Pat Flannery ) wrote:


: Paul F. Dietz wrote:

:
: It's easy to explain, Scott. When things were still up in the air,
: still just hopes, we could still think they'd come up with something
: that actually made sense, or at least had significant components that
: made sense.


: The problem is that everyone has their own idea of what makes sense, and
: is ready to damn anyone else's concept of how things should be done. As
: long as the proposal is all all pie in the sky, everything is fine-
: because everyone assumes that NASA will see the light and do it their
: way....as that is the only obviously correct way of doing it.
: But as soon as something concrete is proposed, around 9/10th's of the
: space community is ****ed off, as it isn't what they wanted to see.
: Should it be done by government developed rockets, or be privately
: developed ones?
: Big aerospace firms or small ones?
: Are we going wherever we end up going to explore, do business of some
: sort, mine, set up military bases, or colonize?
: We even have the Moon exploration and Mars exploration fans at each
: other's throats as both think that the other destination makes no sense
: as a target.
: If anything dooms this whole program, it will probably be the space fans
: tearing it apart as much as any lack of support on the part of congress
: or the general public.

Well said. With attitudes like Dietz's we'd still be in Philadelphia
arguing over the Constitution. I don't doubt he would have made a fine
Tory.

Eric

: Pat