Fiery op-ed against shuttle

[JonClarke]

Although in the past the Planetary Society has taken the attitude that robotic exploration is more cost effective than direct human exploration. That is not the case now. Just three items of PS action:<br /><br />A petition to the US congress in favour of human exploration of Mars http://www.planetary.org/aimformars/index.html<br /><br />A workshop on the future of human space exploration http://www.planetary.org/workshop/<br /><br />A major report on extending human presence in the solar system http://planetary.org/aimformars/study-report.pdf - the list of authors repays study.<br /><br />Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>

 

[mattblack]

What intrigues me is this quote from whoever:<br /><br /> />>To be honest it is hard to justify manned spaceflight on scientific and economic grounds.<<<br /><br />What I say to that is WHO CARES!!!<br /><br />Of COURSE manned spaceflight is expensive. But it's worth doing it. Once upon a time some people thought it was a waste of money going to the Antarctic, too. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p>One Percent of Federal Funding For Space: America <strong><em><u>CAN</u></em></strong> Afford it!!  LEO is a <strong><em>Prison</em></strong> -- It's time for a <em><strong>JAILBREAK</strong></em>!!</p> </div>

 

[nacnud]

<font color="orange">To be honest it is hard to justify manned spaceflight on scientific and economic grounds.<br /><br /><font color="yellow">What I say to that is WHO CARES!!! <br /><br /><font color="white">Politicans and CEOs who have to justify their budgets.</font></font></font>

 

[mrmorris]

<font color="yellow">"You obviously haven't read any of my articles? "</font><br /><br />No, I must admit that I haven't. I based my statement only on what I've seen you post on this board. You've written enough here that I would have thought that would be sufficient, but it's certainly possible that you display different attitudes when writing articles than you do when posting on this forum.

 

[shuttle_rtf]

Correct sir....I have to! <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />There's a very important difference to myself and Derbyshire in that he's a columnist (this opinion-based), I'm a jounalist.<br /><br />I've never - and never will - throw my opinion into an article and you'd be surprised by the difference. Only the other day I was noted as being over critical in regards to certain RTF issues.<br /><br />Of course, on here - a message board - I can post my opinion (which as you correctly noted is pretty much pro-Shuttle)...if I post anything news related it's just the facts. Just very important to note a difference between news media and columnists.<br /><br />For myself to be the opposite end of the scale to Derbyshire, I'd have to be a columnist...which I'm not.<br /><br />Hope that clears it up.

 

[j05h]

Jon-<br /><br />Thanks for the links! the PS was so staunchly pro-robotics for so long that my attitude about them/us has been slow to change. I keep forgetting that Dr. Griffin wrote that VSE report under Planetary Society auspices. Good to know that things change! <br /><br />I think the root of all this, the PS, their recent attitude adjustment, this jerk Derbyshire's article and the constant debate about what "we" should do in space boils down to this: is humanity going to be a spacefaring race or earthbound forever? Are you pro-settlement or pro-extinction?<br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[mrmorris]

<font color="yellow">"Hope that clears it up. "</font><br /><br />I understand what you're saying. Sounds primarily like you're making a distinction that only people in the field really care too much about. Go up to someone that is a Computer Science major and call them a Computer Engineering major (or vice versa) and wait for the reaction. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />However, given your explanation -- I still say my comparison was valid. You say Derbyshire, as a columnist, was able to fill his article with his opinions. You, as a journalist, can't put your opinions into article, but can only put them into unofficial places... like here.<br /><br />I don't know you as a journalist -- as I said, I've never read your articles. I know you as a common poster on SDC. In that, I was comparing the opinions that Derbyshire expressed in his article with the opinions that you express here. Your relationship or the lack thereof with Derbyshire <b>professionally</b> is immaterial. In terms of your opinions of the STS, the two of you are at opposite ends of the scale... which is what I said. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

 

[shuttle_rtf]

Well I disagree with you - this is a message board. There is a huge difference between personal opinion on a message board and a published article.<br /><br />I don't think you appreciate - maybe due to you not being a journalist - how offensive your comment was, but given how inaccurate it was, I'm not too bothered <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

 

[mrmorris]

<font color="yellow">"...don't think you appreciate..."</font><br /><br />I certainly don't understand, it's true. I wasn't intending to be offensive. I'm not comparing your writing to his, or your profession to his, or <b>anything</b> about you to Derbyshire except your relative opinions about the shuttle program. He hates it and fiercely attacks it. You love it and fiercely defend it.<br /><br />Ignore for a second that he's a piddling columnist and pretend that his article was instead a post here on SDC. I'm really missing what difference you see in personal opinion expressed in a published article vs. public opinon expressed on a freely accessible messageboard that makes my comment offensive.

 

[shuttle_rtf]

It's a "writer thing". I know you're comparing my message board posts on here (and only a few posts I'll add...most aren't overly throwing love at the STS) to Derbyshire's published work.<br /><br /> />Yes, well you're about as far on the opposite side of the scale from Derbyshire as is humanly possible, so seeing people call him an idiot has to feel great.<<br /><br />You cannot even start to claim me as some opposite of Derbyshire as we're chalk and cheese and you can't make that comparison when you clearly have very little idea of who I am and my professional work given you're going off a few selective posts on a message board (it's Derbyshire's professional work that you're using as reference, remember). Is SG on here as an official representative of the United Space Alliance? No. Same thing.<br /><br />Also, claiming I take pleasure in seeing a rubbish article on the Shuttle is beyond me.<br /><br /> /> However, I think you'd find that a majority of the posters on SDC -- even the ones who called Derb an idiot in this thread, are actually disgusted (as I am) with his over-the-top writing style rather than with many of the points in the article.<<<br /><br />Actually, read back the posts. Most aren't referencing his writing style (after all, columnists are columnists), most are noting he wants to see an end to manned space flight as their issue with the article.<br /><br />Again, maybe it's a "writer thing" - and I'd expect all writers here to say the same. You're not a writer so no hard feelings, but I could let that remain without a point of clarification on why I took a dislike to that comment.