Moon-landing analysis

Discussion in 'Soap Box' started by me1, Oct 7, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. me1

    me1 Well-Known Member

  2. LostMyMind

    LostMyMind Well-Known Member

    I'm almost convinced that this whole world is a lie.
     
  3. me1

    me1 Well-Known Member

    Yeah, it does tend to get you like that, doesn't it? :laugh:
     
  4. Raven

    Raven Guest

  5. Esmeralda

    Esmeralda Well-Known Member

    The space program is the most asinine waste of money in the history of the U.S. government. We haven't even mapped the bottom of the ocean on our own planet. The cure for cancer is probably down there but we'll never know because we're too busy cocking around in space.
     
  6. me1

    me1 Well-Known Member


    As answered below, the placing of reflectors on the surface of the moon does not require a manned-mission.

     
  7. protonaut

    protonaut Well-Known Member

    I'm not really a big advocate of NASA (I'd like education to receive more funding) but that seems rather extreme.

    If you want to know the benefits of a space program, here are a couple pages that offer answers. Actually examine what is being said, and think about the pros and cons before shooting it down.

    http://techtran.msfc.nasa.gov/at_home.html
    http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/newton/askasci/1993/astron/AST027.HTM

    In regards to your statement itself, that the space program is the most asinine waste of money - consider that the hugest slices of our nation's budget are spent on defense programs, while NASA would be lucky to even get 1% by comparison.

    Only a limited amount of the General Science, Space, and Technology category shown here would be spent on NASA.

    [​IMG]

    You should look at the spending on military, defense, foreign affairs, etc. from the years 1962-2009. (Section 4—Federal Government Outlays by Agency)

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2005/hist.html
    http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2005/sheets/hist04z2.xls

    Look:

    http://www.richardb.us/nasa.html#table1
    http://www.thespacereview.com/article/898/1

    If you want more funding for curing cancer, the funds should be allocated from Military spending. Does anyone else here agree?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 9, 2007
  8. Esmeralda

    Esmeralda Well-Known Member

    NASA should not even exist! If people want to explore space, then fine, but privatize it for the love of God! NASA does a shit job because every contract goes to the lowest bidder! Give this technology to people who have a vested interest in using it and in actually making shuttles and space-planes that are not made of STYROFOAM. If there was ANY competition in this market, we would probably have colonized the moon or figured out how to travel through wormholes by now. The same people that run the DMV run NASA. That's a ringing endorsement for their efficiency. The government should be focusing on so many other things. The space race was a shitload of propaganda brought on by the cold war and shoved down the throats of a frightened American public.
     
  9. protonaut

    protonaut Well-Known Member

    :laugh:
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.