![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() All that money to save the Hubble will go down the drain. A robotic mission will likely take longer than planned, cost more than planned and probably fail. Even if completely successful, it only gives a couple of years. For a couple of billion? A couple of billion to keep a handful of scientists on the gravy train for a ...couple of years. We could hire half of Baghdad for that. What we are looking for is life, Hubble cannot see it. Jonathan s |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
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 |