NASA outlines moon, Mars missions

Efforts to resume shuttle missions next year are just the first step in an emerging strategy by NASA that includes human missions to the moon and Mars,

www.chron.com...

That's incredible, but I hope they can do it sooner than they say they can. I'd really like to see the new shuttle.

All I can say to that is "yeah, right." NASA's been saying pretty much the same thing since the '80s. While I have respect for the technicans and scientists at NASA, this is all stuff they could easily be doing now. Ever since the Space Shuttle came along, NASA has abandoned or delayed one human space flight program after the other.

NERVA? Cancelled.

Freedom Space Station? Had to join with the Russians to gain technology and experience.

X-30? Cancelled.

X-38 Crew Return Vehicle? Cancelled.

X-33 / VentureStar? Cancelled.

Money down the drain (except for NERVA, that was cheap and yielded valuable data).

Meanwhile, the X-Prize contestants push forward with reliable, suborbital manned vehicles - all for a measly 0.1% of NASA's annual budget.

i think this is the very next step to deep space xploration. but it is also a bad waste of money, how many ppl dieing of starvation when the funds coulda went to them for food? and what about the homeless when the money coulda went for better shelters and better livving conditions? strange how we work isnt it?

They must need some more public funding.

Thinking along these same lines...you have probably wasted money that could have saved at least 10 men.

Not only you, almost everyone have.

That might me a little low compared to how many lives Mars mission funding can save, but if all of us do that think about all the lives we can save, that is hundred times higher than Mars mission funding.

NASA don't care even about homeless in U.S. let alone people dying of starvation in the world.

Originally posted by surfup
Thinking along these same lines...you have probably wasted money that could have saved at least 10 men.

Not only you, almost everyone have.

That might me a little low compared to how many lives Mars mission funding can save, but if all of us do that think about all the lives we can save, that is hundred times higher than Mars mission funding.

NASA don't care even about homeless in U.S. let alone people dying of starvation in the world.

think about when earth will get so poluted you will have

to wear a gas mask.

where will you go?

if mars can be lived on then we will be able to go there

to live.

and most homeless are on the streets cause they like the money they get daily without working.

I did a project on homelesses and i found out that most of them are just lazy to work.

also alot of homeless people like to live on strrets.

Who gets to live in Mars or some newly discovered planet, rich and wealthy?

Some planet that will be, where there will be no one to work.

If you have two problems, you solve the one that is the most damaging and within our reach.

Even if we find another planet capable of sustaining life, the chances of us colonizing it and chances of us going and settling there is very little.

Originally posted by surfup
Who gets to live in Mars or some newly discovered planet, rich and wealthy?

Some planet that will be, where there will be no one to work.

If you have two problems, you solve the one that is the most damaging and within our reach.

Even if we find another planet capable of sustaining life, the chances of us colonizing it and chances of us going and settling there is very little.

earth will not break up tomorrow or get smogged up tomorrow

it will be years(alot of years) before such thing happens and by then it will be cheao to go to mars.(the same a traveling on an airplane)

it used to be only for the rich to fly planes and know alot of people fly on planes.

it is because everything losses its value.

at first it will cost probabloy about 1 billion to go to mars but over a period of time it will get cheaper and cheaper cause technology advances.

1 billion? I think it is much more than that. Think about the human input into the project. How many people will work day and night in the project, numerous?

If we directy that hard work into making the earth a better place to live, why would we need space exploration other than for knowledge.

Originally posted by surfup
1 billion? I think it is much more than that. Think about the human input into the project. How many people will work day and night in the project, numerous?

If we directy that hard work into making the earth a better place to live, why would we need space exploration other than for knowledge.

ok if you dont agree with living on mars then at least agree that we need knowledge and maybe advance technology if there are really aleins.

we need technology in space.

for example fighters

If I was given a choice between one human life and all the technology and advances we recieve in a two hundred years and from Aliens, I would choose for sure life.

Originally posted by surfup
If I was given a choice between one human life and all the technology and advances we recieve in a two hundred years and from Aliens, I would choose for sure life.

well sorry cause i would choose the advancements cause that will save more then one human life.

it would probably save billions and the world!

Originally posted by Russian
well sorry cause i would choose the advancements cause that will save more then one human life.

it would probably save billions and the world!

Sacrifice one to save one!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There is no assurance that we will gain advancements or find Aliens. Should we sacrifice millions and take a huge risk that might save billions.

Who decides who should be sacrified and who should be saved?

Most probably the one to die are the innocent, poor people and the ones to be saved are the wealthy!!

This is pointless, futile debate concerning giving NASA's budget to the poor.

1. NASA's budget is nothing compared to the military budget, which does not much besides kill people (and employ 3 million Americans).

2. A fraction of the military budgets of all the nations in the world would feed everybody.

3. 3rd World countries need development programs and structured investment to stimulate local economies, not food.

4. The space program is something everybody on Earth can be proud of, no matter your nationality.

Originally posted by Lampyridae
1. NASA's budget is nothing compared to the military budget, which does not much besides kill people (and employ 3 million Americans).

2. A fraction of the military budgets of all the nations in the world would feed everybody.

If the government was given a choice to choose between military spending and space exploration, what would the government choose?

I accept your argument that a part of U.S. or world's spending can feed millions.

But the world needs protection from others, not exploration.

This is how NASA can get an unlimited budget. They need to discover an "object" that is big enough to do massive damage on to us. When they get all that all they need to do is put on a firework display up there and all the fooled would believe that NASA saved us. They could do it.

Originally posted by surfup
1 billion? I think it is much more than that. Think about the human input into the project. How many people will work day and night in the project, numerous?

If we directy that hard work into making the earth a better place to live, why would we need space exploration other than for knowledge.

umm NASA gets less than 1billion a year....

Forget money.

Think about the hard work thousands of people put into it!!

Money can be earned or stolen or printed. Hard work can't be bought that way.

You need money so people will do hardwork. From the tone I get from comminism, it would be evil to set up a commune for those working on the project.