Obama: "I am 100 percent committed to NASA and its future." - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Gekkosan;37590851]They are still too far away. No amount of practice, rustling and wreching of a space shuttle is going to change that. And by "big balls of money" you mean the planet of other species. Way to bring capitalism onto other innocent species too. Or maybe they think the same way too, the aliens.[/QUOTE] By "big balls of money" he means that the planets in our solar system have an entire planet's worth of valuable, useful, and rare materials and minerals, something this planet it rapidly running out of, and will probably be depleted of extremely soon.

[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;37591080]By "big balls of money" he means that the planets in our solar system have an entire planet's worth of valuable, useful, and rare materials and minerals, something this planet it rapidly running out of, and will probably be depleted of extremely soon.[/QUOTE] Hell. For all we know these planets and asteroids could hold minerals that you just don't find on earth easily or at all. Giving money to NASA is not an instant payoff, which may be why they are reluctant to do it. But in the long run NASA can get asteroid mining going, create new technologies and so much more. Eventually these will pay off, but it could takes decades to see it.

Funding for nasa would be a good idea, after all a lot of everyday inventions came about because of Nasa. We should build a rocket base on the moon if we ever want to get to mars because it is far smaller than earth and therefore the entry speed is a fraction of what it would be on Earth, reducing rocket fuel costs etc. Perhaps that's been posted before. I guess the problem with that is you have to get the rocket fuel and the rocket to the moon, which requires rockets and rocket fuel.... uh...

we're spending so much money anyway why not increase it 100%

[QUOTE=Downsider;37589378]Oh yeah, because you know, pouring money into NASA is really going to help our economy and the problems that are really hitting home right now.[/QUOTE]Do you know where that NASA money goes when they spend it? Hint: it isn't used as rocket fuel or toilet paper.

Keep in mind that NASA could get additional 71 billion dollars a year if churches were to be taxed.

Space exploration can have a [URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFO2usVjfQc"]VERY[/URL] good effect on the culture of a nation.

Space exploration is very important to the human race. Space represents the next frontier in human evolution. Those problems that we have right now on earth will never be solved if we don't keep pushing towards the next frontier. We would have stagnated as a species if we don't continue to expand outside our bubble.

My grandfather worked with nasa at the Jet Propulsion laboratory on the apollo missions, I never got to meet him, He died a long time ago.

[QUOTE=DamagePoint;37587710]If he still really cares about NASA, by the end of the decade we should have a man on the surface of the moon. I mean projects like Voyager and Curiosity are awesome, but I think what really excites people and what we really need now is more manned space exploration. We landed on the moon over 40 years ago, there isn't any reason why we shouldn't be on Mars yet.[/QUOTE] woo people standing on the moon is cool let's spend money on it

[QUOTE=DamagePoint;37587710]If he still really cares about NASA, by the end of the decade we should have a man on the surface of the moon. I mean projects like Voyager and Curiosity are awesome, but I think what really excites people and what we really need now is more manned space exploration. We landed on the moon over 40 years ago, there isn't any reason why we shouldn't be on Mars yet.[/QUOTE] currently multiple space programs are working together to bring 4 people (2 men 2 women) to Mars. I can't wait. As far as I've read they are not yet looking for people to apply because they're still in beginning phases...but its all being planned out. [url]http://mars-one.com/en/[/url] <- hope you enjoy :) Looks like Mars One is a Dutch organization but I believe I read somewhere that they are working with multiple other programs. Recently they earned their first sponsor.

[QUOTE=Downsider;37589378]Oh yeah, because you know, pouring money into NASA is really going to help our economy and the problems that are really hitting home right now.[/QUOTE] there are many asteroid belts in our solar system, and their value in monetary worth reaches thousands of times more than the total value of all assets on the planet. i would consider that wonderful for your precious 'economy'

... so we send boys to trot on the moon. Also I like the scare quotes around "economy". Almost as if caring about the economy is such a childish concern.

[QUOTE=Elecbullet;37593799]... so we send boys to trot on the moon. Also I like the scare quotes around "economy". Almost as if caring about the economy is such a childish concern.[/QUOTE] Why is giving NASA a more fitting and appropriate budget for research and various goals and activities such a terrible thing? And why does giving them a bit more money put the economy in such grave danger, as if it isn't because of plenty of other factors? Are you arguing we take money away from NASA?

[QUOTE=Elecbullet;37593799]... so we send boys to trot on the moon. Also I like the scare quotes around "economy". Almost as if caring about the economy is such a childish concern.[/QUOTE] if you strike me down now elecbullet, i shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine

[QUOTE=Bentham;37593818]Why is giving NASA a more fitting and appropriate budget for research and various goals and activities such a terrible thing? And why does giving them a bit more money put the economy in such grave danger, as if it isn't because of plenty of other factors? Are you arguing we take money away from NASA?[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1579/1[/url] For something to which we can compare theoretical costs of returning to the Moon, the Apollo missions cost $109 billion 2010 dollars. Shit sucks but in times of government-owing-shittons-of-money, things may need to be cut. This [I]and[/I] the military. One of the most annoying parts of this all is Facepunch's attitude. Bobie, for example, only grudgingly seems to want to give any supposed economic benefit. Nobody seems to put any economic benefit into account. Rather, Facepunch's universal attitude is that it's cool, so we should spend money on it. The same happens whenever DARPA makes any gigantic-ass $100 million laser that makes a hotter temperature than has ever been recorded, or some shit. "I love you DARPA." "DARPA is the one part of the military I would raise the budget for." Nobody cares about any benefits, they just like cool shit.

[QUOTE=Zeraxify;37587894]1. end all wars 2. increase nasa's budget 3. explore the galaxy 4. find intelligent life 5. space wars[/QUOTE] Why don't republicans support this? There's definitely more deeply shaded brown people to kill out there, and not just on earth!

[QUOTE=Elecbullet;37593950][url]http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1579/1[/url] For something to which we can compare theoretical costs of returning to the Moon, the Apollo missions cost $109 billion 2010 dollars. Shit sucks but in times of government-owing-shittons-of-money, things may need to be cut. This [I]and[/I] the military. One of the most annoying parts of this all is Facepunch's attitude. Bobie, for example, only grudgingly seems to want to give any supposed economic benefit. Nobody seems to put any economic benefit into account. Rather, Facepunch's universal attitude is that it's cool, so we should spend money on it. The same happens whenever DARPA makes any gigantic-ass $100 million laser that makes a hotter temperature than has ever been recorded, or some shit. "I love you DARPA." "DARPA is the one part of the military I would raise the budget for." Nobody cares about any benefits, they just like cool shit.[/QUOTE] i guess you didnt see the pie chart

[QUOTE=Elecbullet;37593051]woo people standing on the moon is cool let's spend money on it[/QUOTE] woo people standing on a new continent what's the point of sending people to this "new world"? let's fix our issues here first!

[QUOTE=Elecbullet;37593950][url]http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1579/1[/url] For something to which we can compare theoretical costs of returning to the Moon, the Apollo missions cost $109 billion 2010 dollars. Shit sucks but in times of government-owing-shittons-of-money, things may need to be cut. This [I]and[/I] the military. One of the most annoying parts of this all is Facepunch's attitude. Bobie, for example, only grudgingly seems to want to give any supposed economic benefit. Nobody seems to put any economic benefit into account. Rather, Facepunch's universal attitude is that it's cool, so we should spend money on it. The same happens whenever DARPA makes any gigantic-ass $100 million laser that makes a hotter temperature than has ever been recorded, or some shit. "I love you DARPA." "DARPA is the one part of the military I would raise the budget for." Nobody cares about any benefits, they just like cool shit.[/QUOTE] So when people show you the obvious benefits, you say the benefits don't matter we have to pay money

[QUOTE=Elecbullet;37593950][url]http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1579/1[/url] For something to which we can compare theoretical costs of returning to the Moon, the Apollo missions cost $109 billion 2010 dollars. Shit sucks but in times of government-owing-shittons-of-money, things may need to be cut. This [I]and[/I] the military. One of the most annoying parts of this all is Facepunch's attitude. Bobie, for example, only grudgingly seems to want to give any supposed economic benefit. Nobody seems to put any economic benefit into account. Rather, Facepunch's universal attitude is that it's cool, so we should spend money on it. The same happens whenever DARPA makes any gigantic-ass $100 million laser that makes a hotter temperature than has ever been recorded, or some shit. "I love you DARPA." "DARPA is the one part of the military I would raise the budget for." Nobody cares about any benefits, they just like cool shit.[/QUOTE] This was the Apollo program, though, which is substantially different from the things being done now. Using your source, the estimated cost of the actual Space Shuttle program, which is admittedly based on complex information meaning it could be inaccurate, was $1.4 billion per launch, with 134 launches (As stated in the article, I'm not claiming this is the actual number), that's $198.6 billion. But it's worth noting that this isn't an all-at-once expenditure, it's the $1.4 per mission, spread out over the 41 year life of the space shuttle. For the ISS, it would be (as stated in the article) $486 billion in 2010 dollars, but again, this isn't all-at-once, but over the life of the ISS, which is expected to be 30 years. I feel like the article tries to make it more alarming by totaling all these numbers and giving them in a single 2010 sum, when it's an over-time expenditure. But I can't say for sure.

[QUOTE=Downsider;37589704]To me, the billion-dollar rockets and space stations that are sent up there are worthless in every practical respect, so I'm not sure what you're talking about.If you're saying that we need to colonize other planets in order to be successful as a human collective, then please point to the nearest (theoretically) hospitable planet that won't take 1000+ years to get to at in a vehicle that's 25 times faster than the spacecrafts we have today.[/QUOTE] If it weren't for research NASA did to put a man on the moon in 69, you probably wouldn't have a fucking computer to spew that bullshit with.

[QUOTE=Scar;37594142]woo people standing on a new continent what's the point of sending people to this "new world"? let's fix our issues here first![/QUOTE] You, with a transhumanist avatar. I think my idea about Facepunch overly liking cool-sounding shit applies there. Sorry that there were more obvious economic benefits to European colonization of the New World than there are for standing on the Moon.

Ad hominem, really?

[QUOTE=Elecbullet;37594315]You, with a transhumanist avatar. I think my idea about Facepunch overly liking cool-sounding shit applies there. Sorry that there were more obvious economic benefits to European colonization of the New World than there are for standing on the Moon.[/QUOTE] nasa is not an organization devoted to standing on the moon it does alot of other, useful things

[QUOTE=Scar;37594429]Ad hominem, really?[/QUOTE] No, it is a valid example of how Facepunch has a shitty attitude to a lot of things. Your comparison you made was imbalanced enough that I wouldn't even need fallacious arguments to bolster my response.

Like pointlessly attacking people? Yeah, I can see that [editline]8th September 2012[/editline] And how exactly is being a transhumanist a shitty attitude? Explain that to me, please

I personally disagree with transhumanism, but the shitty attitude here is not transhumanism, it's Facepunch relentlessly throwing themselves in favor of cool-sounding shit. Transhumanism would have a very large number of benefits but I have moral issues with it. This is no transhumanism thread though, so let's go our separate ways on that.

[QUOTE=Scar;37594142]woo people standing on a new continent what's the point of sending people to this "new world"? let's fix our issues here first![/QUOTE] Probably literally the worst example you could have used. European exploration of the Americas across the Atlantic occurred specifically because economic interest in faster trade routes for the western European empires, or in the case of Scandinavian exploration, an outright desire for raw materials. That being said it would also be an example of "big government" working because the kings and queens of that time bankrolled the expeditions with tax dollars.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;37594594]Probably literally the worst example you could have used. European exploration of the Americas across the Atlantic occurred specifically because economic interest in faster trade routes for the western European empires, or in the case of Scandinavian exploration, an outright desire for raw materials. That being said it would also be an example of "big government" working because the kings and queens of that time bankrolled the expeditions with tax dollars.[/QUOTE] The Scandinavian example works out with this, then. There are virtually limitless amounts of raw materials out in space, and anything that is rare on this planet is in all probability as common as dirt is here on some other planets. This planet can still support us, for now, but our expanding need for land and material is draining our resources at an alarming rate. It would do wonders for our economy, from both a technological standpoint and a resource standpoint.