On the Politics of Discovery

The latest press release from Nasa says nothing
about the promised analysis of the spheres
composition, the blueberry bowl.

Has it been cancelled?

I'm beginning to suspect that politics are becoming
involved in the science of this mission.

Will their science objectives be tailored for guaranteeing
future missions, as opposed to discovering as much
as possible? They want a sample return mission, the
only objective for that mission would be the search for life.

This mission is about rocks, and only rocks, they chant.

If they discover life with this mission, there would be
no need for a sample return mission. In addition this
mission would prove that robotic eyes are enough and
even a manned mission isn't needed.

If Nasa thinks they can hold back data to protect their
own interests they are mistaken.

The truth will come out, and any attempt to spin this mission
will make Nasa appear self-serving and dishonest.
They will lose the trust and respect of the American
people, and with it the support of Congress. It would
be a huge gamble they are assured of losing.


Jonathan

s

In sci.space.policy jonathan wrote:

The latest press release from Nasa says nothing
about the promised analysis of the spheres
composition, the blueberry bowl.

Has it been cancelled?

I'm beginning to suspect that politics are becoming
involved in the science of this mission.

Will their science objectives be tailored for guaranteeing
future missions, as opposed to discovering as much
as possible? They want a sample return mission, the
only objective for that mission would be the search for life.

This mission is about rocks, and only rocks, they chant.

If they discover life with this mission, there would be
no need for a sample return mission. In addition this
mission would prove that robotic eyes are enough and
even a manned mission isn't needed.

Oh no - if they did discover life - or credible, non-wishful
thinking or outright crackpottery related signs of present
or past one, their ability to get money would shoot up considerably.


If Nasa thinks they can hold back data to protect their
own interests they are mistaken.

Unlike crackpot posters on usenet, they actually have something
to lose from making wild, unwarranteed claims.


The truth will come out, and any attempt to spin this mission
will make Nasa appear self-serving and dishonest.
They will lose the trust and respect of the American
people, and with it the support of Congress. It would
be a huge gamble they are assured of losing.


You are just being silly.


Jonathan

s


--
Sander

+++ Out of cheese error +++

jonathan posted:

The latest press release from Nasa says nothing
about the promised analysis of the spheres
composition, the blueberry bowl.

Has it been cancelled?

No, if you would read the last press release on the MER web page, you would
see that they are doing the analysis of "Berry Bowl" now, using all the
instruments on the arm:
(quote)

OPPORTUNITY UPDATE: Berry Nice News - sol 46, Mar 11, 2004

On sol 46, which ended at 1:30 p.m. PST on Thursday, March 11, Opportunity
awoke at 9:20 Local Solar Time to two songs in honor of researching the
mysterious "blueberries" with the instruments on the robotic arm. The wake-up
songs were "Berry Nice News" by Raffi and "Huckling the Berries" by Country
Cooking.

Opportunity performed a series of activities including microscopic imaging of
the berries and placing the Mössbauer spectrometer on the berries to analyze
their chemical composition. The miniature thermal emission spectrometer later
made multiple atmospheric observations. After a short nap to conserve energy,
Opportunity awoke in the afternoon to perform some additional remote sensing
observations and to transmit data to Earth via the Odyssey orbiter.

Later in the evening Local Solar Time, Opportunity collected data with its
alpha particle X-ray spectrometer at two locations.

The plan for sol 47, which will end at 2:10 p.m. PST on Friday, March 12 is to
continue analyzing the blueberries and the "Berry Bowl." By early next week,
Opportunity will drive to a new area dubbed "Shoemaker's Patio."

(end-quote)

It will be a while before they get all the data down and analyzed, but the
process is ongoing.

I'm beginning to suspect that politics are becoming
involved in the science of this mission.

Sigh... whatever.

They want a sample return mission, the
only objective for that mission would be the search for life.

Nope, its only one of several reasons. In order to do a complete analysis of
the samples, they would have to be returned to Earth, as the experiments on
the rovers are more limited in scope (ie: they can give us a fairly good idea
of what is contained within the rocks and what their *probable* nature is, but
specifics on the minerology and crystaline structure are often beyond the
scope of the rover instrument package). In particular, dating the rocks
requires a complex laboratory analysis which, at present, can only be properly
done on Earth. We have a few samples of Mars rocks here on Earth from Martian
meteorites, but scientists would just *love* to get their hands on the rocks
from the outcrop at Meridiani, as they are clearly different from what has
been seen before.

If Nasa thinks they can hold back data to protect their
own interests they are mistaken.

No, I'm afraid that it is you who are mistaken.

--
David W. Knisely
Prairie Astronomy Club: http://www.prairieastronomyclub.org
Hyde Memorial Observatory: http://www.hydeobservatory.info/

**********************************************
* Attend the 11th Annual NEBRASKA STAR PARTY *
* July 18-23, 2004, Merritt Reservoir *
* http://www.NebraskaStarParty.org *
**********************************************

jonathan wrote:
The latest press release from Nasa says nothing
about the promised analysis of the spheres
composition, the blueberry bowl.

Has it been cancelled?

I'm beginning to suspect that politics are becoming
involved in the science of this mission.

Will their science objectives be tailored for guaranteeing
future missions, as opposed to discovering as much
as possible? They want a sample return mission, the
only objective for that mission would be the search for life.

This mission is about rocks, and only rocks, they chant.

If they discover life with this mission, there would be
no need for a sample return mission. In addition this
mission would prove that robotic eyes are enough and
even a manned mission isn't needed.

If Nasa thinks they can hold back data to protect their
own interests they are mistaken.

The truth will come out, and any attempt to spin this mission
will make Nasa appear self-serving and dishonest.
They will lose the trust and respect of the American
people, and with it the support of Congress. It would
be a huge gamble they are assured of losing.

I've been shouted at for my opinion, but for me, this Mars business is
quite useless, compared with the amount of money involved.

I think that the "extraterrestric life" hysteria is one of few ways for
NASA to justify their existence (or at least the size of their
organisation) - another is the really useless meteorite hysteria.

After all, communication and remote sensing satellites are state of the
art technologies with little improvement potential.

NASA would have to fire thousands of technicians if they didn't find out
new ways of gaining public interest.

Cheers, Christof
--
Christof Kuhn
Inst. f. Angewandte Geologie,
Univ. f. BoKu Wien, Austria


http://homepage.boku.ac.at/h9440283/index.htm

"Christof Kuhn" wrote in message
...

I've been shouted at for my opinion,

With good reason, it seems.

but for me, this Mars business is
quite useless, compared with the amount of money involved.
I think that the "extraterrestric life" hysteria is one of few ways for
NASA to justify their existence (or at least the size of their
organisation) - another is the really useless meteorite hysteria.

The only useless hysteria which you present here is yours.

After all, communication and remote sensing satellites are state of the
art technologies with little improvement potential.

Evidence, please?

NASA would have to fire thousands of technicians if they didn't find out
new ways of gaining public interest.

Yup. A clear cut example of your hysteria.

"David Knisely" wrote in message
...
jonathan posted:

The latest press release from Nasa says nothing
about the promised analysis of the spheres
composition, the blueberry bowl.

Has it been cancelled?

No,


Whew! I was getting worried~

Thanks!


Jonathan

s




if you would read the last press release on the MER web page, you would
see that they are doing the analysis of "Berry Bowl" now, using all the
instruments on the arm:
(quote)

OPPORTUNITY UPDATE: Berry Nice News - sol 46, Mar 11, 2004

On sol 46, which ended at 1:30 p.m. PST on Thursday, March 11, Opportunity
awoke at 9:20 Local Solar Time to two songs in honor of researching the
mysterious "blueberries" with the instruments on the robotic arm. The wake-up
songs were "Berry Nice News" by Raffi and "Huckling the Berries" by Country
Cooking.

Opportunity performed a series of activities including microscopic imaging of
the berries and placing the Mössbauer spectrometer on the berries to analyze
their chemical composition. The miniature thermal emission spectrometer later
made multiple atmospheric observations. After a short nap to conserve energy,
Opportunity awoke in the afternoon to perform some additional remote sensing
observations and to transmit data to Earth via the Odyssey orbiter.

Later in the evening Local Solar Time, Opportunity collected data with its
alpha particle X-ray spectrometer at two locations.

The plan for sol 47, which will end at 2:10 p.m. PST on Friday, March 12 is to
continue analyzing the blueberries and the "Berry Bowl." By early next week,
Opportunity will drive to a new area dubbed "Shoemaker's Patio."

(end-quote)

It will be a while before they get all the data down and analyzed, but the
process is ongoing.

I'm beginning to suspect that politics are becoming
involved in the science of this mission.

Sigh... whatever.

They want a sample return mission, the
only objective for that mission would be the search for life.

Nope, its only one of several reasons. In order to do a complete analysis of
the samples, they would have to be returned to Earth, as the experiments on
the rovers are more limited in scope (ie: they can give us a fairly good idea
of what is contained within the rocks and what their *probable* nature is, but
specifics on the minerology and crystaline structure are often beyond the
scope of the rover instrument package). In particular, dating the rocks
requires a complex laboratory analysis which, at present, can only be properly
done on Earth. We have a few samples of Mars rocks here on Earth from Martian
meteorites, but scientists would just *love* to get their hands on the rocks
from the outcrop at Meridiani, as they are clearly different from what has
been seen before.

If Nasa thinks they can hold back data to protect their
own interests they are mistaken.

No, I'm afraid that it is you who are mistaken.

--
David W. Knisely
Prairie Astronomy Club: http://www.prairieastronomyclub.org
Hyde Memorial Observatory: http://www.hydeobservatory.info/

**********************************************
* Attend the 11th Annual NEBRASKA STAR PARTY *
* July 18-23, 2004, Merritt Reservoir *
* http://www.NebraskaStarParty.org *
**********************************************

"Christof Kuhn" wrote in message
...
jonathan wrote:
The latest press release from Nasa says nothing
about the promised analysis of the spheres
composition, the blueberry bowl.

Has it been cancelled?

I'm beginning to suspect that politics are becoming
involved in the science of this mission.

Will their science objectives be tailored for guaranteeing
future missions, as opposed to discovering as much
as possible? They want a sample return mission, the
only objective for that mission would be the search for life.

This mission is about rocks, and only rocks, they chant.

If they discover life with this mission, there would be
no need for a sample return mission. In addition this
mission would prove that robotic eyes are enough and
even a manned mission isn't needed.

If Nasa thinks they can hold back data to protect their
own interests they are mistaken.

The truth will come out, and any attempt to spin this mission
will make Nasa appear self-serving and dishonest.
They will lose the trust and respect of the American
people, and with it the support of Congress. It would
be a huge gamble they are assured of losing.

I've been shouted at for my opinion, but for me, this Mars business is
quite useless, compared with the amount of money involved.

I think that the "extraterrestric life" hysteria is one of few ways for
NASA to justify their existence (or at least the size of their
organisation) - another is the really useless meteorite hysteria.

After all, communication and remote sensing satellites are state of the
art technologies with little improvement potential.

NASA would have to fire thousands of technicians if they didn't find out
new ways of gaining public interest.



Well, many feel as you do, but I hear little complaints these
days about the cost of Voyager, or the Beagle.

Give this another month, when Opportunity makes it to the
large crater, I'm certain your opinion will change.

This mission is going to be seen by history as a turning point
in human history. And we have front row seats. We're living
in the golden age.


Jonathan

s






Cheers, Christof
--
Christof Kuhn
Inst. f. Angewandte Geologie,
Univ. f. BoKu Wien, Austria


http://homepage.boku.ac.at/h9440283/index.htm

Christof Kuhn wrote:
jonathan wrote:


I'm beginning to suspect that politics are becoming
involved in the science of this mission.

Politics has always been the goal of the American space program from the
race to catch up to Sputnik to the present. That is old news to many
of us. The science and resulting technology are spinoffs.

I've been shouted at for my opinion, but for me, this Mars business is
quite useless, compared with the amount of money involved.

I'd agree, except for the fact that the space and military programmes is
the vehicles the US likes to use for high-tech R&D spinoffs into the
private sector. While freeze-dried ice cream and space pens have limited
usefulness, US companies use government 'goals' such as space, NIH, and
so forth to fund the R&D companies should probably be doing on their
own. To a large degree, and in ways that are positively tortuous at
times, programmes like NASA are in essence the 'socialist support' which
other companies in other countries get directly from the government. US
citizens wouldn't stand for direct support, but they go positively ga-ga
over the "our team' aspects of NASA and similar nationalistic endeavors.

I'm not saying I agreed or disagree, just how it looks to me.

I think that the "extraterrestric life" hysteria is one of few ways for
NASA to justify their existence (or at least the size of their
organisation) - another is the really useless meteorite hysteria.

Other than this newsgroup, I don't see people in the US caring much one
way or another about extraterrestrial life, except of course real flying
saucers, talking, intellingent alien abductors, and similar diversions.
The same is true of 'killer asteroid' hysteria or 'life in
meteorites'--those are pretty much limited to scientists, college
students and science fiction fans.

After all, communication and remote sensing satellites are state of the
art technologies with little improvement potential.

Ah, but Yankee ingenuity always says everything can be improved. Even
safety pins (Velcro) and a cellphone is just the Dick Tracy wrist radio.
I have no doubt my great-grandmother (who did not see an automobile or
telephone until she was in her 20s) would be baffled by cellphones and
computers, much less the concept that one can send a message around the
world to strangers for fractions of a penny. I know of someone still
alive whose mother never knew what to make of lightbulbs. I would be
happier if we concentrated on the useful, but to make the useful, you
have to make and discard the frivolous. Americans tend to do the
opposite: keep the frivolous and discard the useful. That's a fault of
common sense, not engineering.


NASA would have to fire thousands of technicians if they didn't find out
new ways of gaining public interest.

Yes, and then those technicians would have to find other jobs in an
economy where only the government employs many of the high tech workers,
not private industry. I was in college in the 1970s, when NASA laid off
tens of thousands of engineeers who worked on the moon landing program.
From a social aspect, it wasn't pretty. People were given a dream to
aim for, they did it, and then the dream was snatched away.

America is the Peter Pan of nations, Christof. Please forgive my country
men for refusing to put away their toys and grow up! Many of them are
not yet responsible for themselves (Although I do not myself forgive
them for refusing to learn to play nicely with others, even if they
freely choose to remain childish.) Taken in that light, many things
which are otherwise inscrutable make perfect sense.
I respect your point of view; perhaps my post contains some
enlightenment from this side of the pond.

best wishes,
Jo Schaper

"Jo Schaper" wrote in message
...

Snip

Ah, but Yankee ingenuity always says everything can be improved. Even
safety pins (Velcro) and a cellphone is just the Dick Tracy wrist radio.
I have no doubt my great-grandmother (who did not see an automobile or
telephone until she was in her 20s) would be baffled by cellphones and
computers, much less the concept that one can send a message around the
world to strangers for fractions of a penny. I know of someone still
alive whose mother never knew what to make of lightbulbs. I would be
happier if we concentrated on the useful, but to make the useful, you
have to make and discard the frivolous. Americans tend to do the
opposite: keep the frivolous and discard the useful. That's a fault of
common sense, not engineering.

snip
best wishes,
Jo Schaper

I can well remember learning my ABC'c using a kerosene lamp. We eventually
got electricity when the area REA extended their power lines to our area. I
will not go into the many improvements electricity made to life in rural
America.

I will say it is a long way from Learning My ABC's by a Kerosene Lamp in
Rural South Georgia in the early 50's to using a computer to communicate
world wide almost instantly.
Ralph Nesbitt

"Jo Schaper" wrote in message
...
Christof Kuhn wrote:
jonathan wrote:


I'm beginning to suspect that politics are becoming
involved in the science of this mission.

Politics has always been the goal of the American space program from the
race to catch up to Sputnik to the present. That is old news to many
of us. The science and resulting technology are spinoffs.

I've been shouted at for my opinion, but for me, this Mars business is
quite useless, compared with the amount of money involved.

I'd agree, except for the fact that the space and military programmes is
the vehicles the US likes to use for high-tech R&D spinoffs into the
private sector. While freeze-dried ice cream and space pens have limited
usefulness, US companies use government 'goals' such as space, NIH, and
so forth to fund the R&D companies should probably be doing on their
own. To a large degree, and in ways that are positively tortuous at
times, programmes like NASA are in essence the 'socialist support' which
other companies in other countries get directly from the government. US
citizens wouldn't stand for direct support, but they go positively ga-ga
over the "our team' aspects of NASA and similar nationalistic endeavors.

I'm not saying I agreed or disagree, just how it looks to me.

I think that the "extraterrestric life" hysteria is one of few ways for
NASA to justify their existence (or at least the size of their
organisation) - another is the really useless meteorite hysteria.

Other than this newsgroup, I don't see people in the US caring much one
way or another about extraterrestrial life,


But discovering that life evolved on two different planets, and in much
the same way, will reverberate around the globe. The idea that humanity
is a unique creation from some mysterious unknowable creator will be
abolished once and for all.

The only conclusion from such a discovery is that creation is an inherent
property of the universe and is abundant and ...everywhere.


It will lead to an entirely new concept of God that both science and
religion can embrace. A concept of God that is rational, testable
and worthy of reverence. Nature and her simplicity are all
of those things.

This discovery will change everything imho.
Having science and religion at odds for so long
has been the primary source of human suffering.

Alone and in their extremes, science and religion
define evil, together they create beauty.

The math is clear on this~
The world needs this discovery.
It Deserves it.


Jonathan

s




except of course real flying
saucers, talking, intellingent alien abductors, and similar diversions.
The same is true of 'killer asteroid' hysteria or 'life in
meteorites'--those are pretty much limited to scientists, college
students and science fiction fans.

After all, communication and remote sensing satellites are state of the
art technologies with little improvement potential.

Ah, but Yankee ingenuity always says everything can be improved. Even
safety pins (Velcro) and a cellphone is just the Dick Tracy wrist radio.
I have no doubt my great-grandmother (who did not see an automobile or
telephone until she was in her 20s) would be baffled by cellphones and
computers, much less the concept that one can send a message around the
world to strangers for fractions of a penny. I know of someone still
alive whose mother never knew what to make of lightbulbs. I would be
happier if we concentrated on the useful, but to make the useful, you
have to make and discard the frivolous. Americans tend to do the
opposite: keep the frivolous and discard the useful. That's a fault of
common sense, not engineering.


NASA would have to fire thousands of technicians if they didn't find out
new ways of gaining public interest.

Yes, and then those technicians would have to find other jobs in an
economy where only the government employs many of the high tech workers,
not private industry. I was in college in the 1970s, when NASA laid off
tens of thousands of engineeers who worked on the moon landing program.
From a social aspect, it wasn't pretty. People were given a dream to
aim for, they did it, and then the dream was snatched away.

America is the Peter Pan of nations, Christof. Please forgive my country
men for refusing to put away their toys and grow up! Many of them are
not yet responsible for themselves (Although I do not myself forgive
them for refusing to learn to play nicely with others, even if they
freely choose to remain childish.) Taken in that light, many things
which are otherwise inscrutable make perfect sense.
I respect your point of view; perhaps my post contains some
enlightenment from this side of the pond.

best wishes,
Jo Schaper