Opportunity, the second Mars Explorer Rover is on the surface andtransmitting!

Craig Davidson wrote:


At 15 cents a day, would you agree that your efforts would be much more
productive if spent on the other much more expensive programs being funded
by the federal government ?

If I had my druthers I would eliminate -every program- or function of
government that was not directed toward defense of the lives and
property of citizens or peacefully resolving conflicts (law courts).
That means goodbye to welfare, both individual and corporate. By the
way, corporations are the biggest welfare bums in the country. Subsides
to corporations and other business should stop forthwith.

If you want something, pay for it.

I am particularly ****ed at NASA because its management is homicidally
negligent. They have killed two crews and destroyed two expensive
(albeit ill designed vessels). And they have not learned a damned thing
from these misfortunes. Furthermore they have lied to the crews about
the magnitude of the risks they are to take. That is unspeakable immoral.

Any engineer who brings up a safety concern when the management has
declared a mission "do or die" is in grave danger of losing his job and
being publicly denounced as a whistleblower and a trouble-maker. It is
very hard to find another job with such an albatross hung about the neck.

I am very interested in space-based enterprise. Our communication
systems are now dependent on comm-sats. We would be much worse off
without a working GPS. All these unmanned projects are not only
technically excellent, but -they pay for themselves-. The taxpayers do
not have be looted to keep these systems in operation. You and I pay for
these systems when we make telephone calls or subscribe to the services
that our ISP-s provide to us. That is how it -should- be. We pay (of our
own free will) and we get services we value.

If I thought a private company could make a go of launching NEO
functional sattelites I would invest my money. That is MY money. Not
YOUR money. If you are pro-space, join the L5 society.

The mark of a cillized man is that he knows what is his and what is not
his. The savage makes no such distinction. He looks, he wants, he grabs.
That is how our space program is now funded and it is a disgrace.

Bob Kolker

Craig Davidson wrote:


At 15 cents a day, would you agree that your efforts would be much more
productive if spent on the other much more expensive programs being funded
by the federal government ?

If I had my druthers I would eliminate -every program- or function of
government that was not directed toward defense of the lives and
property of citizens or peacefully resolving conflicts (law courts).
That means goodbye to welfare, both individual and corporate. By the
way, corporations are the biggest welfare bums in the country. Subsides
to corporations and other business should stop forthwith.

If you want something, pay for it.

I am particularly ****ed at NASA because its management is homicidally
negligent. They have killed two crews and destroyed two expensive
(albeit ill designed vessels). And they have not learned a damned thing
from these misfortunes. Furthermore they have lied to the crews about
the magnitude of the risks they are to take. That is unspeakable immoral.

Any engineer who brings up a safety concern when the management has
declared a mission "do or die" is in grave danger of losing his job and
being publicly denounced as a whistleblower and a trouble-maker. It is
very hard to find another job with such an albatross hung about the neck.

I am very interested in space-based enterprise. Our communication
systems are now dependent on comm-sats. We would be much worse off
without a working GPS. All these unmanned projects are not only
technically excellent, but -they pay for themselves-. The taxpayers do
not have be looted to keep these systems in operation. You and I pay for
these systems when we make telephone calls or subscribe to the services
that our ISP-s provide to us. That is how it -should- be. We pay (of our
own free will) and we get services we value.

If I thought a private company could make a go of launching NEO
functional sattelites I would invest my money. That is MY money. Not
YOUR money. If you are pro-space, join the L5 society.

The mark of a cillized man is that he knows what is his and what is not
his. The savage makes no such distinction. He looks, he wants, he grabs.
That is how our space program is now funded and it is a disgrace.

Bob Kolker

Chris L Peterson wrote:


To each their own. Personally, I'm happy to have my tax money go to space
exploration, particularly the sort that happens at JPL, where science is more
important than politics. I'm happy to see all sorts of long term science
projects publicly funded, because our economy simply isn't structured to fund
such things privately, and I think there is a huge public benefit (and I'm a
libertarian, although not an extreme one).

Jeepers. Edison invented the light bulb and Marconi invented wireless
telegraphy without government subsidy. The Wright Brothers built the
first successful HTA motor powered flyer using $1200 dollars of their
own money and 4 years of their own time. Samuel Langley with a $50,000
(about 2.5 million dollars present value) dollar grant from Congress
produced flops and splashes. Watt invented his steam engine with
government subsidies and Tesla invented A.C. motors and generators
without government subsidies. Einstein invented Special Theory of
Relativity on time filched from his duties as a patent clerk in
Switzerland. The government never paid him to do that, and if they found
out how he was spending his time they would have fired him.

Thousands of examples exist where government did not promote scientific
advancement. We have simply fallen into the habit of dipping into tax
funds. But the private examples show such dipping is not really necessary.

How did we become hooked on government loot? It was probably the
Manhattan Project during WW2. That was a necessity of war, but the bad
habits carried forth anyway.

Bob Kolker

Chris L Peterson wrote:


To each their own. Personally, I'm happy to have my tax money go to space
exploration, particularly the sort that happens at JPL, where science is more
important than politics. I'm happy to see all sorts of long term science
projects publicly funded, because our economy simply isn't structured to fund
such things privately, and I think there is a huge public benefit (and I'm a
libertarian, although not an extreme one).

Jeepers. Edison invented the light bulb and Marconi invented wireless
telegraphy without government subsidy. The Wright Brothers built the
first successful HTA motor powered flyer using $1200 dollars of their
own money and 4 years of their own time. Samuel Langley with a $50,000
(about 2.5 million dollars present value) dollar grant from Congress
produced flops and splashes. Watt invented his steam engine with
government subsidies and Tesla invented A.C. motors and generators
without government subsidies. Einstein invented Special Theory of
Relativity on time filched from his duties as a patent clerk in
Switzerland. The government never paid him to do that, and if they found
out how he was spending his time they would have fired him.

Thousands of examples exist where government did not promote scientific
advancement. We have simply fallen into the habit of dipping into tax
funds. But the private examples show such dipping is not really necessary.

How did we become hooked on government loot? It was probably the
Manhattan Project during WW2. That was a necessity of war, but the bad
habits carried forth anyway.

Bob Kolker

Chris L Peterson wrote:


To each their own. Personally, I'm happy to have my tax money go to space
exploration, particularly the sort that happens at JPL, where science is more
important than politics. I'm happy to see all sorts of long term science
projects publicly funded, because our economy simply isn't structured to fund
such things privately, and I think there is a huge public benefit (and I'm a
libertarian, although not an extreme one).

Jeepers. Edison invented the light bulb and Marconi invented wireless
telegraphy without government subsidy. The Wright Brothers built the
first successful HTA motor powered flyer using $1200 dollars of their
own money and 4 years of their own time. Samuel Langley with a $50,000
(about 2.5 million dollars present value) dollar grant from Congress
produced flops and splashes. Watt invented his steam engine with
government subsidies and Tesla invented A.C. motors and generators
without government subsidies. Einstein invented Special Theory of
Relativity on time filched from his duties as a patent clerk in
Switzerland. The government never paid him to do that, and if they found
out how he was spending his time they would have fired him.

Thousands of examples exist where government did not promote scientific
advancement. We have simply fallen into the habit of dipping into tax
funds. But the private examples show such dipping is not really necessary.

How did we become hooked on government loot? It was probably the
Manhattan Project during WW2. That was a necessity of war, but the bad
habits carried forth anyway.

Bob Kolker

On Sun, 25 Jan 2004 22:02:05 GMT, "Robert J. Kolker"
wrote:

Jeepers. Edison invented the light bulb and Marconi invented wireless
telegraphy without government subsidy...

Sure, and huge amounts of scientific development continue to be done privately.
I didn't say it should all be publicly funded. I just think there is a certain
class of science where the commercial benefits may be small, or too far out, for
private funding to be viable. These may nevertheless have great value (I, for
one, believe something can be valuable without being commercial.) Space
exploration, particle physics, certain social studies... these are things that I
think should happen, and I don't see where the money is going to come from
except the government. I don't have a problem with that, and I give my vote to
people supporting this kind of research.

Do you really think that something like the Hubble Telescope would ever have
happened without public support? Do you think the return on that investment was
poor?

_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

On Sun, 25 Jan 2004 22:02:05 GMT, "Robert J. Kolker"
wrote:

Jeepers. Edison invented the light bulb and Marconi invented wireless
telegraphy without government subsidy...

Sure, and huge amounts of scientific development continue to be done privately.
I didn't say it should all be publicly funded. I just think there is a certain
class of science where the commercial benefits may be small, or too far out, for
private funding to be viable. These may nevertheless have great value (I, for
one, believe something can be valuable without being commercial.) Space
exploration, particle physics, certain social studies... these are things that I
think should happen, and I don't see where the money is going to come from
except the government. I don't have a problem with that, and I give my vote to
people supporting this kind of research.

Do you really think that something like the Hubble Telescope would ever have
happened without public support? Do you think the return on that investment was
poor?

_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

On Sun, 25 Jan 2004 22:02:05 GMT, "Robert J. Kolker"
wrote:

Jeepers. Edison invented the light bulb and Marconi invented wireless
telegraphy without government subsidy...

Sure, and huge amounts of scientific development continue to be done privately.
I didn't say it should all be publicly funded. I just think there is a certain
class of science where the commercial benefits may be small, or too far out, for
private funding to be viable. These may nevertheless have great value (I, for
one, believe something can be valuable without being commercial.) Space
exploration, particle physics, certain social studies... these are things that I
think should happen, and I don't see where the money is going to come from
except the government. I don't have a problem with that, and I give my vote to
people supporting this kind of research.

Do you really think that something like the Hubble Telescope would ever have
happened without public support? Do you think the return on that investment was
poor?

_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

"Robert J. Kolker" wrote:



Craig Davidson wrote:


At 15 cents a day, would you agree that your efforts would be much more
productive if spent on the other much more expensive programs being funded
by the federal government ?

If I had my druthers I would eliminate -every program- or function of
government that was not directed toward defense of the lives and
property of citizens or peacefully resolving conflicts (law courts).
That means goodbye to welfare, both individual and corporate. By the
way, corporations are the biggest welfare bums in the country. Subsides
to corporations and other business should stop forthwith.

If you want something, pay for it.

I am particularly ****ed at NASA because its management is homicidally
negligent. They have killed two crews and destroyed two expensive
(albeit ill designed vessels). And they have not learned a damned thing
from these misfortunes. Furthermore they have lied to the crews about
the magnitude of the risks they are to take. That is unspeakable immoral.

Any engineer who brings up a safety concern when the management has
declared a mission "do or die" is in grave danger of losing his job and
being publicly denounced as a whistleblower and a trouble-maker. It is
very hard to find another job with such an albatross hung about the neck.

I am very interested in space-based enterprise. Our communication
systems are now dependent on comm-sats. We would be much worse off
without a working GPS. All these unmanned projects are not only
technically excellent, but -they pay for themselves-. The taxpayers do
not have be looted to keep these systems in operation. You and I pay for
these systems when we make telephone calls or subscribe to the services
that our ISP-s provide to us. That is how it -should- be. We pay (of our
own free will) and we get services we value.

If I thought a private company could make a go of launching NEO
functional sattelites I would invest my money. That is MY money. Not
YOUR money. If you are pro-space, join the L5 society.

The mark of a cillized man is that he knows what is his and what is not
his. The savage makes no such distinction. He looks, he wants, he grabs.
That is how our space program is now funded and it is a disgrace.

Bob Kolker


Please take your rants and go away.

plonk That is the sound of you going into the killfile.

"Robert J. Kolker" wrote:



Craig Davidson wrote:


At 15 cents a day, would you agree that your efforts would be much more
productive if spent on the other much more expensive programs being funded
by the federal government ?

If I had my druthers I would eliminate -every program- or function of
government that was not directed toward defense of the lives and
property of citizens or peacefully resolving conflicts (law courts).
That means goodbye to welfare, both individual and corporate. By the
way, corporations are the biggest welfare bums in the country. Subsides
to corporations and other business should stop forthwith.

If you want something, pay for it.

I am particularly ****ed at NASA because its management is homicidally
negligent. They have killed two crews and destroyed two expensive
(albeit ill designed vessels). And they have not learned a damned thing
from these misfortunes. Furthermore they have lied to the crews about
the magnitude of the risks they are to take. That is unspeakable immoral.

Any engineer who brings up a safety concern when the management has
declared a mission "do or die" is in grave danger of losing his job and
being publicly denounced as a whistleblower and a trouble-maker. It is
very hard to find another job with such an albatross hung about the neck.

I am very interested in space-based enterprise. Our communication
systems are now dependent on comm-sats. We would be much worse off
without a working GPS. All these unmanned projects are not only
technically excellent, but -they pay for themselves-. The taxpayers do
not have be looted to keep these systems in operation. You and I pay for
these systems when we make telephone calls or subscribe to the services
that our ISP-s provide to us. That is how it -should- be. We pay (of our
own free will) and we get services we value.

If I thought a private company could make a go of launching NEO
functional sattelites I would invest my money. That is MY money. Not
YOUR money. If you are pro-space, join the L5 society.

The mark of a cillized man is that he knows what is his and what is not
his. The savage makes no such distinction. He looks, he wants, he grabs.
That is how our space program is now funded and it is a disgrace.

Bob Kolker


Please take your rants and go away.

plonk That is the sound of you going into the killfile.