John Glenn Loses his Soul

You would think that astronaut hero John Glenn would be the first to cheer
getting Americans back to the Moon and eventually to Mars. However, retired
politician John Glenn has other notions:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...nm/space_bases
_dc_2

It says in the Good Book that a little profits a man to gain the whole world
at the cost of his soul. But Mr. Glenn, for a John Kerry Presidency?

--
Mark R. Whittington
http://curmudgeons.blogspot.com
Co-author of Nocturne, a Novel of Suspense
http://www.xlibris.com/nocturne.html
Author of Children of Apollo
http://www.xlibris.com/childrenofapollo.html

On Thu, 04 Mar 2004 23:59:47 GMT, in a place far, far away, "Mark R.
Whittington" made the phosphor on my monitor
glow in such a way as to indicate that:

You would think that astronaut hero John Glenn would be the first to cheer
getting Americans back to the Moon and eventually to Mars.

Why would I think that? John Glenn has never shown any interest in
getting anyone into space other than John Glenn.

"Rand Simberg" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 04 Mar 2004 23:59:47 GMT, in a place far, far away, "Mark R.
Whittington" made the phosphor on my monitor
glow in such a way as to indicate that:

You would think that astronaut hero John Glenn would be the first to
cheer
getting Americans back to the Moon and eventually to Mars.

Why would I think that? John Glenn has never shown any interest in
getting anyone into space other than John Glenn.

Rand, that's a good point. Maybe Glenn already sold his soul to get that
seat on the shuttle.

Mark R. Whittington wrote:
You would think that astronaut hero John Glenn would be the first to cheer
getting Americans back to the Moon and eventually to Mars. However, retired
politician John Glenn has other notions:



http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...nm/space_bases
_dc_2

(some snipping and editing to keep URL intact)


It says in the Good Book that a little profits a man to gain the whole world
at the cost of his soul. But Mr. Glenn, for a John Kerry Presidency?


Glenn favors the direct-to-Mars rather than Moon-to-Mars. I can see
arguments for his viewpoint.



--
Hop David
http://clowder.net/hop/index.html

On Thu, 04 Mar 2004 17:20:39 -0700, Hop David
wrote:



Mark R. Whittington wrote:
You would think that astronaut hero John Glenn would be the first to cheer
getting Americans back to the Moon and eventually to Mars. However, retired
politician John Glenn has other notions:



http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...nm/space_bases
_dc_2

(some snipping and editing to keep URL intact)


It says in the Good Book that a little profits a man to gain the whole world
at the cost of his soul. But Mr. Glenn, for a John Kerry Presidency?


Glenn favors the direct-to-Mars rather than Moon-to-Mars. I can see
arguments for his viewpoint.

I can also see an argument that if Clinton had proposed it, he'd be
100% behind it.

Doug

"Mark R. Whittington" wrote in message hlink.net...
You would think that astronaut hero John Glenn would be the first to cheer
getting Americans back to the Moon and eventually to Mars. However, retired
politician John Glenn has other notions:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...nm/space_bases
_dc_2

It says in the Good Book that a little profits a man to gain the whole world
at the cost of his soul. But Mr. Glenn, for a John Kerry Presidency?

Of course. He's a Democrat, isn't he? Mr. Kerry has said
pretty much the same line (that ISS shouldn't be abandoned).
Glenn made some valid points. He argued that NASA would save
little actual money by cutting ISS research. He argued that
NASA was likely to get sidetracked on Lunar exploration
(building a mini-Cape Canaveral on the Moon, etc.). He liked
the idea of returning to the Moon, but believes that a more
sensible approach to send humans to Mars is via a direct assult.

- Ed Kyle

ed kyle wrote:

"Mark R. Whittington" wrote in message hlink.net...
You would think that astronaut hero John Glenn would be the first to cheer
getting Americans back to the Moon and eventually to Mars. However, retired
politician John Glenn has other notions:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...nm/space_bases
_dc_2

It says in the Good Book that a little profits a man to gain the whole world
at the cost of his soul. But Mr. Glenn, for a John Kerry Presidency?

Of course. He's a Democrat, isn't he? Mr. Kerry has said
pretty much the same line (that ISS shouldn't be abandoned).
Glenn made some valid points. He argued that NASA would save
little actual money by cutting ISS research. He argued that
NASA was likely to get sidetracked on Lunar exploration
(building a mini-Cape Canaveral on the Moon, etc.). He liked
the idea of returning to the Moon, but believes that a more
sensible approach to send humans to Mars is via a direct assult.

- Ed Kyle

I believe it would be a good idea to concentrate on getting an
effective and moderate cost reusable transportation system to
orbit and a functional space station before or in parallel with
planning either Lunar or Mars exploration and basis.

I have not seen that in either the NASA plans for recovery
from the Columbia accident or the Bush plan for Lunar and
Mars exploration. So far I don't even see a coherent plan
being presented.

If we plan for a low orbit assembly of a Mars exploration
vehicle we need a functional space station in a better orbit
than the ISS. The old orbital maintenance and refueling
station idea remains a good one.

I note that I see metaphorical theology being advanced for
John Glenn's views. I presume Whittington will place me in
the same church.

After all, I am a Democrat.

Mike Walsh

"Michael Walsh" wrote in message
...


ed kyle wrote:

"Mark R. Whittington" wrote in message
hlink.net...
You would think that astronaut hero John Glenn would be the first to
cheer
getting Americans back to the Moon and eventually to Mars. However,
retired
politician John Glenn has other notions:


http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...nm/space_bases
_dc_2

It says in the Good Book that a little profits a man to gain the whole
world
at the cost of his soul. But Mr. Glenn, for a John Kerry Presidency?

Of course. He's a Democrat, isn't he? Mr. Kerry has said
pretty much the same line (that ISS shouldn't be abandoned).
Glenn made some valid points. He argued that NASA would save
little actual money by cutting ISS research. He argued that
NASA was likely to get sidetracked on Lunar exploration
(building a mini-Cape Canaveral on the Moon, etc.). He liked
the idea of returning to the Moon, but believes that a more
sensible approach to send humans to Mars is via a direct assult.

- Ed Kyle

I believe it would be a good idea to concentrate on getting an
effective and moderate cost reusable transportation system to
orbit and a functional space station before or in parallel with
planning either Lunar or Mars exploration and basis.

I have not seen that in either the NASA plans for recovery
from the Columbia accident or the Bush plan for Lunar and
Mars exploration. So far I don't even see a coherent plan
being presented.

If we plan for a low orbit assembly of a Mars exploration
vehicle we need a functional space station in a better orbit
than the ISS. The old orbital maintenance and refueling
station idea remains a good one.

I note that I see metaphorical theology being advanced for
John Glenn's views. I presume Whittington will place me in
the same church.

After all, I am a Democrat.

Mike Walsh



Well, Mr. Walsh, what I was doing was highlighting Glenn's opposing a
project that he would surely support were it not proposed by a Republican
President. If you believe that this is a charecteristic of all Democrats,
then I cannot argue with you.

In article k.net,
Mark R. Whittington wrote:
Well, Mr. Walsh, what I was doing was highlighting Glenn's opposing a
project that he would surely support were it not proposed by a Republican
President. If you believe that this is a charecteristic of all Democrats,
then I cannot argue with you.

Both Glenn and O'Keefe can take a one-way trip to the moon, Mars, or
LEO for all I care. But don't worry, in the next 20 years there won't
be a moonbase, there won't be a manned mission to Mars, and the space
station will go nowhere. The most likely outcome in this time
frame is that manned spaceflight will shrink from farce to fantasy.
The second possibility is that it will continue to limp along,
at the most with a re-enactment of Apollo.

Meanwhile unmanned missions continue to succeed spectacularly.
--
/\ Greg Kuperberg (UC Davis)
/ \
\ / Visit the Math ArXiv Front at http://front.math.ucdavis.edu/
\/ * All the math that's fit to e-print *

On Fri, 5 Mar 2004 06:36:06 +0000 (UTC), in a place far, far away,
(Greg Kuperberg) made the phosphor on
my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that:

Both Glenn and O'Keefe can take a one-way trip to the moon, Mars, or
LEO for all I care. But don't worry, in the next 20 years there won't
be a moonbase, there won't be a manned mission to Mars, and the space
station will go nowhere. The most likely outcome in this time
frame is that manned spaceflight will shrink from farce to fantasy.
The second possibility is that it will continue to limp along,
at the most with a re-enactment of Apollo.

Meanwhile unmanned missions continue to succeed spectacularly.

You just continue to engage in your own delusions, Greg.