So, the President wants to go to Mars . . . just fucking great

[bigtree]

____When U.S. President Barack Obama speaks at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida Thursday, he is expected to lay out a plan for the space program that will ultimately send astronauts to Mars.

Space author Robert Godwin said Obama will announce that sending humans to Mars will be "a national goal for the United States . . ."

__________________________________

Well, he just went down a peg, in my estimation, for whatever that's worth to anyone. The Mars mission is a pacifier; a distraction for the American public to make them feel like we're accomplishing something other than war, taxes, and greed.

But, more importantly, it's a boondoggle for the very same industries which bring us our bombs and war. It's a welfare program for a multi-billion dollar industry with stars in their eyes. It's a shameful waste of money and resource at a time where solutions to our basic needs are being parsed-out with a miserly indifference to the real and pressing needs of folks right here on Earth.

I know, I know . . . tell me again about all of the wondrous things which have come out of the space program. Bully for them, I say. Got my computer from space, you say? Bully.

Tell me, then, what wondrous things will be forthcoming from Mars to rescue our faltering nation?

[SoCalNative]

1. It could be a good thing

maybe we can send all of the teabaggers and their overlords there.

[derby378]

3. Aw, HELL, no

I don't want them colonizing any planets! Don't give them any ideas for Planet Sarah...

[Javaman]

64. Personally, I applaud the sending of our potential tea bagging overlords to mars. nt

[Oregone]

2. Putting a man on mars will feed, clothe, and house every human on earth!

[NeedleCast]

4. Good

I strongly support a healthy space program.

[Kolesar]

5. I love deep space and Earth observation space programs

But the manned space program is just a relic of the Cold War "space race". Gravy for the aerospace industry.

President Obama is playing for the Florida 2012 electoral college votes. He can win without Florida, though.

[sufrommich]

6. I'm pretty sure NASA's Mars mission will not be the huge

distraction you claim it will be. Science and exploration are a good thing and an important part of any society.Why do "wondrous things" have to come from science for it to be "worth it"?

[bigtree]

12. how about 'anything'

. . . coming from the Mars mission which will benefit the basic needs of millions of Americans which are forecast to be largely unmet well into the future?

[Richardo]

7. I don't think you realize that we don't actually spend the money *on* Mars.

It's not like they take a suitcase with $500 billion in it and leave it there.

It's a stimulus program, and one of the better ones yet conceived. It gets public money into industries that develop technologies that transcend space travel, and puts an emphasis on producing - and employing - scientists, physicists, mathematicians, technicians and engineers. And wouldn't you rather have defense contractors using your tax money to build rocket boosters and space capsules, than making fragmentation bombs and fighters?

[SidDithers]

11. Good post...nt

Sid

[myrna minx]

13. .

:applause:

[bigtree]

14. such a false choice

. . . money for bombs or money for space?

That can't be your argument.

[Richardo]

15. Did you read the rest of the post?

You asked about immediate benefits.

[bigtree]

18. you mean the jobs?

What about the nation's infrastructure? Why do we have a dime to waste on 'exploration' when so many needs are going unmet?

[Richardo]

24. Not everyone's in the construction industry.

Infrastructure is a huge priority in my book, too. And it's already received a substantial amount of funding in the stimulus package.

Time to diversify a bit, and invest in some long-term employment and educational priorities.

[NeedleCast]

29. Support your Argument please

Please show me data or some other concrete fact that proves that if we cut NASA's budget that we'd see gains in "infrastructure."

Your argument seems to be based on the fact that you think NASAs budget is unjustified. I have no idea why you've picked that (very small) piece of the tax puzzle to go after. Cutting the DoD's annual budget by 2% would free up enough money to provide vast improvements in infrastructure. Cutting NASAs budget by 2% might pay for a few local road improvements.

If you're opposed to spending on science until ALL needs are met, then no money would ever get spent on science.

[bigtree]

38. it's just obvious

Where do you get the bonanza of free cash? The money has to come from somewhere. Right now, money for our infrastructure is being misered-out in increments which barely begin to address the problems we face. Your argument is that we can always borrow just a little more.

I don't understand the disconnect between where our money is coming from to fund these things, how we spend the borrowed cash, and how our legislators regularly claim they can't provide enough funds to adequately address our basic needs.

[NeedleCast]

80. You're just straight wrong

I'm not sure what bonanza of free cash you're refering to.

You understand that NASA has an operating budget, right? They don't just go to the government and say "hey, give us money for this." They GET funding, then they base their projects off that funding. There's no taking away from other projects to fund this any more than there is from any other sector. You could just as easily make the argument that "we can't afford to be spending money on freeways when people are going hungry" (or the opposite of it).

[bigtree]

84. where do you think the money comes from

. . . with our nation trillions of dollars in debt?

[FarCenter]

26. So fund the useful scientific research and engineering programs directly

Instead of spending a large percentage of the fund on unproductive anciliary activities related to manned spaceflight.

Even increasing the robotic exploration would be better.

Humans cause huge problems in efficient space exploration, primarily because you need to engineer a lot of life support systems and you need to engineer vehicles that can accomplish a round trip (well not actually - you could get volunteers - but people are squeamish about sending astronauts on one-way trips).

[Richardo]

30. The development of life-support systems has immediate benefit in the healthcare segment, no?

In fact, that's probably one of the more beneficial aspects of the program.

And I don't see how the funding of research and technology can be much more direct than through government contracts.

[FarCenter]

39. What is the connection between life support systems in space and health care?

How does building a zero gravity toilet help hospitals? Or designing a system to turn urine into drinking water?

They are not even very interesting science projects, since they have been done already.

[hobbit709]

47. If you can't figure that out, you're not thinking very hard.

Think monitoring systems, CAT scans, etc.

[Richardo]

51. Exactly. R&D in life sciences - microbiology, bioengineering, physiology.

[FarCenter]

56. R&D in the life sciences is being funded independently of manned spaceflight

R&D funding manned spaceflight is more likely to compete with R&D funding for those subjects, not enhance it.

[FarCenter]

54. Apparently we should fund rock n roll, not manned space flight

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-ray_computed_tomography

Tomography had been one of the pillars of radiologic diagnostics until the late 1970s, when the availability of minicomputers and of the transverse axial scanning method, this last due to the work of Godfrey Hounsfield and South African-born Allan McLeod Cormack, gradually supplanted it as the modality of CT.

The first commercially viable CT scanner was invented by Sir Godfrey Hounsfield in Hayes, United Kingdom at EMI Central Research Laboratories using X-rays. Hounsfield conceived his idea in 1967,<6> and it was publicly announced in 1972. Allan McLeod Cormack of Tufts University in Massachusetts independently invented a similar process, and both Hounsfield and Cormack shared the 1979 Nobel Prize in Medicine.<7>

The original 1971 prototype took 160 parallel readings through 180 angles, each 1° apart, with each scan taking a little over 5 minutes. The images from these scans took 2.5 hours to be processed by algebraic reconstruction techniques on a large computer. The scanner had a single photomultiplier detector, and operated on the Translate/Rotate principle.

It has been claimed that thanks to the success of The Beatles, EMI could fund research and build early models for medical use.<8> The first production X-ray CT machine (in fact called the "EMI-Scanner") was limited to making tomographic sections of the brain, but acquired the image data in about 4 minutes (scanning two adjacent slices), and the computation time (using a Data General Nova minicomputer) was about 7 minutes per picture.

[hobbit709]

58. Before it was used in medicine, it was used in the space program

To make sure there were no flaws in the metal components of the rockets.

[FarCenter]

73. Do you have a reference for the use of CAT scans before EMI?

The history of CAT is pretty clear that it was invented independently of the space program.

I'm familiar with the use of X-rays for inspections of metal parts, but I've never heard that CAT scanners were used for inspecting parts for the space program before they had been used for medical purposes.

[hobbit709]

74. 3D X-rays are the basis for the medical application.

[JVS]

85. This is interesting. Those who have praised stopping the Moon program now have to adjust quickly.

And those who screamed bloody murder at cutting off the new moon program would seem obligated to support this.
Meant to reply to OP
:popcorn:

[Posteritatis]

98. People like to think science is engineering and want their consumer goods predicted in advance. (nt)

[anigbrowl]

101. several...

Recycling and cleaning water and air have many applications here. Also, look into the medical and life support possibilities of sulphur dioxide.

[bigtree]

32. better yet

. . . there's so much concern about 'protecting commercial space' that our military spends millions defending and projecting the defense of the satellites and junk. How about developing the program contemplated where industry paves the way to Mars with their own contributions and support? After all, they will be the ones who ultimately benefit the most in the end, financially. It's not as if they don't already have the money between all of those well-paid executives in and out of government.

[HelenWheels]

43. No

I would rather spend money on exploring the ocean. We might get something useful from that. As far as going to Mars, we could pack it full of some of the plastic island that is polluting our oceans and shooting it up to space.

[Statistical]

68. Very good and often overlooked point.

In the history of space program we have never spent a single dollar "in space".

[shraby]

8. I think it's a great idea. Been waiting for this since the first

satellite went into space. Watched Sputnik from the middle of a field sitting on a car hood way back when and the mind swirled with the idea of someday we'll be on Mars. Hope I see it happen before I check out of this world.

[Botany]

9. Going to Mars is what Great Nations do ......

..... and when we get there (and back) we can be proud. NASA makes up a sliver of the federal budget and has some
really good people.

BTW we are years from any mission.

[Oregone]

65. Great nations have universal healthcare and high social mobility

And they are proud of that

[Botany]

95. Please tell me where in my post did I say that I was against ......

universal healthcare and social mobility?

My guess is that any mission to Mars will be a multinational effort
but we are years from that point right now.

[Oregone]

107. You are defining what great nations do, and I thought Id help

IMHO, a "great" nation needs not to go to Mars to be great. To each their own.

[Truth2Tell]

83. "when we get there (and back) we can be proud..."

First I thought you were missing the sarcasm thingy. Then I realized you were not only serious, but that you just nailed the political motivations behind this entire foolishness dead on with a single sentence.

[Botany]

96. Please write to your man Dennis K. and ask him to help close the NASA

offices in his district. Make sure to include how foolish it is to have smart people
w/ good incomes having jobs in your district.

http://maps.google.com/maps?client=safari&rls=en&oe=UTF-8&um=1&ie=UTF-8&q=cleveland+ohio+nasa&fb=1&gl=us&hq=nasa&hnear=cleveland+ohio&ei=bmLHS9KPMo_8Nbe8yOcI&sa=X&oi=local_group&ct=image&resnum=4&ved=0CB0QtgMwAw

[Truth2Tell]

109. Your red herring doesn't address my point one iota. nt

[Botany]

110. sorry ...

[spinbaby]

10. I'm all for it

Don't know about you, but I want to know what's on Mars before I die.

[muffin1]

16. This is NOT the time.

Time for more focus on unemployment. And getting our troops out of Iraq (AND Afghanistan). And working on repealing DADT - equal rights are civil rights - I'm tired of hearing how Obama "has TOO MUCH ON HIS PLATE to fight for GLBTers"!!11!!
Good fucking lord.

[Richardo]

19. How is this *not* focusing on unemployment?

Just a question.

[NM_hemilover]

93. Maybe if you "mooned him", he would pay attention ?

[still_one]

17. The Hoover Dam, the Empire State building, the interstate highway system were all done started

during the Great Depression

There is a lot of benefit from this, in spite of your cynicism that helps everyone

Medical Technology, clean energy, computer technology, transportation, and even jobs

One cannot stop progress

Rescue our "faltering nation"? You don't think we can do more than one thing?

[NeedleCast]

21. Seems to be the common argument

that we somehow can't improve the economy and continue to support other "left" causes AND fund a space program. I've never understood the argument (mostly because it doesn't make sense).

[bigtree]

27. probably because when it comes time to fund programs and initiatives which address real needs

. . . we get nickled and dimed out of luck.

[NeedleCast]

40. So why pick on the space program?

It uses a pretty inconsequential amount of the federal budget. It's not like money is being diverted from other programs to fund this. If you want to talk about major funding, look at what's spent of defense.

You're making an either/or argument in an area where it doesn't apply.

[bigtree]

49. I pick on a lot of unnecessary spending

. . . and I really don't understand 'inconsequential' expenditures with trillions of dollars in debt and so many other more pressing needs than space exploration ignored and unmet.

Making these fiscal choices and setting priorities is not unheard of. In my own little economy . . .

[bigtree]

22. The Empire State building wouldn't have gotten my support

I'm very familiar with that debate which was raging at the time.

The highway system and dams were productive, practical uses of federal cash. I don't see the Mars mission as useful or practical right now. I don't see this mission as 'progress'.

[HipChick]

20. I support him, and I worked at NASA..people can sit and armchair this all they want..

There are many things that have come out of R&D from NASA that people have benefited from already..people assume that is all at face value of just sending objects out to space..it's not..

[Auggie]

23. Totally agree

I love the concept of space exploration, but I love the concept of alternative fuels, single-payer health insurance, and an end to poverty even more.

[closeupready]

35. +1 That's where I'm at on this.

It would be terrific if we could afford it, but we can't.

"We can't afford not to."

Um, no. If we can afford not to provide single payer to Americans, we can afford not to provide the military/industrial complex (benign though this program would be) with taxpayer cash. We should let the American people keep their money for food and housing and clothing.

[Lerkfish]

25. I've been dreaming about being the first man on mars since 1969

I'm too old now (51) but I still wanted it to happen.

I'm sorry it is too political for you.


However, I agree with you that has been used in the past as a distraction (Bush).

[edbermac]

44. Hey, John Glenn was 77 when he went up on the shuttle.

51? You're just a kid!

[DCBob]

28. No one can predict what "wondrous things" might result from further space exploration..

We might find the "monolith".

[FSogol]

31. A big space program would create jobs. Good move, IMO. n/t

[Kablooie]

33. Hey, don't knock it. Mars has already brought us several great candy bars.

[blogslut]

34. Your Internet came from DARPA

Just a lil' FYI.

[johnnie]

36. This was good news to hear

Many of us breathed a collective sigh of relief yesterday. I, along with thousands of others at other agencies across the country, were pretty concerned about what our futures at NASA would be when "Constellation" got canceled. Even though I work on the aeronautics side of the agency the impact on the space side would have surly played a part in my position at work.

We do a lot more than sending people up to the sky.

[brendan120678]

112. Yep..I work for a Small Business...

Aerospace & Defense Company, and we provide quote a few parts to the major primes on the various components of the Constellation Program.

[ieoeja]

37. Jobs

[hobbit709]

41. If it wasn't for the space program, you wouldn't be posting on the internet.

[Statistical]

42. Sad to see science bashed on DU.

The cost of any "future" (Obama wants to delay Mars mission until 2025 or later, rocket wouldn't be developed until 2015) would be a tiny rounding error on US economy.

We spend more money on video games in a month than we do on space exploration in a year.

[bigtree]

57. that's a dishonest argument

Demonstrate for me the urgency or a specific benefit from this particular mission. That's what I'm objecting to . . . the funding of THIS mission, not 'science'.

[Statistical]

59. Everything begins with one step.

This step isn't going to take place for over a decade and it is a tiny step maybe 0.0001% of global economy.

It isn't a false argument.

There is no immediate urgency but eventually we need to get off this planet or mankind goes extinct. That is a guarantee.

You can't go from no manned space program to colonies in a year or even a decade or even a century. It will take centuries. We shouldn't be taking steps backwards just because you don't like theoretical science.

[bigtree]

69. we should work on this planet before we contemplate leaving for another one

There was so much time left for our air, water, wildlife when I was young. Now, so many of those life-sustaining elements of our planet are at permanent risk because of our neglect, indifference, and abuses.

I'm just completely turned off by arguments which insist we should focus on abandoning this planet for another as our endeavors do so little to preserve or sustain life on this one.

[Statistical]

99. Nobody said anything about abandoing earth.

A colony on Mars would be hard living for thousands of years.

Still even if the Earth was some utopian paradise we are putting all our eggs in one basket by limiting ourself to a single fragile biosphere.

[anigbrowl]

104. we can and should do both. nt

[lumberjack_jeff]

45. "a distraction for the American public to make them feel like we're accomplishing something"

And that's.... bad?

[bigtree]

52. are they there to entertain us

. . . or help sustain us?

[lumberjack_jeff]

55. Did Apollo do anything more?

When Kennedy promised to go to the moon, no one knew what permanent tangible benefit we would realize. All there was, was the shared vision and "sense that we were doing something".

[bigtree]

63. been there, done that

We're much older now, and more aware of and activist about what our government (an industry) does with our money than in those days.

Kinda of silly racing the Soviets, I think. Not the exploration itself . . . that was interesting and revealing. I'm not one who would be at all uncomfortable watching China do this with our country lagging behind. I don't relate to the international competitiveness that drove the race to the moon. I think it was silly. I like the cooperation right now between nations which has been necessary in the face of budget restraints (and has been so in the recent past).

We need to be prudent about our priorities and mindful that there aren't just bonanzas of cash waiting to be dipped in to fund these projects and we need to exercise control over those precious resources to put 'exploration' in the right place in our national priorities. I don't think embarking on this Mars mission - funding it right smack in the middle of our economic struggle - is a particularly prudent ordering of priorities.

It probably wasn't in Kennedy's time either. But, maybe you can describe what benefit you think America gained by showing up the Soviets. I think it was sorta ridiculous when we look back at it all (Cold War, etc.).

[lumberjack_jeff]

72. I'm not big on the competition either.

And I'm ambivalent about whether Mars, specifically, is the best near term goal. I just know that it's time to set some.

Personally, I think the space elevator is the best project humankind could embark upon.

[Newest Reality]

46. Science aside ...

Investing in a relatively dead planet is an excellent, symbolic gesture that reflects our current Gestalt.

It is befitting that we expand our knowledge on these matters since we don't seem to have a clue, (or really, the will) to solve many major problems here. People are a dime a dozen and obviously don't matter if they are not in a specific social class, ey?

I predict this headline in 2035: Huge Wave of Foreclosures hits Mars!

[csziggy]

67. Actually the studies for possible terraforming of Mars will lead to better environmental science

Here on Earth. And if we can terraform Mars - which is not that unreasonable a concept - we would have another planet to settle. Since it would be even more fragile than Earth, we would HAVE to have a complete understanding of the ecology we would construct. That and the studies leading up to the terraforming effort could give us enough understanding of Earth's environment to help repair the damage that has and will be done to it.

What is funny is that years ago I had cooked up a conspiracy theory about the failed Mars missions - all those crashes seemed very odd to me. My theory was that those craft were actually loaded with bacteria to begin the terraforming of Mars. The first step in terraforming would have to be breaking down the surface to release carbon dioxide to warm the planet and oxygen for life. Seeding the planet with bacteria or other microscopic life could be that mechanism.

It was just a tongue in cheek idea, but I wonder...

[FarCenter]

76. I think that the lack of hydrogen on Mars is the problem

You couldn't make Mars into a relatively watery planet like Earth, since there isn't enough hydrogen. If you do find enough to make significant amounts of liquid water on the surface (assuming your CO2 warming made it warm enough for liquid water), the evaporation of H20 into the atmosphere would result in the eventual loss of the hydrogen due to the low gravity.

So even if you could terraform Mars, it would go extinct and barren again well before Earth did so.

Therefore, it is better to focus on terraforming Earth.

[csziggy]

78. Certainly a terraformed Mars would not last as long as Earth

But the knowledge gained could allow us to treat Earth better so it is habitable longer than it will be if we keep abusing our biosphere. And if the doomsday people are correct and one or the other planets is hit by a world killing asteroid or some other cosmic disaster, the chances are that both would not be hit at the same time.

Perhaps with the knowledge gained, we could follow the lead of Heinlein and Clarke and terraform the moons of Jupiter.

We do not need to do these things immediately, but the projections I have seen on the Constellation project, it will be more expensive to shut down the program than to finish it. So since we have taken it this far, let's complete it. The Mars mission is a long term goal. I have not read Obama's plan. I suspect there will be more unmanned missions in the next ten years, ones that are already in the pipeline. The feasibility studies needed to plan for the eventual mission are what will generate the most basic knowledge that is applicable to Earth uses.

Why not keep the idea alive? Without forwarding thinking, we are limiting our vision.

[unhappycamper]

48. I don't know why he doesn't just give the money to Lockheed or BAE or Raytheon.

Space, schmace. I doubt We The People will be launching human beings into space anytime soon.

[Statistical]

66. Actually we will be doing that in 2 months.

Sadly it will be second to last time we do that for very long time.

Don't worry though. We are still going to space. We are just renting (at about 5000% markup) space on Russian rockets to put our astronauts in space.

Kinda like a taxi service. Just like a taxi the fare is far more expensive than doing it ourselves.

[kestrel91316]

50. Link to video of him saying this? Or is just crass speculation?

[bigtree]

53. I'll be glad if the reports are wrong

I could be that he'll define the mission and the funding in a way which isn't too objectionable. I'm still against it, tho. We'll see . . .

[kestrel91316]

62. So, this has not actually OCCURRED, correct?

[bridgit]

60. Naw, the "distraction for the American public" is provided by American Corporate Sports

[WI_DEM]

61. Why would this be any worse than JFK proposing to put a man on the moon?

[Name removed]

70. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bigtree]

71. classy

This is a longstanding argument I've expressed here over the years I've bothered to share my thoughts on this discussion board.

I'm sure you expect folks here to respect your own views . . .

[dionysus]

77. just seems to be a bizarre thing to get worked up about.

[Posteritatis]

91. Prolly a lot of people who hugely overestimate NASA's budget as usual

There was some news floating around about a year ago to the effect that the average American thought NASA's budget was higher than the defense budget, so people upgrade the pittance that is the actual space budget to some vast, existential threat to human civilization.

Of course, DU's been pretty consistent about hating spaceflight, manned and otherwise, over the years.

[Swede]

75. Luddite:

One who opposes technical or technological change.

[Rosco T.]

79. Remeber if not for the space program...

you wouldn't have that computer you're trying on
the internet
most of the modern conveniences you have now..

and a fact.. for the Apollo program every $1 spend on the program circulated thru the economy $9 worth.
How's that for a stimulus...

Be not a luddite...

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

82. The shuttle uses an 8086, for fuck's sake.

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/12/us/for-parts-nasa-boldly-goes-on-ebay.html?pagewanted=1

I'm pretty sure computers would be just fine without the manned space program.

[Toasterlad]

81. I Know What You're Really Worried About: You Think the Rocket Ship Might Hit the Sun Instead.

I can understand why you'd be worried, since you assume that Mars and the Sun share a similar orbit around the Earth. However, both Mars and Earth actually revolve around the SUN, so the spaceship would be going in the OPPOSITE direction!

I know science can be scary, but that's how we find out about things! Give it a try, and you might find out that it can be pretty neat!

[Tailormyst]

86. Well I would rather see money spent on space research then on wars...

or a number of other things.

I am not a fan of what Obama has done since he has been in office, but I have a really hard time getting upset over this one.

[deaniac21]

87. He just tells the people he is speaking to what they want to hear.

Just like every other politician on earth.

[Dr Morbius]

88. Personally, I don't much care about Mars.

It's a dead planet almost two billion miles from the sun. But beyond Mars lies something I find VERY interesting: the asteroid belt. Therein lie riches beyond the dreams of avarice, literally tons of precious semiconductors and useful but rare metals. And I think humanity can eventually move an asteroid into Earth orbit and start mining.

We cannot deny tomorrow. Tomorrow will come, whether we are ready or not. And the human race will either die on this planet or explore space; I'm for the latter. No time like the present to prepare for the future.

[SidDithers]

89. Unrec...

I think money spent on space exploration is money well spent.

Sid

[robertpaulsen]

90. C'mon, admit it. You're scared he's coming off like Black Bush, aren't you?

MARS, BITCHES!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jxogl5C6ano&feature=related

[freeplessinseattle]

92. just great. appealing to the inner child demographic n/t

[TheKentuckian]

94. Fucking good. I'm glad anyone who wanted to hobble exploration is disappointed

I don't get hand to mouth thinkers.

[Forkboy]

97. Good. Tell me, bigtree, do you really think the money for this would be spent on helping the poor?

Do you really that money would be redirected to helping people anyways? Seriously? If so, the word "naive" jumps to mind.

[mainer]

100. Better we go to Mars than spend the $ on bombs and war

The war industry is a powerful, almost unbeatable lobby. Let's get them to focus on space exploration instead of weapons. Maybe it's a pacifier and a distraction as you say, but at least it has a chance of advancing scientific knowledge.

[mzteris]

102. Wonderful!!

Space exploration, development, is not only a great idea, but a necessity IMO.

I really don't understand people how anyone can be "against" the space program.

[Divine Discontent]

106. we certainly need to spend on research and exploration, however, when we're in dire straits we need

budgets reduced on these types of things. I am glad KSC will not be shut down, so they can all breathe a sigh of relief.

[Hannah Bell]

103. Bush said the same thing, then never talked about it again.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,107807,00.html

[sudopod]

105. Why yes, it is fucking great.

Just because you can't wrap your head around something doesn't make it worthless, goddamnit.

[walldude]

108. Well, while I think there are other things

that are a bit more important at the moment, the truth is I support anything that can get me off of this loony rock faster.

[Bluebear]

111. That was Junior's big adventure too. nt