• 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

George VI

Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2009
Messages
146
Reaction score
22
Location
Auckland, New Zealand
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
The White House has ordered a public review of America's options.

It opens at a time when the country's relative standing in space is at an unusually low point.

The Space Shuttle programme which was launched in 1981 will come to an end next year when the last craft will be cannibalised, mothballed or scrapped.

BBC NEWS | Americas | US mulls space exploration future

In summary, NASA and the US space programme is ridiculously expensive to fund and maintain, especially in this financial and political climate.

I call for the continuation of the current space programmes that the US and the West in general are running. We need to stay at the cutting-edge, we don't want China and Russia to exceed us in technological capability.

Remember, some of the most famous inventions today were indirectly and directly invented by NASA, such as smoke alarms, cordless technology and the modern firearm suit, and my favourite, the satellite dish.

I see the space programmes as something more than just exploring space, but also as a good place for discovering and inventing new and useful technologies. For the sake of the people, I'd say continue funding the research, if not the space flights.
 
I'd close all the public schools, the Post Office, and all public assistance in favor of the Space Program.

Remember that those who would enslave you cannot have you envision a bright future.
 
Last edited:
I'd close all the public schools, the Post Office, and all public assistance in favor of the Space Program.

Remember that those who would enslave you cannot have you envision a bright future.

Kind of cool how a Democratic president was the one who pushed so hard for us to get to the moon, then, huh? I guess they're not all taskmasters or loafers.

The space program is absolutely necessary, both for the innovation it brings and because if we don't colonize space, someone else will and they're going to have the first crack at the infinite resources that lie beyond our atmosphere. I would absolutely die happy if I lived long enough to see the Doomsday clock disabled as we spread into space, and maybe even to see Enrico Fermi's paradox fade away as we found another intelligent life form.

Fermi paradox - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Of course, without public schools we're not going to have many educated colonists, but that's a whole other ball game. Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin both graduated from public high schools.
 
Last edited:
Kind of cool how a Democratic president was the one who pushed so hard for us to get to the moon, then, huh? I guess they're not all taskmasters or loafers.

The space program is absolutely necessary, both for the innovation it brings and because if we don't colonize space, someone else will and they're going to have the first crack at the infinite resources that lie beyond our atmosphere. I would absolutely die happy if I lived long enough to see the Doomsday clock disabled as we spread into space, and maybe even to see Enrico Fermi's paradox fade away as we found another intelligent life form.

Fermi paradox - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Your link is to note 30 at the bottom of the article. Did you intend that?
 
Its like a monty python sketch when people talk about wasting money on space programmes.

What has it ever done for us except- cellphones ,sat nav GPS,satellite tv/radio, cordless tools ,smoke decetors ,protective paint, military intelligence being able to measure the effect of climate change and further our knowledge of the cosmos.
 
Kind of cool how a Democratic president was the one who pushed so hard for us to get to the moon, then, huh? I guess they're not all taskmasters or loafers.
Kennedy was before LBJ and the Great Society decided to focus on subsidizing physical and moral lassitude. Since then, the focus of the Anti-Republicans has been to make virtue out of vice. The party of Kennedy would not be a bad governing party, but that party left Washington in 1964 and never came back.

The US should gut every entitlement program if that's what it takes to balance the budget, defend the nation, and send people out to explore and eventually colonize other planets.
 
Kennedy was before LBJ and the Great Society decided to focus on subsidizing physical and moral lassitude. Since then, the focus of the Anti-Republicans has been to make virtue out of vice. The party of Kennedy would not be a bad governing party, but that party left Washington in 1964 and never came back.

The US should gut every entitlement program if that's what it takes to balance the budget, defend the nation, and send people out to explore and eventually colonize other planets.

I know this is hard, but could you, just once, try and not spin those who you disagree with into something they are not.
 
I know this is hard, but could you, just once, try and not spin those who you disagree with into something they are not.
Of course I could.

But why would I? Kennedy had the vision to challenge the nation to send men to the moon. If his presumed philosophical and political heirs had that same vision, they would be respectable. As they have no vision, they are contemptible.
 
It's not really necessary. There isn't much that you can do in space that you can't do on earth. he amount of money it takes to do this is large and can be better spent on a multitude of scientific research. It's not going to really yield anything less we throw in a heck of a lot more time, effort, and tons more money. I mean, we can go to the moon....huzzah! But there's not **** there. Anything inter-solar system is going to be a technological feat, you either commit to it or you don't. You can't half ass that thing, it's going to require too many man-hours, too many scientists, too much money to try to half ass it. You either throw everything you got at it, or you research other things.

BTW, a trip to Mars raises your chance for cancer by 30%.
 
Public perception severely underestimates the value that NASA provides to our nation and our economy. From another thread

NASA is one of the few government programs that can actually be considered an investment. The unique and extreme technological challenges that space poses give rise to R&D (usually done by private coorporations on behalf of the government) that provide indescribable benefit to private industry and the public alike. NASA's ROI has been estimated at $7 on the dollar. It does not directly generate consumer products, but its benefits are undeniable. Obama's commitment to technology and to NASA in particular made a big impact on me during the primaries, and I look forward to what the space program can accomplish when the White House is actually supporting it

For a more comprehensive list of NASA spinoffs you can peruse NASA's site, which has 100+ page pdfs for every year since 1976. Here are a few excerpts from the less comprehensive wikipedia page on the same topic

Light-Emitting Diodes (LEDs)
The Light-emitting diode technology used in NASA space shuttle plant growth experiments led to the development of a hand-held, high-intensity, LED unit developed by Quantum Devices Inc. The WARP 10 is said to relieve minor muscle and joint pain, stiffness,and increases local blood circulation. The WARP 10 is being used by the U.S. Department of Defense and U.S. Navy as a noninvasive “soldier self-care” device for minor injuries and pain. The next-generation WARP 75 has been used to relieve pain in bone marrow transplant patients, and will be used to combat the symptoms of bone atrophy, multiple sclerosis, diabetic complications, Parkinson’s disease, and in a variety of ocular applications.

Artificial Limbs
Advancements such as Environmental Robots Inc.’s development of artificial muscle systems[4] for use in NASA space robotic and extravehicular activities have been adapted to create more functionally dynamic artificial limbs. Other commercial uses of NASA’s temper foam include moldable materials offering the natural look and feel of flesh, as well as preventing friction between the skin and the prosthesis, and heat/moisture buildup

Improved Radial Tires
Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company developed a fibrous material, five times stronger than steel, for NASA to use in parachute shrouds to soft-land the Vikings on the Martian surface. Recognizing the durability of the material, Goodyear expanded the technology and went on to produce a new radial tire with a tread life expected to be 10,000 miles greater than conventional radials.

Video Enhancing and Analysis Systems
Intergraph Government Solutions developed its Video Analyst System (VAS) by building on Video Image Stabilization and Registration (VISAR) technology created by NASA to help FBI agents analyze video footage. Originally used for enhancing video images from nighttime videotapes made with hand-held camcorders, VAS is a tool for video enhancement and analysis offering support of full-resolution digital video, stabilization, frame-by-frame analysis, conversion of analog video to digital storage formats, and increased visibility of filmed subjects without altering underlying footage. Aside from law enforcement and security applications, VAS has also been adapted to serve the military for reconnaissance, weapons deployment, damage assessment, training, and mission debriefing.

Firefighting Equipment
Firefighting equipment in the United States is based on lightweight materials developed for the U.S. Space Program. NASA and the National Bureau of Standards created a lightweight breathing system including face mask, frame, harness, and air bottle, using an aluminum composite material developed by NASA for use on rocket casings. The broadest fire-related technology transfer is the breathing apparatus for protection from smoke inhalation injury. Additionally, NASA’s inductorless electronic circuit technology led to lower-cost, more rugged, short-range two-way radio now used by firefighters. NASA also helped develop a specialized mask weighing less than 3 ounces to protect the physically impaired from injuries to the face and head, as well as flexible, heat-resistant materials—developed to protect the space shuttle on reentry—which are being used both by the military and commercially in suits for municipal and aircraft-rescue firefighters

Freeze Drying Technology
In planning for the long-duration Apollo missions, NASA conducted extensive research into space food. One of the techniques developed was freeze drying. Action Products commercialized this technique, concentrating on snack food. The foods are cooked, quickly frozen, and then slowly heated in a vacuum chamber to remove the ice crystals formed by the freezing process. The final product retains 98 percent of its nutrition and weighs only 20 percent of its original weight. Today, one of the benefits of this advancement in food preparation includes simple nutritious meals available to handicapped and otherwise homebound senior adults unable to take advantage of existing meal programs

Solar Energy
Homes across the country are now being outfitted with high-performance single crystal silicon solar power cells that allow them to reduce their traditional energy expenditures and reduce pollution. The advanced technology behind these solar devices—which provide up to 50 percent more power than conventional solar cells—originated with the efforts of a NASA-sponsored 28-member coalition forming the Environmental Research Aircraft and Sensor Technology (ERAST) Alliance. ERAST’s goal was to develop remotely piloted aircraft, intended to fly unmanned at high altitudes for days at a time and requiring advanced solar power sources that did not add weight. As a result, SunPower Corporation created advanced silicon-based cells for terrestrial or airborne applications

Structural analysis software

NASA software engineers have created thousands of computer programs over the decades equipped to design, test, and analyze stress, vibration, and acoustical properties of a broad assortment of aerospace parts and structures. The NASA Structural Analysis Program, or NASTRAN, is considered one of the most successful and widely-used NASA software programs. It has been used to design everything from Cadillacs to roller coaster rides. Originally created for spacecraft design, NASTRAN has been employed in a host of non-aerospace applications and is available to industry through NASA’s Computer Software Management and Information Center (COSMIC). COSMIC maintains a library of computer programs from NASA and other government agencies and sells them at a fraction of the cost of developing a new program.

Food Safety

Faced with the problem of how and what to feed an astronaut in a sealed capsule under weightless conditions while planning for human space flight, NASA enlisted the aid of The Pillsbury Company to address two principal concerns: eliminating crumbs of food that might contaminate the spacecraft’s atmosphere and sensitive instruments, and assuring absolute absence of disease-producing bacteria and toxins. Pillsbury developed the Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) concept to address NASA’s second concern. HACCP is designed to prevent food safety problems rather than to catch them after they have occurred. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has applied HACCP guidelines for the handling of seafood, juice, and dairy products

You never hear NASA get credit for these things because they only spawn the initial research, which is only commercialized later by private coorporations. NASA's contribution to technology and industry, however, is immense. Other than the military NASA fosters more innovation than any government program, and does it with a comparatively miniscule budget.
 
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.
 
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.

"Could" and "would" are most charitably described as guesses.

That NASA did spur the development of such things is easily described as fact.
 
NASA did do those things, but you can bet your bottom dollar that most if not all of what they invented would have been invented in other labs and by other engineers. Especially things like LEDs and artificial limbs and the likes. And if all that funding wasn't going to NASA, but instead other research programs who knows what else would have been invented. NASA takes a lot of money from other more valid research, so they can spend a lot on doing all sorts of research which can be done better and for less money at Universities. In the end, you have to ask what the actual goal of NASA is and how practical it is to achieve that. Unfortunately, NASA's mandates are given via the President and the scientists get no say in the matter. If the President says go to Mars, they have to work on ways to go to Mars. If the President says to work more on astrophysics, they have to work more on astrophysics. Not being independent also really hurts the overall goals and organization of NASA. In terms of space travel and planet colonization; that's going to take more than the US throwing everything (and I mean everything, we'd have zero money for anything else) it has at the problem to solve it. There's plenty of research out there to do without bogging down into one area because people have seen too many Star Trek episodes.
 
Space travel should certainly continue. However, in times such as these we need to be a bit more practical in how we operate.

1) We should start looking into finding viable commercial activities in space. Examples might be mining rare elements from asteroids or advanced zero-g manufacturing techniques.

2) The biggest priority in building a launch platform should be lowering the cost of getting material into orbit. The scaled composites white knight program showed how flying as high as possible using a normal airplane before firing the rockets dramatically cut costs. Although it is not yet possible, a space elevator would offer even bigger cost reductions.

3) Robots, not people should be going into space. Compare the cost and effectiveness of the mars rover program to the planned attempts at sending people into mars. People are heavy, need too many resources, and have both physical and mental programs from being stuck in space too long. Manned spaceflight is not entirely useless, but robots should be used whenever possible.
 
What "valid" research programs do you have in mind?

Increases in University level research. The vast majority of research that we have, that later engineers take and develop marketable technology from, is from the University labs. I'd put more emphasis into high energy physics as well to develop the necessary detectors and equipment necessary for their research. Lots of interesting stuff. I'm a personal fan of atomic, molecular, and optical physics since you can create macroscopic quantum systems with those and actually start to probe the laws and predictions of quantum mechanics. University level engineering should also be well more funded, there's tons of great stuff that comes out of those labs. Plus the money you spend on a University lab vs. NASA is night and day, grad students are cheap, hardworking suckers.
 
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.
Bad argument. It's the same argument that says - we haven't been attacked since 9/11 because of the policies...- It's easy to say but is invalid.

Here let me add to your argument with one of my own - Yeah but it would have taken 20+ years longer - You can't prove it and neither can I.
 
LEDs were well on their way before NASA, artificial limb technology was also being developed with much interest and funding due to the applications to the medical field. Many things which NASA developed would be developed because of the interest it has to many different fields. Anyone in science would be able to tell this. NASA has made some things, and perhaps because of the level of funding they receive they were able to get it done first. The point is people point to NASA and say "see how great it is!", but scientifically what are they doing? Their best contributions are to astronomy. All the engineering they come up with can be done elsewhere for cheaper, guaranteed. But people get this vision of running off to other galaxies and colonizing other planets without thinking what it would take to do so and what practicalities there are to attempting to do so. Things of that nature would take most of the resources America has at its disposal to develop. Meanwhile, there's a plethora of other research which could be funded instead, physics, chemistry, biology, medicine, engineering, etc.

NASA is cool and all, but it's too interconnected with the whims of politicians and some of what people want it to do is impractical. If you want to fix NASA, you'd isolate it from the demands of the President and would most likely nix the manned space sector in favor of other research avenues till manned space exploration becomes financially and technologically possible. As stated, currently a trip to Mars would raise your risk of cancer by 30%, so there are many problems to work out. In the meantime, we can fund other scientific research which would have a larger impact on our lives.
 
Kind of cool how a Democratic president was the one who pushed so hard for us to get to the moon, then, huh? I guess they're not all taskmasters or loafers.

The space program is absolutely necessary, both for the innovation it brings and because if we don't colonize space, someone else will and they're going to have the first crack at the infinite resources that lie beyond our atmosphere. I would absolutely die happy if I lived long enough to see the Doomsday clock disabled as we spread into space, and maybe even to see Enrico Fermi's paradox fade away as we found another intelligent life form.

Fermi paradox - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Of course, without public schools we're not going to have many educated colonists, but that's a whole other ball game. Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin both graduated from public high schools.



The evidence is that no intelligent life form has visited this solar system in hundreds of millions of years.

There's not a lot of evidence that an intelligent species exists in the solar system now.
 
Of course I could.

But why would I? Kennedy had the vision to challenge the nation to send men to the moon. If his presumed philosophical and political heirs had that same vision, they would be respectable. As they have no vision, they are contemptible.

Kennedy set up that challenge because the Soviets were advancing past the US militarily, and because Kennedy just got his butt whupped at the Bay of Pigs, and he needed a distraction. The boy didn't have a "great vision". Chances are, but my recollection is admittedly a little hazy, the idea of expanding the space program was Johnson's big idea that Kennedy took advantage of. JFK's interest was the non-existent "missile-gap". (If you recall, Dr. Strangelove promoted the idea of a "mine-shaft gap" at the end of the movie...)
 
Yes, I support the growth of human ability and accomplishment.

I also support the space program because it's really really cool. Isn't that the only reason we need?
 
I'd like for us to continue to fund NASA to the best extent possible. Our future logically lies amongst the stars. Although its impossible to state whether NASA itself will be the agency to take mankind, and sow his seed across the galaxy, it is a part of that process. With space exploration, you are constantly pushing the envelope of what we know about physics, chemistry, and all the other sciences. Its a building block, for the path off this remote speck of space dust.

Should we waste money, sitting around here studying the environmental impact man has on the hermit crab, or shall we aspire to a more worthy cause?

Whoever is with me, say "**** the hermit crab!!!"
 
It's not really necessary. There isn't much that you can do in space that you can't do on earth.

Using solar electric power to launch spacecraft without wasting propulsive mass.

Perfect crystal production without gravity induced strain.

Pollution-free production of cubic miles of strain-free iron and steel products.

Tritium mining.

He3 mining.

Low- and zero-gee boinking.

I mean, we can go to the moon....huzzah! But there's not **** there.

Titanium ores, aluminum ores, oxygen, silicon, shallow gravity well, mass, week-long days for solar power, vacuum, room, the Farside.
 
Using solar electric power to launch spacecraft without wasting propulsive mass.

Perfect crystal production without gravity induced strain.

Pollution-free production of cubic miles of strain-free iron and steel products.

Tritium mining.

He3 mining.

Low- and zero-gee boinking.



Titanium ores, aluminum ores, oxygen, silicon, shallow gravity well, mass, week-long days for solar power, vacuum, room, the Farside.

You're not going to do most of that, especially the moon mining, so keep dreaming. Most other things, especially crystal production can be done on earth. Anything dealing with mining in space will not happen in our lifetime, nor is it really worth the effort since the money and resources would cost more to get something that could launch and mine in space and send back material than you would make on the mining itself. I mean, if we want to just list pipe dreams, sure. The space program could allow us to swim with space whales on Io. But I think we need to think practically when we talk about the usefulness of NASA. There are some uses there, I would say primarily in astronomy and astrophysics. I wouldn't exactly nix NASA, but I wish people would quit thinking Star Wars and Star Trek and think about the practical applications of NASA.
 
Back
Top Bottom