Nasa

[Stealth694]

The NASA of the 60's,70's, and 80's died long ago, these days its more politics ect. Flashy Missions that get the publics attention ect. Even NASA executives were saying it was more a pork trough than a vaiable agency. Bush's talk about a Mars Mission before we even had a viable way of getting there and back ect... I want to see NASA continue, but get rid of the Political Hacks...

[Thorne]

I have always been a firm believer in exploring our solar system. I was stunned by the cancellation of Apollo, and the fact that we haven't been back to the Moon since. We should, by now, have a viable base on the Moon, extracting everything they need to survive from the raw materials there.

We should also, by now, have made at least one manned mission to Mars, with the idea of setting up a permanent outpost there, as well. The robotic explorers we have sent there, and to Saturn and Jupiter as well, have performed magnificently, for sure, but their capabilities are necessarily limited and it's my opinion that manned exploration is ultimately necessary.

But I've also come to believe that NASA is no longer the torch-bearer for such exploration. Private corporations, even private individuals, are the future of space exploration. They can, and should, receive support from nations around the world, those who wish to share in the benefits they bring.

And those benefits can be quite large. Much of the advances in technology we take for granted today have their roots in the US space program. Making things smaller, faster, better has given us the modern computers we now use without thinking. The global positioning systems we depend on for so much of our daily lives are all benefits of the space program. Even modern medicine owes some of its tremendous leaps forward to the lessons learned by going to the Moon.

We can only guess at what benefits could come from new explorations into space: New ways to produce food cheaply and efficiently; new ways to manufacture the goods we need and want; new methods for dealing with pollution. All of these are possible, even probably, advances which the space program would spur.

The constellation program which NASA was trying to fund was a step backward, basically returning to the 1970's for a mission to the Moon. We need to move forward! Let NASA develop the technologies, but let the people build and control them.

Yes, there were deaths along the way. Apollo 1, Challenger, Columbia, as well as those in the Soviet Union, many of which we may never learn about. We mourn those who have died, and honor the sacrifices they made. But we honor them by moving forward with the exploration of space. That's why they died. By stopping, turning our backs on space, we diminish them.

Many people died crossing the oceans to the New World. More died crossing the plains of America to new homes. More died exploring the depths of our oceans, the bitter cold of the poles. But mankind has marched onward, seeking to learn everything they can about our home, Earth.

And as we are learning, it's a fragile home. Dinosaurs once ruled this planet. A relatively tiny rock, roaming around the neighborhood for who knows how long, drove those rulers into extinction. And there have been many extinctions in Earth's history. It's foolish to believe that such a thing couldn't happen again. But by moving ourward, spreading to our neighboring planets, we can further insure that mankind will not be destroyed by one of nature's small hiccups. And who knows? Perhaps, one day, we can find a way to move further outward, spreading to the stars to meet those beings who are waiting out there.

The Moon is only the first step.

[steelish]

Closing the door on space exploration is like closing the door on our furture as a species.

I agree! (at the very least we are closing the door on our ability to compete with the other countries that are continuing with space exploration)

I am/would be (is it defininte?) saddened by it. I have been fascinated by space exploration ever since Sputnik-1 was sent into Earth orbit in the 1950's. I remember Laika, Gagarin, Shepard, Glenn, and Tereshkova. At the pinnacle were Armstrong and Aldrin.

I remember the shock of the Challenger and Columbia disasters, and how it was explained that sometimes it takes the supreme sacrifice of some of the best people for human development to continue. I don't know if I believe that entirely, but I do subscribe to it in part.

I also remember waiting for months and years for the Mariner and Voyager missions to complete each stage of their planetary tours, and was fascinated by the pictures that were sent back. Likewise I followed the exploits of the Mars Rovers, Spirit and Opportunity, and grieved along with Colin Pillinger on Christmas Day 2003 when Beagle 2 went missing.

How much has all that cost? God knows! I can't say it was maney well-spent but I believe it was. But if it could have been spent better, then perhaps it should. How does NASA's budget stand against the national wealth of Bangladesh or Haiti? If the Space Programme is cancelled, will these nations benefit? Or maybe the money could be used to fund the US Health Service ...?

America no longer needs to put a man on the Moon or on Mars to prevent them from being "governed by a hostile flag of conquest", so maybe we should choose to raise up the poorer nations instead, because that would be hard too, although the rewards would be just as great - if it were a challenge we were willing to accept.

I too loved (and still love) planets, stars and space exploration. My mother and John Glenn are cousins! (although they are cousins once removed...whatever that means).

You say; "so maybe we should choose to raise up the poorer nations instead" Is that a 'collective' we or should it be the United States responsibility? We pumped millions into Haiti long before the earthquake. Too bad its President didn't give any to his people...but I believe his palace is quite nice in comparison to even the mansions there.

As a side note - what should happen to the U.S. if a space-exploring country happens to find a renewable energy source in outer space? We won't be able to harvest it. We will be relying on another country yet again.

The NASA of the 60's,70's, and 80's died long ago, these days its more politics ect. Flashy Missions that get the publics attention ect. Even NASA executives were saying it was more a pork trough than a vaiable agency. Bush's talk about a Mars Mission before we even had a viable way of getting there and back ect... I want to see NASA continue, but get rid of the Political Hacks...

Personally, I see Bush's talk of a Mars Mission to be ambitious and forward-thinking. It's better than having a President who, when presented with a possibility, negates it as impossible rather than being visionary. I do agree that NASA is very political. It is, after all, a government-sponsored program. Too bad there are no multi-billionnaires out there willing to take it over.