• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Space travel. Is it necessary? Do you support it?

Do you support the continuation of the US space programme?

  • Yes

    Votes: 47 85.5%
  • No

    Votes: 2 3.6%
  • Only the continuation of the research

    Votes: 5 9.1%
  • Other

    Votes: 1 1.8%

  • Total voters
    55
Poll 38 to 6 in favor of continuing. Motion carried, manned exploration of space will continue. :mrgreen:


Seriously, are none of you opposers excited about the idea of a new frontier to colonize? If not for yourself and your kids, for your grandkids or great-great's?

Sure. But being excited about the idea of a new frontier is not a sufficient justification for the enormous pricetag associated with manned missions to other worlds, for which the taxpayers get nothing in return.

There will indeed be a new space frontier to colonize. I just question why we need to colonize it right now.
 
Y'all talk like none of that could have been developed outside of NASA. NASA happens to get a lot of money, well more than the NSF and other scientific funding agencies. They have come up with many great things, but many of those things would have also been developed in other labs if NASA hadn't done it themselves.

I agree. But they weren't. Credit where its due.
 
If something happens to threaten the planet and we have no options the human race is dead. The most important task that humankind can have is to find a way off this rock and settle another one. It was an asinine waste of time to spend all we did to get to the moon if we even did get there and stop going there.

Why do we fail to see the future and doom ourselves to the limits of stupidity and waste. Humanity settles that war is always the answer and will always be. They also say Utopia is an unattainable dream. The human mind limits its own failure by accepting defeat before it even starts.

Space travel should be what all of mankind is about.
 
exactly, and NASA is given far more credit than it deserves....

I disagree with that. I think they get the exact credit they deserve, but sometimes with excess. I grew up with a parent working for NASA for 35 years and have some familiarity with the organization.
 
If something happens to threaten the planet and we have no options the human race is dead.

Exactly. We better be prepared to deal with something like Apophis. [ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apophis_asteroid]99942 Apophis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

The most important task that humankind can have is to find a way off this rock and settle another one.

In the short to medium term, it would be more efficient to colonize the oceans in some way. Vast potential there that is being inefficiently utilized.

It was an asinine waste of time to spend all we did to get to the moon if we even did get there and stop going there.

It was a pissing contest between America and the USSR, primarily. But we shouldn't forget that things like the race to the moon does foster innovation, albeit not necessarily efficiently.

Why do we fail to see the future and doom ourselves to the limits of stupidity and waste. Humanity settles that war is always the answer and will always be. They also say Utopia is an unattainable dream. The human mind limits its own failure by accepting defeat before it even starts.

Space travel should be what all of mankind is about.

Utopia may be impossible, but technology plus wisdom could get us pretty close.
 
Last edited:
I disagree with that. I think they get the exact credit they deserve, but sometimes with excess. I grew up with a parent working for NASA for 35 years and have some familiarity with the organization.

so you have no direct knowledge or bias?
I worked with engineers at a govt owned nuclear research lab....they tend to waste money proving what they already know.
Our tax dollars can better be spent repairing the crumbling infrastructure that is all around us....
or better yet, working on developing alternative ways to satisfy the nation's energy needs...
 
so you have no direct knowledge or bias?
I worked with engineers at a govt owned nuclear research lab....they tend to waste money proving what they already know.

Every single government program falls under that category. It is a problem with most governments.

Our tax dollars can better be spent repairing the crumbling infrastructure that is all around us....
or better yet, working on developing alternative ways to satisfy the nation's energy needs...

I would be willing to bet that new energy alternatives will happen based on something coming out of NASA.

Well what do you know, it is already happening...

NASA - Wind Energy Research Reaps Rewards

Department of Energy - NASA and DOE Collaborate on Dark Energy Research

Renewable Energy Microgrid Research Workshop at NASA Ames | Jack Baskin School of Engineering | UC Santa Cruz

I fully support our space program. Or any space program for that matter.
 
Every single government program falls under that category. It is a problem with most governments.



I would be willing to bet that new energy alternatives will happen based on something coming out of NASA.

Well what do you know, it is already happening...

NASA - Wind Energy Research Reaps Rewards

Department of Energy - NASA and DOE Collaborate on Dark Energy Research

Renewable Energy Microgrid Research Workshop at NASA Ames | Jack Baskin School of Engineering | UC Santa Cruz

I fully support our space program. Or any space program for that matter.

The problem with government is that they can't let go of programs they start. As long as the knot heads in Congress have a say on how money is spent there is no program that will work.
 
The problem with government is that they can't let go of programs they start. As long as the knot heads in Congress have a say on how money is spent there is no program that will work.

Thats all well and good, but makes little difference. We work within the system we have, end of story.
 
or better yet, working on developing alternative ways to satisfy the nation's energy needs...

Use lunar resources to construct solar power satellites that beam microwave energy to earth based rectenna farms.

Use lunar resources to construct a anti-global warming mirror in the L2 position that would also serve to do the "ant under the magnifying glass" trick to any annoying national capital the United States wishes.
 
Every single government program falls under that category. It is a problem with most governments.



I would be willing to bet that new energy alternatives will happen based on something coming out of NASA.

Well what do you know, it is already happening...

NASA - Wind Energy Research Reaps Rewards

Department of Energy - NASA and DOE Collaborate on Dark Energy Research

Renewable Energy Microgrid Research Workshop at NASA Ames | Jack Baskin School of Engineering | UC Santa Cruz

I fully support our space program. Or any space program for that matter.

Hope you are not holding your breath for any of that to happen within the next few decades, even on a small scale...
 
Hope you are not holding your breath for any of that to happen within the next few decades, even on a small scale...

You said...

"Our tax dollars can better be spent repairing the crumbling infrastructure that is all around us....
or better yet, working on developing alternative ways to satisfy the nation's energy needs...
" - UtahBill

So your reply is little more than a red-herring.

A Red Herring is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue.

They are doing exactly what you requested. Time is irrelevant.
 
so you have no direct knowledge or bias?
I worked with engineers at a govt owned nuclear research lab....they tend to waste money proving what they already know.
Our tax dollars can better be spent repairing the crumbling infrastructure that is all around us....
or better yet, working on developing alternative ways to satisfy the nation's energy needs...

No sir, I admit I do not have a direct knowledge or bias. I did a website for Johnson Space Center, Space Center Houston and that is about the most direct contact I've had with NASA or their funding. I don't think that counts.

The familiarity I have is through a family member who was technically involved as well as a member of my father's band who has designed and built many components of the space station here in Clear Lake.

I guess most of this information is inconsequential and I probably shouldn't have brought it up.

However I feel that we should fund space programs simply because we are going to have to find another planet to live on one day, so when is it okay to begin looking? I'd say now, because we can.

We should fund space exploration AND fix the crumbling infrastructure AND find alternative energy sources to facilitate the needs of our planet. All of it. Perhaps one could lead to another. Re: Helium 3

Also, I believe that finding energy sources and finding another planet to live on is the same thing. Our sun will not live forever. It reminds me of Issac Asimov's The Last Question
 
Last edited:
You said...

"Our tax dollars can better be spent repairing the crumbling infrastructure that is all around us....
or better yet, working on developing alternative ways to satisfy the nation's energy needs...
" - UtahBill

So your reply is little more than a red-herring.

A Red Herring is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue.

They are doing exactly what you requested. Time is irrelevant.

NASA works on energy sources for NASA needs, space and air...
DOE works on other energy sources...so let's put some of the NASA engineers to work over at the DOE....not that they have a shortage of personnel trying to find ways to get us off the arab oil teat...strange, they have been working on that since the 70's and still we are addicted to arab oil.

Long story short, I have little confidence in govt agencies inventing or developing anything that will help us.
 
NASA works on energy sources for NASA needs, space and air...
DOE works on other energy sources...so let's put some of the NASA engineers to work over at the DOE....not that they have a shortage of personnel trying to find ways to get us off the arab oil teat...strange, they have been working on that since the 70's and still we are addicted to arab oil.

Long story short, I have little confidence in govt agencies inventing or developing anything that will help us.


How much specialized engineering talent does it take to say "drill here for a change"?

Like ya say, the government's agenda isn't necessarily what's best for the people.
 
NASA works on energy sources for NASA needs, space and air...

So what? It ends up in the civilian sector soon enough.

More advances have come from NASA in technology's than all other government agency's combined.

DOE works on other energy sources...so let's put some of the NASA engineers to work over at the DOE....not that they have a shortage of personnel trying to find ways to get us off the arab oil teat...strange, they have been working on that since the 70's and still we are addicted to arab oil.

More fallacy. The DOE has nothing to do with anything I said.

Long story short, I have little confidence in govt agencies inventing or developing anything that will help us.

And yet you ignore all the good NASA technology has done.

10 NASA Inventions You Might Use Every Day
NASA Spinoffs - Inventions Benefiting Our Daily Lives - Apollo Spinoff Inventions

"Nasa has had a hand in developing just about every synthetic material in existence today, agricultural awareness, detailed maps of the earth, measurung the impact we have on the environment, chemicals, alloys, medicinal/chemical understanding, better computers, shock absorbsion, and just about everything concieved or invented within the past 40 years... excluding the set-it-and-forget-it rotisserie. - WikiAnswers - What inventions has NASA developed

NASA is worth it's weight in gold.
 
So what? It ends up in the civilian sector soon enough.

More advances have come from NASA in technology's than all other government agency's combined.



More fallacy. The DOE has nothing to do with anything I said.



And yet you ignore all the good NASA technology has done.

10 NASA Inventions You Might Use Every Day
NASA Spinoffs - Inventions Benefiting Our Daily Lives - Apollo Spinoff Inventions

"Nasa has had a hand in developing just about every synthetic material in existence today, agricultural awareness, detailed maps of the earth, measurung the impact we have on the environment, chemicals, alloys, medicinal/chemical understanding, better computers, shock absorbsion, and just about everything concieved or invented within the past 40 years... excluding the set-it-and-forget-it rotisserie. - WikiAnswers - What inventions has NASA developed

NASA is worth it's weight in gold.

first link doesn't work, third link says nothing, second link has a list of exaggerations. Do you really think kidney dialysis and freeze dried foods are NASA inventions? That is just 2 from the list. Do an independent search using google on all of the items listed and you will find that most were being worked on prior to 1960. You might even say that NASA is stealing credit for the work of others.

Did they make improvements? Certainly, but those improvements would likely have happened anyway. Do we still drive Model T Fords? No....and NASA has almost nothing to do with the constant modernization of the automobile....
Like I said, NASA has lots of PR people with marketing skills spewing out propaganda to justify the enhancement of their annual budget...
THAT is their primary purpose, to enhance their budget. Same with most govt agencies....
 
So what? It ends up in the civilian sector soon enough.

More advances have come from NASA in technology's than all other government agency's combined.


And yet you ignore all the good NASA technology has done.

[NASA is worth it's weight in gold.

what NASA developed energy source is common in the civilian sector today?
NASA more than all others? Prove it.....
Not ignoring, just adding perspective.
GOLD? If only....
 
what NASA developed energy source is common in the civilian sector today?
NASA more than all others? Prove it.....
Not ignoring, just adding perspective.
GOLD? If only....

I do believe NASA paid for the development of the fuel cell.

They're also responsible for the development of the RTG, the radioisotope thermal generator, are they not?
 
first link doesn't work, third link says nothing, second link has a list of exaggerations. Do you really think kidney dialysis and freeze dried foods are NASA inventions?

They are not exaggerations at all. Give credit where credit is due. You are being intellectually dishonest here.

That is just 2 from the list. Do an independent search using google on all of the items listed and you will find that most were being worked on prior to 1960. You might even say that NASA is stealing credit for the work of others.

The only thing exaggerated here is your opinion. Without the work NASA did those items being worked on would not have gotten to were they are today, period. You cannot say the same.

Did they make improvements? Certainly, but those improvements would likely have happened anyway.

Then again maybe not. Since you can't prove this, and I have already proved my point this amounts to your guess vs my facts.

Do we still drive Model T Fords? No....and NASA has almost nothing to do with the constant modernization of the automobile....

More red-herring, nice.

Like I said, NASA has lots of PR people with marketing skills spewing out propaganda to justify the enhancement of their annual budget...
THAT is their primary purpose, to enhance their budget. Same with most govt agencies....

So what? The benefits we get from NASA far outweigh the cost.

So far you have yet to post a single shred of evidence proving any point you have tried to make. Your argument amounts to opinion backed by fallacy. Wow, great argument. :roll:
 
Last edited:
Every single government program falls under that category. It is a problem with most governments.



I would be willing to bet that new energy alternatives will happen based on something coming out of NASA.

Well what do you know, it is already happening...

NASA - Wind Energy Research Reaps Rewards

Department of Energy - NASA and DOE Collaborate on Dark Energy Research

Renewable Energy Microgrid Research Workshop at NASA Ames | Jack Baskin School of Engineering | UC Santa Cruz

I fully support our space program. Or any space program for that matter.
Wind energy, solar energy have been used by man for thousands of years...
We need more money (smaller class sizes) for our schools and less for more wasteful things such as fed. govt programs (NASA)..
 
Wind energy, solar energy have been used by man for thousands of years...

And through the research at NASA it is becoming more viable.

We need more money (smaller class sizes) for our schools and less for more wasteful things such as fed. govt programs (NASA)..

This has nothing to do with NASA. Public schools should not even exist, and is irrelevant as most state property taxes go to the schools. This is not a Federal problem.

More fallacy arguments, jesh.
 
Back
Top Bottom