The NASA LANDER HAS MADE IT!!!

[Whoha]

Originally posted by pchang
Your post of CIA! CIA! CIA! was totally without context. I had no idea what you were referring to. And no, it wasn't the CIA, it was the little green men who have had a secret alliance with the US since we faked the moon landings.

look at the beagle 2 thread.

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by Sprayber
Outstanding. Now that we have conquered poverty and no child goes without food, shelter and medicine we can begin our exploration of space...

Oh wait a second..

I don't think diverting the few million spent on this space mission would make anywhere near as big a dent on those problems as diverting the few billion spent on other non-essential government programmes would.

[Sava]

I don't think diverting the few million spent on this space mission would make anywhere near as big a dent on those problems as diverting the few billion spent on other non-essential government programmes would.

The IRS and Congressional Budget Office estimates that the US loses between $70 billion and $120 billion per year in tax revenues due to off-shore corporate tax havens. But it's important to give those people tax cut after tax cut...

The sad part is America could have universal health care, education, job training, and every national security plan experts have thought of if we cracked down on corrupt corporations and made the rich pay their share. But that isn't likely to happen as long as the wolves are guarding the henhouse, so to speak.

[Ramo]

I don't think diverting the few million spent on this space mission would make anywhere near as big a dent on those problems as diverting the few billion spent on other non-essential government programmes would.

You're probably off by a couple orders of magnitude (IIRC, the last Mars lander cost over 100 million). But generally speaking, I think much of NASA's $20 billion or so in annual expenditures (which, granted, can't be much more than a couple percent of the federal discretionary budget) could be better used elsewhere.

[Whoha]

Nasa spending for 2003:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget.../pdf/app26.pdf
[edit]probably 10 billion, not 5 to 6 billion[/edit]

we are exploring the solar system extremely cheaply, from the same site discretionary spending was about 750 billion, and what was total spending, 2.27 trillion?

[Ramo]

That's not the right number (I don't know where it is in the file). It should be around $15 billion (instead of 20 as I guessed earlier).

http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n0302/03budget/

[Sava]

plus, the space programs have given contributions to humankind that are priceless... it's well worth the expense.

[Whoha]

I think thats expected for 4 or 5 more shuttle flights, that didn't happen last year(2003), the biggest number there is around 10B. So I cheated there, and its closer to 15 Billion for a normal year.

[DanS]

I don't think diverting the few million spent on this space mission would make anywhere near as big a dent on those problems as diverting the few billion spent on other non-essential government programmes would.

That's a little facile. What did you have in mind?

[Ramo]

plus, the space programs have given contributions to humankind that are priceless... it's well worth the expense

I didn't say that all of NASA is useless, but exploration isn't particularly useful.

[Kuciwalker]

I didn't say that all of NASA is useless, but exploration isn't particularly useful.

Just like Columbus going across the Atlantic in 1492 wasn't particularly useful... (and spare me the crap about all the bad stuff the spanish did to the indians, that's not the point).

[Pekka]

I watched the press conference yesterday, what were the distances again? From here to the moon, and from here to Mars?

[Seeker]

Ramo do you have an Oriental background if I may ask?

It's just that 'exploration is not useful' is so much what I'd expect my old Korean students to say.

[Capt Dizle]

I wonder if we could poll the dinos on whether or not they spent enough on their space program...

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by DanS


That's a little facile. What did you have in mind?

I'm not calling for anything. Just pointing out that in the grand scheme of things very little money goes to NASA and so if someone is going to complain about 'wasting' money on NASA instead of fighting poverty then why not complain about the other 99.5% of the federal budget expenditure first.

[Ramo]

Seeker, I'm Bengali.

Just like Columbus going across the Atlantic in 1492 wasn't particularly useful... (and spare me the crap about all the bad stuff the spanish did to the indians, that's not the point).

And looking at some Martian craters isn't the same thing as finding another continent on Earth (or a shortcut to people on the other side of the world - as was the intent). We're not even figuring out something fundamental (as, say, investing that money in a supercollider might do). I can't help but laugh when those NASA people on CNN get all excited about seeing another few square meters of the Martian surface.

[DanS]

Just pointing out that in the grand scheme of things very little money goes to NASA and so if someone is going to complain about 'wasting' money on NASA instead of fighting poverty then why not complain about the other 99.5% of the federal budget expenditure first.

One useless program at a time, Crunch. This thread isn't about all of the other useless programs.

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by DanS


One useless program at a time, Crunch. This thread isn't about all of the other useless programs.

It wasn't supposed to be about child poverty either.

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by Ramo
Seeker, I'm Bengali.



And looking at some Martian craters isn't the same thing as finding another continent on Earth (or a shortcut to people on the other side of the world - as was the intent). We're not even figuring out something fundamental (as, say, investing that money in a supercollider might do). I can't help but laugh when those NASA people on CNN get all excited about seeing another few square meters of the Martian surface.

Why do we need to discover something fundamental. Darwin's theory of evolution wasn't a fundamental theory, and it was drawn from empirical exploratory evidence. Likewise studying and exploring Mars and other planets is supposed to give a greater general understanding of space and planets which may or may not lead to amazing discoveries or realisations in the near future.

[DanS]

It wasn't supposed to be about child poverty either.

Hey, at least he was willing to distinguish the programs that were essential versus that were useless.

He has a good point that nobody's really addressed.

[Ramo]

Why do we need to discover something fundamental. Darwin's theory of evolution wasn't a fundamental theory, and it was drawn from empirical exploratory evidence.

By fundamental, I meant something that would lead to some sort of general understanding. Something that an exercise in topography probably wouldn't do.

[Lung]

Originally posted by Pekka
I watched the press conference yesterday, what were the distances again? From here to the moon, and from here to Mars?

IIRC, 400,000kms to the moon, 80,000,000kms to Mars. Okay, so i had to look it up, but i did know the distance to the moon, and from memory they said 400,000,000kms to Mars, but that is likely to be the total distance travelled, allowing for the relative change in location of the planets from time of departure to time of arrival, and also the first distance is when Earth and Mars are closest. Still, 80 mil is a long way from 400!

[Pekka]

That's pretty amazing! How long it took to get Mars this time?

[Donegeal]

Blah, blah, blah!

Do we have links to the color pics yet?!?!?! :doitnow:

[Winston]

Here's a colour pic. The first man on Mars is a Dane.

Danish toy manufacturer LEGO has sponsored the NASA Spirit & Opportunity Mars Missions with a six figure amount, and as part of the deal has been able to put a small, specially created LEGO figure, Biff the Astrobot, on the Spirit lander. That is to say, after negotiations with NASA, he's been reduced to an image on the DVD that the Spirit rover carries around on Mars. Still, history was made Sunday morning, and Biff was there, in Spirit.

Gagarin, Armstrong, Biff. Oh yeah.

[TheStinger]

The rovers should be sent to find Beagle 2

[Skanky Burns]

Originally posted by Ramo
By fundamental, I meant something that would lead to some sort of general understanding. Something that an exercise in topography probably wouldn't do.

Fortunately, the current mission is not an exercise in topography.

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by Ramo


By fundamental, I meant something that would lead to some sort of general understanding. Something that an exercise in topography probably wouldn't do.

If it was merely topography they wouldn't have used a lander, they could have done it with satellites - far cheaper, easier and safer.

[Ramo]

So what else does the lander do?

[GePap]

Originally posted by Ramo
So what else does the lander do?

It will study up close the geology of the area, looking for signs that water once filled that crater. And this type of geology you can NOT do from orbit.