Why Put Man in Space at Taxpayers' Expense?

All the arguments against spending BIG on space - except for the most
obivous one, of lack of funds - and/or in favor of robotic-instead-of-
human space explorations, could be applied to the US manned space
program (or any government's). Why send humans into space at all, at
taxpayers' expense?

By this thinking, the US, for example, should pull out of the ISS, and
end all manned spaceflight, period.

If you say, machines can do all we need, then this applies to earth
orbiting missions as much as to moon or Mars missions (or beyond).

Pulling out of space (manned presence therein) altogether will save
the taxpayers' BILLIONS.

Private industry may someday put man into orbit, someday on the Moon,
someday on Mars, someday beyond Mars. Yawn, even if we have to wait a
century and a half for this to begin.

So....end manned spaceflight! It is a mere relic of the Cold War, now
extinct!

giveitawhirl2008 wrote in message


All the arguments against spending BIG on space - except for the most
obivous one, of lack of funds - and/or in favor of
robotic-instead-of-
human space explorations, could be applied to the US manned space
program (or any government's). Why send humans into space at all, at
taxpayers' expense?

By this thinking, the US, for example, should pull out of the ISS,
and
end all manned spaceflight, period.

If you say, machines can do all we need, then this applies to earth
orbiting missions as much as to moon or Mars missions (or beyond).

Pulling out of space (manned presence therein) altogether will save
the taxpayers' BILLIONS.

Private industry may someday put man into orbit, someday on the Moon,
someday on Mars, someday beyond Mars. Yawn, even if we have to wait a
century and a half for this to begin.

So....end manned spaceflight! It is a mere relic of the Cold War, now
extinct!


Why Put Man in Space at Taxpayers' Expense?

Why waste $16 Billion dollars (total annual NASA budget) in one week in
Afghanistan blowing up wedding parties?

Why spend $184 Billion in giveaways to wall steers bankster criminals?

Why spend $5 Billion in an annual giveaway to Isreal so that they could
blow up palestinian kids?

etc etc..

Neocons spend way more than NASA does just to pay off their propaganda
lackeys.
...

Robots suck. They are too limited.
We've had two rovers running around Mars for 2+ years and the only
thing they have done is sent back censored images of rocks.
(They can't even detect whether microbial life exists on Mars)

Finally.. there is no purpose in colonizing other planets with beeping
robots. You need people to colonize planets.

The commie chinese are sending astronauts to the Moon in a few years.
The Hindus will be sending manned spacecraft into orbit in the next two
years...

And just last month Iran announced a manned spacecraft program.

And yet here America sits on its thumb.. its last (publicized) manned
space achievemnet... 30 years in the PAST.

On Feb 22, 5:26*pm, giveitawhirl2008
wrote:
All the arguments against spending BIG on space - except for the most
obivous one, of lack of funds - and/or in favor of robotic-instead-of-
human space explorations, could be applied to the US manned space
program (or any government's). Why send humans into space at all, at
taxpayers' expense?

By this thinking, the US, for example, should pull out of the ISS, and
end all manned spaceflight, period.

If you say, machines can do all we need, then this applies to earth
orbiting missions as much as to moon or Mars missions (or beyond).

Pulling out of space (manned presence therein) altogether will save
the taxpayers' BILLIONS.

Private industry may someday put man into orbit, someday on the Moon,
someday on Mars, someday beyond Mars. Yawn, even if we have to wait a
century and a half for this to begin.

So....end manned spaceflight! It is a mere relic of the Cold War, now
extinct!

Because we aren't all obsessed with basketball and Lady Gaga. Get it?

On Feb 22, 5:56*pm, "Uno Hu" wrote:
giveitawhirl2008 wrote in message









All the arguments against spending BIG on space - except for the most
obivous one, of lack of funds - and/or in favor of
robotic-instead-of-
human space explorations, could be applied to the US manned space
program (or any government's). Why send humans into space at all, at
taxpayers' expense?

By this thinking, the US, for example, should pull out of the ISS,
and
end all manned spaceflight, period.

If you say, machines can do all we need, then this applies to earth
orbiting missions as much as to moon or Mars missions (or beyond).

Pulling out of space (manned presence therein) altogether will save
the taxpayers' BILLIONS.

Private industry may someday put man into orbit, someday on the Moon,
someday on Mars, someday beyond Mars. Yawn, even if we have to wait a
century and a half for this to begin.

So....end manned spaceflight! It is a mere relic of the Cold War, now
extinct!

Why Put Man in Space at Taxpayers' Expense?

Why waste $16 Billion dollars (total annual NASA budget) in one week in
Afghanistan blowing up wedding parties?

Why spend $184 Billion in giveaways to wall steers bankster criminals?

Why spend $5 Billion in an annual giveaway to Isreal so that they could
blow up palestinian *kids?

etc etc..

Neocons spend way more than NASA does just to pay off their propaganda
lackeys.
..

Robots suck. They are too limited.
We've had two rovers running around Mars for 2+ years and the only
thing they have done is sent back censored images of rocks.
(They can't even detect whether microbial life exists on Mars)

Finally.. there is no purpose in colonizing other planets with beeping
robots. You need people to colonize planets.

The commie chinese are sending astronauts to the Moon in a few years.
The Hindus will be sending manned spacecraft into orbit in the next two
years...

And just last month Iran announced a manned spacecraft program.

And yet here America sits on its thumb.. its last (publicized) manned
space achievemnet... 30 years in the PAST.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You missed the point. Why should we spend TAXPAYER dollars for manned
space?

On Tue, 22 Feb 2011 14:26:42 -0800 (PST), giveitawhirl2008
wrote:

"As I stand out here in the wonders of the unknown at Hadley, I sort
of realize there's a fundamental truth to our nature, Man must explore
.. . . and this is exploration at its greatest."

Dave Scott,
Apollo 15

On Feb 22, 6:30*pm, Brian Thorn wrote:
On Tue, 22 Feb 2011 14:26:42 -0800 (PST), giveitawhirl2008

wrote:

"As I stand out here in the wonders of the unknown at Hadley, I sort
of realize there's a fundamental truth to our nature, Man must explore
. . . and this is exploration at its greatest."

Dave Scott,
Apollo 15

As good an answer as any to the Luddite....

On 23/02/2011 9:26 AM, giveitawhirl2008 wrote:
All the arguments against spending BIG on space - except for the most
obivous one, of lack of funds - and/or in favor of robotic-instead-of-
human space explorations, could be applied to the US manned space
program (or any government's). Why send humans into space at all, at
taxpayers' expense?

By this thinking, the US, for example, should pull out of the ISS, and
end all manned spaceflight, period.

If you say, machines can do all we need, then this applies to earth
orbiting missions as much as to moon or Mars missions (or beyond).

Pulling out of space (manned presence therein) altogether will save
the taxpayers' BILLIONS.

Private industry may someday put man into orbit, someday on the Moon,
someday on Mars, someday beyond Mars. Yawn, even if we have to wait a
century and a half for this to begin.

So....end manned spaceflight! It is a mere relic of the Cold War, now
extinct!

The goal was no doubt political, but a lot was learned while achieving it.

It has long been recognised by governments that the free market (i.e.
non-taxpayer funding) is not effective when it comes to advanced
research - it costs a lot and the rewards, if they come at all,
frequently come too late. Investors usually want someting more certain.
Yet the rewards, if they come, can be huge. So if advanced research is
to be done, it has to be done by governments.

If there's a valid criticism of the current manned space program it is
that to much money is being spent merely having men in space, and
replicating previous technology for putting them there.

Sylvia.

On Tue, 22 Feb 2011 14:26:42 -0800 (PST), giveitawhirl2008
wrote:

All the arguments against spending BIG on space - except for the most
obivous one, of lack of funds - and/or in favor of robotic-instead-of-
human space explorations, could be applied to the US manned space
program (or any government's). Why send humans into space at all, at
taxpayers' expense?

By this thinking, the US, for example, should pull out of the ISS, and
end all manned spaceflight, period.

If you say, machines can do all we need, then this applies to earth
orbiting missions as much as to moon or Mars missions (or beyond).

Pulling out of space (manned presence therein) altogether will save
the taxpayers' BILLIONS.

Private industry may someday put man into orbit, someday on the Moon,
someday on Mars, someday beyond Mars. Yawn, even if we have to wait a
century and a half for this to begin.

So....end manned spaceflight! It is a mere relic of the Cold War, now
extinct!

Obogus, the coon from Kenya, already that............

On Feb 23, 12:26*am, giveitawhirl2008
wrote:
All the arguments against spending BIG on space - except for the most
obivous one, of lack of funds - and/or in favor of robotic-instead-of-
human space explorations, could be applied to the US manned space
program (or any government's). Why send humans into space at all, at
taxpayers' expense?

By this thinking, the US, for example, should pull out of the ISS, and
end all manned spaceflight, period.

If you say, machines can do all we need, then this applies to earth
orbiting missions as much as to moon or Mars missions (or beyond).

Pulling out of space (manned presence therein) altogether will save
the taxpayers' BILLIONS.

Private industry may someday put man into orbit, someday on the Moon,
someday on Mars, someday beyond Mars. Yawn, even if we have to wait a
century and a half for this to begin.

So....end manned spaceflight! It is a mere relic of the Cold War, now
extinct!

To open the way for private enterprise, as the Govt. did with aviation
and internet?
To create expertise that may impact favorably other industries?
To pave the way for "serious" scientific efforts (e.g., lunar
exploration, base, astronomy, etc)
Morale? National prestige?
Developing and maintaining medium/heavy lift capability that's also
useful for other things (asteroid defense)
Because the taxpayer WANTS IT !!!

Cutting the manned part of NASA or even all space funds won't do much.
Remember ALL the money is spent on Earth.

On 2/22/2011 6:30 PM, Brian Thorn wrote:
On Tue, 22 Feb 2011 14:26:42 -0800 (PST), giveitawhirl2008
wrote:

"As I stand out here in the wonders of the unknown at Hadley, I sort
of realize there's a fundamental truth to our nature, Man must explore
. . . and this is exploration at its greatest."

Dave Scott,
Apollo 15

Little did he suspect that the Nazis had gotten their first:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KEueJnsu80