[RadioAstronomer]

I have been on launch failures where years of hard work, and the resulting science goes poof in an instance. It is quite devastating. :-(

However, I cannot even imagine the shock felt thru the scientific community with the cancellation of the SSC, especially after it was so far along towards completion.

I think the ripples from that decision are still being felt in this country today. Are Americans up to the task of truly "big science"? I wonder. Where would this country be if "big science" had been canceled in the past? Would Lewis and Clark been funded? Note; there were congressmen at the time that debated and questioned the funding issue of that exploration as well. Think of the Apollo legacy and the incredible boost to our engineering, miniaturization, and manufacturing capabilities. (I would lay money on the table that the return in taxes and GNP from all of the industries enabled and created thru the technology from the space program has exceeded the cost of same program)

To this day, I wonder what discoveries of the very nature of the universe we live would have been revealed by the SSC. Who knows what may have come from this. IMHO, this is national tragedy that most will never even be aware of or worse even give a damn.

I read many statements like; not with my taxes or it's unconstitutional, etc. Well they are FLAT WRONG! Big science and the resultant discoveries are in the national interest and national defense. Where would we be if Germany or Japan had completed their work on the Atom Bomb before we did back in 1945?

I also read all of the time here on FR, cancel NASA, or make it private. What company in these uncertain times would try to even fund projects of the magnitude of say a program like Cassini? Again, I would put money on the table and say NONE!

Just recently, I read a critique here on FR of just how much the Mars missions cost the taxpayers that are going to land next month. Well here is a contrast: If you only bought just ONE Starbuck latte for every family in America, you would spend more money than the price of these two Mars Landers, their launches, and the cost of operations.

Does anyone really expect the American public to give up his or her latte for ONLY ONE SINGLE day to fund a Mars mission? I sure don't.

Sorry for the rant, but I fear our country is slipping from the forefront if science and exploration and the benefits reaped from such explorations.

[R. Scott]

Government funding is seldom based on need but on vote buying. Back in the ‘60s people were all fired up with space – the Russians beat us up there. Our fledging aerospace industry had the support of The People, and support meant votes.
Few people realize the possibilities from the collider. Any politician that supported funding might have gained a few thousand votes – while losing tens of thousands of votes.

[VadeRetro]

Just recently, I read a critique here on FR of just how much the Mars missions cost the taxpayers that are going to land next month.

Personally, I think we should be landing tax collectors on Mars.

Sorry! I agree totally with your rant. :)

[PatrickHenry]

If you only bought just ONE Starbuck latte for every family in America, you would spend more money than the price of these two Mars Landers, their launches, and the cost of operations.

I like the space program (but not every project they have going on), and I agree that national defense is the proper Constitutional justification for such research; however I suggest you reconsider that particular line of argument -- the one I'm quoting in this post. Every left-wing spending program gets "justified" the same way ("We spend more each year on dog food than this little ol' program will cost!"), so it's the kind of argument that will justify literally anything.

[farmfriend]

Sorry for the rant,

Hahaha, keep that up and we will start getting you mixed up with SierraWasp.

[RightWingAtheist]

A point of interest: I was reading Philip J. Hilts's Scientific Temperaments a while ago, and in the section on Robert R. Wilson (the founder of Fermilab), it noted that WIlson had invented the O-Ring, and that it was originally made as a vacuum seal for use in cyclotrons. Science proceeds not just through the invention of completely new ideas, but exaptiating ones used elsewhere. For this reason, it is difficult-possibly impossible-to determine which fields of basic science are most deserving of crucial funding when the benefits of research go on beyond the intended usages.

[RightWhale]

I read many statements like; not with my taxes or it's unconstitutional, etc. Well they are FLAT WRONG!

They say: 'where in the Constitution does it say . . .?' As a rhetorical device it should lead to a sure loss to the one who employs it in a refereed debate.

[Alamo-Girl]

Well said, RadioAstronomer! I agree that we cannot afford to give up.

[XBob]

75 - Good Rant!

"To this day, I wonder what discoveries of the very nature of the universe we live would have been revealed by the SSC. Who knows what may have come from this. IMHO, this is national tragedy that most will never even be aware of or worse even give a damn."

Physicist doesn't seem to know why high temperature superconducting magnets are not 'advised' for a super-collider. Perhaps you do.

So, they are ceramic, and brittle - so what? If they can run mag-lev trains sucessfully, why can't they be used on supr-colliders?

[XBob]

75 - "To this day, I wonder what discoveries of the very nature of the universe we live would have been revealed by the SSC. "

Probably the same discoveries that could be made today, much faster and cheaper if we would get off our collective butt's and do something, instead of just bitching about a screwed up project 10-15 years ago.

Sometimes it is better to cut your losses and try again, later.

If you notice the history of the super-collider, the world was with us, as long as the US paid for it. The billions of funding from other sources never materialized. As long as we were paying, there was plenty of participation - similar to the situation in Iraq today - they all want to share in the glory (pay off) but few want to step up to the plate and actually support the project with hard cash -

Bravo for Bush for telling France and Germany and Russia and those who failed to support us in the war on terrorism, to 'GO STUFF IT'.

[LasVegasMac]

The science will continue.

But the military will play a much larger role, thanks to the way NASA has done (not done) business these past years.

I still cannot comprehend how that organization has managed to stay in existence.

We had the Cold War, and we won.

Next up?......the Space War.

If Hitlery gets elected Pres, forget everything I just said. We will assume the role of "target" for anybody that manages to get a weapon in orbit.

LVM

[Aracelis]

Rant away...you know I agree with you.

[edwin hubble]

"Does anyone really expect the American public to give up his or her latte for ONLY ONE SINGLE day to fund a Mars mission? I sure don't."

RadioAstronomer, This is an important message about the investment that the space program projects make:

Note that the simple and straightforward language is intended not for you, but for the lurkers who may believe that we actually send "dollars into space".

1. Astronauts actually cash their paychecks and pay their mortgages on Earth, not in space.

2. Hardware for the space program is produced here on Earth and pays wages to workers here on Earth. The workers raise their families here on Earth and buy goods and services on Earth.

3. Space projects buy mostly American materials.

4. The space program had an important part in the development of the computer as we know it, global telecommunication, GIS, GPS... A good part of our present economy is due, in no small part, to the space program.