Weirder election than Battlestar Galactica's

"Scott Hedrick" wrote in message
...

By the instrument of Kennedy's speech, of course, later supported by
enabling legislation. Duh.


No, the instrument would be the legislation.

"Scott Hedrick" wrote in message
...

But he *did* initiate the *lunar landing program* that Apollo was merged
with.


No, Apollo was a manned lunar landing program from the outset.

Bob wrote:
On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 21:58:44 GMT, h (Rand
Simberg) wrote:


President Kennedy proposed the project to the nation in May of 1961.
Had he not done that, there would have been no moon landings.


Please, you are making a real fool out of yourself with all this
made-up history.



I think he has a point. Without public support the project might not
have done as well. Whatever else he was, Kennedy was popular, and we as
a country went thru with it. (still amazes me)

Certainly none of the broad mission statements for space - by
presidents - in the last couple decades have accomplished much.

Of course Kennedy wasn't the instigator of the idea. But he was
willing to popularize it, and it took wing. Intended or not, he had a
huge part in it. Kinda like Gore and the internet, but with less splashy
theatrics ;-) and Gore didn't get to bed Monroe...


A

Robert J. Kolker wrote:
Bob wrote:

On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 13:14:28 -0500, "Robert J. Kolker"
wrote:


It was JFK who proposed the mission. NASA took him up on it.



You mean Congress authorized the funds...

Werner was talking about a manned landing back in the 1950s.


Without JFK's grand proposal Werner v. Braun would just be another ex
Nazi rocket scientist.

Bob Kolker


It still amazes me that it happened at all. Would that we had that
much coherent spirit behind it now.

A

On Fri, 24 Mar 2006 17:03:00 -0600, Brian Thorn
wrote:

Perhaps he didn't want to risk America losing
two sitting Presidents in a row.

ROTF

That megalomaniac didn't care about anyone but himself.

He was responsible for JFK's death and the powers behind the scenes
told him if he won again they would expose him. He ****ed up Vietnam
and the economy with his stupid "great society", so he had to go.


--
"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant:
It's just that they know so much that isn't so."
--Ronald Reagan

Robert J. Kolker wrote:
Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

"Rand Simberg" wrote in message
...

Then who do you fantasize did?



I don't know, but I do know that NASA announced Project Apollo on July
28, 1960, when Senator JFK was busily running for president.


Not announced. Proposed. It took JFK and Congress to come up with the
money. Twentfour billion 1960s dollars to leave a foot print on the
Moon. Not a very good deal, was it?

It was the best deal in history. It gave the wildest imaginations of
the frontier intellect proof that it can be done. I'm not sure the real
worth of that can be calculated.

A

Robert J. Kolker wrote:
Cranny Dane wrote:



Maybe Disney would for him ?


Disney was an honest business man. He did not have twenty four billion
to spend on leaving footprints on the Moon. He probably did not even
have a billion to spend. On the other hand, the U.S. government anually
rapes and plunders is citizens so it has the money to do such useful
things as leaving foot prints on the moon.

If the gummint was going to spend that kind of money, it should have set
up habitats ( a system similar to Antarctica) for science study and
funded telescopes to be built on the dark side of the moon. At least we
would have gotten decent astronomy out of it.

In other words, we should have followed thru with our investments. We
didn't. Why not can be argued to death but the fact is we had a good
head start on opening a new frontier and we blew it; and now our
government, our public, isn't willing to commit to anything near as
ambitious. Pretty pictures, yes. Pretty pictures of astronauts
elsewhere, no - not if we have to worry about lawsuits.

Pussies.

A

Robert J. Kolker wrote:
Robert Juliano wrote:

Robert J. Kolker wrote:

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

"Rand Simberg" wrote in message
...

Then who do you fantasize did?



I don't know, but I do know that NASA announced Project Apollo on
July 28, 1960, when Senator JFK was busily running for president.




Not announced. Proposed. It took JFK and Congress to come up with the
money. Twentfour billion 1960s dollars to leave a foot print on the
Moon. Not a very good deal, was it?

Bob Kolker




Mr. Kolker,

It wasn't JUST "leaving footprints on the moon."

we managed to get a few more benefits than JUST landing on the moon...

like:

bio telemetry


Existed before Apollo. Every major hospital had some kind of automated
telemetry system to keep track of patients in the ICUs. You don't have
to go to the moon to do that, and private companies developed it because
it is profitable.

alloys


Alloy work was already done in the development of the SR-71. A
legitimate defense expenditure. We did not have to go to the moon for
that one. Mach 3 and Mach 4 aircraft need durable metal hulls made of
stuff like titanium.

large scale systems engineering


PERT and PEP charts existed well before the Apollo project.

satellite monitoring


Launching satellites (which was done before and after Apollo) does not
need a man rated system. It can be done cheaply as an unmanned project.

fuel cells


High quality items that nearly destroyed Apollo 13. Way to go NASA!

power management


That would have occurred without a moon program. After the debacle of
1965 with the power gone out over most of the East coast power
managament was a required item. We don't need NASA for that.

more alloys
better weather prediction


How did going to the Moon result in better weather models. Is
puzzlement. We already had weather satellites up before the Moon shot. A
Moon shot was not necessary for that.


Each and all of these things separately could have been developed for
less money by private firms. When the government does something it does
it badly (like the first capsule design that killed the three astronauts
in the Apollo 1 static test).

What really gripes me is once we got there why didn't we set up habitats
for further research and build observertories on the dark side. We came,
we saw, we left. It makes no sense except as a dick measuring
competation between the U.S. and the (then) U.S.S.R. We spent and spent
then ****ed it away. And for what? A footprint on the Moon that said
made in the U.S.A..

Bob Kolker

At least we know that it can be done. That's something that can
possibly be used as a club to beat the dick-wavers of the future with.
Hopefully severely.

A

Bob wrote:


That megalomaniac didn't care about anyone but himself.

He was responsible for JFK's death and the powers behind the scenes
told him if he won again they would expose him. He ****ed up Vietnam
and the economy with his stupid "great society", so he had to go.

Thank the Diety of your choice for that! One FDR was bad enough. An FDR
plus LBJ was almost more than the Republic could bear. LBJ wanted to be
all that FDR was without being an Eastern Patrician. He might have done
it if he had fought the Viet Nam war to win it.

Bob Kolker

Andy wrote:



He let the *******s chop it short, if not being outright involved in
the budget axe.


The Apollo program succeeded in its function. It showed that our dick
(no pun) was bigger and thicker than their dick. And if it took Dick to
recognize it, so be it. The Apollo program was a surrogate to hostile
warfare. It was conspicuous consumptio. It was a potlach. It was our
Great Pyramid of Giza. The program was ill conceived from the git go.
The goal should have been to occupy the Moon, not just get there and
back safely. We should have had working habitats on Luna and a system of
observatories on the dark side. Who needs hubble when you have
observatories on the dark side? With regular traffic between Earth and
Luna we could be doing low gravity and zero gravity stuff. Besides a
satellite going around Luna won't be slowed down by an atomospher. ISS
Alpha **** Can One has to be boosted regularly because there is enough
atomospher at 250 miles to slow it down.

Bob Kolker