One small backward step for man; One giant leap for fake global warming

[CrusaderFrank]

The Marxist Macaca is destroying the US Space Program.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Can we all agree that the "Party of JFK " is now officially dead? So sad.

 

[Navy1960]

Nevermind, Navy. With that comment, you've also shown that you only read and acknowledge what suits the right-wing agenda. And by the way, the NASA program is NOT going to be cut in its entirety, or did you choose to ignore that linked facts I provided earlier on in this thread.

Maggie in all that I posted including John F. Kennedys comments about space , it was YOU who made the choice to see my postings as somehow meaning that NASA is going to be cut completely or in your words in its entirety. I was under the impression that we were talking about the Constellation program, and NASA's intention to return to the moon were we not? Further I was also led to believe by many on here yourself included that NASA's money in it's budget was better spent on projects here on earth your previous post comes to mind. The point of my post was to show you that NASAs budget is quite small compared to the programs that people are citing as reasons that need attention and as a justification for cutting the Constellation program. Now as for your contention on what you posted earlier in this thread, I addressed that issue with the two largest providers of private rockets to show you the fallacy in the reasoning behind the Presidents decision. As these companies have no where near the lifting capability of NASA or the ability to even put a human in orbit at the moment then that will leave a window that will need to be filled elsewhere when the Shuttle retires this year and that window will be filled by China, Russia, or perhaps France. One other thing you did not repsond too, there is a good reason for going to the moon and I find it interesting that you would advocate research on energy soilutions and yet choose to ignore the possiblity of perhaps one of the largest sources of energy and thats the moon.

Frankly, I would worry more about China's capability to just shoot down any contraptions that would be needed to capture the moon's energy. Someone posted an artist's rendition of capturing energy from the sun (at least I think that's what that was), and it looked rather vulnerable to me. There is so much space junk and the capability of just about every country who plugs in to send up their own satellites, how do we know that even after an investment in Constellation it won't be destroyed? There are way to many foreseeable problems, imo. That said, greater minds than mine will be making those kinds of decisions, and I'm comfortable that a few of those "minds" have consulted with the powers that be which led to this decision.

I still stand by my statement that all this sudden support for a government program--the political support being that NASA projects create jobs--is so hypocrical that it nearly brings me to tears. And that's because of all the shrieking that "government jobs" are still paid for by the taxpayers. But apparently that's okay, as long as those "government jobs" aren't ones that were proposed by Obama.

Which brings me to my real PROBLEM here, Navy, which is this is not a discussion about Constellation being cut. It's just one...more...excuse for the frantic Obama haters to weigh in with more of their innane comments. The exremists couldn't care less about NASA.

Lastly, I know what President Kennedy said regarding space exploration. I was there, and I heard him say it.

I like to think I have a reasonable view on the matter and to be honest this is not a matter of hating the President at least as far as I am concerned. I honestly believe that this decision makes little sense in terms of security, science, and yes jobs. This is not just me saying this Maggie this is even the former director of NASA Michael Griffin.

"Former NASA Administrator Michael Griffin apparently has sent a scathing memo to friends and supporters in Washington, lashing out at the work of the presidential committee reviewing NASA's human space flight plans and calling some of its recommendations "irresponsible."

Mike Griffin Lashes Out at The Augustine Committee via Email | SpaceRef - Space News as it Happens

I invite you to read this memo Maggie as this is where I stand on this issue. The Presidents decision was based on this committees recommendations which was tasked with finding a less expensive way to approach human space flight.

On the issue of jobs let me say this, it is contradictoary to want to create jobs be they though the application of Stimulus money in infrastructue or perhaps the construction of High Speed Rail and then tell NASA that it is too expensive to have a moon program at the expense of those very same job, which are more often than not private sector jobs. I personnally do not care if it's a Govt. job or not as long as the goal is a worthy one and their are benefits that everyone can enjoy that offset the costs and clearly NASA does that.

 

[Political Junky]

In this tape, Bob McDonnell denies global warming, but, in the same tape, John McCain, Lindsey Graham, John Warner, Bush Jr. and Schwarzeneggar assert that global warming exists.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZd40NrjJrU]YouTube - Bob McDonnell: Global Warming Denier[/ame]

 

[Navy1960]

“I am a skeptic…Global warming has become a new religion.” - Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever.

“Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly….As a scientist I remain skeptical.” - Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology and formerly of NASA who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called “among the most preeminent scientists of the last 100 years.”

Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history…When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.” - UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist.

“The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn’t listen to others. It doesn’t have open minds… I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists,” - Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the UN-supported International Year of the Planet.

“The models and forecasts of the UN IPCC "are incorrect because they only are based on mathematical models and presented results at scenarios that do not include, for example, solar activity.” - Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera, a researcher at the Institute of Geophysics of the National Autonomous University of Mexico

“It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don’t buy into anthropogenic global warming.” - U.S Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA.

“Even doubling or tripling the amount of carbon dioxide will virtually have little impact, as water vapour and water condensed on particles as clouds dominate the worldwide scene and always will.” – . Geoffrey G. Duffy, a professor in the Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering of the University of Auckland, NZ.

“After reading [UN IPCC chairman] Pachauri's asinine comment [comparing skeptics to] Flat Earthers, it's hard to remain quiet.” - Climate statistician Dr. William M. Briggs, who specializes in the statistics of forecast evaluation, serves on the American Meteorological Society's Probability and Statistics Committee and is an Associate Editor of Monthly Weather Review.

“For how many years must the planet cool before we begin to understand that the planet is not warming? For how many years must cooling go on?" - Geologist Dr. David Gee the chairman of the science committee of the 2008 International Geological Congress who has authored 130 plus peer reviewed papers, and is currently at Uppsala University in Sweden.

“Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic camp…Climate models can at best be useful for explaining climate changes after the fact.” - Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch UN IPCC committee.

“Many [scientists] are now searching for a way to back out quietly (from promoting warming fears), without having their professional careers ruined.” - Atmospheric physicist James A. Peden, formerly of the Space Research and Coordination Center in Pittsburgh.
.: U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works :: Minority Page :.


There does seem to be some disagreement in the scientific community on the causes or even the existance by some. So as well meaning as those in video are their opinions do not end the debate nor should it ever end the debate on science. In doing so you limit the possiblity of discovery and isn't that EXACTLY what some in the AGW community are asking bu making such statements as "the science is settled"

 

[Navy1960]

Here is another video thats a little better....

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ouRbkBAOGEw]YouTube - JFK - We choose to go to the Moon, full length[/ame]

 

[rightwinger]

Here is another video thats a little better....

YouTube - JFK - We choose to go to the Moon, full length

Inspirational by JFK.

We did go to the moon and it was one of the premier events in US History. However, it has been almost 40 years and there is still no pressing reason to return. No other nation has stepped up to say moon exploration is critical.

NASA is still a great agency. They just need to redefine their mission away from Star Trek and Buck Rodgers towards unmanned probes and maintaining our satellite infrastructure

 

[Murf76]

I like to think I have a reasonable view on the matter and to be honest this is not a matter of hating the President at least as far as I am concerned. I honestly believe that this decision makes little sense in terms of security, science, and yes jobs. This is not just me saying this Maggie this is even the former director of NASA Michael Griffin.

"Former NASA Administrator Michael Griffin apparently has sent a scathing memo to friends and supporters in Washington, lashing out at the work of the presidential committee reviewing NASA's human space flight plans and calling some of its recommendations "irresponsible."

Mike Griffin Lashes Out at The Augustine Committee via Email | SpaceRef - Space News as it Happens

I invite you to read this memo Maggie as this is where I stand on this issue. The Presidents decision was based on this committees recommendations which was tasked with finding a less expensive way to approach human space flight.

On the issue of jobs let me say this, it is contradictoary to want to create jobs be they though the application of Stimulus money in infrastructue or perhaps the construction of High Speed Rail and then tell NASA that it is too expensive to have a moon program at the expense of those very same job, which are more often than not private sector jobs. I personnally do not care if it's a Govt. job or not as long as the goal is a worthy one and their are benefits that everyone can enjoy that offset the costs and clearly NASA does that.

Interesting link. Thanks for posting it.

I think most Americans are going to agree with Griffin rather than Obama when it's all said and done. Of particular interest is this:

"Independent" cost estimates for Constellation systems are cited. There is no acknowledgement that these are low-fidelity estimates developed over a matter of weeks, yet are offered as corrections to NASA's cost estimates, which have years of effort behind them. No mention is made of NASA's commitment to probabilistic budget estimation techniques for Constellation, at significantly higher cost-confidence levels than has been the case in the past. If the Commission believes that NASA is not properly estimating costs, or is misrepresenting the data it has amassed, it should document its specific concerns. Otherwise, the provenance of NASA's cost estimates should be accepted, as no evidence has been supplied to justify overturning them.

That's pretty damned high-handed. Par for the course from the Obama White House, but I don't think he's thinking things through. It's not going to take more than a laundry-list of the silly crap he spends on and one incident of the Chinese having to lift a payload for us... to put him down in the history books as the anti-JFK.

 

[Navy1960]

Here is another video thats a little better....

YouTube - JFK - We choose to go to the Moon, full length

Inspirational by JFK.

We did go to the moon and it was one of the premier events in US History. However, it has been almost 40 years and there is still no pressing reason to return. No other nation has stepped up to say moon exploration is critical.

NASA is still a great agency. They just need to redefine their mission away from Star Trek and Buck Rodgers towards unmanned probes and maintaining our satellite infrastructure

Well riightwinger, I guess that makes me different I suppose because I believe that NASA should be TREKing the Stars and have a Buck Rodgers attitude because without the thirst for discovery then what some are saying is that they are willing to close their eyes in the hunt for knowledge. It is EXACTLY the reason why we should be reaching for the moon and other places in our solar system, because this is where we are, and where we live and to understand the true nature of where we live and the only way to do that is actually reach out and see for ourselves how the universe around us works. The only way is to explore, research, and physically make the effort to do so. Frankly I am NOT willing to settle for second best, and none of you should, not for your nation and not for those that will come after you. John F. Kennedy understood this very well as did many others. You know I have come to believe that the only reason our nation cannot do the things it once did is because the American people have been misled to believe their "can do" spirit has to be tempered with "good enough". There are many things in this nation that need doing and it's my belief that a lof the reasons for not doing them have more to do with peoples belief one way or the other that it's "good enough" or " I CAN'T". I for one happen to believe that the American people still have the same spirit that led them to the moon and thrist for the leadership to get them to there. You can apply that to anything you wish, High Speed Rail, Healthcare, etc.

I have heard constanly that there is no reason to go to the moon, but let me keep telling you at least one of the reasons beyond the obvious which is if you want to reach out to places like Mars and beyond you have to be able to aquire the knowledge to do so. Going to the moon affords us the ability to do just that.

Researchers and space enthusiasts seehelium 3 as the perfect fuel source: extremely potent, nonpolluting, withvirtually no radioactive by-product. Proponents claim its the fuel ofthe 21st century. The trouble is, hardly any of it is found on Earth.But there is plenty of it on the moon.

Society is straining to keep pace withenergy demands, expected to increase eightfold by 2050 as the world populationswells toward 12 billion. The moonjust may be the answer.

"Helium 3 fusion energy may be thekey to future space exploration and settlement," said Gerald Kulcinski,Director of the Fusion Technology Institute (FTI) at the University ofWisconsin at Madison.

Scientists estimate there are about1 million tons of helium 3 on the moon, enough to power the world for thousandsof years. The equivalent of a single space shuttle load or roughly 25 tonscould supply the entire United States' energy needs for a year, accordingto Apollo17 astronaut and FTI researcher Harrison Schmitt.
SPACE.com -- Researchers and space enthusiasts see helium-3 as the perfect fuel source.

 

[rightwinger]

Here is another video thats a little better....

YouTube - JFK - We choose to go to the Moon, full length

Inspirational by JFK.

We did go to the moon and it was one of the premier events in US History. However, it has been almost 40 years and there is still no pressing reason to return. No other nation has stepped up to say moon exploration is critical.

NASA is still a great agency. They just need to redefine their mission away from Star Trek and Buck Rodgers towards unmanned probes and maintaining our satellite infrastructure

Well riightwinger, I guess that makes me different I suppose because I believe that NASA should be TREKing the Stars and have a Buck Rodgers attitude because without the thirst for discovery then what some are saying is that they are willing to close their eyes in the hunt for knowledge. It is EXACTLY the reason why we should be reaching for the moon and other places in our solar system, because this is where we are, and where we live and to understand the true nature of where we live and the only way to do that is actually reach out and see for ourselves how the universe around us works. The only way is to explore, research, and physically make the effort to do so. Frankly I am NOT willing to settle for second best, and none of you should, not for your nation and not for those that will come after you. John F. Kennedy understood this very well as did many others. You know I have come to believe that the only reason our nation cannot do the things it once did is because the American people have been misled to believe their "can do" spirit has to be tempered with "good enough". There are many things in this nation that need doing and it's my belief that a lof the reasons for not doing them have more to do with peoples belief one way or the other that it's "good enough" or " I CAN'T". I for one happen to believe that the American people still have the same spirit that led them to the moon and thrist for the leadership to get them to there. You can apply that to anything you wish, High Speed Rail, Healthcare, etc.

I have heard constanly that there is no reason to go to the moon, but let me keep telling you at least one of the reasons beyond the obvious which is if you want to reach out to places like Mars and beyond you have to be able to aquire the knowledge to do so. Going to the moon affords us the ability to do just that.

Researchers and space enthusiasts seehelium 3 as the perfect fuel source: extremely potent, nonpolluting, withvirtually no radioactive by-product. Proponents claim its the fuel ofthe 21st century. The trouble is, hardly any of it is found on Earth.But there is plenty of it on the moon.

Society is straining to keep pace withenergy demands, expected to increase eightfold by 2050 as the world populationswells toward 12 billion. The moonjust may be the answer.

"Helium 3 fusion energy may be thekey to future space exploration and settlement," said Gerald Kulcinski,Director of the Fusion Technology Institute (FTI) at the University ofWisconsin at Madison.

Scientists estimate there are about1 million tons of helium 3 on the moon, enough to power the world for thousandsof years. The equivalent of a single space shuttle load or roughly 25 tonscould supply the entire United States' energy needs for a year, accordingto Apollo17 astronaut and FTI researcher Harrison Schmitt.
SPACE.com -- Researchers and space enthusiasts see helium-3 as the perfect fuel source.

I support unmanned space exploration. There are no living beings within our reach that we can walk up to and say "Take me to your leader". The challenge of sustaining a living being through a long space flight makes it cost prohibitive. It also limits how long you can stay on another planet. The mars rovers lasted for years.
Space probes like Voyager and the Hubble telescope can see more of our universe than any manned mission could.

As to helium 3...I am a skeptic. If it is the treasure trove that is claimed, we should have no problem getting international and private investment in these flights. I don't see it forthcoming

 

[Xenophon]

Former astronaut Bill Nelson isn't down with Barry on this, heard him yesterday say it a huge mistake to take NASA off mission.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

The "Party of JFK" is dead. Pretty sad stuff.

 

[Navy1960]

Inspirational by JFK.

We did go to the moon and it was one of the premier events in US History. However, it has been almost 40 years and there is still no pressing reason to return. No other nation has stepped up to say moon exploration is critical.

NASA is still a great agency. They just need to redefine their mission away from Star Trek and Buck Rodgers towards unmanned probes and maintaining our satellite infrastructure

Well riightwinger, I guess that makes me different I suppose because I believe that NASA should be TREKing the Stars and have a Buck Rodgers attitude because without the thirst for discovery then what some are saying is that they are willing to close their eyes in the hunt for knowledge. It is EXACTLY the reason why we should be reaching for the moon and other places in our solar system, because this is where we are, and where we live and to understand the true nature of where we live and the only way to do that is actually reach out and see for ourselves how the universe around us works. The only way is to explore, research, and physically make the effort to do so. Frankly I am NOT willing to settle for second best, and none of you should, not for your nation and not for those that will come after you. John F. Kennedy understood this very well as did many others. You know I have come to believe that the only reason our nation cannot do the things it once did is because the American people have been misled to believe their "can do" spirit has to be tempered with "good enough". There are many things in this nation that need doing and it's my belief that a lof the reasons for not doing them have more to do with peoples belief one way or the other that it's "good enough" or " I CAN'T". I for one happen to believe that the American people still have the same spirit that led them to the moon and thrist for the leadership to get them to there. You can apply that to anything you wish, High Speed Rail, Healthcare, etc.

I have heard constanly that there is no reason to go to the moon, but let me keep telling you at least one of the reasons beyond the obvious which is if you want to reach out to places like Mars and beyond you have to be able to aquire the knowledge to do so. Going to the moon affords us the ability to do just that.

Researchers and space enthusiasts seehelium 3 as the perfect fuel source: extremely potent, nonpolluting, withvirtually no radioactive by-product. Proponents claim its the fuel ofthe 21st century. The trouble is, hardly any of it is found on Earth.But there is plenty of it on the moon.

Society is straining to keep pace withenergy demands, expected to increase eightfold by 2050 as the world populationswells toward 12 billion. The moonjust may be the answer.

"Helium 3 fusion energy may be thekey to future space exploration and settlement," said Gerald Kulcinski,Director of the Fusion Technology Institute (FTI) at the University ofWisconsin at Madison.

Scientists estimate there are about1 million tons of helium 3 on the moon, enough to power the world for thousandsof years. The equivalent of a single space shuttle load or roughly 25 tonscould supply the entire United States' energy needs for a year, accordingto Apollo17 astronaut and FTI researcher Harrison Schmitt.
SPACE.com -- Researchers and space enthusiasts see helium-3 as the perfect fuel source.

I support unmanned space exploration. There are no living beings within our reach that we can walk up to and say "Take me to your leader". The challenge of sustaining a living being through a long space flight makes it cost prohibitive. It also limits how long you can stay on another planet. The mars rovers lasted for years.
Space probes like Voyager and the Hubble telescope can see more of our universe than any manned mission could.

As to helium 3...I am a skeptic. If it is the treasure trove that is claimed, we should have no problem getting international and private investment in these flights. I don't see it forthcoming

Nestled among the agency's 200-point mission goals is a proposal to mine the moon for fuel used in fusion reactors -- futuristic power plants that have been demonstrated in proof-of-concept but are likely decades away from commercial deployment.

Helium-3 is considered a safe, environmentally friendly fuel candidate for these generators, and while it is scarce on Earth it is plentiful on the moon.

As a result, scientists have begun to consider the practicality of mining lunar Helium-3 as a replacement for fossil fuels.

"After four-and-half-billion years, there should be large amounts of helium-3 on the moon," said Gerald Kulcinski, a professor who leads the Fusion Technology Institute at the University of Wisconsin at Madison.

Last year NASA administrator Mike Griffin named Kulcinski to lead a number of committees reporting to NASA's influential NASA Advisory Council, its preeminent civilian leadership arm.

The Council is chaired by Apollo 17 astronaut Harrison Hagan "Jack" Schmitt, a leading proponent of mining the moon for helium 3.
Race to the Moon for Nuclear Fuel


China could attempt a manned circumlunar flight in 2015, says outgoing NASA administrator Michael Griffin.

Griffin, a George Bush appointee whose job ended upon Barack Obama's inauguration, was addressing NASA employees and was asked about the likelihood of the Chinese going to the Moon - and whether that could encourage the US government to increase NASA's funding.

Declining to comment on agency funding, Griffin said he could envisage a Chinese Moon mission by 2016 that uses the country's new Arianespace Ariane 5-like Long March 5 rocket in a double-launch scenario. This would see China send a manned Shenzhou spacecraft with an improved lunar return-capable heatshield and an Earth departure stage into low Earth orbit on separate rockets. They would dock in LEO and the Earth departure stage would send the Shenzhou round the Moon.

China achieved its third successful manned mission, Shenzhou-7, in September 2008, which included its first spacewalk. China expects to fly Shenzhou-8 by 2012 and dock it with a free-flying research module called Tiangong-
Griffin departs NASA predicting 2015 Chinese Moon mission

MOSCOW, August 31 (RIA Novosti) - Russia plans to send cosmonauts to the Moon by 2025 and establish a permanent manned base there in 2027-2032, the head of the space agency said Friday.
Anatoly Perminov said that in accordance with Russia's space program through 2040, a manned flight to Mars will be carried out after 2035.

He said that toward the end of this year, Russia will have 103 satellites in orbit, up from the current 95.

There are plans for a new space center in the country, but a site has not yet been selected, he said. Russia currently launches all manned flights from the Baikonur space center in Kazakhstan. Perminov said previously that construction of a new launch facility would only begin after a new type of spacecraft was built.

A major source of revenue for the agency in recent years has been space tourist flights from Baikonur to the International Space Station (ISS), with tickets currently priced at around $30 million. Russia has put five wealthy foreign tourists into space since 2001.

Russia to send manned mission to the Moon by 2025 - space agency | Top Russian news and analysis online | 'RIA Novosti' newswire


ESA's SMART-1 put Europe in the lead in the new race back to the Moon. As well as India and Japan, China and the USA also intend to launch lunar missions in the coming years. The cooperation with India will keep European scientists in the forefront.

The ESA Director of Science, David Southwood, said: "One should also see the cooperation in a wider context. Space science is a natural area for space agencies to learn to work together in technical matters. Such cooperation remains a strategic element in the Director General's wider agenda for the Agency."
India and Europe Agree on Lunar Mission | Universe Today

Global rivalries have probably stoked the lunar ambitions of India and Japan as well. India, to much domestic fanfare, sent an orbiter around the moon in November 2008 -- the Chandrayaan-1. India plans to send astronauts into orbit by 2014-15, making it the fourth nation to carry out manned space missions. The Indian Space Research Organization said it plans to send a man to the moon by 2020.

Not to be outdone, Japan sent its first probe to the moon in 1990 and a second in 2007. It plans another probe by 2012-13. The Japanese are also planning a manned mission to the moon by 2020 and a manned lunar base by 2030.

The European Space Agency and the Russians, seeing all this activity culminate around the moon, will be under pressure to accelerate their own programs as well. At present, the agency has no official manned mission to the moon, but plans a manned mission to Mars, called the Aurora Program, by 2030.
The New Race for the Moon - WSJ.com

You know right, there are nations especially the one WE owe so much money too is going to the moon. The reason is quite obvious as the technology has been demonstrated, so far the only nation to actualy back out is the United States.

 

[Dr Grump]

Neocon Whacksjobs: Obama has increased the deficit by a zillion dollars. He is nothing but a Marxist, socialist, Ameri-hater who will see the country bankrupt and will not curtail govt spending.

Normal Folk: Obama tries to save money by cutting a program that reached its zenith over 40 years ago and has gone nowhere since, thereby saving the country billions of dollars...

Neocon Whackjobs: Obama hates America because he is cutting the space program.

Normal Folk: No wonder nobody takes you guys seriously. You guys are fucking nuts...

 

[Navy1960]

Sensitive Obama Supporter- Those who believe that a rational disagreement always revolves around Obama

Normal Folk- Those that are able to tell the difference

 

[MaggieMae]

Sensitive Obama Supporter- Those who believe that a rational disagreement always revolves around Obama

Normal Folk- Those that are able to tell the difference

The OP specifically blames Obama.

I would say that 99% of all the OPs posted by Repcons in the Politics Section specifically refer to Obama. The other 10% get derailed and become all about Obama.

 

[rightwinger]

You know right, there are nations especially the one WE owe so much money too is going to the moon. The reason is quite obvious as the technology has been demonstrated, so far the only nation to actualy back out is the United States.

I do not feel threatened if China goes to the moon. I will applaud their accomplishment much as I applauded our trips to the moon. They can even visit some of our old sites and see our flag flying there.
As for the US.....we did it 40 years ago. Show some bonifide financial benefit of going and I will support it. As for Helium 3, its a possibility. But if I were an investor, I would not bet the ranch on financial viability.
Once it is proven to be a financial windfall, I'd go for it. In the mean time, I prefer to invest our space dollars in unmanned missions and satellite launching rockets

 

[Dr Grump]

China could attempt a manned circumlunar flight in 2015, says outgoing NASA administrator Michael Griffin.

Russia plans to send cosmonauts to the Moon by 2025 and establish a permanent manned base there in 2027-2032, the head of the space agency said Friday.

Is the US ego that huge that it can't bear other nations reaching the moon? So if China makes it, it means what? The whole pats them on the back and thinks they've done a great job?

Oh, the horror.....

 

[Gadawg73]

I have been fishing Apalachicola Bay almost all my life. The guide I use is 70 years old and I know many oyster men that are 70s also.
Why is it that the speckled trout go up river later each fall and come down river earlier each spring?
Now are you folks trying to tell me the oyster folks and guides in Apalachicola are political?
The facts are the water is warming sports fans. And at a radical rate. Go ask someone that spends their life in the outdoors. They will tell you there is no doubt climate change going on.
Now we can argue all you want why it is happening and the amount that man has contributed to it but the fact that it IS going on is easy enough for an oyster man to know. Doesn't take a scientist to tell them.

 

[rightwinger]

I have been fishing Apalachicola Bay almost all my life. The guide I use is 70 years old and I know many oyster men that are 70s also.
Why is it that the speckled trout go up river later each fall and come down river earlier each spring?
Now are you folks trying to tell me the oyster folks and guides in Apalachicola are political?
The facts are the water is warming sports fans. And at a radical rate. Go ask someone that spends their life in the outdoors. They will tell you there is no doubt climate change going on.
Now we can argue all you want why it is happening and the amount that man has contributed to it but the fact that it IS going on is easy enough for an oyster man to know. Doesn't take a scientist to tell them.

Your guide must be a liberal.....so are the trout