Water on the Moon

[Mr_Draco]

Originally Posted by Bonnie

what a waist of the tax payers money! that changes my life, how?

Originally Posted by Bonnie

it just seems like a waist.

Originally Posted by PQ

It's a waist of Fing money.

Originally Posted by PQ

80% of NASA is a waist of money.

I've got a question.

What does a person's WAIST line has anything to do with the governments WASTE of money?

[Zeus]

Originally Posted by PQ

Ok, now name something that was discovered or invented using TAX dollars?

All those you named were for OUR use. And ALL were either readily available or a direct result of free enterprise. I sure could use a car, a phone, an air conditioner and computer, but somehow I'm missing the part where moon rocks and moon water are helpful to us. We got bigger problems right now.

Those would have been developed anyway. And by PRIVATE companies.

I'd dispute that you can just assume advanced aerospace technology would have been developed by private industry.... and that argument is like saying that, Oh well Sir Issac Newton is responsible for Gravity... but who cares? if not him someone else would have eventually discovered it.

I'm not sure what your asking. You want an example of a Government funded (tax payer money) project that did what? Saved lives? We use every day? How bout the internet lol.

[tones2SS]

Originally Posted by PQ

Spin it how you want. It's a waist of Fing money. Sooooooo let's trasnport water form deep inside the Moon back here to earth. If you think drilling for oil is expensive here, ............. well........... (I know you refereing to using it there)

I know, let's buy a second home when we can't afford our first one.

Than we can fix the place up, you know install an atmosphere and some firtile soil.

This idea is stupid. Christopher Columbus?

I agree 100%. BIG WASTE of American dollars. For what?!?! To see if there is life out there?!? I don't really see the point/worthiness for the money in researching. Just my opinion.

[wrek]

This movie is worth a watch if you like Sci-fi or brain twisters... http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1182345/

[crazz28]

This is the best use of US government's money I've seen in a while, at least it has proved something is actually there, lol. I'd rather see you guys spend 20B or so of your budget on NASA exploration than 700B on AIG and the likes.

[zebra]

[AZCamaroFan]

i'm sorry, but when i read that NASA is a waste of money it bothers me. You know their budget basically hasn't increased in the last 20 years. So we can spend 100s of billions on stimulus, bailouts etc. , and NASA gets about 15billion a year. And it's not like that money goes in a hole-people actually work there, work for the companies that build the rockets, parts, etc. I think we've learned a lot from space. I don't think we should go to Mars with the technology we have. But i think there's a lot to learn out there.

[PQ]

Originally Posted by Mr_Draco

I've got a question.

What does a person's WAIST line has anything to do with the governments WASTE of money?

Well, if you think about it, it could work.

Originally Posted by Zeus

I'd dispute that you can just assume advanced aerospace technology would have been developed by private industry.... and that argument is like saying that, Oh well Sir Issac Newton is responsible for Gravity... but who cares? if not him someone else would have eventually discovered it.

I'm not sure what your asking. You want an example of a Government funded (tax payer money) project that did what? Saved lives? We use every day? How bout the internet lol.

I'm saying, they would have been developed (yes, even the internet) without the insanely mamoth amount of money spent by NASA. They have ballooned into a pit of waste that could be scaled back to free up a hell of a lot of money to put toward better things.

[Captain Vlad]

Originally Posted by PQ

Those would have been developed anyway. And by PRIVATE companies.

Eventually they would have, but how many lives, how much property, and how many dollars have been saved by having them earlier? How much farther along are we down the technological road because we needed to kick the process in the butt to get to the moon or build a reusable spacecraft?

Private companies are more conservative with their money because they want to make a profit. Ventures like NASA force private companies to indulge in areas of research they might not be interested in because the things NASA wants to do require more capability that we have right now, and thus new capabilities must be developed.

It's the same sort of relationship you see with racing versus the car industry at large. You don't need the average road car to move like an F1 car, but what else can you make a road car do when it's benefiting from the development you're putting into the F1 car?

Besides, if we last long enough, we'll need a way off this rock. Might as well start figuring out the basic requirements now.

[PQ]

Originally Posted by crazz28

This is the best use of US government's money I've seen in a while, at least it has proved something is actually there, lol. I'd rather see you guys spend 20B or so of your budget on NASA exploration than 700B on AIG and the likes.

Well, I have opinions on that too. NASA is just ONE thing that should be scaled back. This is a thread about Moon water so I fugured it was related. We don't DARE start threads on the rest of the waste of money.

Originally Posted by azfan

i'm sorry, but when i read that NASA is a waste of money it bothers me. You know their budget basically hasn't increased in the last 20 years. So we can spend 100s of billions on stimulus, bailouts etc. , and NASA gets about 15billion a year. And it's not like that money goes in a hole-people actually work there, work for the companies that build the rockets, parts, etc. I think we've learned a lot from space. I don't think we should go to Mars with the technology we have. But i think there's a lot to learn out there.

Don't care how their annual budget is figured. It's still a big waste. I'm not saying all of it. But someone please tell me why we are spending all this money to go back to the moon? And mars? That's like throwing a hail mary pass in the 3rd quarter.

So we should spend 15 billion dollars to create how many jobs? Most of those jobs would still be filled if we diverted the funds to something that is more practical and makes more sense.

[PQ]

Originally Posted by Captain Vlad

Eventually they would have, but how many lives, how much property, and how many dollars have been saved by having them earlier? How much farther along are we down the technological road because we needed to kick the process in the butt to get to the moon or build a reusable spacecraft?

Private companies are more conservative with their money because they want to make a profit. Ventures like NASA force private companies to indulge in areas of research they might not be interested in because the things NASA wants to do require more capability that we have right now, and thus new capabilities must be developed.

It's the same sort of relationship you see with racing versus the car industry at large. You don't need the average road car to move like an F1 car, but what else can you make a road car do when it's benefiting from the development you're putting into the F1 car?

Besides, if we last long enough, we'll need a way off this rock. Might as well start figuring out the basic requirements now.

That's the problem. We want stuff earlier. Wether we can afford it or not. That's why my grandkids will NEVER know the free world I lived in. They're in massive debt before they are even born because we wanted things earlier. SELFISH if you ask me.

[NoUCantDriveIt]

[this comment is NOT meant to flame anyone or their opinion, just me spouting off from my soapbox. ]

Ok, so water on the moon. One of those cool 'n groovy discovery moments for scientists and perhaps those that think life is a Sci-fi movie. I've nothing against NASA in general, and think PQ's arguments on Tax dollars and redirecting funding for research is valid.

I'll add to that with...
1. If we can't respect water resources on earth, why do we even deserve another source to muck up?

2. If moon water becomes a necessary source, the situation on earth is past the point of no return. Better off taking the Camaro for a drive to buy a few kegs (while there's still water to make beer), then drive back and party with your family and/or favorite C5 friends.

3. If a (as of yet non-existent) $huttle to a (as of yet non-existent) $pace $tation is the way "out of Dodge" who do you think will be on the passenger list(s)? Yeah, me neither. :( Again... Camaro. Kegs. Family. C5.

On the up-side... none of this has any affect on C5 Fest in April!

[PQ]

And as far as 'Saving the Human Race' in the inevitable end. It would only get us into a religious discusion.

[NoUCantDriveIt]

Hear Ye! Hear Ye! ...All bow to PQ, King of the saved human race (sans moon water and C5 religious discussion)