The last space shuttle flight: Yeah..I am furious.

[daveman]

Perhaps a realization that the human animal is too fragile and has too short a life span to make space exploration feasible. We’ve learned more with Hubble and probes than with manned flights.

The moon project was about Cold War politics, not science. And the science of space is too insignificant to justify the spending of taxpayers’ money.

But there never was any real ‘space exploration,’ nor will there ever be.

There was a caveman who once said "we can't cross that mountain, its impossible"

There was some European that said "Don't go West, theres nothing but water and death"

There were people that laughed at the idea of man powered flight

There were people that ridiculed the concept of orbital flight, and making it to the moon

Anything is possible until proven impossible, and proving something impossible is rather difficult.

There are still the physics of time and distance to contend with as long as the biological limitations of man

Distance is measured in light years, the distance light can travel in a year. No matter how fast you think man may eventually be able to travel, it will take years to get there and return. The limitations of man mean you have to provide oxygen, food and water as well as safety

Much of space is best explored by telescope. Why not send a telescope to the end of the galaxy and see what you discover? It is easier and safer to send R2D2 into space than a human being. R2D2 doesn't need room to move around or food or oxygen if he gets destroyed, nobody cares. R2D2 can survive for hundreds of years and still send back data

Most of the solar system is reachable. No one's talking about starships just yet.

 

[007]

What if we were to invest the US scientific might into energy exploration vs space exploration?

What are the potential economic benefits of exploring new energy frontiers vs new space frontiers?

There's no reason we can't do both. None.

We really have to get out of the war making business. It's disgusting.

Son of a *****... I agree with sallow...

 

[daveman]

This thread seems to put the lie to the left's ridiculous notion that the right is anti-science.

Most of the people in this thread who oppose the space program are on the left. Most who support it are on the right.

What's more science-y than man in space?

Indeed.

LOL two who are agreeing on a lie.

What lie?

Oh, you mean we're proving your stereotypes wrong. Sorry, that's not a lie. That's you being butthurt.

Do you really think science is only science if it advances the leftist agenda?

 

[Triton]

I agree with RightWinger and C_Clayton Jones, overall apathy was definitely a primary cause in the demise of the space program along with the limitations of the shuttles.

Also, for us to be able to really explore space there has to be new forms of propulsion/transportation. The distances are too great and exceed the capacity of the human body. It would have to be some form of space/time manipulation to travel these distances which is all still theory as far as I know.

 

[martybegan]

Perhaps a realization that the human animal is too fragile and has too short a life span to make space exploration feasible. We’ve learned more with Hubble and probes than with manned flights.

The moon project was about Cold War politics, not science. And the science of space is too insignificant to justify the spending of taxpayers’ money.

But there never was any real ‘space exploration,’ nor will there ever be.

There was a caveman who once said "we can't cross that mountain, its impossible"

There was some European that said "Don't go West, theres nothing but water and death"

There were people that laughed at the idea of man powered flight

There were people that ridiculed the concept of orbital flight, and making it to the moon

Anything is possible until proven impossible, and proving something impossible is rather difficult.

There are still the physics of time and distance to contend with as long as the biological limitations of man

Distance is measured in light years, the distance light can travel in a year. No matter how fast you think man may eventually be able to travel, it will take years to get there and return. The limitations of man mean you have to provide oxygen, food and water as well as safety

Much of space is best explored by telescope. Why not send a telescope to the end of the galaxy and see what you discover? It is easier and safer to send R2D2 into space than a human being. R2D2 doesn't need room to move around or food or oxygen if he gets destroyed, nobody cares. R2D2 can survive for hundreds of years and still send back data

There are some theoretical methods of going faster than light, be it warp (alburrie drive) or "jumps" (space folding). We have this current hubris that we have finnally figured out all forms of science. Granted the current energy expenditures required are beyond our limits, but no one has found a hard reason why things like this couldn't be done if some theories are refined.

The reason to send people is that robots are fine, but they just don't do it. Sending people means WE have reached it, not our proxies.

 

[Sallow]

There was a caveman who once said "we can't cross that mountain, its impossible"

There was some European that said "Don't go West, theres nothing but water and death"

There were people that laughed at the idea of man powered flight

There were people that ridiculed the concept of orbital flight, and making it to the moon

Anything is possible until proven impossible, and proving something impossible is rather difficult.

There are still the physics of time and distance to contend with as long as the biological limitations of man

Distance is measured in light years, the distance light can travel in a year. No matter how fast you think man may eventually be able to travel, it will take years to get there and return. The limitations of man mean you have to provide oxygen, food and water as well as safety

Much of space is best explored by telescope. Why not send a telescope to the end of the galaxy and see what you discover? It is easier and safer to send R2D2 into space than a human being. R2D2 doesn't need room to move around or food or oxygen if he gets destroyed, nobody cares. R2D2 can survive for hundreds of years and still send back data

Most of the solar system is reachable. No one's talking about starships just yet.

Nothing is impossible..

Humans have constantly met challenges through the ages..and thrived.

The only limit is imagination.

I truly believe that.

 

[martybegan]

There are still the physics of time and distance to contend with as long as the biological limitations of man

Distance is measured in light years, the distance light can travel in a year. No matter how fast you think man may eventually be able to travel, it will take years to get there and return. The limitations of man mean you have to provide oxygen, food and water as well as safety

Much of space is best explored by telescope. Why not send a telescope to the end of the galaxy and see what you discover? It is easier and safer to send R2D2 into space than a human being. R2D2 doesn't need room to move around or food or oxygen if he gets destroyed, nobody cares. R2D2 can survive for hundreds of years and still send back data

Most of the solar system is reachable. No one's talking about starships just yet.

Nothing is impossible..

Humans have constantly met challenges through the ages..and thrived.

The only limit is imagination.

I truly believe that.

Holy crap we agree on something.

 

[daveman]

There are still the physics of time and distance to contend with as long as the biological limitations of man

Distance is measured in light years, the distance light can travel in a year. No matter how fast you think man may eventually be able to travel, it will take years to get there and return. The limitations of man mean you have to provide oxygen, food and water as well as safety

Much of space is best explored by telescope. Why not send a telescope to the end of the galaxy and see what you discover? It is easier and safer to send R2D2 into space than a human being. R2D2 doesn't need room to move around or food or oxygen if he gets destroyed, nobody cares. R2D2 can survive for hundreds of years and still send back data

Most of the solar system is reachable. No one's talking about starships just yet.

Nothing is impossible..

Humans have constantly met challenges through the ages..and thrived.

The only limit is imagination.

I truly believe that.

I do, too, but we have the technology to explore the solar system now. We don't need hyper- or warp drives. Chemical rockets to get to orbit, and ion drives and solar sails to get around.

We can do it. We just have to set our minds to it.

 

[rdean]

Well, at least NASA is more Muslim friendly.

So that makes 2 Big Science Projects the Dems killed: The Space Shuttle and the Superconducting Supercollider.

Nice work, fellas!

They probably have more Muslim scientists than Republican scientists. Except in Iran and Afghanistan, is there any political party less friendly to science than Republicans?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Well, at least NASA is more Muslim friendly.

So that makes 2 Big Science Projects the Dems killed: The Space Shuttle and the Superconducting Supercollider.

Nice work, fellas!

They probably have more Muslim scientists than Republican scientists. Except in Iran and Afghanistan, is there any political party less friendly to science than Republicans?

Why did Democrats kill both the SSC and the Space Shuttle, Deany?

 

[daveman]

This thread seems to put the lie to the left's ridiculous notion that the right is anti-science.

Most of the people in this thread who oppose the space program are on the left. Most who support it are on the right.

What's more science-y than man in space?

Indeed.

LOL two who are agreeing on a lie.

What lie? Answer the question, asshole.

 

[martybegan]

Well, at least NASA is more Muslim friendly.

So that makes 2 Big Science Projects the Dems killed: The Space Shuttle and the Superconducting Supercollider.

Nice work, fellas!

They probably have more Muslim scientists than Republican scientists. Except in Iran and Afghanistan, is there any political party less friendly to science than Republicans?

As I Republican, I am not hostile to science, I have a MS in ChemE. What I am hostile to is the use of science to further a poltical agenda, espeically when said branch of science treats itself almost as dogma, and consigns its critics to heresy.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Deany, why did Dems kill the SSC?

 

[rightwinger]

What if we were to invest the US scientific might into energy exploration vs space exploration?

What are the potential economic benefits of exploring new energy frontiers vs new space frontiers?

There's no reason we can't do both. None.

We really have to get out of the war making business. It's disgusting.

We don't have the budget to take care of our own people, how can we do both? It would cost close to a trillion dollars to go to Mars. What kind of energy breakthroughs could we achieve with a trillion dollars?

What economic benefits would we get from exploring Mars? We would get bragging rights, some neat pictures and some rocks to show off in museums.

What would be the economic benefits of developing the next energy breakthrough? It would be immeasurable.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

What if we were to invest the US scientific might into energy exploration vs space exploration?

What are the potential economic benefits of exploring new energy frontiers vs new space frontiers?

There's no reason we can't do both. None.

We really have to get out of the war making business. It's disgusting.

We don't have the budget to take care of our own people, how can we do both? It would cost close to a trillion dollars to go to Mars. What kind of energy breakthroughs could we achieve with a trillion dollars?

What economic benefits would we get from exploring Mars? We would get bragging rights, some neat pictures and some rocks to show off in museums.

What would be the economic benefits of developing the next energy breakthrough? It would be immeasurable.

Maybe the energy breakthroughs the SSC would have found...oopsies

 

[CrusaderFrank]

What if we were to invest the US scientific might into energy exploration vs space exploration?

What are the potential economic benefits of exploring new energy frontiers vs new space frontiers?

There's no reason we can't do both. None.

We really have to get out of the war making business. It's disgusting.

We don't have the budget to take care of our own people, how can we do both? It would cost close to a trillion dollars to go to Mars. What kind of energy breakthroughs could we achieve with a trillion dollars?

What economic benefits would we get from exploring Mars? We would get bragging rights, some neat pictures and some rocks to show off in museums.

What would be the economic benefits of developing the next energy breakthrough? It would be immeasurable.

Id support a Trillion Dollar Plan to send all Progressives to Mars. Let Mars be their next frontier to try their "ideas"

 

[rightwinger]

There's no reason we can't do both. None.

We really have to get out of the war making business. It's disgusting.

We don't have the budget to take care of our own people, how can we do both? It would cost close to a trillion dollars to go to Mars. What kind of energy breakthroughs could we achieve with a trillion dollars?

What economic benefits would we get from exploring Mars? We would get bragging rights, some neat pictures and some rocks to show off in museums.

What would be the economic benefits of developing the next energy breakthrough? It would be immeasurable.

Maybe the energy breakthroughs the SSC would have found...oopsies

Go ahead and fund it....Republicans control the House

I must have missed that line item in the Ryan budget

 

[martybegan]

What if we were to invest the US scientific might into energy exploration vs space exploration?

What are the potential economic benefits of exploring new energy frontiers vs new space frontiers?

There's no reason we can't do both. None.

We really have to get out of the war making business. It's disgusting.

We don't have the budget to take care of our own people, how can we do both? It would cost close to a trillion dollars to go to Mars. What kind of energy breakthroughs could we achieve with a trillion dollars?

What economic benefits would we get from exploring Mars? We would get bragging rights, some neat pictures and some rocks to show off in museums.

What would be the economic benefits of developing the next energy breakthrough? It would be immeasurable.

The next energy breakthrough could come from a Mars mission. Things like this tend to lift science in general up, be it materials science discoveries, theoretical discoveries, or propulsion/power discoveries.

 

[007]

Why can't the private sector fund a Mars mission? Why does that have to fall on the tax payers?

 

[Sallow]

There's no reason we can't do both. None.

We really have to get out of the war making business. It's disgusting.

We don't have the budget to take care of our own people, how can we do both? It would cost close to a trillion dollars to go to Mars. What kind of energy breakthroughs could we achieve with a trillion dollars?

What economic benefits would we get from exploring Mars? We would get bragging rights, some neat pictures and some rocks to show off in museums.

What would be the economic benefits of developing the next energy breakthrough? It would be immeasurable.

The next energy breakthrough could come from a Mars mission. Things like this tend to lift science in general up, be it materials science discoveries, theoretical discoveries, or propulsion/power discoveries.

Mars would be an obvious choice..if we are skipping the moon for a base.

I remember an idea being floated around to send older astronaunts to establish the base. It would be a one way ticket. But man..what a ride.