Skip to comments.
Majority Wants Space Flights Halted Until Goals Set
Houston Chronicle ^
| July 20, 2003, 9:47AM
| TONY FREEMANTLE and MIKE TOLSON
Posted on 07/21/2003 1:08:04 PM PDT by anymouse
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-24 next last
Some deceptive polling to support the author's bias.
1
posted on
07/21/2003 1:08:04 PM PDT
by
anymouse
To: *Space
Space ping.
2
posted on
07/21/2003 1:08:22 PM PDT
by
anymouse
To: anymouse
A sample group of only 800 is not sufficient to be accurate and we could question selection of respondents. There isn't much doubt that this is a phony survey. There are many people including myself who think the program is a luxury we cannot afford and the best thing would be to close it down permanently.
To: anymouse
I am thoroughly, absolutely supportive of maintaining and expanding the space exploration program. However, I agree not only with grounding the space shuttle fleet but reorganizing NASA altogether in the process of articulating clearly defined mission objectives. Placing colonies in near-Earth space and/or celestial bodies - sooner rather than later - should be the ultimate, systematic goal IMHO.
4
posted on
07/21/2003 1:18:27 PM PDT
by
AntiGuv
(™)
To: anymouse
I would also strongly support efforts to disseminate/encourage technology in the course of stimulating private sector space exploration/exploitation endeavors.
5
posted on
07/21/2003 1:21:36 PM PDT
by
AntiGuv
(™)
To: AntiGuv
The best way to improve human space flight is to make it profitable....
6
posted on
07/21/2003 1:22:27 PM PDT
by
Lunatic Fringe
(When news breaks, we fix it.)
To: anymouse
"This just in. Zogby's latest Manipulation Poll purports that Americans want to give up to al Qaeda,
want to dismantle NASA, and change the Constitution and country to an Islamic Caliphate Society run from Iran.
Zogby claims to have learned this based upon his poll of his entire extended family and more than 80 murderous terrorists,
20 fifth-columnists and traitors at the "US" State Dept."
7
posted on
07/21/2003 1:23:58 PM PDT
by
Diogenesis
(If you mess with one of us, you mess with all of us)
To: AntiGuv
Many people fail to remember that one of the reasons the Shuttle was developed was to service a future space station. Sure, it flew around for years waiting for the ISS to come to be, but it was at the time (and still may be) the most feasble way to get back and forth.
I don't know what is left to transport to the ISS as far as modules go, but if they have to redesign those in order to use a different delivery system, then you'll REALLY hear people whine and complain about costs.
8
posted on
07/21/2003 1:31:36 PM PDT
by
Normal4me
To: Normal4me
The Russian Soyuz spacecraft are more than sufficient for servicing the ISS during whatever interim when the space shuttle program gets redesigned or superceded. What we really need is nuclear propulsion, which President Bush was widely reported considering to declare as a NASA initiative during his State of the Union but deferred for whatever reason.
9
posted on
07/21/2003 1:38:17 PM PDT
by
AntiGuv
(™)
To: Normal4me
Sure, it flew around for years waiting for the ISS to come to be, but it was at the time (and still may be) the most feasble way to get back and forth. The shuttle is a political bastard. Everybody wanted to screw around, but no one wanted to commit. That is the history of the space program since apollo in a nutshell.
Congress doesn't want to shut NASA down and appear pessimistic, nor do they want to fund NASA as NASA wants and appear irresponsible. NASA can't conceive of doing anything without an army of bureaucrats driving up the costs beyond what Congress will fund.
If congress asked NASA to build an outhouse they would need 100 bureaucrats just to get started, and 200 to maintain the thing when they were done.
To: AntiGuv
President Bush was widely reported considering to declare as a NASA initiative during his State of the Union but deferred for whatever reason. Probably because NASA would just embarass him with a trillion dollar estimate the same way they did his father.
To: hopespringseternal
Lol...so true. I worked there at one time (not for NASA) and had to wait seven hours to simply connect a spring loaded ground clamp to a rail car. Seven people to watch and verify I did it right....bwhahaha.
To: hopespringseternal
To be sure, I have little but contempt for the cumbersome, redundant NASA bureaucracy, which is why I support a comprehensive reorganization...
13
posted on
07/21/2003 1:50:42 PM PDT
by
AntiGuv
(™)
To: anymouse
More than two-thirds of the 800 respondents said NASA was doing an excellent or good job of directing the nation's space program, and an overwhelming majority, 83 percent, said they thought it was important to the country's international prestige to have humans flying in space.Between 1959 and 1969 the United States took the space program from ICBMs to landing on the Moon. That was ten short years. This is thirty-four years later.
Please tell me the citizens of the United States are not as dumb as this poll question and answer indicate.
NASA is lost on terra firma. The Robinsons would be ashamed.
To: anymouse
Instead of having a space program, let's have a space rush. The government annouces that the United States will establish a permanent colony (Moonbase) on the surface of the Moon. Instead of gearing up a "space program", a prize is offered: the first individual or corporation to build a lunar colony and keep in up and running for five years never pays corporate income taxes again.
Next, NASA is disbanded and reconstituted as the United States Department of Space Exploration and Colonization (US/SPACE), which is divided into two parts: a uniformed United States Space Service (and associated Space Academy) and a civilian United States Space Colonization Authority. The U.S. Space Service is subdivided into three sections: the U.S. Space Command ("S-COM" / military operations, treaty enforcement, BMD, asteroid defense, etc.), the U.S. Space Exploration Command ("X-COM", deep-space and planetary exploration and research) and the U.S. Space Transport Command ("T-COM" / transport, licensing of private vessels, space "merchant marine"). Once the lunar colony is up and running, volunteer colonization groups would register with the Colonization Authority, which provides legal title for their claims, and purchase sections of lunar property for colonization purposes. The Moon, Mars, the moons of Jupiter, and te asteroid belt would be thoroughly explored by the crews of X-COM ships, which would identify potential colony sites. Colonizing groups would then purchase private transport (licensed by T-COM) to their chosen claims, said claims to be honored under the watchful eye of S-COM. The stated goal of the whole enterprise would be "To discover, explore, settle and develop extraterrestrial territories for the benefit of the people of the United States."
15
posted on
07/21/2003 1:52:05 PM PDT
by
B-Chan
(Catholic. Monarchist. Texan. Any questions?)
To: AntiGuv
Yes, the Soyuz is great for supplies and transporting people but I was referring to modules that were designed to fit the cargo bay of the orbiter.
To: Normal4me
I suppose the foremost question then revolves about how visionary NASA might be (don't smirk..) and how swiftly it may be so (don't smirk..) B-Chan is speculating in the right general direction, IMO. Regardless, I definitely see your point that practical reality is what it is and a successful transition for the space program would require proper attention and leadership. I think the American people would be quite supportive so long as elected officials articulate clear, defined objectives for the reorganization - objectives beyond just flying back & forth in near-Earth space..
17
posted on
07/21/2003 1:59:02 PM PDT
by
AntiGuv
(™)
To: biblewonk
My-special-interest-is-better-than-yours ping.
18
posted on
07/21/2003 2:09:59 PM PDT
by
newgeezer
(the difference between liberals and some "conservatives" is their special interests)
To: henderson field
There are many people including myself who think the program is a luxury we cannot afford and the best thing would be to close it down permanently. That opinion is completely wrong. The space program is vital to America's future if any, and is absolutely the only reason America is still in a leadership role today. Further, the space program is the only means available to permanently win the War on Terrorists. The program should be re-oriented toward building a manned base on the moon, a cislunar shuttle system, and a manned outpost on Phobos. The budget may be increased or not. If the Space Shuttle and the ISS are mothballed or handed over to the international community to do with as they see fit, NASA's budget need not increase to achieve these new goals, although the budget may increase by a factor of 2 or 3 without imposing any hardship on the tax-paying citizens. Maybe we'll still be around in 50 years if we make the investment.
19
posted on
07/21/2003 2:12:01 PM PDT
by
RightWhale
(Destroy the dark; restore the light)
To: B-Chan
The Moon, Mars, the moons of Jupiter, and te asteroid belt would be thoroughly explored by the crews of X-COM ships, which would identify potential colony sites. Okay except one thing. Colonization won't pay for anything. Mining of asteroids will pay for everything. Explore asteroids to find good ones to mine. Everything else is secondary.
20
posted on
07/21/2003 2:24:03 PM PDT
by
RightWhale
(Destroy the dark; restore the light)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-24 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson