- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Apollo 8 assembly, NASA is incredible
Posted on 12/29/16 at 8:01 am to AlwysATgr
Posted on 12/29/16 at 8:01 am to AlwysATgr
quote:
FTR, we had a man driving around on the moon in '71. All you've described is nothing special and pales in comparison with what we could be doing.
We could be doing all manner of things and I wish we were, but to describe those as nothing special is absurd. We can do much more science without having to support a human in space along the way to do it, so that's the course we take. I'm all for manned spaceflight, but for the vast majority of missions it's not only unnecessary but a huge hindrance.
Until we find a cheaper method to space there's very little reason to send up the mass of not only an astronaut but all of the life support that comes along with it, especially just for the "cool" factor. Eventually do I see someone walking on the face of Mars? Sure, and I hope that day comes sooner rather than later. For the time being the satellites and probes we've sent are doing a phenomenal job collecting data. Same with the other missions we've sent throughout the solar system.
2
Posted on 12/29/16 at 8:05 am to DavidTheGnome
quote:
Until we find a cheaper method to space there's very little reason to send up the mass of not only an astronaut but all of the life support that comes along with it, especially just for the "cool" factor.
The "cool" factor gets the public interested. The public' interest is what gets you funding. Funding is what gets you more science.
Posted on 12/29/16 at 8:19 am to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
The "cool" factor gets the public interested. The public' interest is what gets you funding. Funding is what gets you more science.
So the guy who thinks women shouldn't have the right to vote because they vote with their emotions also thinks NASA needs to entertain us in order to operate...got it.
Posted on 12/29/16 at 8:23 am to DavidTheGnome
quote:Ive never said the reason they shouldn't be allowed to vote because they vote with their emotions.
So the guy who thinks women shouldn't have the right to vote because they vote with their emotions
quote:
also thinks NASA needs to entertain us in order to operate...got it.
They don't "need" to do anything. But when you're asking taxpayers to give you billions a year you better provide something to show for it because they don't care about rovers on Mars or a robot crashing into a comet.
Posted on 12/29/16 at 8:36 am to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
Ive never said the reason they shouldn't be allowed to vote because they vote with their emotions.
Fairly certain. It sticks out in my mind since it's such an absurd position to take. If not, what was your rationale for barring women to vote?
Posted on 12/29/16 at 8:38 am to DavidTheGnome
I'll be more than happy to discuss that on the poliboard.
Cliffs:
We all vote with emotions. Women have different emotions than men and those emotions always lead to voting for a larger and more intrusive government.
Cliffs:
We all vote with emotions. Women have different emotions than men and those emotions always lead to voting for a larger and more intrusive government.
Posted on 12/29/16 at 8:46 am to DavidTheGnome
quote:
it's such an absurd position to take.
Is it really, though?
Posted on 12/29/16 at 8:53 am to DavidTheGnome
quote:
They are currently driving a vehicle around another planet, have landed on a comet, have a probe orbiting Jupiter and Saturn, just did a flyby of Pluto, and are about to launch a telescope that can see back to damned near the beginning of the universe.
Yeah, they suck.
They are also lying about climate data and doing crap they have no business doing and getting more politicized by the day. They have also, due to their hubris and politicized climate, killed about 15 people that would otherwise be alive. Why? Because the engineers did their job but the administrators, the politicized douche bags that they are, made decisions that got those people killed.
As for the stuff you specifically mentioned, my response is: That's all we get for the trillions that have been dumped into that organization? We have private companies doing extraordinary things with exponentially fewer resources, hell we have amateur 'rocketeers' out there putting stuff up to the edge of space, on their own time and their own dime.
NASA, since the Apollo program, is a failure.
Posted on 12/29/16 at 9:01 am to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:This is exactly why we don't let the stupids control the money.
They don't "need" to do anything. But when you're asking taxpayers to give you billions a year you better provide something to show for it because they don't care about rovers on Mars or a robot crashing into a comet.
Posted on 12/29/16 at 9:04 am to TigerFanInSouthland
quote:
See, that's some fricking bullshite right there. Sure, a lot of dumb ones are spewing their dumb shite all over Facebook, twitter, etc. while the really brilliant kids are doing nerd shite like studying.
I don't get the older generations, y'all constantly trash on us for living in a world we didn't create, living in an economy we had no part of, with shitty parents and a lackadaisical government that would rather line their coffers than see the American people's success. And y'all have the nerve to tell us that we're the problem? We're not the ones that gave the collective "frick you" to NASA. That happened generations before we got here.
Your generation produced Fakebook and worships Lean Dunham.
Their generation put a man on the fooking moon.
Shut up you little bitch.
Posted on 12/29/16 at 9:04 am to DavidTheGnome
quote:
Until we find a cheaper method to space there's very little reason to send up the mass of not only an astronaut but all of the life support that comes along with it, especially just for the "cool" factor. Eventually do I see someone walking on the face of Mars? Sure, and I hope that day comes sooner rather than later. For the time being the satellites and probes we've sent are doing a phenomenal job collecting data. Same with the other missions we've sent throughout the solar system.
No one but nerds gives a shite about these probes. Name me the current Rover operating on Mars on the top of your head?
Posted on 12/29/16 at 9:09 am to OMLandshark
Curiosity. Also one of the two smaller rovers is still going AFAIK. Spirit or Opportunity, not sure which.
Posted on 12/29/16 at 9:11 am to NOLApurpleandgold
quote:
One Christmas several years ago
quote:
& still have it!!
I mean it's only been several years, I would certainly hope you still have it.
Posted on 12/29/16 at 9:12 am to DavidTheGnome
Nerd
Posted on 12/29/16 at 9:23 am to GurleyGirl
quote:looking forward to never hearing this again soon. But I doubt it. Because the last 40 year's of NASA decline is Obama's direct fault ??
thanks obama
Posted on 12/29/16 at 9:26 am to tybeebomb
quote:
looking forward to never hearing this again soon. But I doubt it. Because the last 40 year's of NASA decline is Obama's direct fault ??
Well... at least 20% of it.
Posted on 12/29/16 at 9:31 am to tybeebomb
quote:
the last 40 year's of NASA decline
They keep having success after success, how has it been a decline?
Posted on 12/29/16 at 9:33 am to DavidTheGnome
quote:
They keep having success after success, how has it been a decline?
I'd say the bar for success is in a steady decline.
Posted on 12/29/16 at 9:39 am to just1dawg
Has anybody been to a launch?
Posted on 12/29/16 at 9:41 am to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
I'd say the bar for success is in a steady decline.
If anything I'd say it's been raised. Pluto flyby? Jupiter insertion? The continual success of Cassini? Landing rovers on Mars? Telescopes that find planets millions of light years away? These are all extreme precision endeavors, where one thing goes wrong and the entire project does. And they have to work many years after the initial launch due to the timeframes involved in spaceflight. That's a damned high bar to cross in my opinion.
Page 6 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News