NASA cutting both space and earth science to fund Moon/Mars initiative

[pmbryant]

Since Bush refuses to back up his words with real money, NASA is forced to cannibalize its science programs in order to find funds to pay for Bush's alleged "vision" of returning to the Moon and going on to Mars. (Well, the former at least. Without more money, the latter goal is a complete pipe dream, even if all NASA science were eliminated.)

Among the Earth science victims are the Global Precipitation Measurement system mission, whose data on rainfall all over the planet would be a great boon to climate research and weather forecasting, and the GIFTS satellite, whose comprehensive atmospheric data-gathering capability is supposed to demonstrate the technology for the next generation of weather satellites.

Among the space science victims, as most are aware of, is the Hubble telescope. But other victims include the Space Interferometry "PlanetQuest" mission and the Terrestrial Planet Finder. Both are extremely exciting missions that will give humans the capability, for the first time, to discover and study Earth-like planets around other stars.

My opinions on this are very strong that this tradeoff is extremely detrimental. I know, though, that there are a lot of space exploration enthusiasts that may feel otherwise, so I am wondering whether people here believe that sacrificing critical Earth science and exciting space science is a fair tradeoff for a return to the Moon fifty or sixty years after Neil Armstrong and company first walked on it.

(For more information about all of these mission I mentioned, see the posts at my blog that are linked to in the text above.)

--Peter

[shoelace414]

1. in reading a Carl Sagan book

pale blue dot, he pretty much said that robotic exploration dollar for dollar earned waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more scientific value than human exploration.

It wasn't even close.

[Ready4Change]

2. Bush's Mars initiative will destroy the USA's space capabilities.

It's another unfunded mandate. It pretty much requires the cancellation of most other NASA initiatives, and I'm certain, once those are gone, bean counters will say "Hey, this NASA thing isn't doing ANYTHING! Lets just cross it off the budget."

My .02

[getmeouttahere]

3. No, remember, they might need it for....

the weaponization of space!

[yowzayowzayowza]

4. Naw, jus another excuse to funnel...

money to his military-industrial complex buddies. He doesn't care if it accomplishes anything of scientific interest atall.

[Johonny]

14. Hmm...

I work for the "military-industrial complex" and our science budget money is shrinking like everyone else.

More lose, more cost and more moonbases.

[Ready4Change]

5. That's handled via the military budget. n/t

[bloom]

13. That's what I think

- it seems to fit their plans.

[pmbryant]

9. That's certainly not an unlikely scenario (n/t)

[Bill McBlueState]

6. f'n tell me about it.

My advisor and I are writing our proposal to get our NASA Origins grant renewed. This year, Origins is funding just 30 proposals nationally. I'm going to make a very bitter TA if I can't get a research assistantship thanks to *'s Mars fantasy.

[Ian David]

8. I own stock in SpaceHab and SpaceDev. I have an idea for a proposal...

Extra-planetary banking.

Simply re-program a decommissioned satellite-- or launch a new one-- and use it as the databank for a bank.

No country on Earth could regulate it.

Put the thing on the Moon, and you own that real estate by virtue of making use of it.

You could also add an ATM reader in case E.T. wants to make a deposit...

[Ian David]

7. I call it, "No Astronaut Left Behind"

[muriel_volestrangler]

10. The Republicans need some 'heroes' to parade in front of the masses

and astronauts fit the bill nicely - lots of self-effacing "it's just my duty" quotes, and risking their lives for something with an American flag on it. Much better than funding PhDs who come up with inconvenient evidence for global warming, and who are far too likely to be Democrats to be allowed in front of the cameras.

[pmbryant]

11. The "hero" thing doesn't fit the current plan

The return to the Moon isn't for 10-20 years, if ever. And the space shuttle program will be ended in just a few years according to the current plan.

Meanwhile, the current administration is too scared to send astronauts to maintain the Hubble telescope in low Earth orbit.

So this theory about needing "heroes" doesn't fit.

But the latter part of your theory is, of course, much more plausible.

--Peter

[Johonny]

15. Hmm

Dead astronauts don't make for good parades. That's why the shuttle isn't flying. They want a program soooooooooooooooo long term nothing negative will get done. It's all about controling negative news. They could give a crap about science and actual research.

[pmbryant]

12. Science proponents need to make our voices heard

:kick: