|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
The ISS became a welfare program for large aerospace companies on
several continents. Never has so much public money been spent to accomplish so little. As for Bush's exploration initiative, I'm sorry you feel the need to characterize it as a "crusade". The plan makes a lot of sense, but as a nation, I'm afraid we lack the collective will to make it happen. Our population is older and soft-headed, and the teenagers who would design, build, and fly the hardware, are far more concerned with PS2s and hanging out. Perhaps another generation in another country will pick up the torch. Before the Columbia accident cut him off at the knees, Sean O'Keefe made some good calls for the kind of space infrastructure we need to get beyond LEO. I was hoping he'd find a way to kill off the ISS outright, but that didn't happen, and $billions more were poured into our local black hole. Too bad because IMO, the U.S. government is going to see some difficult times, and harsh economic reality will force big cuts in discretionary spending. Once the shuttles are grounded, and ISS is "complete", watch for drastic budget reductions at NASA. Hilton Evans wrote: Correct. However, I would mothball the ISS and the Bush Moon/Mars crusades to get the money. The proceeds could (theoretically) build a few more Kecks and still leave change to fix Hubble or replace it with next generation orbiting scopes. That said there is also a case to be made for saving Hubble. The public loves it and it still yields scientific value. I'll take popular support for physical science wherever I can get it. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Why? It would only ever get good views of less than half the sky, and
it would be useless nearly half the year (of course, during the other half of the year it would offer 24-hour observing, so that sort of makes up for it). -Paul W. On 24 Jan 2005 10:57:12 -0800, wrote: That aside, a telescope in Antarctica would be money well spent. ---------- Remove 'Z' to reply by email. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Tim Killian wrote: The ISS became a welfare program for large aerospace companies on several continents. Never has so much public money been spent to accomplish so little. As for Bush's exploration initiative, I'm sorry you feel the need to characterize it as a "crusade". The plan makes a lot of sense, but as a nation, I'm afraid we lack the collective will to make it happen. Our population is older and soft-headed, and the teenagers who would design, build, and fly the hardware, are far more concerned with PS2s and hanging out. Perhaps another generation in another country will pick up the torch. speaking strictly as a member of the lazy PS2 generation first, teenagers have always been concerned with hanging out. no more so now than during the fourties and fifties. second, the PS2 has inspired more kids to take up science in four years than the entire manned space program in its history. third, the next generation will be just as concerned (and by your logic more so) with PS3 and hanging out than this one. that aside 6% of university graduates are in science and the rest are in arts. there could be a number of reasons why this happened. my personal opinion is that america places so little value on highschool science choosing a carrere in the field is an act of pure will and determination. no one has burned the martian chronicles. the inspiration is still there. if you want more scientists you need to make the education process more appealing. henrietta |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Hilton Evans wrote: "Tim Killian" wrote in message ... The ISS became a welfare program for large aerospace companies on several continents. Never has so much public money been spent to accomplish so little. The superconducting supercollider might give it a run for the money. Only because the project was canceled. I am not saying it would have revolutionalized particle physics, but it would have at least produced good science. -- Bill |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
When was the last time you saw a teenager:
1) build and fly a model airplane or rocket? 2) grind/polish/figure a telescope mirror? 3) write their own computer program? 4) ask about a ham radio license? There are of course, rare exceptions, but my point is that most teenagers in 2005 are content with enjoying the fruits of technology, not in understanding the underpinnings, or creating something new. That is in sharp contrast with the culture that existed in the '50s and '60s. We talk about education and we spend exorbitant sums on public schools, but from my perspective, the achievement level of average high school students today is 1-2 years behind the level of students from my generation. We have dumbed everything down, teachers, students, entertainment, etc. What I see are kids (and adults as well) who are willing to substitute watching and daydreaming for actual achievement. Leadership is certainly important, but without people willing to pick up tools or learn difficult concepts, there can be no collective will. And without a collective will, there can be no real achievements on national-scale technology efforts like space exploration, energy independence, etc. Hilton Evans wrote: I spend a fair amount of time around MIT(libraries) and haven't found this. Our population is older and soft-headed, and the teenagers who would design, build, and fly the hardware, are far more concerned with PS2s and hanging out. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
"Tim Killian" wrote in message ... When was the last time you saw a teenager: 1) build and fly a model airplane or rocket? 2) grind/polish/figure a telescope mirror? 3) write their own computer program? 4) ask about a ham radio license? There are of course, rare exceptions, but my point is that most teenagers in 2005 are content with enjoying the fruits of technology, not in understanding the underpinnings, or creating something new. That is in sharp contrast with the culture that existed in the '50s and '60s. We talk about education and we spend exorbitant sums on public schools, but from my perspective, the achievement level of average high school students today is 1-2 years behind the level of students from my generation. We have dumbed everything down, teachers, students, entertainment, etc. What I see are kids (and adults as well) who are willing to substitute watching and daydreaming for actual achievement. Leadership is certainly important, but without people willing to pick up tools or learn difficult concepts, there can be no collective will. And without a collective will, there can be no real achievements on national-scale technology efforts like space exploration, energy independence, etc. Are you in contact with a lot of kids, or are you basing your judgments on what you see on the news? My kids and their friends are an amazing bunch (regularly engaged in 1-3 above, among other things), and I consider myself privileged to know them. Maybe my experiences are outside of the norm, or maybe yours are. In any case, I know that there are a lot of great kids. Maybe you should seek them out? Dennis |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message oups.com...
Hilton Evans wrote: "Tim Killian" wrote in message ... The ISS became a welfare program for large aerospace companies on several continents. Never has so much public money been spent to accomplish so little. The superconducting supercollider might give it a run for the money. Only because the project was canceled. I am not saying it would have revolutionalized particle physics, but it would have at least produced good science. I agree. I was opining on the money spent and the return on the investment and not the merits of the program. -- Hilton Evans ----------------------------------------------- ChemPen Chemical Structure Software http://www.chempensoftware.com |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
My daughter is in high school, and I see what her friends and classmates
do on a regular basis. Last year I was a judge at their science fair, and saw first hand what the "best and brightest" were up to these days. A few of the 80+ projects had scientific merit, but most were truly lame, 5th-grade stuff. One effort I though showed real insight involved testing a theory that sun spots have an effect on climate. The other four judges dismissed it outright because the boy used 50 years of historical sunspot data in his analysis instead of actually doing the measurements! These people had so little understanding of how science works in the real world, they couldn't even recognize it when it was in front of them. But the other judges were impressed by crap like jumping an RC car off a ramp to see how far it traveled. Only a handful of projects showed any math skills beyond addition and subtraction. Many of these kids have desktop computers at home more powerful than the first Cray super computers, but not a single project involved an original computer program, and only a few used Excel and/or Power Point. I wish it were different, but the majority of kids I see today have little interest in physical sciences, mathematics, or model making. Dennis Woos wrote: Are you in contact with a lot of kids, or are you basing your judgments on what you see on the news? My kids and their friends are an amazing bunch (regularly engaged in 1-3 above, among other things), and I consider myself privileged to know them. Maybe my experiences are outside of the norm, or maybe yours are. In any case, I know that there are a lot of great kids. Maybe you should seek them out? Dennis |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 13:19:57 GMT, "Hilton Evans"
wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Both Keck telescopes put together cost less than half the projected repair cost of Hubble (adjusted for inflation). There are places in Antarctica with seeing better than the theoretical resolution of HST. IMHO it would make more sense to use the money to place a pair of 10 meter+ class telescopes on Dome C rather than repair Hubble. Correct. However, I would mothball the ISS and the Bush Moon/Mars crusades to get the money. The proceeds could (theoretically) build a few more Kecks and still leave change to fix Hubble or replace it with next generation orbiting scopes. That said there is also a case to be made for saving Hubble. The public loves it and it still yields scientific value. I'll take popular support for physical science wherever I can get it. Me I'll take physical science wherever I can get it over popular support any day. -JATO http://jatobservatory.org |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Tim Killian wrote: When was the last time you saw a teenager: I am 19 1) build and fly a model airplane or rocket? both required part of seventh grade cericulum 2) grind/polish/figure a telescope mirror? I have, but then again what percentage of teenagers did this back in your day 3) write their own computer program? required part of tenth grade cerriculum 4) ask about a ham radio license? we have this new fandangeld internet, its swell. There are of course, rare exceptions, but my point is that most teenagers in 2005 are content with enjoying the fruits of technology, not in understanding the underpinnings, or creating something new. That is in sharp contrast with the culture that existed in the '50s and '60s. We talk about education and we spend exorbitant sums on public schools, ah! the crux of the problem: you spend half as much as you should which is twice as much as you want. but from my perspective, the achievement level of average high school students today is 1-2 years behind the level of students from my generation. We have dumbed everything down, teachers, students, entertainment, etc. What I see are kids (and adults as well) who are willing to substitute watching and daydreaming for actual achievement. Leadership is certainly important, but without people willing to pick up tools or learn difficult concepts, there can be no collective will. And without a collective will, there can be no real achievements on national-scale technology efforts like space exploration, energy independence, etc. the hard thing about hard work is its hard. no one wants to do it. no one has ever wanted to do it. technology has changed but people have not. can you point to one specific quantifiable change in society? have you seen any statistics or quantitative evidence to back up your claim? if you cant then you have no right to hold your opinion. there is a word for what you a curmudgeon. Henrietta |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
NASA Is Not Giving Up On Hubble! (Forwarded) | Andrew Yee | Astronomy Misc | 2 | May 2nd 04 01:46 PM |
Congressional Resolutions on Hubble Space Telescope | EFLASPO | Amateur Astronomy | 0 | April 1st 04 03:26 PM |
Don't Desert Hubble | Scott M. Kozel | Space Shuttle | 54 | March 5th 04 04:38 PM |
Don't Desert Hubble | Scott M. Kozel | Policy | 46 | February 17th 04 05:33 PM |
Hubble images being colorized to enhance their appeal for public - LA Times | Rusty B | Policy | 4 | September 15th 03 10:38 AM |