Turn Space Exploration Over to APS..Don't Think So

Status
Not open for further replies.
H

haywood

Guest
Reading this article from today's Space.com Main page confirms to me why Organizations such as APS should not be given free reign to run our Space program.<br /><br />http://www.space.com/news/aps_report_041123.html<br /><br />Pure science for pure science's sake is wasted IMHO. Why are we collecting it all if we aren't going to do anything with it but fill up databases with this stuff?<br /><br />2 cents worth.
 
B

backspace

Guest
Groups like the APS make statements like this all the time, especially when one or two of the more prominent members is having their pet project threatened. See the link in my NASA budget post to see just how much science is actually going to be funded. I wonder if they issued their decree before or after Congress finished their directive. <br /><br />It's the sad fact that these groups know well that their cries of "NASA's screwing it all up!" are reported at a ratio of 10:1 versus the good reports on what NASA's doing. The net effect is counter-intuitive to these jerks, though, since bad PR for NASA is just going to drain their funding anyway.<br /><br />Not enough Vulcans in these groups. Otherwise, there'd be more logic.
 
L

lunatic133

Guest
I agree! Knowledge that doesn't come in any use to anybody is nearly as bad as no knowledge at all. I don't see what's the point in spending millions to send robot probes if we don't plan to USE the knowledge gathered. It boggles my mind why the anti-human camp cannot see that.
 
R

radarredux

Guest
> <i><font color="yellow">Knowledge that doesn't come in any use to anybody is nearly as bad as no knowledge at all.</font>/i><br /><br />I don't disagree, but sometimes it is difficult to understand today what knowledge might be useful in the future. Also, the discovery process itself can reveal unexpected results that can be very useful.<br /><br />But there is also general human curiosity that can be difficult to justify in direct benefits -- from discovering humans' split from the other primate lines to the discovering the age of the Universe. I am not sure how these facts will benefit anyone today, but I appreciate the efforts to discover and refine the answers.</i>
 
L

lunatic133

Guest
I don't have a problem with discovery for the sake of discovery, but these people are against humanity journeying to the cosmos, giving the very same arguments that it is without a point. I think that human exploration and space science must go hand in hand ... exploration will further science and science will further exploration. One without the other feels rather empty and without purpose. But together, they further and advance the immutable human spirit.
 
H

halman

Guest
RadarRedux,<br /><br />In a way, I feel sympathy for the physicists and other scientists who see their long-planned science missions being threatened with delay or termination. These programs have been the focus of their lives, for years in some cases, and having to suddenly find new priorities when the original questions haven't been answered would be tough.<br /><br />It is not that these scientific inquiries will never be completed, it is that they will not be completed NOW. <br /><br />However, by taking the Long Term View, the usefulness of the knowledge that these science missions seek is dependent upon the continued existance of the human race, a sufficently advanced technology to be able to understand and utilize the knowledge, and the financial resources to make such utilization possible. While I do not belive that Homo Sapiens is threatened with immediate annihilation, I do believe that such an event is not only possible, but probable, if our existance is confined to a single planet. More immediate, I see a decline in the scientific and technological capabilities of much of this country, which could make implementing any new knowledge difficult. And there is little doubt that the economy which made such pure research possible is rapidly desintegrating.<br /><br />Without the stimulous which manned spaceflight creates in economics, education, and applied technology, we could easily see our ability to get off of this rock shrink and fade. Knowing the content of dark matter in the universe is an important goal, but not as important as maintaining the ability to look for dark matter, or black holes, or global warming. I know of no direct benefits from any of the reserach done in physics or cosmology. I can think of several which have resulted from manned spaceflight. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> The secret to peace of mind is a short attention span. </div>
 
J

JonClarke

Guest
I am filled with sympathy for the APS. So of their pet projects might get delayed by a year or two? My goodness! Some of us have waited 30 years for the opportunity to do more field science on the Moon and Mars. We will still have to wait another 10-30 years for people to do it in person. The physicists have had a good run for the last few decades when it has come to space missions. Let them eat cake!<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>
 
F

frodo1008

Guest
I am also sympathetic to the scientists. However, the idea that scientific space studies by robots are most important is simply not true! The average American taxpayer could care less about most of the more esoteric science studies. The average person has absolutely no interest in cosmic rays! What he or she does have an interest in is the human side of the space program! I know this goes against a lot of the wisdom of some on these boards, but it is true never the less. People relate a great deal more closely to what people are doing in space than they do to what various scientific instruments on satellites are doing. It is the manned side of the space program that is carrying (even if we don’t seem to be going anywhere but LEO at the present) the space program not the unmanned. IF we can get the manned program out of LEO and going toward the moon and Mars this interest will be even far greater. Of we have to postpone some of the scientific studies to do this then that is what the taxpayer is willing to pay for. Perhaps his children or grandchildren will then have far greater opportunities than we have had!! This interest will increase even more as private industry opens up this limitless horizon to more average people with space tourism. <br /><br />This does not mean that science and robotic exploration need to be shortchanged. Both of these efforts should also be fully supported. It is both men and robots that will be needed to explore and exploit the dimensions of space. I very much prefer a balanced approach to the exploration of space, but the scientific people need to more fully support the efforts of the manned exploration not the other way around, or the taxpayers are going to cut off both efforts, and this simply would NOT do anyone any good!!!<br />
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts