Thank you. If one is advocating to spend more money, everybody is happy. Take a critical eye to any Sacred Cow and you're a pariah.

You, sir, may be a weak advocate for your opinions but I am not. If you have an opinion, support it vigorously.

You missed my point entirely. I completely agree on the urgent need to fund scientific research--but research that addresses current pressing needs.

I applaud the past research done by NASA. However, that research is done. We need to focus our scientific research--which agreed should be increased--but only on current pressing needs. I fail to see how a trip to the Moon or Mars is going to address the obviously pressing needs we have on this planet for green energy and to address climate change.

Merely because you prefer to spend money on NASA, you are conflating NASA research with all scientific research. The two are not necessarily connected. It is possible to do tons of pure scientific research that does not send people or machines to the Moon or Mars.

You must have some vested interest that you're not disclosing. There is plenty of pure scientific research that does not revolve around blasting off into space.

Once you stop the wheel... True
Aerospace engineering expertise exists... True
Tell me, as an engineer who recently graduated... True but nobody promised anybody a job
Those engineers might want to design rockets... True


True true true... we still can't afford it!

I share your rage at the bankers. Being as I work in Midtown Manhattan, I walk around these bastards on a daily basis.

Alas, that does not provide a reason for us to blow money on the space program. Conflating the two is meaningless.

If you are pissed at the things our government wastes money on, that's an argument for eliminating that waste--NOT for wasting more.

What, is there an expiration date on space travel? What a ridiculous statement. Trust me, it will be waiting for us.

Not true. Has there ever been a time when we were engaging in Space Travel while our country was going through a Greater Depression?

I don't think so. Sadly, this is a time when we cannot afford this.

I agree those things piss me off too. However, that is an argument for eliminating those wasteful items of spending, NOT an argument for wasting MORE money in NASA.
I agree the Mercury, Gemini and Apollo programs hugely expanded our knowledge.
The Space Shuttle really did not and even less so the International Space Station. I believe the ISS should have been canceled even though at the time I was all for it. It served no great purpose other than providing a vacation location for millionaires with $20 million.

Two wrongs don't make a right. Just because a luxury is not a high percentage of our budget--does not justify it.

I never said it will not be [note: future tense construction] important. But, again, we don't have the money for it now.

For example: spending $500 billion dollars to find a cure for cancer will be very important. [We can't afford it right now.]

Even if I read up on the mission objectives--that does not create money out of thin air to pay for it! Why does every Space Travel Booster (I consider myself one) totally disregard the cost! This is so frustrating. Are you little children who can't see the obvious. No matter now important it is--if we can't pay for it--it's unattainable right now. Maybe in 20 years we will be able to afford it but right now--we can't!

So, since you're more than willing to allow [other] people to shoulder some pain so you can have your gee-wiz moments of watching blast offs, I would bet it's fair to say you're not on disability. How magnanimous of you.

[Full disclosure: I have never taken any sort of government benefit and am not on any now.]

I agree that in the long term space travel will be deemed very important. However, that does not create the funds to pay for it. You sidestepped my point, which is that we cannot afford it.

As for your politically-based comment regarding Climate Change, you're just showing your Right-Wing Jackassedness, Mr. UK.

So, your lack of an argument is showing. And my response? Go to Hell

So what? That's logic on a par with "two wrongs make a right." 2006 dollars or 2009 ones--we cannot afford it right now.

Though I have always adored the thought and reality of space travel--this is just a luxury we cannot afford now. There is no pressing problem that would cause this need to travel to the Moon or Mars to occur.

We have so many problems in the United States right now and I really don't see why this is necessary. Since this just recycles Space Shuttle technology, I don't see that this Ares I rocket represents any innovation that would justify the expense.

Though I know all the Aerospace Engineers are going to hate me for killing off their jobs program, there are other scientific needs--such as the need to develop clean energy sources and stop global Climate Change in its tracks--that warrant priority over any dough we spend at NASA.

Example of International Space Station
Currently, for example, the ISS is slated to be decommissioned in a few short years. I ask you, what sort of great innovation has resulted from the ISS? I am hard-pressed to think of any great advances in knowledge that were not already known from by the time the cruddy but long-surviving MIR burned up in the atmosphere.

Again, though I adore seeing these rockets take off and follow every STS-n mission with great interest, it's just a joyride and is not justified in a country like ours that is in danger of becoming a has-been global power.

NASA should halt the Ares-I and, even more painful because it would have been the biggest rocket to date, the Ares V. They are boondoggles that do not solve a pressing problem.

Tim,
You view the world through your Microsoft-glasses. Why is Microsoft the standard for interoperability?

If your need is for a language, you have Java, which runs on any OS unchanged.

If your need is for a web protocol, you have HTML, which runs on any OS unchanged.

If your need is for [holding my nose] .doc documents, you have Open Office.

When I switched from Windows to a Mac, I had absolutely ZERO compatibility issues.

When the large multi-national corporation I work for switched all its developers from Windows to Mac, our productivity skyrocketed.

Windows is such a piece of crap that its users assume that the constant threat of viruses, trojans and other malware is just part of life. In fact, it's part of the terrible architecture that is Windows.

I disagree 1000% with your premise that Windows is the only way to universal compatibility.