President Obama scraps NASA Project Constellation

You tell em Chris. If America wants to remain financially viable for the next 50 years and more, colonization of the moon is an imperative. Instead of spending trillions on military budgets for wars that cannot be won, we should be investing in our economy by becoming the technological leader of the world when it comes to space exploration and colonization.

Thanks man! For America to retain its position as a leader in technology, we cannot and must not abandion the the exploration of outer space. Harnessing the wealth of the solar system may be 50 years off but if we do not begin now, we will be left in the dust by other nations who are willing to committ the resources to this goal. The wealth of the Moon's resources as well as mining th asteroids would make our present GDP comparable to that of today's with that of America in the early 1800s!

Agreed. We must act now.

I would much rather see a big chunk of that so called "stimulus" money spent on the space program that will reap real technical rewards for the US as well as economic growth and security then spending money on short term, low skill jobs that will do nothing to enhance our technological edge in global competition.

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1958230,00.html

I found this... "We Have No Liftoff: Obama's Plan Grounds NASA"

Thanks for the link. I'm concerned about the military budget for space because Bush's national space policy actually called for it. I don't think I've seen any indication of it being reversed.

http://www.space4peace.org/articles/bush_seeking_control.htm

The problem that confronts uswith the need to explore military options is space is China. We get along pretty well with Russia on space exploration. China however is highly secretive and their entire space program is run by their military. They have already tested a weapon that puts all of our spacecraft including the ISS at risk. Their plans are for a moon base that could act as a launching platform for weapons directed against other nations. We cannot sit back and wait to be dictated to by the Chinese if they have a military space force.

My friend Pete wanted to fix his financial problem he had and he insisted that he and his wife never leave the house until they finish paying off all their dept. NO fun until they were done. She divorced him due to him causing her unreasonable amount of stress on her weak heart.

Did you steal that from Start Trek?

individual countries laying claim to areas of space will only lead to war. Space exploration should be done on the basis of the human species as a whole, only in this light will we ever make any progress in unlocking the secrets our galaxy has to offer.

I disagree vehemently with your position! hehehe Always wanted ta write that. Hey Jubal, all those other space-faring countries will share their discoveries with Americans, or haven't you been to the brain wave alteration center yet? oops, I mean airport. Everybody walks through the same machines and voila, we're all thinking the same. Easy. Blink eye fast, painless too they say.

Does it remind you of a Start Trek episode. I didn't steal anything, but then, great minds think alike. HEHEH

That is exactly my point, WAR. If America doesn't take the lead on colonizing the moon, we will end up in war over getting our piece of the moon.

I agree that colonization outside of this planet should be undertaken as a unified effort by humanity, but with capitalists at the helm, it will be every "artificial person" to themselves or there will be a consortium of "artificial person/corporations" that work together to undertake space exploration and colonization.

Just wait till they start laying claim to Mars and the asteroid belts. It will belong to whoever gets there first and maintains a manned presence, I guarantee that is how it will go down, even with or without wars here to settle the matter.

You either prepare for the future, or are left in the proverbial Lunar Dust.

The majority of knowledge and wisdom gained in going to the moon was achieved in the journey to be able to get there, not the act it self......... thousands of products ordinary people use daily were created by NASAs ingenuity. Just because your ultimate goal is ambitious dosnt mean you cant have small victories along the way.

I've read about this before rather thoroughly, but it suffers greatly from requiring too radical a change in order to fully implement. There are many great ideas like that people as a whole simply won't allow.

On behalf of all of us I apologize for our lack in being progressive. But give us time. It's only been a year and a few days.

Agreed. Not that human life is too fragile for space exploration, just that robotics is a cheaper means of attaining the same reults. Human space exploration is absolutely necessary just not a priority in the U.S' current state.

hah, peace loving people....your joking right?

the middle east has never been peaceful, and likely never will be, and thats why it is essential to send weapons and support to those countries like Israel and Saudi Arabia because they are relatively in control, and are somewhat stabilizing the area. people tend to not see the big picture and find it easier to point their fingers at the government for everything thats going wrong in the world. while the government is fucking up in most things it does, it is making the right descision on halting both unnecessary space exploration and shipping arms to the middle east. i am fascinated with space and science, but when America is in a depression and people are out of work (including some of my family) space exploration just doesnt cut it as top priority. its top priority when everything is going good (ie no war, poverty, etc), or when trying to piss off the soviets. either one, take your pick

shut the fuck up dude. god, i am sick how everyone says "da usa is a third world country" when places like somalia or haiti have it so much worse. the country and economy are far from perfect but anyone who actually lives in a third world country could tell you how much worse it is where they come from. you should be grateful that you can actually (i assume so if you are using a computer and internet) afford food on your plate.

Third world countries have the very rich just like the U.S. Sure everything is beautiful in the good ole USA as long as you can pay the price. You want me to STFU? Make me punk.

No need to be quiet. I like hearing your echo. It's awesome. Hear it?

Keep making less than positive comments and they might give away your place in line for the giant centrifuge that hurls little ships filled with Old People out into Space. We are watching your further comments. This has been a Demerit Alert.

u cant compare the usa to places that i mentioned. seriously, those places have it so much worse there with the crime. i know the united states government can be corrupt a lot of times and i dont trust it a lot but still try not to compare it to the worst third world countries around. and i can tell u to stfu whether u like it or not. its the internet, there are people who actually dont agree with u online

I never said he's canceling NASA's budget. What the President is doing is hindering the progression of the space program which is going to have a cascading effect upon all future programs. NASA’s doesn’t just decide to do things on a whim. It takes years-decades to design a plan and to train and develop systems. NAS’s already invested millions if not billions into the constellation program.

Then redesign and testing of the Ares rocket was not free.

“Don't blow this event out of proportion; it is a wise redirection of funds in our national budget.”

Bullshit. Reducing NASA’s budget hardly constitutes a “wise redirection of funds.” The amount of money we spend on the space program is nothing. Futhermore NASA probably has the largest ROI of any government organization. There are plenty of programs that could be downsized or eliminated that could end up saving the feds more than a portion of the 18billion NASA gets (military industrial complex or corporate welfare for starters).

“You can't justify firing teachers, laying off workers, foreclosing homes, reducing medicare and other social services for poor families and the diabled, by spending billions on sending more astronauts to the moon in order to update old equipment.”

LOL I think you need to check which side you are on. Cutting NASA’s budget means firing teachers, laying off workers, foreclosing homes, reducing medicare and other social services for poor families and the disabled. Who do you think makes all those wonderful spacecrafts, who maintains the launch pads and facilities, trains the workers, sends them to school to better their education and provides health insurance?

“That would be a misprioritization of the welfare of the American people and the importance of America's space program.”

No the epitome of a misappropriation of funds is when the military industrial complex gets a raise after torturing hundreds and killing hundreds of thousands while the one US government program everyone looks up to gets punished.

agreed. Nothing personal against the president, but it's such a micro part of the federal budget, and benefits everyone so much (look at NASA website and it shows you lists of things created via NASA researcher, microwave is one 0.0). One would think there would be a more ideal place to shave off half a percent of the budget...

If you can’t take the occasional four letter word being thrown out in a discussion then you should probably take your sheltered, easily offended self back to the commune. It’s 2010 sweetheart. The whole notion of intelligence and maturity being the sole attributes of those with sticks up their assess and Jesus in their heart is fading/ or has faded into a distant memory.

Anyways getting back to the real world.

“In the wake of a prospective budget freeze, reducing funding to one area of the budget means increased spending in another,”

Except that’s not the case here. Overall the president is going to increase the federal budget. He’s not simply moving money around.

“To me, people come before space exploration, and fortunately, those sentiments are shared by the current administration.”

I’m starting to get a feel for your argument and I think it stinks. If you honestly going to argue that the US can either feed the homeless and yada yada yada OR fund NASA then by all means stop reading now because no amount of logic is going to pull you from that absolutist, delusional rhetoric.

“As much as I would love to go to space, I would rather have a suitable habitat to come back to first.”

Your suitable habitat, or any chance of having one in the future owes itself to the countless selfless individuals that made a life of studying it. That includes NASA and all the work they have done to further our understand of the atmosphere, climate and everything covered by their Earth Sciences department.

“How many people does NASA hire, feed, shelther, care for, and train on yearly basis? Are you saying that halting this project will shut down the entire association and everyone who works for them will be displaced?”

Somewhere around 300,000 to 400,000 either work for NASA directly or are employed as subcontractors or government liaisons. I don’t know how anyone is supposed to know the exact number of people that are going to get caned but from I’ve read it’s going to be at least in the tens of thousands. And for the record I never said President Obama was going to shut down the entire shebang and I wasn’t trying to imply that the whole thing would collapse either. What I was trying to convey is that it’s pretty ridiculous to go on a moral tirade about saving the homeless and educating the poor when your going to defund an insanely successful government program that educates and employs thousands. This is seriously an as backward way to create jobs.

“Once again, you have blown this story way out of proportion. NASA still has money to spend on building platforms and space shuttles, just not as much.”

No it doesn’t. NASA is set to retire it’s STS system by 2010. That includes the space shuttle and many of the systems that go along with it.

“Plus, I am not sure what return of investment there is on sending a spaceship into space..”

Well I’m not sure what ROI I’d get from whoring myself out to a collection of sex deprived sailors that being said it doesn’t automatically mean it’s impossible to get a couple of bucks for giving a dude an HJ. The fact of the matter is that it’s insanely easy to figure out how NASA makes money and how it helps the American people, and to a larger extent, the rest of the world. Google it.

I don’t like the Phobos idea. I posted a response to that idea somewhere else in this thread. You should check it out.

Ricky84, as far as your opening statement, I echo your sentiments. We are living in 2010. Its time to deflower all the TABOOS. Freedom and liberty are just words used to empower one group over another unless they include everyone and their lifestyle. Words have incredible power. And forbidden words have even more power, because speaking them will illicit such a negative backlash. Is this because the offended are right? Perhaps, in their own semantic universe. But we are trying to create understanding and foster honest dialogue and communication. Who should be the one to compromise? Making the words acceptable takes away their power to oppress and to entice.

Besides, FUCK is the one word in the English language that is really an acronym, however, it has become a word none the less. It is considered in most respectable circles as a vulgarity, but in the modern world of 2010, it has an innumerable number of meanings, and its number grows each oh decade or so. People have actually written books attempting to cover most of the commonly used meanings and ways the word is modified, such as by adding an ING to the end ore and ER after the four letter word. Even IT works as well as NO or even YES, but then you are into slippery territory because you venture into YOU. This combination could elicit an angry confrontation and even violence.

So we must remember that CONTEXT really has a lot to do with understanding whether the word and any of its conjugates are appropriate to the communication. Sometimes its meaning can be lost due to cultural differences.

Using word of the days from Dictionarycom's past as subtle insults is valid and ok. I'll have to look that rule up. Seems like you made that one up yourself. But I could be wrong. I am only a liberal.

I’m not surprised at all that you can’t take my argument seriously. Based on what you’ve said I can tell that besides having a fundamental lack of understand of the space program you like to make wildly judgmental assertions on the morality of an individual based on unrealistic or at the very least unverifiable assumptions of what the hell is actually going on. In short you‘re a fan of bigoted arguments. Worst still you surround your bigoted viewpoints around flowery language and high in the sky- holier than thou nonsense to try to disguise what it really is.

The idea that it’s true or likely or an indicator that an individual doesn’t care about the poor or cares about them less than someone else because they feel a certain way about space exploration is an epic attempt to build the foundation of a civil discussion on a steaming pile of bigotry and horseshit. By all means please stop responding to my posts and go find someone else to annoy. Seriously why don’t you go to tell someone their a genocide supporting maniac for not agreeing with your opinion of the new Ipad or something.

Yeah it's pretty funny how the work works. We pass laws to fight racial and sexual discrimination because on some level the population and government recognizes the damaging effects of the racist mindset. On the other hand racism is just a particular form of bigotry and bigoted viewpoints still come a dime a dozen.

That I am. I think it's commendable the way you use it to attack someone in such a way that it keeps you looking mature. It is also good that you point out that someone else is attacking you in an aggressive way while doing it at the same time yourself. Your finesse is impeccable. I appreciate it.

Teach me how to tell someone that they are immature and childish and totally not worthy to debate me, because that's something anyone can use on anyone in an online debate. It's a formidable weapon of mass misinformation. You're playing chess with words. It's amazing how well it is working.

My friend does exactly what you do. I like to watch him do it online with others. For me I don't let him toy with me like that. But with others, it's amusing...like a fly in a web of words that they just can't seem to maneuver out of.

I always appreciate your ladylike composure. Spaceships the way they are designed now truly are a total waste of money. They're too heavy so they have to have more heavy fuel that makes them, uhm, even more heavy. Total Waste of $$$$, plus all that vaporized fuel puts out a year's worth of pollution. It doesn't go through a catalytic converter...

I wasn't encouraging him to be rude and obnoxious, I was talking about the semantics of words and how they can change based on context.

You couldn’t be any more wrong. The moon IS the key to future space exploration. Where else are we going to develop and test the technology to go to Mars and beyond that also happens to have large quantities of water, rocket fuel and a relatively low gravity making it easier to launch deep space explorations? Oh that’s right is no other place but the moon.

I have heard of Phobos and I can tell you that trying to campaign for a mission to Phobos over the moon given what we know at this moment is insane. At best we could assume that Phobos could be a potential jumping point to the asteroid belt and beyond and that‘s about it. For starters we don’t even know what Phobos is made out of while on the other hand we have a fair understanding of the lunar composition( oxygen mainly and other assorted elements) and most importantly to the exploration of space we know it has water, hydrogen and helium-3.

This is confirmed, validated, set in stone fact and not fiction. Everything about Phobos besides the dynamics of launching a mission to and from it surface is speculation.

At any rate colonizing Phobos would not solve the problem that could easily be remedied by colonizing the moon. 90% of a spacecrafts weight before launch is composed of propellant. It costs a billion dollars in fuel just to go to the moon because a gas tank with enough fuel to clear earth’s orbit, go to the moon and return is insanely heavy. That’s why everyone is trying to get to the moon now.

Shackleton crater on the south pole of the moon has somewhere around ten trillion tons of water which could used to fuel future space exploration at fourteen times less then it costs right now. The moon is also rich in iron and other elements that could be used to develop spacecraft, tools, nuclear generators and so forth. The same can not be said for Phobos.

"Perhaps a little research is in order before you start hashing out judgements on others opinions, unless you are a rocket scientist or an expert on space travel that is."

I'm going to take a wild guess and say you're probably not a rocket scientist or expert on space exploration either. So then what gives you the right to comment on the issue?

I'm no "Space scientist" but if you're recommending removing 10 trillion tons of water from the Moon you're the one who is insane here. Only idiots would alter the weight of the Moon like that, even if the idiot is a scientist or a scientist-wannabee President of the United States.

I think I've spent more time on this thread arguing about stuff I never said or endorsed more than on any other post. Gravity I said there exists ten trillion tonnes of water ice under Shackleton's crater and that was it. Furthermore, what the hell have you been smoking? How in gods name are we going to mine ten trillion tonnes of ANYTHING from the moon?

On earth even with world demands and six billion plus worth of potential help we can only mine about 5 million tonnes of coal per year. What you're proposing is never going to happen and even if it did I'm not so sure it would be that big of a deal. all that water ice came from meteorite impacts and the moon is still there. On top of that the mass of the moon is like 73,430,000,000,000,000,000 tonnes and it already has a a 25% elliptical orbit that's taking it father and farther away from the earth each year.

So to summarize all this I'd bet you dollar to donuts that by the time we could mine all the water ice on Shackleton's crater then whatever minor deviance (if any) caused by removing all that material will be vastly overshadowed by the naturally elongating orbit of the moon anyways.

Perhaps so but your attitude sucks rotten eggs. If every country launching people to the Moon get there with your attitude that nothing they can do will harm it then gee, that's good to know just exactly how screwed we really will be.

Good thing Spain didn't say the same thing after Columbus' first voyage to America.

...well, bad thing for the Indians. But who cares.

That was not the original purpose of sending a crew back to moon.