the past. Walking away from that now seems short sighted.

 

[dilloduck]

Just because innovations came from research about one thing does not mean that one is the ONLY way it can be done. It's faulty logic.

No one is saying that.

What people are saying is that NASA has been a fruitful source of innovation in the past. Walking away from that now seems short sighted.

Only to those with tunnel vision.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

Just because innovations came from research about one thing does not mean that one is the ONLY way it can be done. It's faulty logic.

No one is saying that.

What people are saying is that NASA has been a fruitful source of innovation in the past. Walking away from that now seems short sighted.

Only to those with tunnel vision.

Ok, balls in your court. What will be the new engine to fuel innovation?

 

[Truthmatters]

What many of these shortsighters fail to realize is Nasa has provided research for all American companies free of cost.

When corporations research they dont share the results with each other.

This fact SLOWS innovation.

 

[dilloduck]

No one is saying that.

What people are saying is that NASA has been a fruitful source of innovation in the past. Walking away from that now seems short sighted.

Only to those with tunnel vision.

Ok, balls in your court. What will be the new engine to fuel innovation?

No clue. I'm just saying that if we're going to treat NASA as if it's the only place science can be innovative in we're missing the boat. The combustion engine wasn't invented to get us to the moon.

 

[Charles Stucker]

Only to those with tunnel vision.

Ok, balls in your court. What will be the new engine to fuel innovation?

No clue. I'm just saying that if we're going to treat NASA as if it's the only place science can be innovative in we're missing the boat. The combustion engine wasn't invented to get us to the moon.

So you admit to being clueless but refuse to listen to anyone who disagrees with you. How Liberalated that must make you feel.


Definition - Liberalated - past tense of verb Liberalate; to set yourself free of reason to pursue liberalism.

 

[52ndStreet]

Should we not solve the problems here on the Earth first , before venturing out into space.
Hunger, clean drinking water, housing for the homeless.
Get our house in order ,before venturing out , is what I was always told.!!

 

[Charles Stucker]

Should we not solve the problems here on the Earth first , before venturing out into space.
Hunger, clean drinking water, housing for the homeless.
Get our house in order ,before venturing out , is what I was always told.!!

Should we not solve the problems confronting us here in Europe before venturing across the Atlantic to a strange new world. There are problems enough in to occupy us in the old world

 

[dilloduck]

Should we not solve the problems here on the Earth first , before venturing out into space.
Hunger, clean drinking water, housing for the homeless.
Get our house in order ,before venturing out , is what I was always told.!!

Should we not solve the problems confronting us here in Europe before venturing across the Atlantic to a strange new world. There are problems enough in to occupy us in the old world

Why limit yourself to ships ? Go for the moon !

 

[theHawk]

The money "wasted" on those programs fund jobs though.

I'd rather the government give money to people working and doing something constructive than give a handout to someone too lazy to even get a job at McDonalds.

I agree. I have to ask though, who's getting handouts that are too lazy to get a job at McDonalds?

Everyone on welfare.

 

[Mr. Peepers]

I do say that the food stamps program gives way too much money to people for food.
I can't understand how a single person can possibly go through 200 dollars in food all by themselves in one month. That is basically what we are spending on food stamps per person, per month. Sorry, but a person does not need that much money for food.

Um, my weekly food bill is @ $47. Thing is, I try to eat healthy and not buy cheap processed "crap" created to use up corn subsidies. I eat no meat and very little fish, but yes, it is normal for a single person to spend $200 a month on food, especially if they are buying unprocessed, nutritious food.

 

[rdean]

No one is saying that.

What people are saying is that NASA has been a fruitful source of innovation in the past. Walking away from that now seems short sighted.

Only to those with tunnel vision.

Ok, balls in your court. What will be the new engine to fuel innovation?

Who knows? It's so "new" that no one knows what it is yet.

I was once contracted to work at NASA at White Sands for maintenance on a "cone calorimeter". It's a unit that performs burn testing in an oxygen rich environment. To see what toxic gases are given off and to see how much heat that burning material produces plus the amount of o2 consumed. I was only there for two weeks.

Living out in the desert, they don't get much company. Scientists dropped by several times during the week I was there to ask if I would be interested in seeing this test or that one. Who wouldn't be interested.

The head of one of their R&D Departments was from Transylvania and yes, he did sound like Bela Lugosi.

I saw one test where they put some type of canvas material behind an enormous rocket to see if they could contain the "burn", but they couldn't.

Another test, they had some type of magnesium based material that burns when it hits the atmosphere. They were hoping to used it as a fuel because of the enormous amount of energy it produces, but it sparked so much, it looked like fireworks. The light it produced has to be viewed by a piece of black glass an inch thick. The test happened in an underground bunker.

Suppose they were able to create a fuel that took up half the space and produced twice the power without pollution? Would it be worth it? Whose to say it can't happen?

One thing we don't want is China, India and Russia overhead while we are down here.

 

[judyd]

NASA has been overcharged for the space program for years. It's been a cash cow for some suppliers since it began. I do believe that private industry handling the space program would cost far less than having the government handle it. Every part has a premium price now, that I don't believe the private companies will do, if the success of the project depends on them. Since the companies involved won't let the program be scrapped (remember the recent SC decision), I think it should be turned over to them, as well as the costs involved. I am sure they will do it cheaper under those circumstances.

If they're not interesting in carrying on, then it probably wasn't that important to begin with.

 

[Navy1960]

I have had the opportunity to read this entire thread and the same old theme seems to be spoken by many "it's better used elsewhere". NASA's budget is one of the smallest budgets in the Gvot. at around 18 billion dollars a year and when you compare that too, say the DoD at around 600 plus Billion or Medicaid 240 Billion or many other agencies the argument that the money is better used elsewhere is nonsense. In fact 17 billion is the amount of money the Obama Administration wanted to cut out of Medicaid in a SINGLE program. NASA's contributions help save millions of lives that travel on commercial aircraft every single day in this nation , it's R&D work has advanced aviation safety that many take for granted. It's work in space and the knowledge gained from the ISS (International Space Station) to the HST (Hubble Space Telescope) advances science and knowledge for our young people. Advances in medicines and materials are a result of research in human space flight. All of this return on your taxpayer investment is done on one of the smallest budgets in the Govt. Frankly what NASA spends would not even finance healthcare for 5 minutes. and yet what the return is in terms of jobs and the things I mentioned above is priceless. Unlike many other agencies. I don't see any of this outrage for the 8 billion thats about to be spent on High Speed Rail after the Govt. has lost billions and billions on Amtrak and 8 billion won't even build 100 miles of track. There is a good reason for going to the moon and that is that the moon holds the key to an unlimited CLEAN energy future for this nation and it has a PROVEN amount , and yes I said PROVEN amount of this source on its surface. The notion that private companies can simply step in is laughable as there is NO private company that has the ability as of yet to even orbit a human being and the only company so far to even put a man in space is Burt Rutans group at Virgin Galactic. Rocket X with the Falcon 9 is in its infancy and there will be a LONG LONG window for these companies until such time as they gain that capability. In the interm time period other nations, China, Russia, India, Japan, and France will be the ONLY way our nation can explore the reaches of space and we will have to do so by Wal-Marting our way on them. I'm a bit surprised that those that advocate for buy American and are so fervant about outsourcing would simply champion the same thing when it comes to something so vital to our security as our space program. The attitude that we can spend the money elsewhere would work had our society not advanced beyond black and white TV's. However, we as a nation depend on space for our communications and safety, so if your willing to outsource that, then by all means do so.

 

[Dr Gregg]

I am really pleased that President Obama has decieded to cancel the back to the Moon, and the Mars program. Those kinds of program do nothing but massage Americas ego.

When I think of all the billions of dollars that have been spent at Nasa, I think how that money could have been spent on housing for the homeless, or food for people who have nothing to eat.

I value all the technological advances that the space program has brought us, but in these economic times, money must be spent on human needs.

Then you don't realize all the technological advances made by NASA. There would be no satellites with Sat. Tv, Cell phones, GPS, without NASA

 

[Liberty]

I am really pleased that President Obama has decieded to cancel the back to the Moon, and the Mars program. Those kinds of program do nothing but massage Americas ego.

When I think of all the billions of dollars that have been spent at Nasa, I think how that money could have been spent on housing for the homeless, or food for people who have nothing to eat.

I value all the technological advances that the space program has brought us, but in these economic times, money must be spent on human needs.

are you friggin serious? You want humanity to be stuck on this planet forever? I'm surprised but I don't understand why more people can't understand that being able to explore space is a vital part of any species' development. But maybe I am too much of a sci-fi geek or something.

 

[Dr Gregg]

Nasa is very much the reason we were on the top of the worlds cutting edge industries for decades.

Don't corporations deal in industries ?

based off the research and findings and technology discvered by NASA.

 

[Dr Gregg]

Those that claim there isn't benefit from gov't research like NASA, NIH, etc are really ignorant on the topic.

businesses are focused on doing research that will lead to a marketable product. They are not going to piss away tons of money on "basic research" which may not lead to a product for the company to make money. The basic research to make new findings that open the doors for idead for a marketable product are done largely in academia (funded heavily by the gov't) and government institutes. Industry takes a finding that could be a product, and develops it, hence making their business flourish.

20 years ago there was a huge NIH increase in Cancer funding, which paved the way for all the cancer drugs that are out today. all the money spent these days on anti microbial research for protection against bioterrorism, is going to lead to a bunch of anti microbial products in the future.

 

[judyd]

Those that claim there isn't benefit from gov't research like NASA, NIH, etc are really ignorant on the topic.

businesses are focused on doing research that will lead to a marketable product. They are not going to piss away tons of money on "basic research" which may not lead to a product for the company to make money. The basic research to make new findings that open the doors for idead for a marketable product are done largely in academia (funded heavily by the gov't) and government institutes. Industry takes a finding that could be a product, and develops it, hence making their business flourish.

20 years ago there was a huge NIH increase in Cancer funding, which paved the way for all the cancer drugs that are out today. all the money spent these days on anti microbial research for protection against bioterrorism, is going to lead to a bunch of anti microbial products in the future.

When private industry gets government funding for research, they behave like a bunch of thieves. Pharmaceutical companies are supposed to pay the money back once they start making a profit on the drugs for which the government financed the research. That is rarely, if ever, done, and then they have the nerve to tell the American public that the high cost of the drugs is because of the research involved. This country pays more for drugs than any oither country in the world because there haven't been any controls on this dishonest practice.

 

[Avatar4321]

How on earth is doing research, exploring, learning new things, and developing new technology to assist in this process a waste of money?