NASA's InSight lander on Mars

[sealybobo]

Banal partisanship derails almost every thread. Certain trolls seem to make it their mission in life.

Put us back on track please.

Are we wasting time going to mars? What do you think?

 

[sealybobo]

The planet earth is not dying.

This is the only thing on topic you’ve said this entire thread. You were wrong but at least it wasn’t just a troll thread but it’s a good example of how you make a claim but never back it up.

Anyways, have you made one comment about the mission to mars? Should we be bothering or in your opinion are we stuck on earth forever? Is it a waste of time?

 

[Unkotare]

The planet earth is not dying.

... You were wrong ....

No, I wasn't.

 

[sealybobo]

The planet earth is not dying.

... You were wrong ....

No, I wasn't.

Talk about derailing threads

 

[Markle]

Banal partisanship derails almost every thread. Certain trolls seem to make it their mission in life.

Put us back on track please.

Are we wasting time going to mars? What do you think?

No.

 

[james bond]

why ANOTHER Mars rover?

When are they going to send some to the poles where things may be more interesting?

great IDEA!!!!! waste more $$$$$
you're a godamn genius

It's your hard earned tax dollars going to waste because there is/was no life on Mars. Are we supposed to find gold or other precious metals there? My choice is to build a luxurious space station with a view . A luxury space hotel is scheduled to go up in 2021.

Typical of Progressives. Talking without having any facts at hand.

Almost everyone except for the authors of the quotes above knows that NASA is one of the government agencies which returns far more dollars to our economy than the dollars spent. Were it not for their research and development, our houses would be far emptier than they are today.

No One Should Think That Money Spent on NASA is a Waste
lenrosen4 Sep 16th, 2014 7 Comments
September 16, 2014 – One of my readers shared the following infographic called NASA Spinning Off Since 1962. It highlights the inventions, discoveries and economic return on investment resulting from NASA. For every dollar invested by the government the American economy and other countries economies have seen $7 to $14 in new revenue, all from spinoffs and licensing arrangements. That amounts to in $17.6 billion current NASA dollars spent to an economic boost worth as much as $246.4 billion annually.

No One Should Think That Money Spent on NASA is a Waste

Oh, and evenflow1969, we have permanent outposts for research at both poles.

Here's a NASA site where you can follow all the spinoffs which are benefiting our society. Their research into streamlining has gone into big tractor-trailer rigs saving millions of gallons of diesel fuel.

NASA supports the global warming theories. Isn't this the BS that's driving finding another planet?

Again, going to Mars is a waste because there is no life there and we can't live there, i.e. colonize it. And coming back takes longer than going there because one has to fly around Venus. It's better to wait for the James Webb Telescope to come online and check out Europa.

Debate.org says it's a waste 67% to 33%.

Is NASA a waste of money?

 

[Markle]

NASA supports the global warming theories. Isn't this the BS that's driving finding another planet?

Again, going to Mars is a waste because there is no life there and we can't live there, i.e. colonize it. And coming back takes longer than going there because one has to fly around Venus. It's better to wait for the James Webb Telescope to come online and check out Europa.

Debate.org says it's a waste 67% to 33%.

Is NASA a waste of money?

NASA was stripped of their original intent by the failed former President Barack Hussein Obama. They were then paid to "research" global warming and to reach out to children and Islam.

Barack Obama: Nasa must try to make Muslims 'feel good'
The head of the Nasa has said Barack Obama told him to make "reaching out to the Muslim world" one of the space agency's top priorities.
By Toby Harnden in Washington
8:00PM BST 06 Jul 2010

Barack Obama: Nasa must try to make Muslims 'feel good'

 

[Markle]

NASA supports the global warming theories. Isn't this the BS that's driving finding another planet?

Again, going to Mars is a waste because there is no life there and we can't live there, i.e. colonize it. And coming back takes longer than going there because one has to fly around Venus. It's better to wait for the James Webb Telescope to come online and check out Europa.

Debate.org says it's a waste 67% to 33%.

Is NASA a waste of money?

Then again there are actual scientific polls, unlike your internet vote.

50% Say Space Shuttle Program Worth What It Cost Taxpayers
in Lifestyle

Tuesday, July 12, 2011

With the last planned U.S. space shuttle currently circling the globe, Americans are slightly more supportive of the NASA program than they were a year-and-a-half ago.

Still, the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that just 50% of American Adults believe the 30-year-old Space Shuttle program has been worth the expense to taxpayers. Twenty-seven percent (27%) do not believe the program has been worth the cost, while another 23% are undecided. (To see survey question wording,

These findings are little changed from a survey conducted last October, but the number who says the program has been worth the cost is up from 40% in January 2010.

Looking ahead, 38% of adults believe the government should fund future space programs, but 33% say such programs should be funded by the private sector. Twenty-nine percent (29%) are not sure. While those sentiments are little changed from October, voters were more evenly divided on the question last April.

50% Say Space Shuttle Program Worth What It Cost Taxpayers - Rasmussen Reports®

 

[sealybobo]

why ANOTHER Mars rover?

When are they going to send some to the poles where things may be more interesting?

great IDEA!!!!! waste more $$$$$
you're a godamn genius

It's your hard earned tax dollars going to waste because there is/was no life on Mars. Are we supposed to find gold or other precious metals there? My choice is to build a luxurious space station with a view . A luxury space hotel is scheduled to go up in 2021.

Typical of Progressives. Talking without having any facts at hand.

Almost everyone except for the authors of the quotes above knows that NASA is one of the government agencies which returns far more dollars to our economy than the dollars spent. Were it not for their research and development, our houses would be far emptier than they are today.

No One Should Think That Money Spent on NASA is a Waste
lenrosen4 Sep 16th, 2014 7 Comments
September 16, 2014 – One of my readers shared the following infographic called NASA Spinning Off Since 1962. It highlights the inventions, discoveries and economic return on investment resulting from NASA. For every dollar invested by the government the American economy and other countries economies have seen $7 to $14 in new revenue, all from spinoffs and licensing arrangements. That amounts to in $17.6 billion current NASA dollars spent to an economic boost worth as much as $246.4 billion annually.

No One Should Think That Money Spent on NASA is a Waste

Oh, and evenflow1969, we have permanent outposts for research at both poles.

Here's a NASA site where you can follow all the spinoffs which are benefiting our society. Their research into streamlining has gone into big tractor-trailer rigs saving millions of gallons of diesel fuel.

NASA supports the global warming theories. Isn't this the BS that's driving finding another planet?

Again, going to Mars is a waste because there is no life there and we can't live there, i.e. colonize it. And coming back takes longer than going there because one has to fly around Venus. It's better to wait for the James Webb Telescope to come online and check out Europa.

Debate.org says it's a waste 67% to 33%.

Is NASA a waste of money?

I love how you don’t care what 97% of scientists say but you go with 67% on debate.org.

 

[sealybobo]

NASA supports the global warming theories. Isn't this the BS that's driving finding another planet?

Again, going to Mars is a waste because there is no life there and we can't live there, i.e. colonize it. And coming back takes longer than going there because one has to fly around Venus. It's better to wait for the James Webb Telescope to come online and check out Europa.

Debate.org says it's a waste 67% to 33%.

Is NASA a waste of money?

Then again there are actual scientific polls, unlike your internet vote.

50% Say Space Shuttle Program Worth What It Cost Taxpayers
in Lifestyle

Tuesday, July 12, 2011

With the last planned U.S. space shuttle currently circling the globe, Americans are slightly more supportive of the NASA program than they were a year-and-a-half ago.

Still, the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that just 50% of American Adults believe the 30-year-old Space Shuttle program has been worth the expense to taxpayers. Twenty-seven percent (27%) do not believe the program has been worth the cost, while another 23% are undecided. (To see survey question wording,

These findings are little changed from a survey conducted last October, but the number who says the program has been worth the cost is up from 40% in January 2010.

Looking ahead, 38% of adults believe the government should fund future space programs, but 33% say such programs should be funded by the private sector. Twenty-nine percent (29%) are not sure. While those sentiments are little changed from October, voters were more evenly divided on the question last April.

50% Say Space Shuttle Program Worth What It Cost Taxpayers - Rasmussen Reports®

Think of all the jobs it would create and the cause is worth it. So that the human race doesn’t go extinct which will happen eventually if we are stuck here. It could be a meteor or super volcano or global warming.

Republicans, what is our purpose? I mean us humans. It isn’t to live a good life and one day go to heaven. Grow up. Our purpose is to keep on living.

 

[Unkotare]

Banal partisanship derails almost every thread. Certain trolls seem to make it their mission in life.

.

 

[fncceo]

Like totally and completely cannot land on them.

The Huygens probe has successfully mapped and landed on Titan, Saturn's largest moon. Cassini ended it's mission by flying into Saturn's upper atmosphere to send back data (Saturn has no solid surface on which to land).

Jupiter has been subject of space missions of over 40 years, The Galileo mission mapped Jupiter's moons and entered the upper atmosphere of Jupiter.

Venus has been studied and mapped very accurately from orbit and been landed on four time, each time sending back photos and data, by two Russian and two American landers.

Mercury has been studied and mapped in extensive detail by three different spacecraft since the '70s.

 

[SixFoot]

The simple fact of the matter with the Mars landers is, mankind has to walk before it can run. If we can't explore planets within our own solar system, then we might as well give up on ever traveling to an xoplanet light years away that's actually much like earth and inhabitable.

We built some pretty crude cars when they were first developed too, horseless carriages, but now we have cars that'll do over 200 mph right off the showroom floor that will drive, park and stop themselves, among other things. It's probes to Mars now, a manned mission in the not so distant future, and who knows what after that.

One thing is for CERTAIN, if mankind doesn't find it's way off earth to a different planet that can sustain human life, we're done, we're extinct, because our planet isn't going to be here forever.

How many of you weren't aware that our sun was exploding? Maybe you won't be so fast to criticise the Mars landers if you think about the fact that we HAVE to find a way off this planet, far, far away, if mankind is ever going to survive.

I wish I could be around long enough to see the genetic changes people undergo from being born and raised on Mars.

 

[james bond]

NASA supports the global warming theories. Isn't this the BS that's driving finding another planet?

Again, going to Mars is a waste because there is no life there and we can't live there, i.e. colonize it. And coming back takes longer than going there because one has to fly around Venus. It's better to wait for the James Webb Telescope to come online and check out Europa.

Debate.org says it's a waste 67% to 33%.

Is NASA a waste of money?

Then again there are actual scientific polls, unlike your internet vote.

50% Say Space Shuttle Program Worth What It Cost Taxpayers
in Lifestyle

Tuesday, July 12, 2011

With the last planned U.S. space shuttle currently circling the globe, Americans are slightly more supportive of the NASA program than they were a year-and-a-half ago.

Still, the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that just 50% of American Adults believe the 30-year-old Space Shuttle program has been worth the expense to taxpayers. Twenty-seven percent (27%) do not believe the program has been worth the cost, while another 23% are undecided. (To see survey question wording,

These findings are little changed from a survey conducted last October, but the number who says the program has been worth the cost is up from 40% in January 2010.

Looking ahead, 38% of adults believe the government should fund future space programs, but 33% say such programs should be funded by the private sector. Twenty-nine percent (29%) are not sure. While those sentiments are little changed from October, voters were more evenly divided on the question last April.

50% Say Space Shuttle Program Worth What It Cost Taxpayers - Rasmussen Reports®

Pew Research updated in 2014. Americans keen of space exploration, but don't want to pay for it.

"Despite these positive opinions of the space program, just a two-in-ten Americans in the 2012 GSS survey said that the U.S. spends too little on space exploration. Four-in-ten believed the current spending was adequate, while three-in-ten believed further cuts should be made to the program. Instead, Americans strongly preferred increased spending on programs closer to home, including education (76%), public health (59%), and developing alternative energy sources (59%)."

Americans keen on space exploration, less so on paying for it

You have no evidence of life on Mars. Wouldn't you agree that if no microbes can live there, then humans can't? I'm not sure if we can colonize our moon either. Maybe it can be a fueling stop, but even then it would be difficult to have people there to stock and provide fuel and supplies for space stations or rocket travelers. There are other countries in the lead for doing that. Why not wait to see how they do? What about Europa instead of Mars? I don't want to nuke Mars just to see if the ice there can be melted into water. That was one of the most hair-brained ideas from Elon Musk.

 

[james bond]

I love how you don’t care what 97% of scientists say but you go with 67% on debate.org.

Atheist scientists, sealybobo. Atheists and their scientists are usually wrong. I mean why sent astronauts out there when they won't have enough fuel to return? and the flight back will have to be a longer path around Venus. The as's claim the astronauts can make their own fuel on Mars. I'd like to see one or two of them go along because of this. Put your life where your mouth is. I don't think it's much of an accomplishment to plant the US flag on Mars. I'd be fine seeing the Russians or Chinese go there, land safely and see if they can return. I'm not against space exploration, but let's find some planet better than Mars.

 

[fncceo]

Wouldn't you agree that if no microbes can live there, then humans can't?

No. We can actually bring our own microbes. We have plenty.

 

[Markle]

Pew Research updated in 2014. Americans keen of space exploration, but don't want to pay for it.

"Despite these positive opinions of the space program, just a two-in-ten Americans in the 2012 GSS survey said that the U.S. spends too little on space exploration. Four-in-ten believed the current spending was adequate, while three-in-ten believed further cuts should be made to the program. Instead, Americans strongly preferred increased spending on programs closer to home, including education (76%), public health (59%), and developing alternative energy sources (59%)."

Americans keen on space exploration, less so on paying for it

You have no evidence of life on Mars. Wouldn't you agree that if no microbes can live there, then humans can't? I'm not sure if we can colonize our moon either. Maybe it can be a fueling stop, but even then it would be difficult to have people there to stock and provide fuel and supplies for space stations or rocket travelers. There are other countries in the lead for doing that. Why not wait to see how they do? What about Europa instead of Mars? I don't want to nuke Mars just to see if the ice there can be melted into water. That was one of the most hair-brained ideas from Elon Musk.

Depends on how the questions were asked. Suppose all the cost benefits were provided along with some of the most obvious spinoffs?

So what if there is no life on Mars?

Who are the companies competing for an economical, effective method to reach and do research on Mars? Or do you know such a competition is underway?

 

[mamooth]

I think they keep doing Mars because Mercury, Venus and Jupiter are totally impossible.... Like totally and completely cannot land on them.

Mercury is tough because of the orbital mechanics. As probes from Earth fall deeper into the Sun's gravity well, they pick up speed, so they have to brake a great deal to match speed with Mercury. They can't use atmospheric braking to help, being there's no atmosphere on Mercury. It takes a great deal of fuel to slow down, which limits the payload. Only one spacecraft so far, MESSENGER in 2011, has achieved Mercury orbit, and that took many complicated flybys of Venus over several years to bleed speed. Nobody has put a lander on Mercury, though the Russians are tentatively planning one for 2031.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

NASA supports the global warming theories. Isn't this the BS that's driving finding another planet?

Again, going to Mars is a waste because there is no life there and we can't live there, i.e. colonize it. And coming back takes longer than going there because one has to fly around Venus. It's better to wait for the James Webb Telescope to come online and check out Europa.

Debate.org says it's a waste 67% to 33%.

Is NASA a waste of money?

Then again there are actual scientific polls, unlike your internet vote.

50% Say Space Shuttle Program Worth What It Cost Taxpayers
in Lifestyle

Tuesday, July 12, 2011

With the last planned U.S. space shuttle currently circling the globe, Americans are slightly more supportive of the NASA program than they were a year-and-a-half ago.

Still, the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that just 50% of American Adults believe the 30-year-old Space Shuttle program has been worth the expense to taxpayers. Twenty-seven percent (27%) do not believe the program has been worth the cost, while another 23% are undecided. (To see survey question wording,

These findings are little changed from a survey conducted last October, but the number who says the program has been worth the cost is up from 40% in January 2010.

Looking ahead, 38% of adults believe the government should fund future space programs, but 33% say such programs should be funded by the private sector. Twenty-nine percent (29%) are not sure. While those sentiments are little changed from October, voters were more evenly divided on the question last April.

50% Say Space Shuttle Program Worth What It Cost Taxpayers - Rasmussen Reports®

Pew Research updated in 2014. Americans keen of space exploration, but don't want to pay for it.

"Despite these positive opinions of the space program, just a two-in-ten Americans in the 2012 GSS survey said that the U.S. spends too little on space exploration. Four-in-ten believed the current spending was adequate, while three-in-ten believed further cuts should be made to the program. Instead, Americans strongly preferred increased spending on programs closer to home, including education (76%), public health (59%), and developing alternative energy sources (59%)."

Americans keen on space exploration, less so on paying for it

You have no evidence of life on Mars. Wouldn't you agree that if no microbes can live there, then humans can't? I'm not sure if we can colonize our moon either. Maybe it can be a fueling stop, but even then it would be difficult to have people there to stock and provide fuel and supplies for space stations or rocket travelers. There are other countries in the lead for doing that. Why not wait to see how they do? What about Europa instead of Mars? I don't want to nuke Mars just to see if the ice there can be melted into water. That was one of the most hair-brained ideas from Elon Musk.

So what? Americans are financially dumb and bad with big numbers. If I worded the question as "Are you okay with paying roughly $150 per household, with the richest 5% covering 95% of this, to sustain the entire annual NASA budget?", the poll numbers would climb into the 90s.

 

[fncceo]

NASA supports the global warming theories. Isn't this the BS that's driving finding another planet?

Again, going to Mars is a waste because there is no life there and we can't live there, i.e. colonize it. And coming back takes longer than going there because one has to fly around Venus. It's better to wait for the James Webb Telescope to come online and check out Europa.

Debate.org says it's a waste 67% to 33%.

Is NASA a waste of money?

Then again there are actual scientific polls, unlike your internet vote.

50% Say Space Shuttle Program Worth What It Cost Taxpayers
in Lifestyle

Tuesday, July 12, 2011

With the last planned U.S. space shuttle currently circling the globe, Americans are slightly more supportive of the NASA program than they were a year-and-a-half ago.

Still, the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that just 50% of American Adults believe the 30-year-old Space Shuttle program has been worth the expense to taxpayers. Twenty-seven percent (27%) do not believe the program has been worth the cost, while another 23% are undecided. (To see survey question wording,

These findings are little changed from a survey conducted last October, but the number who says the program has been worth the cost is up from 40% in January 2010.

Looking ahead, 38% of adults believe the government should fund future space programs, but 33% say such programs should be funded by the private sector. Twenty-nine percent (29%) are not sure. While those sentiments are little changed from October, voters were more evenly divided on the question last April.

50% Say Space Shuttle Program Worth What It Cost Taxpayers - Rasmussen Reports®

Pew Research updated in 2014. Americans keen of space exploration, but don't want to pay for it.

"Despite these positive opinions of the space program, just a two-in-ten Americans in the 2012 GSS survey said that the U.S. spends too little on space exploration. Four-in-ten believed the current spending was adequate, while three-in-ten believed further cuts should be made to the program. Instead, Americans strongly preferred increased spending on programs closer to home, including education (76%), public health (59%), and developing alternative energy sources (59%)."

Americans keen on space exploration, less so on paying for it

You have no evidence of life on Mars. Wouldn't you agree that if no microbes can live there, then humans can't? I'm not sure if we can colonize our moon either. Maybe it can be a fueling stop, but even then it would be difficult to have people there to stock and provide fuel and supplies for space stations or rocket travelers. There are other countries in the lead for doing that. Why not wait to see how they do? What about Europa instead of Mars? I don't want to nuke Mars just to see if the ice there can be melted into water. That was one of the most hair-brained ideas from Elon Musk.

So what? Americans are financially dumb and bad with big numbers. If I worded the question as "Are you okay with paying roughly $150 per household, with the richest 5% covering 95% of this, to sustain the entire annual NASA budget?", the poll numbers would climb into the 90s.

You can get any result you want by re-phrasing a poll question. One of the reason that polls have very limited usefulness.

On the other hand. What is the point in spending Billions of dollars annually to keep humans puttering around in LEO like we have for the past 50 years? It makes no sense.

For a long time to come, robots are going to be the only travelers in this solar system. They're cheaper, they're more survivable, they'll do literally anything you say, and people don't get all weepy when they get killed.