|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
NASA - National Atmospheric and Space Administration
NASA - National Atmospheric and Space Administration
I like the sound of that. That's going to be your new NASA in 2009. That gives direct overlap with NOAA, where is counts the most, and puts the agencies at the forefront of atmospheric research and remediation, where they belong. This is the way it's going to be. Get used to it. George W. Bush's vision of visiting space expensively and exploring space as stupidly as possible, will soon be relegated to the scrap heap of history, where everything he does belongs. Screw you Michael Griffin. -- Get A Free Orbiter Space Flight Simulator : http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/orbit.html |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
NASA - National Atmospheric and Space Administration
"kT" wrote in message ... NASA - National Atmospheric and Space Administration I like the sound of that. That's going to be your new NASA in 2009. Well they better start making themselves useful again. Where the public looks at NASA as an agency that gives us answers, not more problems. Diverting more and more resources to go back to the moon is exactly the opposite of that. Less and less answers with ever growing waste. It's so sad to see the Big Interests take NASA apart piece by piece for their own short-term enrichment. Jonathan That gives direct overlap with NOAA, where is counts the most, and puts the agencies at the forefront of atmospheric research and remediation, where they belong. This is the way it's going to be. Get used to it. George W. Bush's vision of visiting space expensively and exploring space as stupidly as possible, will soon be relegated to the scrap heap of history, where everything he does belongs. Screw you Michael Griffin. -- Get A Free Orbiter Space Flight Simulator : http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/orbit.html |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
NASA - National Atmospheric and Space Administration
Jonathan wrote:
"kT" wrote in message ... NASA - National Atmospheric and Space Administration I like the sound of that. That's going to be your new NASA in 2009. Well they better start making themselves useful again. That's the whole point, Jonathan, and the best way to start doing that is with a simple name change, which effectively splits the responsibility of the atmosphere between two premier science agencies. Where the public looks at NASA as an agency that gives us answers, not more problems. We demonstrably no longer need any aeronautical answers from NASA. Diverting more and more resources to go back to the moon is exactly the opposite of that. Less and less answers with ever growing waste. Right, but the present administration is a wash. We know we won't get anything out of them so by default it has to be the next administration. It's so sad to see the Big Interests take NASA apart piece by piece for their own short-term enrichment. Time to clean the house and senate too. -- Get A Free Orbiter Space Flight Simulator : http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/orbit.html |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
NASA - National Atmospheric and Space Administration
"Jonathan" wrote in message ... "kT" wrote in message ... NASA - National Atmospheric and Space Administration I like the sound of that. That's going to be your new NASA in 2009. Well they better start making themselves useful again. Where the public looks at NASA as an agency that gives us answers, not more problems. Diverting more and more resources to go back to the moon is exactly the opposite of that. Less and less answers with ever growing waste. It's so sad to see the Big Interests take NASA apart piece by piece for their own short-term enrichment. Jonathan Bush has done all the wrong things when it comes to NASA.. He tried cutting funds with Hubble and decided on going back to the moon by 2019. A man will land on the moon in 12 years to start building a moonstation. I may agree with that at the most and mostly to explore its resources (ideally hydrogen), but going to Mars is ridiculous. Billions of dollars when we have nations here that have people who need to be freed and brought into civilization. Sheesh. I would rather be spending on a NHC than sending a man to Mars. It would cost the same and bring the same results.. SH_T! |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
NASA - National Atmospheric and Space Administration
In article o%Gei.4882$AR5.1624@trnddc06, "GO Mavs"
wrote: Bush has done all the wrong things when it comes to NASA.. He tried cutting funds with Hubble and decided on going back to the moon by 2019. A man will land on the moon in 12 years to start building a moonstation. I may agree with that at the most and mostly to explore its resources (ideally hydrogen), but going to Mars is ridiculous. True, but fortunately, nobody in power is talking about going to Mars. Even the original VSE speech barely mentioned it in passing, along with "and other destinations". The Mars nuts have somehow spun this into sounding like an actual goal, when it is not. Best, - Joe |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
NASA - National Atmospheric and Space Administration
Joe Strout wrote:
In article o%Gei.4882$AR5.1624@trnddc06, "GO Mavs" wrote: Bush has done all the wrong things when it comes to NASA.. He tried cutting funds with Hubble and decided on going back to the moon by 2019. A man will land on the moon in 12 years to start building a moonstation. I may agree with that at the most and mostly to explore its resources (ideally hydrogen), but going to Mars is ridiculous. True, but fortunately, nobody in power is talking about going to Mars. Even the original VSE speech barely mentioned it in passing, along with "and other destinations". The Mars nuts have somehow spun this into sounding like an actual goal, when it is not. That's true, in the faith based world, there are no goals. -- Get A Free Orbiter Space Flight Simulator : http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/orbit.html |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
NASA - National Atmospheric and Space Administration
I agree about that being a fault of Bush. There is no reason we need to send
men to Mars or set up a space station on the Moon. We have learned there is a ton we can do with cameras, machines, robots, and magnetic and inferred technology. Going as far as we can into space should only be funded privately. "kT" wrote in message ... NASA - National Atmospheric and Space Administration I like the sound of that. That's going to be your new NASA in 2009. That gives direct overlap with NOAA, where is counts the most, and puts the agencies at the forefront of atmospheric research and remediation, where they belong. This is the way it's going to be. Get used to it. George W. Bush's vision of visiting space expensively and exploring space as stupidly as possible, will soon be relegated to the scrap heap of history, where everything he does belongs. Screw you Michael Griffin. -- Get A Free Orbiter Space Flight Simulator : http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/orbit.html |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
NASA - National Atmospheric and Space Administration
GO Mavs wrote:
I agree about that being a fault of Bush. There is no reason we need to send men to Mars or set up a space station on the Moon. We have learned there is a ton we can do with cameras, machines, robots, and magnetic and inferred technology. Going as far as we can into space should only be funded privately. Actually, no, there is a dire need for remote sensing of the Earth from Earth Orbit, and manned space flight for future asteroid deflection missions, which is most easily simulated and tested in Earth orbit. Bush clearly got the destinations wrong (Ceres, Phobos and Deimos, and the asteroids immediately come to mind), the reason for doing it wrong, (manned space exploration is meaningless, protecting the planet Earth makes far more sense) and the cost (which is also irrelevant now that Bush has effectively bankrupted US). Americans can do better than that. -- Get A Free Orbiter Space Flight Simulator : http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/orbit.html |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
NASA - National Atmospheric and Space Administration
"kT" wrote in message ... GO Mavs wrote: I agree about that being a fault of Bush. There is no reason we need to send men to Mars or set up a space station on the Moon. We have learned there is a ton we can do with cameras, machines, robots, and magnetic and inferred technology. Going as far as we can into space should only be funded privately. Actually, no, there is a dire need for remote sensing of the Earth from Earth Orbit, and manned space flight for future asteroid deflection missions, which is most easily simulated and tested in Earth orbit. Bush clearly got the destinations wrong (Ceres, Phobos and Deimos, and the asteroids immediately come to mind), the reason for doing it wrong, (manned space exploration is meaningless, protecting the planet Earth makes far more sense) and the cost (which is also irrelevant now that Bush has effectively bankrupted US). Americans can do better than that. I have no problem with manned space flight. I am talking about going on a journey through the solar system or at least Mars with manned space flight. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
NASA - National Atmospheric and Space Administration
GO Mavs wrote:
"kT" wrote in message ... GO Mavs wrote: I agree about that being a fault of Bush. There is no reason we need to send men to Mars or set up a space station on the Moon. We have learned there is a ton we can do with cameras, machines, robots, and magnetic and inferred technology. Going as far as we can into space should only be funded privately. Actually, no, there is a dire need for remote sensing of the Earth from Earth Orbit, and manned space flight for future asteroid deflection missions, which is most easily simulated and tested in Earth orbit. Bush clearly got the destinations wrong (Ceres, Phobos and Deimos, and the asteroids immediately come to mind), the reason for doing it wrong, (manned space exploration is meaningless, protecting the planet Earth makes far more sense) and the cost (which is also irrelevant now that Bush has effectively bankrupted US). Americans can do better than that. I have no problem with manned space flight. I am talking about going on a journey through the solar system or at least Mars with manned space flight. But going to the asteroids is ok, since barring that, they will be definitely coming here. Better to fight them there, otherwise we'll have to fight them here. Ceres is a ****ing planet already too, a hell of a lot easier planet to land on than Mars, and a hell of a lot more interesting and mysterious too. With all those Mexican Americans breeding like rabbits, and America being a third world country and all now, we're definitely going to need another planet, but Mars isn't it. George W. Bush couldn't even get the destination right. -- Get A Free Orbiter Space Flight Simulator : http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/orbit.html |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The evil administration of Ronald Reagan presided over the Space Shuttle Columbia tragedy! | [email protected] | Space Shuttle | 18 | July 8th 07 08:29 PM |
U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration satellite launched on Atlas-5 rocket (Forwarded) | Andrew Yee[_1_] | News | 0 | March 14th 07 12:29 PM |
NASA honored by small business administration | Jacques van Oene | News | 0 | April 27th 05 06:24 PM |
Bush Administration Kills Hubble Space Telescope | Explorer | Policy | 131 | January 27th 05 11:22 PM |
NASA scientists discuss giant atmospheric brown cloud | Jacques van Oene | News | 0 | December 15th 04 11:09 PM |