I Dream of Jeanne

This it: the end of the shuttles, and with them the end of the arthritic
NASA bureaucracy.

Richard Schumacher wrote:

This it: the end of the shuttles, and with them the end of the arthritic
NASA bureaucracy.

Yes!

Down with NASA! Down with the space program!

Let's spend the money where it is really useful.
We could send more troops to Bagdad with all that money.
We could even start bombing another third world country
arab of preference like Iran, Syria, that's useful!

All that bureaucrats were never able to BOMB anything out
of existence what are they useful for?

They just babbled of "coming in peace for all mankind"
What a piece of BS!!!

They only managed to send probes to almost every planet in the
solar system. Nothing! No dead bodies, no lost wars!

SCRAP THEM!

Let's sing the hymn of free enterprise once again, and
start from scratch returning to the leves of the sixties.

Down with the space program!

---
I stated in this group a week ago:
The next manned U.S. flight will not happen before 10-20 years.
I fear I will be right.

Joann Evans wrote:

Better access to LEO won't happen by merely grounding the shuttles,
it'll happen by building and flying something that can do it better.

Sure. But the shuttle is serving no purpose that justifies its cost.(*)
Eliminating it would be a net plus, *even if nothing replaced it*.

Paul

(*) Ditto for ISS

On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 09:52:27 -0500, "Paul F. Dietz"
wrote:

Better access to LEO won't happen by merely grounding the shuttles,
it'll happen by building and flying something that can do it better.

Sure. But the shuttle is serving no purpose that justifies its cost.(*)
Eliminating it would be a net plus, *even if nothing replaced it*.

Paul

(*) Ditto for ISS

I bet you'd be the first to complain about the loss of high-tech jobs
in this country once Shuttle and ISS were shut down. Just what the
worlds needs... another United Kingdom.

Brian

On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 12:20:23 -0500, in a place far, far away, Brian
Thorn made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such
a way as to indicate that:

Better access to LEO won't happen by merely grounding the shuttles,
it'll happen by building and flying something that can do it better.

Sure. But the shuttle is serving no purpose that justifies its cost.(*)
Eliminating it would be a net plus, *even if nothing replaced it*.

Paul

(*) Ditto for ISS

I bet you'd be the first to complain about the loss of high-tech jobs
in this country once Shuttle and ISS were shut down. Just what the
worlds needs...

I'd take that bet. ;-)

If the only purpose of the Shuttle and ISS is to create "high-tech"
jobs, there are far more effective ways to do that with the money.

Brian Thorn wrote:

I bet you'd be the first to complain about the loss of high-tech jobs
in this country once Shuttle and ISS were shut down. Just what the
worlds needs... another United Kingdom.

You overestimate the importance of the shuttle program or ISS in
the overall tech job market, and particularly in the part of the market
in which I work. I've deliberately avoided aerospace, since I've had
no confidence that it will thrive. I'm sorry for those who let romance
(or NASA propaganda) trump realism in their career choices.

Paul

Paul F. Dietz wrote:

Joann Evans wrote:

Better access to LEO won't happen by merely grounding the shuttles,
it'll happen by building and flying something that can do it better.


Sure. But the shuttle is serving no purpose that justifies its cost.(*)
Eliminating it would be a net plus, *even if nothing replaced it*.

Paul

(*) Ditto for ISS

You can't see any purpose in a spaceship Paul. Those are concepts
beyond your world horizon.

A spaceship is of no use to you.

What would you do with it?

Concepts such as exploration, and the joy of discovery are alien
to you. You just can't see them.

I would calm down Paul, range the gun, turn on your brain and reflect...

Well...

What can a spaceship be used for?

jacob navia wrote:

You can't see any purpose in a spaceship Paul. Those are concepts
beyond your world horizon.

That's a wonderful argument, jacob. It's utterly unfalsifiable.
Basically, you're expressing an article of faith.

Concepts such as exploration, and the joy of discovery are alien
to you. You just can't see them.

I would calm down Paul, range the gun, turn on your brain and reflect...

If I were you, I'd think some more about the separation of church
and state, and decide that maybe the government shouldn't be funding
this cult.

A free clue, boy: the value of an idea is demonstrated by convincing
the skeptical, not by convincing the true believer.

If you can't convince me, that's *your* problem, not mine.

Paul

Paul F. Dietz wrote:

If I were you, I'd think some more about the separation of church
and state, and decide that maybe the government shouldn't be funding
this cult.


Space exploration is not a religion, it is an activity.
People at NASA and people following NASA's steps are
engaged in exploration of the ocean just above us:
200-400 Km high.

Exploration is one of the oldest human activities,
the origin of sailors goes down in the night of time.

I can't explain you exploration if you do not understand
it by your own means, in the same vein as I can't
explain you music. You have to hear it and if music
doesn't mean anything to you I can't explain it why we
should spend time and effort educating kids and ourselves
playing and listening to music.

A free clue, boy: the value of an idea is demonstrated by convincing
the skeptical, not by convincing the true believer.


I do not want to convice you of anything. Actual
exploration goes on, and it will increase because we
are humans.

There is no need to do any P.R. office for space.

If you can't convince me, that's *your* problem, not mine.

If you can't see the purpose of a spaceship Paul, I can't convince
you of anything. We have no common ground you see?

On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 22:17:45 +0200, in a place far, far away, jacob
navia made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:

If you can't see the purpose of a spaceship Paul, I can't convince
you of anything. We have no common ground you see?

It is possible to both see the purpose of a spaceship, and to think
NASA's manned space program a collosal waste of money (money that
might be better invested in spaceships).