Thanks for the 6%.

[OriginalWheelman]

Well, I found one thing good about Obama's presidency so far. Personally I think NASA needs a LOT more funding, but it's a start.

http://www.dailytech.com/Presi...9.htm

President Barack Obama followed through on a promise to give more money to NASA, offering a 6 percent increase -- up to $18.7 billion -- from President George W. Bush's monetary request in 2008.

"This budget ensures NASA maintains its global leadership in Earth and space research, and it advances global climate change studies, funds a robust program of human and robotic space exploration, allows us to realize the full potential of the International Space Station, advances development of new space transportation, and renews our commitment to aeronautics," according to NASA Administrator Christopher Scolese.

The $18.7 billion budget gives NASA an additional $2.4 billion, and Obama wants more research into climate change and space exploration. Similar to Bush, Obama also hopes to launch a manned mission to the moon, and have space probes explore Mars.

"NASA will develop new space-based research sensors in support of the administration's goal to deploy a global climate research and monitoring system," the new budget says.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) will also get a $1.3 billion boost to create new weather satellites in the years to come.

[Armelius]

Anything that goes for a manned space program is a waste in space. I am not bothered with much other funds going there.

[wawazat8402]

Anything that goes for a manned space program is a waste in space. I am not bothered with much other funds going there.

That pretty much explains my feelings on NASA. Why are we spending so much for bragging rights when we have other programs that represent our own citizens who truly could use the funding?

This is the main reason I am against tax hikes. Spending my money on programs that show no real benefit to the country and then asking for more kinda irks me. If we cut out unnecessary programs there would be a lot more money to go around without touching the current tax rates.

[OriginalWheelman]

Space is man's future. We won't be able to stay on this planet forever.

[480sx]

^^ Well, while thats not necessarily true(unless your talking about time on a galactic scale..), we will eventually need to whore out other planets for resources. Its also in mans nature to expand and move elsewhere, and once its possible it will happen.

I do however agree that a manned mission to the moon is a big fat waste. Seriously, who cares.

[OriginalWheelman]

A moon base is a vital step to the exploration of our solar system. The moon is pretty far away. Getting from the moon to the rest of the solar system is easier than launching from Earth to the moon. With a moon base, we could launch several manned and unmanned missions into the solar system. It is almost necessary for continued space exploration.

[DroptopDrifting]

they should be focusing on trying to reach other areas of our galaxies, other solar systems to see if there are planets suitable for life, and maybe even have life. planets like ours, that are just the right distance away from their own sun. i think that should be nasa's #1 priority. #2 should be to find a way to travel through space quicker. and then i would say to raise the budget of noaa to figure out whats even on our own planet, and try to work together to start exploring deeper in the ocean, or the polar ice caps. and lastly i think money needs to be spent largely on the energy dept. to try to find new ways to create power and energy with much less harmful side effects. if we can find a way to create a new form of power, the explorations by nasa and noaa would be infinite. i feel the only planet worth sending people to focus their time and energy on any more in our solar system is mars, to find out more about the life that was once there.

also, if we can get a closer view of sagitarius B we might even be able to figure out the origin of our galaxy and the life inside it. it's time we need to start lookin at a bigger scale of things.

but on a less sci-fi note.....we need to stop throwing billions of dollars away on stupid people and their businesses. dont even get me started on our retarded communist regime

[DroptopDrifting]

oh, but yeah, what i was tryin to get to was that i totally agree....not only our future, but our past as well, lie somewhere out there and we need to start lookin

[480sx]

That, i didnt think about and your absolutely right. I look at our current mission as just being a 'check us out were on the moon, b****es' kinda thing.

Unless there is planning to figure out or to take parts needed to set up a base on the moon in this most recently planned trip to the moon i think its a waste.

I mean, we dont have to go to the moon to figure out what we need to have a base there. We would need to scout and make sure we picked a good spot with geological surveys and drilling. THAT would be a good mission, but only after extensive surveys were done through every other way thats possible to view and study the moon.

EDIT - Woah, my reply was to OWM, those last two posts wernt there..

[DroptopDrifting]

lol yeah, we gotcha. but i totally agree. setting up a base on a moon or planet with low atmospheric pressure is the first step to launching a mission much much further away. my posts were just a build on originalwheelman's concept.

on earth acceleration due to gravity is what 9.81m/s2 somethin like that, the moon is probably less than a 1/4 of that, it would take far less energy and fuel to break the g-force needed to escape its atmosphere. most of the fuel burned by the shuttles now is burned just tryin to escape our atmosphere

[OriginalWheelman]

I have a acquaintance at NASA working on the current "to the moon" project. The ultimate goal is to prepare for a moon base.

To DtD, we can go to other solar systems but there are a few big problems with that. 1. Most of what we know about the other solar systems is calculated. We are just now getting telescope tech to the point where we can see single / a few pixel big images of planets in other solar systems. Within a few years we will undoubtedly be able to take better resolution pictures and have a much better idea what is there. 2. While we could launch a ship towards Proxima Centari (the closest star) it would take over a lifetime to get there, in the fastest man made spacecraft. 3. Even if we could go the speed of light, which we don't know how to do, it would still take several years to get there. 4. In space you have to take everythign you need with you. This is extremely expensive. No one wants to pay for it.

[DroptopDrifting]

I have a acquaintance at NASA working on the current "to the moon" project. The ultimate goal is to prepare for a moon base.

To DtD, we can go to other solar systems but there are a few big problems with that. 1. Most of what we know about the other solar systems is calculated. We are just now getting telescope tech to the point where we can see single / a few pixel big images of planets in other solar systems. Within a few years we will undoubtedly be able to take better resolution pictures and have a much better idea what is there. 2. While we could launch a ship towards Proxima Centari (the closest star) it would take over a lifetime to get there, in the fastest man made spacecraft. 3. Even if we could go the speed of light, which we don't know how to do, it would still take several years to get there. 4. In space you have to take everythign you need with you. This is extremely expensive. No one wants to pay for it.

i understand, ive been looking into it. the 12 Meter Telescope at Kitt Peak, Arizona is able to see crazy far. everyday were finding things we never thought we'd find. as for getting to these places, i understand how long it would take, that's why i was sayin to up the budget for researching and developing new energy forms for a more efficient/faster way of travel. if we can even just send a big telescope like the one in arizona way out there, we'd be able to take much better pictures of a longer distance away, even if it ends up being our kids who see the pictures the telescope sends back while we continue to work on a way of getting there. as far as the money issue, i feel the money spent on these things are way more worth it than the way were spending it now

http://news.softpedia.com/news...shtmlcraziness

[OriginalWheelman]

There was a new computer program written to clean the atmospheric interference out of the telescope images lately. Also mirror tech has improved and new scopes will be launching with it soon. Orbital scopes are the way to go, but expensive. We just launched STEREO to observe the sun in 3d detail a few years ago. We learn more everyday but it takes money to keep all these projects going. Most of them are being done on university budgets by students. The space industry is our future and it's grossly underfunded.

[DroptopDrifting]

i totally agree. we need to start spending more money on the progression of these programs

[dusred]

In my opinion NASA is a fraud organization taking money with not much to show for it.

Just my .02

PS- the US never did and never will go to the moon.

There I said it. Flame away.

[480sx]

Dusred your post is as ignorant as a main stream Iranian's views on America. The advances in technology that Nasa has created have filtered down and benefit everyone in their daily lives.

Although i do wonder about the first moon landing lol.

Back on subject..

The thing is, most NASA missions are very long term investments. We are in an economic crises, and a military crises. Its hard to justify long term investments.

I however really dont have much of a problem with giving NASA more money. They are one of the cutting edges, and we will always need it as sharp as possible.

[dusred]

Dusred your post is as ignorant as a main stream Iranian's views on America. The advances in technology that Nasa has created have filtered down and benefit everyone in their daily lives.

Don't get me wrong, they've done a lot to make our lives easier (I love my Garmin) but for how much money has gone into the organization it seems they would have a little more to show for it.

[hsckris]

Although i do wonder about the first moon landing lol.

Mythbusters did a pretty good job on the moon landing. IIRC they disproved every major point asserted by conspiracy theorists, and therefore they concluded that the moon landing was not a hoax.

[dusred]

Mythbusters say alot more then just their prayers. . . however I wouldn't mind seeing their evidence in disproving it.

edit-I went and found some of their videos about it but they failed to address the main issue with the whole thing. . . . the radiation.
Modified by dusred at 9:42 PM 3/3/2009

[liquid_cool]

Well, I found one thing good about Obama's presidency so far. Personally I think NASA needs a LOT more funding, but it's a start.

http://www.dailytech.com/Presi...9.htm

ooohhhh no! he dint!...so my gas tax goes up on April 1st by $1.24 a gallon so they can play space man?..F-ing no way!...the one releive we get in this economey and this is how they tax and spend. us to where..the moon..been there done that!..stupid!

[480sx]

but for how much money has gone into the organization it seems they would have a little more to show for it.

What do you expect ffs? We have people living in our outer atmosphere. We have pictures of things from billions of light years away. We have a space craft that can(well, did) go into outerspace, then fly back and land under their own power on a freaken landing strip.

Seriously.

Mythbusters did a pretty good job on the moon landing. IIRC they disproved every major point asserted by conspiracy theorists, and therefore they concluded that the moon landing was not a hoax.

I will have to watch that, i like that show, just never watch TV. The whole thing about the shadow and the billowing flag just kinda made question it. Along with cold war incentives.

[Jacko3]

In my opinion NASA is a fraud organization taking money with not much to show for it.

Just my .02

PS- the US never did and never will go to the moon.

There I said it. Flame away.

That is completely untrue. Some of the technology in your car, is NASA technology. For example, ceramic technology is space technology because during re-entry, the body of a space ship can approach over 2,000 degrees (not sure about exact temperatures) Fahrenheit and yet maintain the structural integrity required of the spaceship, so as not to disintegrate during re-entry.

[Urabus GodofTraction]

PS- the US never did and never will go to the moon.

There I said it. Flame away.

Noooo problem! Here it is:

Congratulations! If your intent was to to make me immediately disreguard anything you'll ever say, you have become sucessful!

Research, and therefor NASA, is one of the few things I have no problem with the government funding. It's a "lighthouse effect."

[dusred]

Congratulations! If your intent was to to make me immediately disreguard anything you'll ever say, you have become sucessful!

If I would have known it would be that easy I would have done it a long time ago.

[Urabus GodofTraction]

If I would have known it would be that easy I would have done it a long time ago.

That doesn't mean ignore, unfortunatly for you!

[audtatious]

NASA is happy to receive the blessing of The One by receiving additional funding. We need to name the moon after him now