What, no mention of its global warming B.S. mandate?

Is NASA really going to start looking up again and not down???

11 October 2010 Last updated at 13:39 ET
Share this page

* Facebook
* Twitter
* Share
* Email
* Print

Obama signs Nasa up to new future
By Jonathan Amos Science correspondent, BBC News
Falcon 9 launch (AP) The legislation calls for funds to be allocated
to the development of commercial crew launch services

The US space agency (Nasa) has been given a new direction, one that
will seek to put astronauts in orbit using privately run launch
services.

The change comes into effect with the signing by President Barack
Obama of the Nasa Authorization Act 2010.

The legislation, passed by Congress last week, mandates the agency to
fly the space station until 2020 and to launch one extra shuttle next
year.

It also instructs Nasa to start work on a rocket for deep-space
exploration.

The president's signature on the act brings to an end eight months of
fractious debate on Capitol Hill about the future course of the
agency.
Continue reading the main story
“Start Quote

"If we can't develop a new rocket for $11.5bn, building on a lot
of the technologies that were already developed in spending $9bn... we
ought to question whether we can build a rocket”

End Quote Democratic Senator Bill Nelson

Nasa's Administrator Charles Bolden told reporters: "Our nation's
leaders have come together and endorsed a blueprint for Nasa, one that
requires us to think and act boldly as we move our agency into the
future. This legislation supports the president's ambitious plan for
Nasa to pioneer new frontiers of innovation and discovery."

The act will mark a sea change in the way Nasa does some of its
business, particularly in the realm of human spaceflight.

The legislation calls for $1.3bn to be allocated to the development of
commercial crew services over the next three years.

The money will seed private companies to design and build rockets and
capsules capable of delivering astronauts to the International Space
Station (ISS).

The legislation also signals a formal end to the Constellation
programme begun under President George Bush that sought to return
humans to the Moon with a new spaceship called Orion and two new
rockets called Ares 1 and Ares 5.

Some $9bn was spent on Constellation. Much of its technology and know-
how will now be directed into an alternative rocket system big enough
to launch a spaceship, or at least some of its elements, on missions
that go far beyond the ISS.
Atlantis shuttle (Nasa) Nasa will aim to fly one last shuttle to the
space station, probably in June or July 2011

These ventures are likely to include asteroids and, eventually, Mars.

Legislators want Nasa to receive $11.5bn over the next six years to
have the new heavy-lift rocket ready for operation by 31 December
2016.

Some critics of the legislation have questioned whether the funding
being requested is sufficient for the task, but Florida Senator Bill
Nelson who helped build bipartisan support for the legislation said it
should be ample.

"If we can't develop a new rocket for $11.5bn, building on a lot of
the technologies that were already developed in spending $9bn - if we
can't do it for that then we ought to question whether we can build a
rocket."

The act authorises $19bn for Nasa in the federal year 2011, a
significant increase on 2010.

This would allow the agency to expand its activities in a number of
areas, including in Earth observation where some missions have been
allowed to run past their nominal lifetimes without replacements being
ordered up in time to prevent data gaps.
Lockheed Martin Work done on Constellation will now be directed into
the new heavy-lift launch system

"I think it's wonderful that we're now at this stage," commented Dr
Sally Ride, the first American woman in space and one of a group of
experts tasked by President Obama with reviewing human spaceflight
policy when he came into office.

"The extensive discussion of the president's budget and the
deliberation of the elements of this bill I believe have resulted in
legislation that will strengthen Nasa and the space programme."

The $19bn is not completely guaranteed. The money still has to be
allocated by congressional appropriators, but Senator Nelson said he
thought wide support on Capitol Hill for Nasa would ensure its
activities were not denied funding as a result of more general
arguments over federal spending and the need to reduce the nation's
deficit.

On Oct 11, 11:05*pm, "$27 TRILLION to pay for Kyoto"
wrote:

snip off-topic nonsense and add oil to the flames

http://www.costofwar.com/

Nobody has lived up to Kyoto. It is vapour-ware. The new technologies
and the countless real jobs which would have matched the empty
promises given at Kyoto are going straight to China.

The money which would have paid for home insulation and solar panels
and affordable electric cars has gone straight into the fat banker's
pockets. The rest has gone on defence of the indefensible.
Conventional war is very low risk but gets all the media attention.
While half a Holocaust die on the roads every year and it goes
unmentioned. 9/11 was a minor flesh wound compared with annual road
deaths and murders. Yet you expect the sympathy of the entire world
for all eternity. Just like the Israelis playing on a seventy year-old
war wound to run riot with other's human rights.

Glance over the figures in this link and ask yourself what the cost to
the US economy is in crime fighting, prison services, security,
insurance, health care etc.:

http://www.unitedjustice.com/death-statistics.html

Keep the people poor. Keep them too cold and too hot. Keep them in
debt to wasteful, centralised, energy producers. Keep them without
jobs. Keep them hopeless. Keep them fearfully patriotic and you can
recruit as much cannon fodder as you will ever need to run an oil-
based economy.

"Chris.B" wrote in message
...
On Oct 11, 11:05 pm, "$27 TRILLION to pay for Kyoto"
wrote:

snip off-topic nonsense and add oil to the flames


Ok, done.
Any other idiot drool I can snip for you?

On Oct 11, 4:05*pm, "$27 TRILLION to pay for Kyoto"
wrote:
Is NASA really going to start looking up again and not down???

*11 October 2010 Last updated at 13:39 ET
Share this page

* * * Facebook
* * * Twitter
* * * Share
* * * Email
* * * Print

Obama signs Nasa up to new future
By Jonathan Amos Science correspondent, BBC News
Falcon 9 launch (AP) The legislation calls for funds to be allocated
to the development of commercial crew launch services

The US space agency (Nasa) has been given a new direction, one that
will seek to put astronauts in orbit using privately run launch
services.

The change comes into effect with the signing by President Barack
Obama of the Nasa Authorization Act 2010.

The legislation, passed by Congress last week, mandates the agency to
fly the space station until 2020 and to launch one extra shuttle next
year.

It also instructs Nasa to start work on a rocket for deep-space
exploration.

The president's signature on the act brings to an end eight months of
fractious debate on Capitol Hill about the future course of the
agency.
Continue reading the main story
“Start Quote

* * "If we can't develop a new rocket for $11.5bn, building on a lot
of the technologies that were already developed in spending $9bn... we
ought to question whether we can build a rocket”

End Quote Democratic Senator Bill Nelson

Nasa's Administrator Charles Bolden told reporters: "Our nation's
leaders have come together and endorsed a blueprint for Nasa, one that
requires us to think and act boldly as we move our agency into the
future. This legislation supports the president's ambitious plan for
Nasa to pioneer new frontiers of innovation and discovery."

The act will mark a sea change in the way Nasa does some of its
business, particularly in the realm of human spaceflight.

The legislation calls for $1.3bn to be allocated to the development of
commercial crew services over the next three years.

The money will seed private companies to design and build rockets and
capsules capable of delivering astronauts to the International Space
Station (ISS).

The legislation also signals a formal end to the Constellation
programme begun under President George Bush that sought to return
humans to the Moon with a new spaceship called Orion and two new
rockets called Ares 1 and Ares 5.

Some $9bn was spent on Constellation. Much of its technology and know-
how will now be directed into an alternative rocket system big enough
to launch a spaceship, or at least some of its elements, on missions
that go far beyond the ISS.
Atlantis shuttle (Nasa) Nasa will aim to fly one last shuttle to the
space station, probably in June or July 2011

These ventures are likely to include asteroids and, eventually, Mars.

Legislators want Nasa to receive $11.5bn over the next six years to
have the new heavy-lift rocket ready for operation by 31 December
2016.

Some critics of the legislation have questioned whether the funding
being requested is sufficient for the task, but Florida Senator Bill
Nelson who helped build bipartisan support for the legislation said it
should be ample.

"If we can't develop a new rocket for $11.5bn, building on a lot of
the technologies that were already developed in spending $9bn - if we
can't do it for that then we ought to question whether we can build a
rocket."

The act authorises $19bn for Nasa in the federal year 2011, a
significant increase on 2010.

This would allow the agency to expand its activities in a number of
areas, including in Earth observation where some missions have been
allowed to run past their nominal lifetimes without replacements being
ordered up in time to prevent data gaps.
Lockheed Martin Work done on Constellation will now be directed into
the new heavy-lift launch system

"I think it's wonderful that we're now at this stage," commented Dr
Sally Ride, the first American woman in space and one of a group of
experts tasked by President Obama with reviewing human spaceflight
policy when he came into office.

"The extensive discussion of the president's budget and the
deliberation of the elements of this bill I believe have resulted in
legislation that will strengthen Nasa and the space programme."

The $19bn is not completely guaranteed. The money still has to be
allocated by congressional appropriators, but Senator Nelson said he
thought wide support on Capitol Hill for Nasa would ensure its
activities were not denied funding as a result of more general
arguments over federal spending and the need to reduce the nation's
deficit.

Poor Rich! He is on Canadian welfare because he never learned to read
or do simple math. From the NASA webpage, which you can down load
NASA's budget (420990mainFY_201_Budget_Overview_1_Feb_2010.pdf), you
will find that the Earth Science budget rose from 1.3 billion in 2009
to the proposed 1.8 billion in 2011. Only personel and facilities has
a higher dollar amount in the budget. So I guess NASA is still meeting
it's charter and reason for existing.

On Oct 12, 9:59*pm, "Androcles"
wrote:

Ok, done.
Any other idiot drool I can snip for you?

Not really.

Do you want to try some salt and vinegar muons?

Flame fried with extra virgin, classical Greek oiliness.

100% guaranteed no slave's drool residues.

I'm thinking of marketing them as Einstein's Crisps. [No relation]

A sort of pseudo-upmarket, intellectual snob's snack with a slow,
afterburner bite. :-)

On Oct 14, 12:51*am, "Androcles de Malwort" wrote:

I'm fully aware that you may be so stupid as to reply, but the purpose
of this message is to encourage others to kill-file ****wits like you.

Well, it seems that even the profane paranoid has enemies.

Frankly, old chap, you display remarkably poor skills at quoting for
an ancient, Geek scholar. ;-)

One can never be absolutely certain to whom you are being so rude.

But that's entertainment, for you. :-)

On Oct 14, 8:20*am, "Malwort von Androcles" scribbled furiously:

Scholarly Geeks are an oxymoron, grinagog.

There! I knew you could do it with a little encouragement.

One whole post without a single obscenity!

One day at a time, Malwort! ;-)

G.

On Oct 14, 5:41*pm, "Androcles" @ alcoholicsanonymouse wrote:

"As you go through life, make this your goal:
Keep your eye on the doughnut and not on the hole."

Au contraire, my bijoux faux pas. The ambitious visual astronomer is
always more interested in the light which passes through the hole than
the light which impinges upon the whole. Except in the case of
photography or imaging, where the light may be collected upon a
sensitive surface in order to record the information hidden within the
converging beam. I vaguely remember doughnuts being employed in some
rather unusual "telescopes" which use grazing angles of incidence on
the inner surface of a weakly, axial-cylindrical, mirror polished,
focusing device. Used on orbiting satellite, imaging platforms for
studying X-rays? It was shown in a magazine illustration probably some
decades ago now.

G.Pedant.

yourmommycalledandsaidbehave wrote in
:

On Oct 11, 4:05*pm, "$27 TRILLION to pay for Kyoto"
wrote:
Is NASA really going to start looking up again and not down???

*11 October 2010 Last updated at 13:39 ET
Share this page

* * * Facebook
* * * Twitter
* * * Share
* * * Email
* * * Print

Obama signs Nasa up to new future
By Jonathan Amos Science correspondent, BBC News
Falcon 9 launch (AP) The legislation calls for funds to be allocated
to the development of commercial crew launch services

The US space agency (Nasa) has been given a new direction, one that
will seek to put astronauts in orbit using privately run launch
services.

The change comes into effect with the signing by President Barack
Obama of the Nasa Authorization Act 2010.

The legislation, passed by Congress last week, mandates the agency to
fly the space station until 2020 and to launch one extra shuttle next
year.

It also instructs Nasa to start work on a rocket for deep-space
exploration.

The president's signature on the act brings to an end eight months of
fractious debate on Capitol Hill about the future course of the
agency.
Continue reading the main story
“Start Quote

* * "If we can't develop a new rocket for $11.5bn, building on a lot
of the technologies that were already developed in spending $9bn... we
ought to question whether we can build a rocket”

End Quote Democratic Senator Bill Nelson

Nasa's Administrator Charles Bolden told reporters: "Our nation's
leaders have come together and endorsed a blueprint for Nasa, one that
requires us to think and act boldly as we move our agency into the
future. This legislation supports the president's ambitious plan for
Nasa to pioneer new frontiers of innovation and discovery."

The act will mark a sea change in the way Nasa does some of its
business, particularly in the realm of human spaceflight.

The legislation calls for $1.3bn to be allocated to the development of
commercial crew services over the next three years.

The money will seed private companies to design and build rockets and
capsules capable of delivering astronauts to the International Space
Station (ISS).

The legislation also signals a formal end to the Constellation
programme begun under President George Bush that sought to return
humans to the Moon with a new spaceship called Orion and two new
rockets called Ares 1 and Ares 5.

Some $9bn was spent on Constellation. Much of its technology and know-
how will now be directed into an alternative rocket system big enough
to launch a spaceship, or at least some of its elements, on missions
that go far beyond the ISS.
Atlantis shuttle (Nasa) Nasa will aim to fly one last shuttle to the
space station, probably in June or July 2011

These ventures are likely to include asteroids and, eventually, Mars.

Legislators want Nasa to receive $11.5bn over the next six years to
have the new heavy-lift rocket ready for operation by 31 December
2016.

Some critics of the legislation have questioned whether the funding
being requested is sufficient for the task, but Florida Senator Bill
Nelson who helped build bipartisan support for the legislation said it
should be ample.

"If we can't develop a new rocket for $11.5bn, building on a lot of
the technologies that were already developed in spending $9bn - if we
can't do it for that then we ought to question whether we can build a
rocket."

The act authorises $19bn for Nasa in the federal year 2011, a
significant increase on 2010.

This would allow the agency to expand its activities in a number of
areas, including in Earth observation where some missions have been
allowed to run past their nominal lifetimes without replacements being
ordered up in time to prevent data gaps.
Lockheed Martin Work done on Constellation will now be directed into
the new heavy-lift launch system

"I think it's wonderful that we're now at this stage," commented Dr
Sally Ride, the first American woman in space and one of a group of
experts tasked by President Obama with reviewing human spaceflight
policy when he came into office.

"The extensive discussion of the president's budget and the
deliberation of the elements of this bill I believe have resulted in
legislation that will strengthen Nasa and the space programme."

The $19bn is not completely guaranteed. The money still has to be
allocated by congressional appropriators, but Senator Nelson said he
thought wide support on Capitol Hill for Nasa would ensure its
activities were not denied funding as a result of more general
arguments over federal spending and the need to reduce the nation's
deficit.

Poor Rich! He is on Canadian welfare because he never learned to read
or do simple math. From the NASA webpage, which you can down load
NASA's budget (420990mainFY_201_Budget_Overview_1_Feb_2010.pdf), you
will find that the Earth Science budget rose from 1.3 billion in 2009
to the proposed 1.8 billion in 2011. Only personel and facilities has
a higher dollar amount in the budget. So I guess NASA is still meeting
it's charter and reason for existing.


It's reason for existing? The originators of the program are spinning in
their graves...