Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Perspectives. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
NASA bombshell: Government agency admits it can't pay for humans to go to Mars
Topic Started: Jul 14 2017, 11:58 AM (769 Views)
Coast2coast

Tsalagi
Jul 15 2017, 07:16 AM
Drudge X
Jul 15 2017, 03:43 AM
China is the future owner of Mars.
Well....good news is that when we finally get there, we'll be able to find a place for good sweet and sour pork and lo Mein noodles.
You sure you're not Jewish?

Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
clone
Member Avatar
Director @ Center for Advanced Memetic Warfare
Obama turned NASA into a Global Warming pet project...space exploration was no longer it's primary purpose.....

Hijacked! How Obama and the Left Killed NASA: The journey from the Moon to radical activism

LINK
Only liberals can choose not to go down the road to widespread, systematic violence.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
70-101
Member Avatar

First of all, the Bush Administration killed the space shuttle, which the Russians couldn't even build. Then he took over 3 billion in funding from our nations premier science agency, then he negotiated with the Russians to provide America Russian taxi service into space. The Obama Administration extended the life of the shuttle program by adding several additional flights.

Your argument is so partisan and distorted it doesn't even qualify as fake news, lunacy would be more accurate.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
estonianman
Member Avatar

Attaburnsinhell
Jul 15 2017, 09:58 AM
The Earth is the only known planet in the known universe with the ability to support life. All the rest of the planets in our solar system are failed planets, positioned in the wrong place - either too close or too far from the sun

The system that heats and cools the earth is three parts. The tilt of the axis gives us winter to summer, the 24 hour rotation gives us night cooling and day warmth. The third is the amount of CO2 in the atmoshere

The elements that make up our atmosphere are nitrogen, oxygen, hydrogen, and CO2. Unlike the first three elements, CO2 is the only one that absorbs heat because it is carbon based. CO2 is measured in parts per million, ppm, meaning out of a million molecules.

For thousands of years the amount of CO2 in our atmosphere averaged around 250-275ppm, which occured naturally. We know this from ice core samples taken from Greenland and Antarctica. This is the reason Earth has been able to support life as we know it and allowed us to grow food

But what scientists have discovered from these core samples has been a rapid increase of the amount of carbon in the atmosphere in the last 100 years, going from 270ppm to amounts as high as 400ppm. That increased amount is due to human pollution,which leaves a carbon finger print that scientists can specifically identify.

So when a denier says ''sure the planet is warming, but we dont know if it's due to human activity'' thats a bald faced lie, because we know exactly what the additional 100+ ppm is made up of -airborne pollutants

CO2 is carbon based, as in coal. We have launched billions of tons of heated coal into the air and the Earth can not absorb it enough to properly cool the planet
ITs nice to see that you are finally feeling some guilt for Attanomics. :box:

Acceptance is coming ...
MEEK AND MILD
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Robert Stout
Member Avatar

estonianman
Jul 15 2017, 09:25 PM
Attaburnsinhell
Jul 15 2017, 09:58 AM
The Earth is the only known planet in the known universe with the ability to support life. All the rest of the planets in our solar system are failed planets, positioned in the wrong place - either too close or too far from the sun

The system that heats and cools the earth is three parts. The tilt of the axis gives us winter to summer, the 24 hour rotation gives us night cooling and day warmth. The third is the amount of CO2 in the atmoshere

The elements that make up our atmosphere are nitrogen, oxygen, hydrogen, and CO2. Unlike the first three elements, CO2 is the only one that absorbs heat because it is carbon based. CO2 is measured in parts per million, ppm, meaning out of a million molecules.

For thousands of years the amount of CO2 in our atmosphere averaged around 250-275ppm, which occured naturally. We know this from ice core samples taken from Greenland and Antarctica. This is the reason Earth has been able to support life as we know it and allowed us to grow food

But what scientists have discovered from these core samples has been a rapid increase of the amount of carbon in the atmosphere in the last 100 years, going from 270ppm to amounts as high as 400ppm. That increased amount is due to human pollution,which leaves a carbon finger print that scientists can specifically identify.

So when a denier says ''sure the planet is warming, but we dont know if it's due to human activity'' thats a bald faced lie, because we know exactly what the additional 100+ ppm is made up of -airborne pollutants

CO2 is carbon based, as in coal. We have launched billions of tons of heated coal into the air and the Earth can not absorb it enough to properly cool the planet
ITs nice to see that you are finally feeling some guilt for Attanomics. :box:

Acceptance is coming ...
Why cry ???....All that CO2 is great for plant life....More crops to feed the growing population of earthlings............. :oyvey
Jesus can raise the dead, but he can't fix stupid
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
peewee

Robertr2000
Jul 15 2017, 02:20 PM
Humans have been to Mars. We're there now.
If I recall correctly a fellow named John Carter went there once, came back, and then went again. I know of no other earthling that has been there, however.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BuckFan

clone
Jul 15 2017, 08:51 PM
Obama turned NASA into a Global Warming pet project...space exploration was no longer it's primary purpose.....

Hijacked! How Obama and the Left Killed NASA: The journey from the Moon to radical activism

LINK
A Rightie think tank criticizing Obama, what a surprise.

Obama turned the focus of NASA from expensive manned missions to affordable robotic missions. We went farther into space than we had before. Hardly turning away from space exploration.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
estonianman
Member Avatar

BuckFan
Jul 16 2017, 11:29 AM
Obama turned the focus of NASA from expensive manned missions to affordable robotic missions. We went farther into space than we had before. Hardly turning away from space exploration.
I can agree with that.
MEEK AND MILD
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Demagogue
Member Avatar
Administrator
BuckFan
Jul 16 2017, 11:29 AM
Obama turned the focus of NASA from expensive manned missions to affordable robotic missions. We went farther into space than we had before. Hardly turning away from space exploration.
This is actually not correct.

All NASA missions that are currently operating on Mars were planned and received their development funding prior to the Obama administration. The most recent that got there was the Mars Science Laboratory/Curiosity Rover mission which started development in 2004 and by 2008 nearly all of the hardware and software had been developed. The budget ran about $400 million over.

The Mars InSight mission (if it launches) will be the first Obama admin mission to mars. It might launch in 2018.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/InSight

Under Obama in 2012 NASA pulled out of a rover project called ExoMars that we were supposed to do with ESA the European Space Agency.

There is a Mars2020 rover which is supposed to launch on an Atlas V in 2018. This mission is basically a copy of the Curiosity Rover mission using what amounts to a copy of the Curiosity Rover. It is even going to carry some of the backup scientific instruments from the Curiosity Rover along with some other new projects.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_2020

Even the successful COTS program was actually started under the administration that came before Obama. It was extended under Obama and so he definitely deserves credit for supporting it.

When the first Dragon V2 flies with a commercial crew variant it will mark the first successful NASA space project under the Obama administration even though it is using a lift rocket and spacecraft that are variants of those developed under the previous admin. The Boeing CST-100 probably represents the first 100% developed under Obama space mission and craft. It will probably fly in late 2018 early 2019.

So, criticism that Obama focused NASA on activism rather than Space Exploration does actually have some merit.
Edited by Demagogue, Jul 16 2017, 03:28 PM.
People sleep peacefully in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to visit violence on those who would do them harm.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Robert Stout
Member Avatar

BuckFan
Jul 16 2017, 11:29 AM
clone
Jul 15 2017, 08:51 PM
Obama turned NASA into a Global Warming pet project...space exploration was no longer it's primary purpose.....

Hijacked! How Obama and the Left Killed NASA: The journey from the Moon to radical activism

LINK
A Rightie think tank criticizing Obama, what a surprise.

Obama turned the focus of NASA from expensive manned missions to affordable robotic missions. We went farther into space than we had before. Hardly turning away from space exploration.
We could save billions by eliminating our astronaut program and simply shoot illegals to the moon.......... :)
Jesus can raise the dead, but he can't fix stupid
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Attaburnsinhell

Robert Stout
Jul 16 2017, 12:41 AM
estonianman
Jul 15 2017, 09:25 PM
Attaburnsinhell
Jul 15 2017, 09:58 AM
The Earth is the only known planet in the known universe with the ability to support life. All the rest of the planets in our solar system are failed planets, positioned in the wrong place - either too close or too far from the sun

The system that heats and cools the earth is three parts. The tilt of the axis gives us winter to summer, the 24 hour rotation gives us night cooling and day warmth. The third is the amount of CO2 in the atmoshere

The elements that make up our atmosphere are nitrogen, oxygen, hydrogen, and CO2. Unlike the first three elements, CO2 is the only one that absorbs heat because it is carbon based. CO2 is measured in parts per million, ppm, meaning out of a million molecules.

For thousands of years the amount of CO2 in our atmosphere averaged around 250-275ppm, which occured naturally. We know this from ice core samples taken from Greenland and Antarctica. This is the reason Earth has been able to support life as we know it and allowed us to grow food

But what scientists have discovered from these core samples has been a rapid increase of the amount of carbon in the atmosphere in the last 100 years, going from 270ppm to amounts as high as 400ppm. That increased amount is due to human pollution,which leaves a carbon finger print that scientists can specifically identify.

So when a denier says ''sure the planet is warming, but we dont know if it's due to human activity'' thats a bald faced lie, because we know exactly what the additional 100+ ppm is made up of -airborne pollutants

CO2 is carbon based, as in coal. We have launched billions of tons of heated coal into the air and the Earth can not absorb it enough to properly cool the planet
ITs nice to see that you are finally feeling some guilt for Attanomics. :box:

Acceptance is coming ...
Why cry ???....All that CO2 is great for plant life....More crops to feed the growing population of earthlings............. :oyvey
Esto translation: ''capitalism is good because it gives people money, except that money goes to buying cars and stuff, so maybe capitalism isnt so good. Im confused''

Stout: most of the prime land for growing is disappearing, with nothing to replace it. Deniers think you can grow food in northern canada, Alaska and Siberia. Wrong. That ground has no top soil, it takes thousands of years for that to happen
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
estonianman
Member Avatar

Attaburnsinhell
Jul 17 2017, 08:18 AM
Robert Stout
Jul 16 2017, 12:41 AM
estonianman
Jul 15 2017, 09:25 PM
Attaburnsinhell
Jul 15 2017, 09:58 AM
The Earth is the only known planet in the known universe with the ability to support life. All the rest of the planets in our solar system are failed planets, positioned in the wrong place - either too close or too far from the sun

The system that heats and cools the earth is three parts. The tilt of the axis gives us winter to summer, the 24 hour rotation gives us night cooling and day warmth. The third is the amount of CO2 in the atmoshere

The elements that make up our atmosphere are nitrogen, oxygen, hydrogen, and CO2. Unlike the first three elements, CO2 is the only one that absorbs heat because it is carbon based. CO2 is measured in parts per million, ppm, meaning out of a million molecules.

For thousands of years the amount of CO2 in our atmosphere averaged around 250-275ppm, which occured naturally. We know this from ice core samples taken from Greenland and Antarctica. This is the reason Earth has been able to support life as we know it and allowed us to grow food

But what scientists have discovered from these core samples has been a rapid increase of the amount of carbon in the atmosphere in the last 100 years, going from 270ppm to amounts as high as 400ppm. That increased amount is due to human pollution,which leaves a carbon finger print that scientists can specifically identify.

So when a denier says ''sure the planet is warming, but we dont know if it's due to human activity'' thats a bald faced lie, because we know exactly what the additional 100+ ppm is made up of -airborne pollutants

CO2 is carbon based, as in coal. We have launched billions of tons of heated coal into the air and the Earth can not absorb it enough to properly cool the planet
ITs nice to see that you are finally feeling some guilt for Attanomics. :box:

Acceptance is coming ...
Why cry ???....All that CO2 is great for plant life....More crops to feed the growing population of earthlings............. :oyvey
Esto translation: ''capitalism is good because it gives people money, except that money goes to buying cars and stuff, so maybe capitalism isnt so good. Im confused''

Stout: most of the prime land for growing is disappearing, with nothing to replace it. Deniers think you can grow food in northern canada, Alaska and Siberia. Wrong. That ground has no top soil, it takes thousands of years for that to happen
Creating wealth out of thin air - what could go wrong?
MEEK AND MILD
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Robertr2000
Member Avatar

NASA doesn't actually pay for anything.
"if that **** wins we'll all hang from nooses"
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Robertr2000
Member Avatar

Attaburnsinhell
Jul 17 2017, 08:18 AM
Robert Stout
Jul 16 2017, 12:41 AM
estonianman
Jul 15 2017, 09:25 PM
Attaburnsinhell
Jul 15 2017, 09:58 AM
The Earth is the only known planet in the known universe with the ability to support life. All the rest of the planets in our solar system are failed planets, positioned in the wrong place - either too close or too far from the sun

The system that heats and cools the earth is three parts. The tilt of the axis gives us winter to summer, the 24 hour rotation gives us night cooling and day warmth. The third is the amount of CO2 in the atmoshere

The elements that make up our atmosphere are nitrogen, oxygen, hydrogen, and CO2. Unlike the first three elements, CO2 is the only one that absorbs heat because it is carbon based. CO2 is measured in parts per million, ppm, meaning out of a million molecules.

For thousands of years the amount of CO2 in our atmosphere averaged around 250-275ppm, which occured naturally. We know this from ice core samples taken from Greenland and Antarctica. This is the reason Earth has been able to support life as we know it and allowed us to grow food

But what scientists have discovered from these core samples has been a rapid increase of the amount of carbon in the atmosphere in the last 100 years, going from 270ppm to amounts as high as 400ppm. That increased amount is due to human pollution,which leaves a carbon finger print that scientists can specifically identify.

So when a denier says ''sure the planet is warming, but we dont know if it's due to human activity'' thats a bald faced lie, because we know exactly what the additional 100+ ppm is made up of -airborne pollutants

CO2 is carbon based, as in coal. We have launched billions of tons of heated coal into the air and the Earth can not absorb it enough to properly cool the planet
ITs nice to see that you are finally feeling some guilt for Attanomics. :box:

Acceptance is coming ...
Why cry ???....All that CO2 is great for plant life....More crops to feed the growing population of earthlings............. :oyvey
Esto translation: ''capitalism is good because it gives people money, except that money goes to buying cars and stuff, so maybe capitalism isnt so good. Im confused''

Stout: most of the prime land for growing is disappearing, with nothing to replace it. Deniers think you can grow food in northern canada, Alaska and Siberia. Wrong. That ground has no top soil, it takes thousands of years for that to happen
With a Warming Planet, Canada, Russia and Alaska will become the new Farm Belt :cheers:
"if that **** wins we'll all hang from nooses"
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BuckFan

Demagogue
Jul 16 2017, 03:25 PM
BuckFan
Jul 16 2017, 11:29 AM
Obama turned the focus of NASA from expensive manned missions to affordable robotic missions. We went farther into space than we had before. Hardly turning away from space exploration.
This is actually not correct.

All NASA missions that are currently operating on Mars were planned and received their development funding prior to the Obama administration. The most recent that got there was the Mars Science Laboratory/Curiosity Rover mission which started development in 2004 and by 2008 nearly all of the hardware and software had been developed. The budget ran about $400 million over.

The Mars InSight mission (if it launches) will be the first Obama admin mission to mars. It might launch in 2018.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/InSight

Under Obama in 2012 NASA pulled out of a rover project called ExoMars that we were supposed to do with ESA the European Space Agency.

There is a Mars2020 rover which is supposed to launch on an Atlas V in 2018. This mission is basically a copy of the Curiosity Rover mission using what amounts to a copy of the Curiosity Rover. It is even going to carry some of the backup scientific instruments from the Curiosity Rover along with some other new projects.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_2020

Even the successful COTS program was actually started under the administration that came before Obama. It was extended under Obama and so he definitely deserves credit for supporting it.

When the first Dragon V2 flies with a commercial crew variant it will mark the first successful NASA space project under the Obama administration even though it is using a lift rocket and spacecraft that are variants of those developed under the previous admin. The Boeing CST-100 probably represents the first 100% developed under Obama space mission and craft. It will probably fly in late 2018 early 2019.

So, criticism that Obama focused NASA on activism rather than Space Exploration does actually have some merit.
I wasn't focusing on Mars. Under Obama the two big starts were the asteroid missions which Trump has killed. There was funding for the Webb telescope and extending the space station life. We also should not take away credit for earth observation either. That is an important mission.

Here is a summary of Obama's space legacy

https://www.space.com/35394-president-obama-spaceflight-exploration-legacy.html
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Demagogue
Member Avatar
Administrator
BuckFan
Jul 17 2017, 01:38 PM
Demagogue
Jul 16 2017, 03:25 PM
BuckFan
Jul 16 2017, 11:29 AM
Obama turned the focus of NASA from expensive manned missions to affordable robotic missions. We went farther into space than we had before. Hardly turning away from space exploration.
This is actually not correct.

All NASA missions that are currently operating on Mars were planned and received their development funding prior to the Obama administration. The most recent that got there was the Mars Science Laboratory/Curiosity Rover mission which started development in 2004 and by 2008 nearly all of the hardware and software had been developed. The budget ran about $400 million over.

The Mars InSight mission (if it launches) will be the first Obama admin mission to mars. It might launch in 2018.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/InSight

Under Obama in 2012 NASA pulled out of a rover project called ExoMars that we were supposed to do with ESA the European Space Agency.

There is a Mars2020 rover which is supposed to launch on an Atlas V in 2018. This mission is basically a copy of the Curiosity Rover mission using what amounts to a copy of the Curiosity Rover. It is even going to carry some of the backup scientific instruments from the Curiosity Rover along with some other new projects.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_2020

Even the successful COTS program was actually started under the administration that came before Obama. It was extended under Obama and so he definitely deserves credit for supporting it.

When the first Dragon V2 flies with a commercial crew variant it will mark the first successful NASA space project under the Obama administration even though it is using a lift rocket and spacecraft that are variants of those developed under the previous admin. The Boeing CST-100 probably represents the first 100% developed under Obama space mission and craft. It will probably fly in late 2018 early 2019.

So, criticism that Obama focused NASA on activism rather than Space Exploration does actually have some merit.
I wasn't focusing on Mars. Under Obama the two big starts were the asteroid missions which Trump has killed. There was funding for the Webb telescope and extending the space station life. We also should not take away credit for earth observation either. That is an important mission.

Here is a summary of Obama's space legacy

https://www.space.com/35394-president-obama-spaceflight-exploration-legacy.html
Well you specifically mentioned affordable robotic missions and I pointed out that he really did not fund much of that at all. Your link seems to agree with me.

Quote:
 
Earth science, planetary science and more

President Obama's space-science legacy is perhaps a bit more complicated. In these tough budget times, the outgoing administration seems to have prioritized Earth science and full funding of the $8.8 billion James Webb Space Telescope over robotic-exploration missions, Dreier said. He pointed to a $300 million cut to NASA's planetary science funding in the White House's proposed budget for fiscal year 2013 as an example.

The planetary-exploration cupboard therefore looks to be somewhat bare in the near future, two recently announced asteroid missions notwithstanding, Dreier said. There are no uncrewed NASA Mars missions on the books beyond the Mars 2020 rover, he pointed out, and, in a year or so, the agency won't have an active probe at Jupiter or Saturn for the first time in two decades (excepting a nine-month stretch in 2003 and 2004).


As for "planetary science", yes there is an organization that covers that. Their initials are NOAA though, not NASA. Unfortunately, President Obama was not clear on that and decided to use NASA to further his environmentalist goals rather than funding space exploration.

I don't have a problem with NASA doing their bit to hug a tree but the fact of the matter is, the right wing site that criticized Obama for the missions he gave NASA had a valid point. When you compare the missions that every other President has charged NASA with to those that Obama charged NASA with it seems that maybe Obama or his staff were not aware that the agency name NASA is actually an acronym that is supposed to mean something. :cheers:
Edited by Demagogue, Jul 17 2017, 05:40 PM.
People sleep peacefully in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to visit violence on those who would do them harm.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Robert Stout
Member Avatar

Attaburnsinhell
Jul 17 2017, 08:18 AM
Robert Stout
Jul 16 2017, 12:41 AM
estonianman
Jul 15 2017, 09:25 PM
Attaburnsinhell
Jul 15 2017, 09:58 AM
The Earth is the only known planet in the known universe with the ability to support life. All the rest of the planets in our solar system are failed planets, positioned in the wrong place - either too close or too far from the sun

The system that heats and cools the earth is three parts. The tilt of the axis gives us winter to summer, the 24 hour rotation gives us night cooling and day warmth. The third is the amount of CO2 in the atmoshere

The elements that make up our atmosphere are nitrogen, oxygen, hydrogen, and CO2. Unlike the first three elements, CO2 is the only one that absorbs heat because it is carbon based. CO2 is measured in parts per million, ppm, meaning out of a million molecules.

For thousands of years the amount of CO2 in our atmosphere averaged around 250-275ppm, which occured naturally. We know this from ice core samples taken from Greenland and Antarctica. This is the reason Earth has been able to support life as we know it and allowed us to grow food

But what scientists have discovered from these core samples has been a rapid increase of the amount of carbon in the atmosphere in the last 100 years, going from 270ppm to amounts as high as 400ppm. That increased amount is due to human pollution,which leaves a carbon finger print that scientists can specifically identify.

So when a denier says ''sure the planet is warming, but we dont know if it's due to human activity'' thats a bald faced lie, because we know exactly what the additional 100+ ppm is made up of -airborne pollutants

CO2 is carbon based, as in coal. We have launched billions of tons of heated coal into the air and the Earth can not absorb it enough to properly cool the planet
ITs nice to see that you are finally feeling some guilt for Attanomics. :box:

Acceptance is coming ...
Why cry ???....All that CO2 is great for plant life....More crops to feed the growing population of earthlings............. :oyvey
Esto translation: ''capitalism is good because it gives people money, except that money goes to buying cars and stuff, so maybe capitalism isnt so good. Im confused''

Stout: most of the prime land for growing is disappearing, with nothing to replace it. Deniers think you can grow food in northern canada, Alaska and Siberia. Wrong. That ground has no top soil, it takes thousands of years for that to happen
Attaburnsinhell did not get the memo about hydroponic greenhouses powered by coal................ :rotflmao:
Jesus can raise the dead, but he can't fix stupid
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
clone
Member Avatar
Director @ Center for Advanced Memetic Warfare
Demagogue
Jul 17 2017, 05:39 PM
BuckFan
Jul 17 2017, 01:38 PM
Demagogue
Jul 16 2017, 03:25 PM
BuckFan
Jul 16 2017, 11:29 AM
Obama turned the focus of NASA from expensive manned missions to affordable robotic missions. We went farther into space than we had before. Hardly turning away from space exploration.
This is actually not correct.

All NASA missions that are currently operating on Mars were planned and received their development funding prior to the Obama administration. The most recent that got there was the Mars Science Laboratory/Curiosity Rover mission which started development in 2004 and by 2008 nearly all of the hardware and software had been developed. The budget ran about $400 million over.

The Mars InSight mission (if it launches) will be the first Obama admin mission to mars. It might launch in 2018.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/InSight

Under Obama in 2012 NASA pulled out of a rover project called ExoMars that we were supposed to do with ESA the European Space Agency.

There is a Mars2020 rover which is supposed to launch on an Atlas V in 2018. This mission is basically a copy of the Curiosity Rover mission using what amounts to a copy of the Curiosity Rover. It is even going to carry some of the backup scientific instruments from the Curiosity Rover along with some other new projects.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_2020

Even the successful COTS program was actually started under the administration that came before Obama. It was extended under Obama and so he definitely deserves credit for supporting it.

When the first Dragon V2 flies with a commercial crew variant it will mark the first successful NASA space project under the Obama administration even though it is using a lift rocket and spacecraft that are variants of those developed under the previous admin. The Boeing CST-100 probably represents the first 100% developed under Obama space mission and craft. It will probably fly in late 2018 early 2019.

So, criticism that Obama focused NASA on activism rather than Space Exploration does actually have some merit.
I wasn't focusing on Mars. Under Obama the two big starts were the asteroid missions which Trump has killed. There was funding for the Webb telescope and extending the space station life. We also should not take away credit for earth observation either. That is an important mission.

Here is a summary of Obama's space legacy

https://www.space.com/35394-president-obama-spaceflight-exploration-legacy.html
Well you specifically mentioned affordable robotic missions and I pointed out that he really did not fund much of that at all. Your link seems to agree with me.

Quote:
 
Earth science, planetary science and more

President Obama's space-science legacy is perhaps a bit more complicated. In these tough budget times, the outgoing administration seems to have prioritized Earth science and full funding of the $8.8 billion James Webb Space Telescope over robotic-exploration missions, Dreier said. He pointed to a $300 million cut to NASA's planetary science funding in the White House's proposed budget for fiscal year 2013 as an example.

The planetary-exploration cupboard therefore looks to be somewhat bare in the near future, two recently announced asteroid missions notwithstanding, Dreier said. There are no uncrewed NASA Mars missions on the books beyond the Mars 2020 rover, he pointed out, and, in a year or so, the agency won't have an active probe at Jupiter or Saturn for the first time in two decades (excepting a nine-month stretch in 2003 and 2004).


As for "planetary science", yes there is an organization that covers that. Their initials are NOAA though, not NASA. Unfortunately, President Obama was not clear on that and decided to use NASA to further his environmentalist goals rather than funding space exploration.

I don't have a problem with NASA doing their bit to hug a tree but the fact of the matter is, the right wing site that criticized Obama for the missions he gave NASA had a valid point. When you compare the missions that every other President has charged NASA with to those that Obama charged NASA with it seems that maybe Obama or his staff were not aware that the agency name NASA is actually an acronym that is supposed to mean something. :cheers:
Agreed....

Posted Image
Only liberals can choose not to go down the road to widespread, systematic violence.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · UnitedStates.com DOMESTIC U.S. news · Next Topic »
Add Reply