NASA - Our Fascist Space Agency

Thomas Lee Elifritz wrote:
http://cosmic.lifeform.org/?p=169

NASA Watch covered it too.

Michael Griffin goes fascist.

NOAA under Conrad Lautenberg is just as bad.

This is what you get when you vote fascists into office.

http://cosmic.lifeform.org

Not fascist, but corrupt and moronic. Griffin says:
There are many, many other groups who enjoy giving, or who believe

themselves to be empowered to give, advice to NASA.
Those other groups would be scientists objecting to the politicians'
plan to kill off nearly all NASA science in favor of a 50th anniversary
joyride to the moon. What a jackass. I suspect that they're trying to
burn NASA's budget to obstruct scientific discoveries that are
inconvenient to their political allies, i.e. Creationists. Further
proof of the Big Bang in particular.

On 24 Aug 2006 12:14:42 -0700, in a place far, far away, "Don't Be
Evil" made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:

Thomas Lee Elifritz wrote:
http://cosmic.lifeform.org/?p=169

NASA Watch covered it too.

Michael Griffin goes fascist.

NOAA under Conrad Lautenberg is just as bad.

This is what you get when you vote fascists into office.

http://cosmic.lifeform.org

Not fascist, but corrupt and moronic. Griffin says:
There are many, many other groups who enjoy giving, or who believe

themselves to be empowered to give, advice to NASA.
Those other groups would be scientists objecting to the politicians'
plan to kill off nearly all NASA science in favor of a 50th anniversary
joyride to the moon. What a jackass. I suspect that they're trying to
burn NASA's budget to obstruct scientific discoveries that are
inconvenient to their political allies, i.e. Creationists.

Yes, of course. That's what they're doing.

rolling eyes at the idiocy

On 24 Aug 2006 12:14:42 -0700, "Don't Be Evil"
wrote:

Those other groups would be scientists objecting to the politicians'
plan to kill off nearly all NASA science in favor of a 50th anniversary
joyride to the moon.

$5+ Billion a year is "killing off"?

I really wonder how you folks can make some of these claims with a
straight face.

Brian

You sir, and use that term graciously in this case, are a total and complete
asshole.




"Don't Be Evil" wrote in message
ps.com...
Thomas Lee Elifritz wrote:
http://cosmic.lifeform.org/?p=169

NASA Watch covered it too.

Michael Griffin goes fascist.

NOAA under Conrad Lautenberg is just as bad.

This is what you get when you vote fascists into office.

http://cosmic.lifeform.org

Not fascist, but corrupt and moronic. Griffin says:
There are many, many other groups who enjoy giving, or who believe

themselves to be empowered to give, advice to NASA.
Those other groups would be scientists objecting to the politicians'
plan to kill off nearly all NASA science in favor of a 50th anniversary
joyride to the moon. What a jackass. I suspect that they're trying to
burn NASA's budget to obstruct scientific discoveries that are
inconvenient to their political allies, i.e. Creationists. Further
proof of the Big Bang in particular.

Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), Don't Be Evil said
in alt.impeach.bush:
Not fascist, but corrupt and moronic.

And who has fundamentalist religion as his puppetmaster. If it is ever
confirmed that we are not alone in the universe, RELIGION is the one who
stand to lose the most.

--
C an't
I nterpret
A nything

Don't Be Evil wrote:

Thomas Lee Elifritz wrote:

http://cosmic.lifeform.org/?p=169

NASA Watch covered it too.

Michael Griffin goes fascist.

NOAA under Conrad Lautenberg is just as bad.

This is what you get when you vote fascists into office.

http://cosmic.lifeform.org


Not fascist, but corrupt and moronic. Griffin says:
There are many, many other groups who enjoy giving, or who believe

themselves to be empowered to give, advice to NASA.
Those other groups would be scientists objecting to the politicians'
plan to kill off nearly all NASA science in favor of a 50th anniversary
joyride to the moon. What a jackass. I suspect that they're trying to
burn NASA's budget to obstruct scientific discoveries that are
inconvenient to their political allies, i.e. Creationists. Further
proof of the Big Bang in particular.


As if no one else would ever learn them? Neither you (perhaps) nor
'they' are so arrogant as to assume that all science flows (or doesn't)
from the United States...

Oh, and BTW, geologists, at least, are *quite* happy with the
returns from those 'joyrides to the Moon.' It's true that Apollo and
Orion weren't/aren't just for science, and you can argue const/benefit
ratios, but some science most certainly did/will come of it.

And more interestingly, it appears that the trend toward lower-cost
space access (which is something both manned/robot folks should both get
behind) *is* coming more from the United States (though not NASA) than
anywhere else....

--

Frank

You know what to remove to reply...

Check out my web page: http://www.geocities.com/stardolphin1/link2.htm

"Man who say it cannot be done, should not interrupt man doing it."
- Chinese Proverb

Frank Glover wrote:
Don't Be Evil wrote:

Thomas Lee Elifritz wrote:

http://cosmic.lifeform.org/?p=169

NASA Watch covered it too.

Michael Griffin goes fascist.

NOAA under Conrad Lautenberg is just as bad.

This is what you get when you vote fascists into office.

http://cosmic.lifeform.org


Not fascist, but corrupt and moronic. Griffin says:
There are many, many other groups who enjoy giving, or who believe

themselves to be empowered to give, advice to NASA.
Those other groups would be scientists objecting to the politicians'
plan to kill off nearly all NASA science in favor of a 50th anniversary
joyride to the moon. What a jackass. I suspect that they're trying to
burn NASA's budget to obstruct scientific discoveries that are
inconvenient to their political allies, i.e. Creationists. Further
proof of the Big Bang in particular.


As if no one else would ever learn them? Neither you (perhaps) nor
'they' are so arrogant as to assume that all science flows (or doesn't)
from the United States...

Oh, and BTW, geologists, at least, are *quite* happy with the returns
from those 'joyrides to the Moon.' It's true that Apollo and Orion
weren't/aren't just for science, and you can argue const/benefit ratios,
but some science most certainly did/will come of it.

You mean those same geologists that gave us global warming,
overpopulation and a completely fraudulent civilization?

Ah ... those geologists. We are so happy to give them another sever
hundred billion dollars to look at some worked over moon rocks.

And more interestingly, it appears that the trend toward lower-cost
space access (which is something both manned/robot folks should both get
behind) *is* coming more from the United States (though not NASA) than
anywhere else....

You are completely full of ****. But you knew that.

http://cosmic.lifeform.org

Thomas Lee Elifritz wrote:
Frank Glover wrote:

Don't Be Evil wrote:

Thomas Lee Elifritz wrote:

http://cosmic.lifeform.org/?p=169

NASA Watch covered it too.

Michael Griffin goes fascist.

NOAA under Conrad Lautenberg is just as bad.

This is what you get when you vote fascists into office.

http://cosmic.lifeform.org



Not fascist, but corrupt and moronic. Griffin says:
There are many, many other groups who enjoy giving, or who believe

themselves to be empowered to give, advice to NASA.
Those other groups would be scientists objecting to the politicians'
plan to kill off nearly all NASA science in favor of a 50th anniversary
joyride to the moon. What a jackass. I suspect that they're trying to
burn NASA's budget to obstruct scientific discoveries that are
inconvenient to their political allies, i.e. Creationists. Further
proof of the Big Bang in particular.


As if no one else would ever learn them? Neither you (perhaps) nor
'they' are so arrogant as to assume that all science flows (or
doesn't) from the United States...

Oh, and BTW, geologists, at least, are *quite* happy with the
returns from those 'joyrides to the Moon.' It's true that Apollo and
Orion weren't/aren't just for science, and you can argue const/benefit
ratios, but some science most certainly did/will come of it.


You mean those same geologists that gave us global warming,
overpopulation and a completely fraudulent civilization?

??? You aremaking ZERO sense here.

Overuse of fossil fuels seem to be behind global warming.

Improved sanitation, agriculture, medicine and reduced infant
mortality, with no equal (and I emphasize 'equal') decrease in
fertility, gives us overpopulation.

You need to be more specific as to what a sweeping assertion
'fradulent civilization' means...

And then tell me how to lay the above at the foot of geologists. I
happen to know ne at JSC. I suspect she'd be quite amused.


Ah ... those geologists. We are so happy to give them another sever
hundred billion dollars to look at some worked over moon rocks.

And more interestingly, it appears that the trend toward lower-cost
space access (which is something both manned/robot folks should both
get behind) *is* coming more from the United States (though not NASA)
than anywhere else....


You are completely full of ****. But you knew that.

http://cosmic.lifeform.org


Ah, so you believe spaceflight technology will remain as it is for
all time? Thae even a hundred years from now, we'll be launching small
payloads on (essentially) converted ICBMs? You clearly haven't lived
more than a fraction of the last century, or you'd know enough not to
blow off almost any technological change so cavileirly.

That the space access situation will improve, is a virtual given.
It's only a matter of who does it, and when. And currently it's most
likely to be done by non-government people in the United States.

THAT is what I know, Thomas. Find your fecal mater elsewhere.



--

Frank

You know what to remove to reply...

Check out my web page: http://www.geocities.com/stardolphin1/link2.htm

"Man who say it cannot be done, should not interrupt man doing it."
- Chinese Proverb

Don't Be Evil wrote:

Those other groups would be scientists objecting to the politicians'
plan to kill off nearly all NASA science in favor of a 50th anniversary
joyride to the moon.

You don't think that we'll learn anything useful to science on the
Moon? Has it ever occurred to you that establishing a Lunar presence
is a step towards constructing the long-desired Farside
radiotelescopes, for instance?

What a jackass. I suspect that they're trying to
burn NASA's budget to obstruct scientific discoveries that are
inconvenient to their political allies, i.e. Creationists. Further
proof of the Big Bang in particular.

I think that's already been proved to everyone's satisfaction -- we now
have _pictures_ indicating the structure of the Universe a few million
years afterward, for instance.

- Jordan

Jordan wrote:
Don't Be Evil wrote:
Those other groups would be scientists objecting to the politicians'
plan to kill off nearly all NASA science in favor of a 50th anniversary
joyride to the moon.

You don't think that we'll learn anything useful to science on the
Moon? Has it ever occurred to you that establishing a Lunar presence
is a step towards constructing the long-desired Farside
radiotelescopes, for instance?

That would be great, but I hardly think Orion is going to do it.

What a jackass. I suspect that they're trying to
burn NASA's budget to obstruct scientific discoveries that are
inconvenient to their political allies, i.e. Creationists. Further
proof of the Big Bang in particular.

I think that's already been proved to everyone's satisfaction -- we now
have _pictures_ indicating the structure of the Universe a few million
years afterward, for instance.

Right, that was a satellite if I recall correctly.

Face it, we're throwing away our future on a ride to the moon. There is
no doubt in most people's minds that the ESAS space launch architecture
is fundamentally flawed. Most of us are thinking in terms of what we can
salvage from it when it is killed. In particular, the ten meter ET, the
SSMEs, and yes, the SRBs for the really big jobs. But the J2, the Orion
and the Stick are a complete loss. Even Mr. Big is well aware of that.

Speaking of Mr. Big, I expect a big announcement from him any day now.
Certainly he is now in a position to realize that NASA isn't going to
come through for him in terms of a credible space launch architecture.

The other thing to look at is Grumman and Boeing. Here we have premier
shipbuilders and aircraft designers, with a perfectly good rocket on
line and ready to go. Somebody certainly is going to step in and take up
the NASA slack. A six man capsule on a Delta IV Medium upper stage, with
a new Pratt and Whitney engine, is very high on the priority list here.

I just can't believe the way this whole Bush fiasco is developing, but
with this administration, the worst case scenario always become real.

http://cosmic.lifeform.org