[ClearCase_guy]

Our real step backward was when we went back to the 7th century and decided to focus on Muslim outreach.

[Balding_Eagle]

President Johnsons’ decision to destroy the Black Family took precedent over any NASA mission.

[SkyPilot]

Barack Obama: NASA must try to make Muslims 'feel good'

Barack Obama wants Nasa to acknowledge Muslim achievements and contributions to science maths and engineering

[cripplecreek]

Should have kept going to the moon and built a station there.

[Jack Hydrazine]

"...The Orion spaceship is almost a carbon copy of the Apollo spacecraft."

Here's the Project Apollo patch/logo. See anything familiar?

[Jack Hydrazine]

From the article:

DW: “Should we go back to the moon?”

Worden:”I see no value in going back to the moon. What will we go back for? To explore it some more? Do we need to explore it some more? I don’t think so. The moon is a very, very baby step on the way out.”

China considers Manned Moon Landing following breakthrough Chang’e-3 mission success
http://www.universetoday.com/107716/china-considers-manned-moon-landing-following-breakthrough-change-3-mission-success/

The People’s Daily reports that “Chinese aerospace researchers are working on setting up a lunar base,” based on a recent speech by Zhang Yuhua, deputy general director and deputy general designer of the Chang’e-3 probe system.

[BitWielder1]

We should develop the hardware to colonize the solar system and use the moon for practice runs.

[Snickering Hound]

Gave us the EPA, OSHA, and the Space Shuttle. He also killed the last 3 Apollo missions.

[setha]

“We took a step backwards back in the late 70s when they decided to build the space shuttle. That was, in my opinion, a mistake. The shuttle was a very complicated machine. It did some pretty unusual, clearly spectacular things, like launch vertically and land horizontally. But from a technical standpoint, we launched a 280,000 pound machine to carry 25,000 pounds up to space. To go to the International Space Station.”

The only mistake was not developing the Shuttle far enough. Unlike the Apollo and Apollo-based programs, the Shuttle could land more conventionally.

“If we had maintained the Saturn V as a launch vehicle, we would have put eight times as much into Earth’s orbit. What’s interesting to me is: We are going back to the Saturn V system for the future programs. The Orion spaceship is almost a carbon copy of the Apollo spacecraft.”

Throwing out the Shuttle completely and revisiting Apollo was the step backwards.

[Steve0113]

bookmark