Nova (PBS) Tuesday - EXCELLENT Program

"JAS" wrote in message
...
"Robert J. Kolker" wrote in message
news:ZD6Kb.736785$HS4.5640135@attbi_s01...


Brian Tung wrote:

Robert J. Kolker wrote:

And they only cost $400,000,000 apiece. What a bargain! And how much
new
technology is spinning off of that effort?

Wouldn't it be nice if our space effort actually paid for itself?


That's a buck forty or so per lander, per person in the United States.
It's not extraordinarily cheap, but we've seen what NASA does with
cheap,
and sorry, no thank you.

You neglect to say the buck forty was taken whether or not the person
gave a damn about landing on Mars. Unless this is somehow related to our
national defense or keeping order in our land, I would say this is flat
out theft.


Although it would be commendable if the space effort paid for itself,
I
think it is unreasonable to expect it to do so.

You prefer theft?

It is an exploratory
effort. In my opinion, we need some basic science research that
cannot
be expected to yield results--certainly not monetary results--until
far
down the road. If we only conducted efforts that had an expectation
of
monetary return, we would stultify ourselves as a people.

At least we would not indulge in plunder of our own folk. If an effort
is so valuable I am sure the money can be raised in a voluntary fashion.

Any tax that is not earmarked for our defense or our safety if plunder
and redistribution. Governments are established to protect the lives
and property of the people who ordain them. Governments are not supposed
to be charitable with other people's money.

Bob Kolker


Sounds like a typical Republican.

For my part, I'd much rather spend the money on space exploration than
spend
it to send hundreds of young soldiers to their deaths based on lies from a
president who was not elected.

--


Map Of The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy:
http://www.freewebs.com/vrwc/


Yea...he was...

--
----
JAS
US Army (Retired)

"JAS" wrote in message
...
"Robert J. Kolker" wrote in message
news:ZD6Kb.736785$HS4.5640135@attbi_s01...


Brian Tung wrote:

Robert J. Kolker wrote:

And they only cost $400,000,000 apiece. What a bargain! And how much
new
technology is spinning off of that effort?

Wouldn't it be nice if our space effort actually paid for itself?


That's a buck forty or so per lander, per person in the United States.
It's not extraordinarily cheap, but we've seen what NASA does with
cheap,
and sorry, no thank you.

You neglect to say the buck forty was taken whether or not the person
gave a damn about landing on Mars. Unless this is somehow related to our
national defense or keeping order in our land, I would say this is flat
out theft.


Although it would be commendable if the space effort paid for itself,
I
think it is unreasonable to expect it to do so.

You prefer theft?

It is an exploratory
effort. In my opinion, we need some basic science research that
cannot
be expected to yield results--certainly not monetary results--until
far
down the road. If we only conducted efforts that had an expectation
of
monetary return, we would stultify ourselves as a people.

At least we would not indulge in plunder of our own folk. If an effort
is so valuable I am sure the money can be raised in a voluntary fashion.

Any tax that is not earmarked for our defense or our safety if plunder
and redistribution. Governments are established to protect the lives
and property of the people who ordain them. Governments are not supposed
to be charitable with other people's money.

Bob Kolker


Sounds like a typical Republican.

For my part, I'd much rather spend the money on space exploration than
spend
it to send hundreds of young soldiers to their deaths based on lies from a
president who was not elected.

--


Map Of The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy:
http://www.freewebs.com/vrwc/


Yea...he was...

--
----
JAS
US Army (Retired)

"JAS" wrote in message
...
"Robert J. Kolker" wrote in message
news:ZD6Kb.736785$HS4.5640135@attbi_s01...


Brian Tung wrote:

Robert J. Kolker wrote:

And they only cost $400,000,000 apiece. What a bargain! And how much
new
technology is spinning off of that effort?

Wouldn't it be nice if our space effort actually paid for itself?


That's a buck forty or so per lander, per person in the United States.
It's not extraordinarily cheap, but we've seen what NASA does with
cheap,
and sorry, no thank you.

You neglect to say the buck forty was taken whether or not the person
gave a damn about landing on Mars. Unless this is somehow related to our
national defense or keeping order in our land, I would say this is flat
out theft.


Although it would be commendable if the space effort paid for itself,
I
think it is unreasonable to expect it to do so.

You prefer theft?

It is an exploratory
effort. In my opinion, we need some basic science research that
cannot
be expected to yield results--certainly not monetary results--until
far
down the road. If we only conducted efforts that had an expectation
of
monetary return, we would stultify ourselves as a people.

At least we would not indulge in plunder of our own folk. If an effort
is so valuable I am sure the money can be raised in a voluntary fashion.

Any tax that is not earmarked for our defense or our safety if plunder
and redistribution. Governments are established to protect the lives
and property of the people who ordain them. Governments are not supposed
to be charitable with other people's money.

Bob Kolker


Sounds like a typical Republican.

For my part, I'd much rather spend the money on space exploration than
spend
it to send hundreds of young soldiers to their deaths based on lies from a
president who was not elected.

--


Map Of The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy:
http://www.freewebs.com/vrwc/


Yea...he was...

--
----
JAS
US Army (Retired)

In article , "JAS" writes:
"Robert J. Kolker" wrote in message
news:ZD6Kb.736785$HS4.5640135@attbi_s01...


Brian Tung wrote:

Robert J. Kolker wrote:

And they only cost $400,000,000 apiece. What a bargain! And how much new
technology is spinning off of that effort?

Wouldn't it be nice if our space effort actually paid for itself?


That's a buck forty or so per lander, per person in the United States.
It's not extraordinarily cheap, but we've seen what NASA does with
cheap,
and sorry, no thank you.

You neglect to say the buck forty was taken whether or not the person
gave a damn about landing on Mars. Unless this is somehow related to our
national defense or keeping order in our land, I would say this is flat
out theft.


Although it would be commendable if the space effort paid for itself, I
think it is unreasonable to expect it to do so.

You prefer theft?

It is an exploratory
effort. In my opinion, we need some basic science research that cannot
be expected to yield results--certainly not monetary results--until far
down the road. If we only conducted efforts that had an expectation of
monetary return, we would stultify ourselves as a people.

At least we would not indulge in plunder of our own folk. If an effort
is so valuable I am sure the money can be raised in a voluntary fashion.

Any tax that is not earmarked for our defense or our safety if plunder
and redistribution. Governments are established to protect the lives
and property of the people who ordain them. Governments are not supposed
to be charitable with other people's money.

Bob Kolker


Sounds like a typical Republican.

For my part, I'd much rather spend the money on space exploration than spend
it to send hundreds of young soldiers to their deaths based on lies from a
president who was not elected.

1) The president *was* elected.
2) 9/11 did happen.
3) Following 9/11 it takes a *moron* to believe that doing nothing, or
a purely defensive response is going to resolve the problem.
4) Therefore, you're a moron.
5) Plonk.

Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
| chances are he is doing just the same"

In article , "JAS" writes:
"Robert J. Kolker" wrote in message
news:ZD6Kb.736785$HS4.5640135@attbi_s01...


Brian Tung wrote:

Robert J. Kolker wrote:

And they only cost $400,000,000 apiece. What a bargain! And how much new
technology is spinning off of that effort?

Wouldn't it be nice if our space effort actually paid for itself?


That's a buck forty or so per lander, per person in the United States.
It's not extraordinarily cheap, but we've seen what NASA does with
cheap,
and sorry, no thank you.

You neglect to say the buck forty was taken whether or not the person
gave a damn about landing on Mars. Unless this is somehow related to our
national defense or keeping order in our land, I would say this is flat
out theft.


Although it would be commendable if the space effort paid for itself, I
think it is unreasonable to expect it to do so.

You prefer theft?

It is an exploratory
effort. In my opinion, we need some basic science research that cannot
be expected to yield results--certainly not monetary results--until far
down the road. If we only conducted efforts that had an expectation of
monetary return, we would stultify ourselves as a people.

At least we would not indulge in plunder of our own folk. If an effort
is so valuable I am sure the money can be raised in a voluntary fashion.

Any tax that is not earmarked for our defense or our safety if plunder
and redistribution. Governments are established to protect the lives
and property of the people who ordain them. Governments are not supposed
to be charitable with other people's money.

Bob Kolker


Sounds like a typical Republican.

For my part, I'd much rather spend the money on space exploration than spend
it to send hundreds of young soldiers to their deaths based on lies from a
president who was not elected.

1) The president *was* elected.
2) 9/11 did happen.
3) Following 9/11 it takes a *moron* to believe that doing nothing, or
a purely defensive response is going to resolve the problem.
4) Therefore, you're a moron.
5) Plonk.

Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
| chances are he is doing just the same"

In article , "JAS" writes:
"Robert J. Kolker" wrote in message
news:ZD6Kb.736785$HS4.5640135@attbi_s01...


Brian Tung wrote:

Robert J. Kolker wrote:

And they only cost $400,000,000 apiece. What a bargain! And how much new
technology is spinning off of that effort?

Wouldn't it be nice if our space effort actually paid for itself?


That's a buck forty or so per lander, per person in the United States.
It's not extraordinarily cheap, but we've seen what NASA does with
cheap,
and sorry, no thank you.

You neglect to say the buck forty was taken whether or not the person
gave a damn about landing on Mars. Unless this is somehow related to our
national defense or keeping order in our land, I would say this is flat
out theft.


Although it would be commendable if the space effort paid for itself, I
think it is unreasonable to expect it to do so.

You prefer theft?

It is an exploratory
effort. In my opinion, we need some basic science research that cannot
be expected to yield results--certainly not monetary results--until far
down the road. If we only conducted efforts that had an expectation of
monetary return, we would stultify ourselves as a people.

At least we would not indulge in plunder of our own folk. If an effort
is so valuable I am sure the money can be raised in a voluntary fashion.

Any tax that is not earmarked for our defense or our safety if plunder
and redistribution. Governments are established to protect the lives
and property of the people who ordain them. Governments are not supposed
to be charitable with other people's money.

Bob Kolker


Sounds like a typical Republican.

For my part, I'd much rather spend the money on space exploration than spend
it to send hundreds of young soldiers to their deaths based on lies from a
president who was not elected.

1) The president *was* elected.
2) 9/11 did happen.
3) Following 9/11 it takes a *moron* to believe that doing nothing, or
a purely defensive response is going to resolve the problem.
4) Therefore, you're a moron.
5) Plonk.

Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
| chances are he is doing just the same"

In article 1VdKb.755898$Fm2.701597@attbi_s04,
"Robert J. Kolker" wrote:


Happy Dog wrote:


You mean made a financial profit? Sure. Assuming that you see some
value
in exploration, what programs of this nature could pay for themselves in
the
short term?

None. Projects that don't pay should be supported by voluntary
subscription. We could all join the L5 Society, for example. Nearly one
billion dollars on a pair of landers that will be dead in 90 days, and
will probably tell us there is no water on Mars. Whoopie!. I would
rather the money be invested in finding cures to contagious diseases
that might afflict you and me. In the mean time we have billions
invested in space communications which have the virtue of being of some
use to some people and are paid for privately. If you don't want to pay,
then don't use a cellphone or a datalink to and from an orbiting comsat.

And you would have never been able to access an orbiting comsat
IF there had never been a goverment doing the R&D work first.

There isn't any way you can predict what will and what will not
be a side effect of space exploration. The only thing you can
predict is that, if there is none, there will be no side effects.

/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

In article 1VdKb.755898$Fm2.701597@attbi_s04,
"Robert J. Kolker" wrote:


Happy Dog wrote:


You mean made a financial profit? Sure. Assuming that you see some
value
in exploration, what programs of this nature could pay for themselves in
the
short term?

None. Projects that don't pay should be supported by voluntary
subscription. We could all join the L5 Society, for example. Nearly one
billion dollars on a pair of landers that will be dead in 90 days, and
will probably tell us there is no water on Mars. Whoopie!. I would
rather the money be invested in finding cures to contagious diseases
that might afflict you and me. In the mean time we have billions
invested in space communications which have the virtue of being of some
use to some people and are paid for privately. If you don't want to pay,
then don't use a cellphone or a datalink to and from an orbiting comsat.

And you would have never been able to access an orbiting comsat
IF there had never been a goverment doing the R&D work first.

There isn't any way you can predict what will and what will not
be a side effect of space exploration. The only thing you can
predict is that, if there is none, there will be no side effects.

/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

In article 1VdKb.755898$Fm2.701597@attbi_s04,
"Robert J. Kolker" wrote:


Happy Dog wrote:


You mean made a financial profit? Sure. Assuming that you see some
value
in exploration, what programs of this nature could pay for themselves in
the
short term?

None. Projects that don't pay should be supported by voluntary
subscription. We could all join the L5 Society, for example. Nearly one
billion dollars on a pair of landers that will be dead in 90 days, and
will probably tell us there is no water on Mars. Whoopie!. I would
rather the money be invested in finding cures to contagious diseases
that might afflict you and me. In the mean time we have billions
invested in space communications which have the virtue of being of some
use to some people and are paid for privately. If you don't want to pay,
then don't use a cellphone or a datalink to and from an orbiting comsat.

And you would have never been able to access an orbiting comsat
IF there had never been a goverment doing the R&D work first.

There isn't any way you can predict what will and what will not
be a side effect of space exploration. The only thing you can
predict is that, if there is none, there will be no side effects.

/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

In article 7XdKb.740369$HS4.5670619@attbi_s01,
"Robert J. Kolker" wrote:


lcopps wrote:

I suppose you think paying people not to work, farmers not to grow
crops, or other pork spending to allow politicians to buy votes is a
better investment.

No. I think it is redistribution and theft and if anything it is worse
than the money we **** away space projects that do not have any
commercial use.


Once upon a time, I took a psych class. One of the ladies in
that class made the statement that she didn't see any reason
to spend any more money on space exploration because there
wasn't anything more to learn (humans already knew it all).
This was before cell phones, PeeCees, DVDs, video games
on systems one person could buy, broadband, cable TV to
the masses, more than 3 TV networks, CDs, web sites,
newsgroups, etc.

/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.