Bush Sets America's Sights on the Moon, Mars

  • Thread starter TurboSmoke
  • 86 comments
  • 2,116 views
its dishonest because he cannot possibly make it happen in his lifetime...
Click to expand...

Wrong!!! NASA is fully capable of putting a man on mars in his lifetime. Everything he said is not only possible in his lifetime, its possible sooner than dates he mentioned, it's all a matter of funding.

and on the subject of natural resources, i wasnt talking about survival i was aiming more towards spending money on outerspace when renewable energies are still in its infancy starved of research cash...
Click to expand...

Ah but space technology is very much about renewable energies. Solar panels are being researched in large part because of solar electric ion space propulsion (which has been used on a mission and is very much a part of the future of spaceflight). Get you facts straight before you spout off.
 
The link also mentions that one should not pay attention to the scams claiming you can buy land on the moon.
Click to expand...

Now I know there is a discussion going on about the legitamacy of buying land on the moon, but here is just something I was told by a friends father who works for the inland revenue.
Even though you may own the land, unless you are inhabiting it or carrying out work on it you have no legal right to block people such as NASA from using the land for exploration/experiments.
 
Originally posted by danoff
Wrong!!! NASA is fully capable of putting a man on mars in his lifetime. Everything he said is not only possible in his lifetime, its possible sooner than dates he mentioned, it's all a matter of funding.
Click to expand...

Indeed - it's possible right now. And with a person at the controls, rather than a remote link which takes 4 minutes to do anything, he's less likely to crash like the last four probes before Mars Express (although I am including Beagle 2).

It's not WISE to do it right now. But it's possible.
 
Just thinking on this - do you think this is a response to the successful Chinese manned mission last year? Are we on the cusp of another space race?
 
Could be - but with China focussing a lot of energy on its space program (with a leg up from the Soviets) and enjoying a fairly spectacular success last year, and the US space program in some disarray with Columbia (although obviously the Mars mission success has helped restore some pride), I guess the time was due for a refocussing of efforts.

I guess its the timing that's raising a few eyebrows - the War on Terror™ seems somewhat directionless at the moment, Iraq is still a mess (despite Hussain's capture), and the domestic economy still struggling, if someone was looking for a distraction at the moment it would probably be Bush.
 
I don't know about that. The economy is picking back up (we've started gaining jobs rather than losing them) and the War on Terror is going pretty well (with a lack of terrorist attacks here). I think Bush has a lot of good things to talk about. Also he's pushed a bunch of terrible legislation through congress that I'm sure is making a lot of idiots happy.

I think the idea really was to use some of the JPL (NASA Jet Propulsion Labs) mission success at Mars to get his face out there on a positive story, and to give JSC (NASA Johnson Space Center) a new direction in light of the Columbia thing. I don't think the public fully understands the stall that happened at JSC following Columbia but there has been a lot of speculation and uncertainty about where to go with human space flight. The president fixed that problem and refocused the human space flight efforts (which was badly needed).

Honestly, I don't get the impression that the American space program takes the Chinese space program seriously yet, they're still half a century behind us.
 
Originally posted by milefile
China is where we were almost fifty years ago. It's far from a race.
Click to expand...

they were at the time of that launch, but they also have access to technology that didn't exist back then. They also are now working in a field to which there is TONS of knowledge - it's no longer purely experimentation but rather trying to find a better way. I think that it IS possible for them to do more, it's just a matter of whether or not and how much they are devoted to it.
 
So where's Turbo Smoke hiding? Let's hear some rebuttal, if your thoughts are so together!
 
where's Turbo Smoke hiding?
Click to expand...

he said

time for bed, good night..
Click to expand...

I'm hoping to hear more rebuttle tomorrow. Whenever that is for him. Glad to know you're dropping in on this discussion Neon. Any thoughts?

they were at the time of that launch, but they also have access to technology that didn't exist back then. They also are now working in a field to which there is TONS of knowledge - it's no longer purely experimentation but rather trying to find a better way. I think that it IS possible for them to do more, it's just a matter of whether or not and how much they are devoted to it.
Click to expand...

Emad, you're right! I can hardly believe I just said that. They do have access to knowledge that we were only pioneering back then - so they are in fact not actually 50 years behind us. In terms of accomplishments, though, they are 50 years behind us. That leaves them with possibly less than 50 years of work to get caught up. The point was that it is still a substantial distance behind us.
 
:odd: we agreed on something? Something is wrong...

anyways, whoever throws the most time and money at the idea is going to win this race...the US just has a bit of a head start on it since they've had past experiences
 
Originally posted by neon_duke
So where's Turbo Smoke hiding?
Click to expand...

errr...you posted @ 4:38am my friend...i was in bed just as my last post suggested....maybe its YOU thats not 'so together'....either that or you dont read my post in order to reply to what i have said...

so....do you think bush will carry out this plan if he is re-elected? and why is it not in the general manifesto of all other canididates if this is so important to the american public....?

are the agendas set out to appease the public and when reelected he'll do what he wants....or does bush genuenily in his little heart have the best interest of the US in mind?

50% voted against this man and he gets in office...you call that deomocracy....?
 
Originally posted by danoff
Wrong!!! NASA is fully capable of putting a man on mars in his lifetime. Everything he said is not only possible in his lifetime, its possible sooner than dates he mentioned, it's all a matter of funding.
Click to expand...

a manned station on Mars by 2029?...okay, if you believe that i'll agree with you...that was after all the original proposal..

i didnt say that he was...nor did i imply it, so dont know who you are misquoting on that one..
Click to expand...

still no danoff, the quote you are referring to wasnt referring to Bush, it was a general statement not a specific one..
 
I hate Bush in general...but not the US - I had a great time living there. It was also fun going to a school where, for once, I was the smartest person around. Everyone, and i mean EVERYONE was sooo stupid :P.

anyways, we KNOW it's just a way for Bush to get votes, but get around the damnable propaganda and lets discuss whether or not it can or will happen...ok?

Don't expect me to come back to this thread unless there's some substance 👍
 
Originally posted by emad
I hate Bush in general...but not the US - I had a great time living there. It was also fun going to a school where, for once, I was the smartest person around. Everyone, and i mean EVERYONE was sooo stupid :P.

Don't expect me to come back to this thread unless there's some substance 👍
Click to expand...
Good. Feel free to stay away from here for a long time, after your staement immediately above that one.

[rant]

All right, I'm officially bloody sick and tired of hearing how fat, stupid, and lazy we Americans are. If we're the bumbling, interfering, moronic oafs of the world, it should be pretty damn easy for all of you oh-so-superior non-Americans to come over here and kick our asses, physically, intellectually, or economically.

Bring it on. I'd dearly love to see you try it.

We got in the air first. We got into space a very close second and we were the only country with a bloody hope of getting to the Moon, and we still are, the Chinese notwithstanding. We're the only people with a reusable spacecraft of any kind, and the thing has a better than 98% success rate!

You all talk about how stupid Americans are, but half the Canadians and Australians and Britons here are nearly illiterate. I won't single anybody out, but take a look at people who have English as their first language - Americans are not one damn bit worse than the rest of you.

No, we're not the only people on the face of the planet. No, we aren't the only people who do anything. But before you're so freaking smug about how uncouth and inferior we are, start naming your achievements and contributions to modern society.

When your country can start matching what America has done, come talk to me. Until then, keep it to your damn self. Any country that lists Twiglets and Page Three Girls among its "contributions" to world culture has no damn right to feel superior to anybody.

[/rant]
 
Page Three girls - mostly naked, but not naked enough... What's the point? :D But it beats Australia, whose only invention is the rotary washing line.

Things Britain has contributed to the world
The Mariner's Compass (1187)
The Magnifying Glass (1250)
The Dry Dock (1495)
The Slide Rule (1621)
The Pressure Cooker (1679)
The Match (1680)
Sign language (1680)
The Kitchen Range (C17th)
The Vasectomy (C17th)
The Typewriter (1714)
The Machine Gun (1718)
The Chronometer (1735)
The Sandwich (1760)
The Modern Flushing Toilet (1775)
The Iron Bridge (1777)
The Power Loom (1785)
Gas Lighting (1792)
The Piggy Bank (C18th)
Clothes washer & dryer (C19th)
The Locomotive (1804)
Photographic Lens (1812)
The Wellington Boot (1815)
The Electromagnet (1824)
Modern Rainwear (1830)
The Lawnmower (1830)
The Computer (1835)
Paper photography (1838)
The Postage Stamp (1840)
The Bicycle (1840)
The Travel Agency (1841)
Ships' Metal Hull and Propelloer (1844)
Pneumatic Tyre (albeit for coaches) (1845)
The Glider (1853)
Steel (1854)
The Refridgerator (1855)
Linoleum (1860)
Colour Photography (1861)
The Telegraph (via Transatlantic Cable) (1866)
The Stapler (1868)
Electric Light (1878)
The Vending Machine (1883)
The Pneumatic Tyre for bicycles (1888)
The Thermos (vacuum) flask (1892)
The Loudspeaker (1900)
The Electric Vacuum Cleaner (1901)
Disc Brakes for cars (1902)
The Telephone Booth (1903)
The Geiger Counter (1908)
Stainless Steel (1913)
The Tank (1916)
Television (1925)
The Turbojet (1928)
Colour Television (1928)
The Decompression Chamber (1929)
Broadcast Television (1936)
The Food Processor (1947)
The Integrated Circuit (1952)
The Hovercraft (1955)
Fast-Breeder Nuclear Power Station (1962)
Acrylic Paint (1964)
The CAT Scanner (1972)
Test-Tube Babies (1978)
Genetic Fingerprinting (1987)
"The Internet", allegedly (1991).

And I missed out and English :lol: (but that's technically a Roman, Greek, German and French invention. Bleugh! :D)
 
Originally posted by neon_duke
[rant]
All right, I'm officially bloody sick and tired of hearing how fat, stupid, and lazy we Americans are. If we're the bumbling, interfering, moronic oafs of the world, it should be pretty damn easy for all of you oh-so-superior non-Americans to come over here and kick our asses, physically, intellectually, or economically.

Bring it on. I'd dearly love to see you try it.
Click to expand...


dude...I spent more than half my life there and every single thing you said about fat, stupid, and lazy applied to almost everybody I knew. That is the ONLY reason I did well in school there - they had to dumb things down for the other kids. In the end, before I left, I was probably 1 in around 80 out of 300 8th grade students that had any hope of staying in high school and continuing on to college. Of the teachers were even more incompetent than their students. I'm not saying it applies everywhere because I DID know some good people down there.

anyways, I'm off to class
 
50% voted against this man and he gets in office...you call that deomocracy....?
Click to expand...

Try holding your ground on one point for a change. I'll make a list of the arguments you have conceeded to me.
 
Arguments of Danoff’s that turbo has given up on:

The NASA budget “increase” in an effective decrease because of inflation and will actually reduce as a percentage of the government’s budget. So the American tax payer will actually get a break.

The 8 trillion dollar cost, which is 5.5 trillion dollars over NASA’s proposed budget over the next 25 years is meaningless because until NASA looks deeply at what it will cost and runs a few missions, not even they know. Besides, that figure is less than 3 times the current NASA budget which is only 84 billion. Did you know that our government pisses away over 30 billion dollars on government housing projects alone?

Natural resources are there to be plundered.

No land on any celestial body or Antarctica can be claimed by any country.

Bush’s plan to build a base on the moon would enable new exploration (which we cannot currently accomplish) that would benefit all humanity.

You have shown no figures indicating that a Mars base cannot happen by 2030. That’s over 25 years! How the hell do you know what we can do in a quarter century? I don’t have to prove that it will happen, you have to prove that it can’t in order to back up your statement (which is currently defeated).

Investing in space technology is focusing on renewable energies.


Turbo I would call this a logical defeat. You have conceded every one of these points and yet will not change your opinions on the matter. I would call that a closed mind.
 
still no danoff, the quote you are referring to wasnt referring to Bush, it was a general statement not a specific one..
Click to expand...


You claim that "the thirst for knowledge is a masquerade for the thirst for exploitable resources..." in general.

First of all, all resources (if they truely are resources) are exploitable.

The thirst for knowledge is a fundamental part of humanity rooted in problem solving. Problem solving does not equal finding resources. That would be a zero sum game. Problem solving is about finding easier ways to do things.

Also, lots of people thirst for knowledge they can't even use. There is a basic quest for understanding that human beings have ingrained in them even if that understanding leads to nothing. It's not a thirst for resources, it's an instinct that is ingrained because of natural selection.


....and if I'm a stupid fat lazy American, why am I skinny, active, and able to kick your rear all over the place in a logical discussion?
 
dude...I spent more than half my life there and every single thing you said about fat, stupid, and lazy applied to almost everybody I knew. That is the ONLY reason I did well in school there - they had to dumb things down for the other kids.
Click to expand...
Do yourealize what you just said?

In the end, before I left, I was probably 1 in around 80 out of 300 8th grade students that had any hope of staying in high school and continuing on to college. Of the teachers were even more incompetent than their students. I'm not saying it applies everywhere because I DID know some good people down there.
Click to expand...
No it does apply everywhere. There are fat idiots all over the world, even in Scotland.

Obviously your parents chose to live where they felt they and their family would fit in the best. Don't blame America for that.
 
Things America has contributed to the world:

Electricity
Powered aircraft
Supersonic aircraft
Helicopters
VTOL aircraft
Reusable spacecraft
Pencils
Telephones
Computer mouse
Long distance telegraphy, Morse code
FM Radio
Air conditioning
Transistors
Plastics - nylon, teflon, ployethylene
Telephone
Aluminum refining
CAT scanner and MRI scanner
Electric guitar
Gramaphone/phonograph
Manufacturing/production lines
Typewriters
Motion pictures
Calculators
Skyscrapers
Elevators/lifts
Vulcanized rubber, synthetic rubber
Digital computers
Pacemaker / artificial heart
Cotton gin
Rock and Roll, Jazz, and Blues
Videotape
Nuclear power
Zippers
Genetic engineering
Photocopier
Kevlar & carbon fiber
Electron microscope
Peanut Butter
Gyroscopic compass
Laser
Dry film photography, self-developing photography
Polio vaccine
Blood typing
Repeating firearms
Medical respirator/ventilator
Oral contraceptives
Cyclotron
Mechanical harvester
Vaccum tube
LCDs/LEDs
Screw-type propellor
Liquid fuel rockets

And that's just off the top of my head.
 
Electric Light (1878)
Click to expand...

Um... actually Thomas Edison is credited with inventing the electric light bulb. This electric light crap was first done in Brittain but it wasn't useable. It was only after Edison got to the problem (in the US) that the light bulb became useful for everyone.

internet (technically)
Click to expand...

I'd like to see some documentation on that one.

Also, on the list of things that Brittain has contributed to the world, you forgot to put America.
 
Originally posted by danoff
Um... actually Thomas Edison is credited with inventing the electric light bulb. This electric light crap was first done in Brittain but it wasn't useable. It was only after Edison got to the problem (in the US) that the light bulb became useful for everyone.
Click to expand...

Had I meant Electric Light Bulb, you can be assured that is what I would have said. But I didn't. So I didn't. But to update that, I found this:

1878 Incandescent filament lamp - the light bulb, first demonstrated by Joseph Swan in the UK.


I'm not getting into America-bashing, but neon_duke said "But before you're so freaking smug about how uncouth and inferior we are, start naming your achievements and contributions to modern society", so I named a few of them. I wasn't saying they were better or worse, but they are all contributions to the modern world. Although it's true that most of the USA's (and Britain's) subsequent inventions would be worth a crap without steel/stainless steel. And please spell the name of our island group correctly - Brittain make model farm animals.

Anyway, now I've named our acheivments and contributions to modern society, can I be smug about how uncouth and inferior you are? :D I'm not going to, of course. I like Americans (generally).


We know we gave the world America, but we don't like to talk about it :lol:

Interestingly, the CAT scanner appears on neon_duke's list. I'd be interested to hear about that one - since I was quoting directly from a print published source (saying we invented it in 1972). But I'll try and find something on the British role in the creation of the internet for yers..

Edit: Tim Berners-Lee, British physicist. Credited with the invention of the internet in 1991.

On VTOL, I'm actually curious with this. I've got the Harrier credited as the first and only truly successful VTOL aircraft (1966), but that doesn't necessarily mean it's a British invention. Duke?

Edit: Another one for Duke... I've got "1839 The marine screw propeller was developed and first used by Francis Pettit Smith in the UK"...
 
Had I meant Electric Light Bulb, you can be assured that is what I would have said. But I didn't. So I didn't.
Click to expand...

were you skimming my post? I mentioned that the electric light thing happened in England. But I also said that it didn't help anyone and that it wasn't till Edison got a hold of it that it was worth a damn. I know what you said and I responded correctly.

We know we gave the world America, but we don't like to talk about it
Click to expand...

We don't like to talk about it a whole lot either. But you have to admit that America is one of Britain's (that looks so wrong to me, I must have been misspelling that for years) biggest accomplishments. I'll check in to the internet thing since you won't give me sources.

edit:
hmmm there seems to be some argument about the invention of the internet

this website:

http://www.ideafinder.com/history/inventions/story070.htm

says:

The Internet and Transmission Control Protocols were initially developed in 1973 by American computer scientist Vinton Cerf as part of a project sponsored by the United States Department of Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) and directed by American engineer Robert Kahn.

then is says:

The World Wide Web was developed in 1989 by English computer scientist Timothy Berners-Lee for the European Organization for Nuclear Research

I believe that means that the internet was invented in America. The world wide web was invented in Britain (still looks wrong).
 

Similar threads

Sauc3
The reasons why Bush's government is corrupt
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
Solid Fro
Solid Fro

Latest Posts

Back