1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

A pretty amazing thing might happen tonight on Mars

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by 93Devil, Aug 5, 2012.

  1. 93Devil

    93Devil Well-Known Member

    If you are into space travel, this is pretty damn interesting.


    Watch the youtube video and that will give you a better idea of what they are trying to pull off.

  2. Killick

    Killick Well-Known Member

    Fingers crossed for a three-titted Martian hooker.
  3. NDub

    NDub Guest

    This is very interesting to me and I'm hopeful nothing goes bad during the "seven minutes of terror."
  4. TigerVols

    TigerVols Well-Known Member

    I'm a nervous wreck about this...a bad result would give the NASA-haters in Congress a pretty sharp sword to swing on future budgets.

    Plus, this thing is California-made, so I'm cheering for the home team.
  5. Stoney

    Stoney Well-Known Member

    Which might not be a bad thing. Given our current financial plight, Mars landings ain't exactly the wisest allocation for billions right now.
  6. TigerVols

    TigerVols Well-Known Member

    Nasa's budget is .53 percent of the entire US Federal budget.

    Find somewhere else to cut, not somewhere that employs thousands of high-tech jobs that aren't being shipped overseas and that do prove on a daily basis America's scientific prowess.
  7. WriteThinking

    WriteThinking Well-Known Member

    That is amazing. Pretty hard to look at some of that scenery, think how it looks so much like some canyons and desert-type areas on Earth, and be able to believe that there is no life there.

    I was just imagining the silence, with nothing but that robot on the planet. And the early scenes from space really do give a sense of a big universe out there, not just a big, wide world...

    Just fascinating. I've always thought and lamented that I was born a few generations too soon. I would love to be around if/when space travel ever becomes something more regular and for more regular people.

    It's also hard to look at and experience all that and just talk about something as practical and mundane-seeming as jobs being the main reason to do it.
  8. TigerVols

    TigerVols Well-Known Member

    WT, agree whole-heartedly with your last point; however, the forces massing to cut NASA couldn't care less about big-picture, human-endeavor kinds of arguments. Mostly because every scientific advance puts another chink in their Bible, they are hell-bent on killing it off under the guise of "it's a waste of taxpayer dollars!"
  9. WriteThinking

    WriteThinking Well-Known Member

    I know. You're right, and it's too bad.

    They need to look at and watch more of this kind of stuff. If you do, you get it, and you're likely to get on board with it. If not, you just go with what you know, and take a short-sighted view, and in that, money is everything, unfortunately.
  10. Stoney

    Stoney Well-Known Member

    Sorry to keep playing the grumpy guy, but what would be the point of a colony on the moon to justify the insane expense? If we're gonna allocate that kind of public money toward scientific pursuit, perhaps it would be better directed toward curing diseases or other areas that would actually impact the average American's life beyond "oh, wow!"

    It's not "world without wonderment" that has impeded NASA's progress--we've still got an awe inducing plentitude of wondrous research in other scientific and tech fields--as much as it's today's economic reality. In the 50s and 60s our govt could afford to chase the moon because we had our fiscal house in order, we balanced our budgets, and had the extra bucks to spend. Now we don't. When (or if) our disastrous budget/debt situation is ever cleaned up, that's when we can renew talk about colonizing the moon.
  11. da man

    da man Well-Known Member

    Not a Tea Party/Republican thing. Democrats have cut space funding and Obama administration is very much behind the current (and very conservative-sounding) trend to privatize the space program.



    From a July CS Monitor story:

    President Barack Obama's federal budget request for 2013, which was unveiled in February, keeps NASA's overall budget flat, at $17.7 billion.

    But the request cuts NASA's planetary science funding from $1.5 billion to $1.2 billion, with further reductions expected in coming years. The space agency's Mars program gets hit particularly hard, with funding dropping from $587 million this year to $360 million in 2013, then falling to just $189 million in 2015.

    As a result, NASA is scaling back and reformulating its Red Planet exploration strategy. The space agency has put together a committee called the Mars Program Planning Group, which is assessing possible future missions to Mars.

    NASA also withdrew from the European-led ExoMars mission, which aims to launch an orbiter and a rover to the Red Planet in 2016 and 2018, respectively.

    ExoMars is viewed as a key step toward sample-return, which the U.S. National Research Council identified last year as the highest-priority planetary science mission for the next decade.

    Many researchers believe that sending pieces of the Red Planet back to Earth is the best way to search for signs of Martian life. But sample-return would almost certainly be a multibillion-dollar flagship effort, putting it out of NASA's reach in today's budget environment.

    "There is no room in the current budget proposal from the president for new flagship missions anywhere," Grunsfeld said shortly after the budget was released.

    FYI, Obama took a lot of heat from former astronauts for eliminating plans for the Constellation manned space program a couple years ago.
  12. Starman

    Starman Well-Known Member

    The end of the manned space program is the successful execution of the 'starve the beast' strategy.

    NASA's budget has been cut on a percentage basis every single year since 1969, with only a few very brief-blip exceptions.

    Also, replacement launch vehicles should have been developed after both of the Shuttle disasters, in 1986 and 2003. The administrations at the time failed to do so.

    The current priority for the space program is to privatize and militarize it, to divert financial resources to that sector.

    Manned space flight has no prospect for immediate or even foreseeable-future economic payback. Manned space flight from now on will be predominantly military.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page