• 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!

Has NASA Outlived it's Usefulness?

Has NASA outlived its usefulness

  • Yes

    Votes: 8 11.8%
  • No

    Votes: 60 88.2%

  • Total voters
    68
Come on Folks, I got one hand tied behind my back---show me how valuable NASA has been in the last 20 years, and how 42 billion Dollars is just a drop in the bucket.

What would you define as "valuable"?
 
What would you define as "valuable"?

Obviously someone has not heard of the Jet Propulsion Lab :lol:

NASA has not outlived its usefulness, if anything we are reaching a critcal point where it and other likeminded organisations are going to become crucial to the continued survival of humans.
 
I do think we should look into some sort of space colonization as a long term plan. Simply, people are not going to stop having children, and even with the decline in birth rates in industrialized nations, it'll be a long time before population stabilizes.
 
I do think we should look into some sort of space colonization as a long term plan. Simply, people are not going to stop having children, and even with the decline in birth rates in industrialized nations, it'll be a long time before population stabilizes.

Not just that, there is also the mineral wealth one can gain from space colonization - it is theorized that a local asteroid contains more gold than has ever been mined in the history of the planet. Not to mention the dearth of fuel gases from the gas giants, and the unfiltered solar energy from the Sun. Th long term benefits are limitless.

If one considers the Gaia principle as true then it is our natural imperative as humans to expand across space.:lol:
 
Not just that, there is also the mineral wealth one can gain from space colonization - it is theorized that a local asteroid contains more gold than has ever been mined in the history of the planet. Not to mention the dearth of fuel gases from the gas giants, and the unfiltered solar energy from the Sun. Th long term benefits are limitless.

If one considers the Gaia principle as true then it is our natural imperative as humans to expand across space.:lol:
So then, if we had all that gold, how much would gold be worth?? the reason gold is expensive, is because it is rare.---If your plans include using gold for technology, I can see that, but it would turn the worlds gold Market upside down in the process. ---But say we adapt your plan, which is not a bad plan, who would pay for it, when we are more than 13 Trillion dollars in debt now? Our children will have to take on that debt. I would like to leave mine debt free as possible.---Each project is more expensive than the last. and the cost will continue to go up, the farther we reach out into space. And the more expensive and dangerous it becomes. Even to just send robots would break the bank. ---Your dreams are well intended, but this just may not be the right time to try to pay for them. ---and we do have to pay for them.
 
Last edited:
So then, if we had all that gold, how much would gold be worth?? the reason gold is expensive, is because it is rare.---If your plans include using gold for technology, I can see that, but it would turn the worlds gold Market upside down in the process. ---But say we adapt your plan, which is not a bad plan, who would pay for it, when we are more than 13 Trillion dollars in debt now? Our children will have to take on that debt. I would like to leave mine debt free as possible.

I was talking about the mineral wealth available using the asteroid as an example, market prices are irrelevant.

Debt is not necessarily a bad thing, especially when the growth and survival of humanity is a factor to be taken into consideration.
 
I was talking about the mineral wealth available using the asteroid as an example, market prices are irrelevant.

Debt is not necessarily a bad thing, especially when the growth and survival of humanity is a factor to be taken into consideration.
I hear ya---"Hang on to the Dream" maybe one day, they will come true. :mrgreen:
 
I hear ya---"Hang on to the Dream" maybe one day, they will come true. :mrgreen:

They won't if we let NASA sit idle with less funding than the nuclear weapons program. I'm amazed they do what they do with their budget.
 
People stomping their feet, and saying I'm wrong, does not make for a rebuttal.---did you name three things, no--you just attack me, because you have nothin.

We may just have a new forum jester here.

People posting exceedingly long lists of things NASA has provided and you ignoring every single one of them doesn't make you right. Furthermore, you have gone out of your way to ignore every hard question asked to you.

I'm still waiting for how you think that fuel for fusion reactors isn't "serious work."

And I see you are a hypocrite due to your refusal to answer my question about giving up everything that was based on a NASA breakthrough.
 
So then, if we had all that gold, how much would gold be worth?? the reason gold is expensive, is because it is rare.

Incorrect. Gold is expensive because people want it and because it is rare. Merely because something is rare doesn't make it expensive. Iridium is extremely rare, but per troy ounce can't compare to Gold. Many of the elements on the bottom of the periodic table have never exceeded more then a few nanograms at any one time. Are they worth anything? Not really.

Gold in terms of applicable material usages in industry is a good reason to increase supply. Gold is an excellent conductor as well as does not corrode.

You do appear very much a luddite.
 
Incorrect. Gold is expensive because people want it and because it is rare. Merely because something is rare doesn't make it expensive. Iridium is extremely rare, but per troy ounce can't compare to Gold. Many of the elements on the bottom of the periodic table have never exceeded more then a few nanograms at any one time. Are they worth anything? Not really.

Gold in terms of applicable material usages in industry is a good reason to increase supply. Gold is an excellent conductor as well as does not corrode.

You do appear very much a luddite.
I stand corrected, rare, and wanted---I wouldn't give much thought to how I appear though.
 
Back
Top Bottom