More proof that moon landing was fake
- Thread starter Scrubking
- Start date
Kayden
Banned
Keep in mind the space shuttles are over 20 years old and should probably be retired. Additionally, they aren't built to leave Earth's orbit.
The Titan V (?) rockets were a one shot solution to the moon, gravity was suppose to get them back. As far as the shuttles go... they have reusable rockets that are just meant to get them into orbit.
The Titan V (?) rockets were a one shot solution to the moon, gravity was suppose to get them back. As far as the shuttles go... they have reusable rockets that are just meant to get them into orbit.
Drocket
CAGiversary!
There's 3 key problems with NASA right now:
1) The shuttle design is/was a bad decision. This is something that most experts in the field figured out shortly after they were originally built, but at that point, NASA couldn't/wouldn't change its mind because it had spent billions designing and building them.
2) NASA desperately needs to replace the aging and not particularly well designed space shuttles, but simply doesn't have the budget to do so. If NASA was given a mandate (much like 'go to the moon by the end of the decade' like they had in the 60's) and the budget to fulfill it, they would do a whole lot of sweet things. Instead, they barely have the cash to keep patching up shuttles that are 25 years old. The shuttles are actually older than their originally designed lifespan, even if their design had been perfect.
3) The US is focused way too much on safety anymore. When the moonlanding too place, there was a HUGE chance that it would end badly - and they went anyway. Anymore, if there's even a minor possibility of a problem, the launch gets scrubbed.
In summation, NASA needs a whole lot of money and a pair of balls. Then we'd see some pretty sweet things.
1) The shuttle design is/was a bad decision. This is something that most experts in the field figured out shortly after they were originally built, but at that point, NASA couldn't/wouldn't change its mind because it had spent billions designing and building them.
2) NASA desperately needs to replace the aging and not particularly well designed space shuttles, but simply doesn't have the budget to do so. If NASA was given a mandate (much like 'go to the moon by the end of the decade' like they had in the 60's) and the budget to fulfill it, they would do a whole lot of sweet things. Instead, they barely have the cash to keep patching up shuttles that are 25 years old. The shuttles are actually older than their originally designed lifespan, even if their design had been perfect.
3) The US is focused way too much on safety anymore. When the moonlanding too place, there was a HUGE chance that it would end badly - and they went anyway. Anymore, if there's even a minor possibility of a problem, the launch gets scrubbed.
In summation, NASA needs a whole lot of money and a pair of balls. Then we'd see some pretty sweet things.
Kayden
Banned
You mean theres danger inherent in the act of sitting on an ignited load of rocket fuel of sufficient volume to send you into space? The hell you say. :lol:
[quote name='Drocket']There's 3 key problems with NASA right now:
1) The shuttle design is/was a bad decision. This is something that most experts in the field figured out shortly after they were originally built, but at that point, NASA couldn't/wouldn't change its mind because it had spent billions designing and building them.
2) NASA desperately needs to replace the aging and not particularly well designed space shuttles, but simply doesn't have the budget to do so. If NASA was given a mandate (much like 'go to the moon by the end of the decade' like they had in the 60's) and the budget to fulfill it, they would do a whole lot of sweet things. Instead, they barely have the cash to keep patching up shuttles that are 25 years old. The shuttles are actually older than their originally designed lifespan, even if their design had been perfect.
3) The US is focused way too much on safety anymore. When the moonlanding too place, there was a HUGE chance that it would end badly - and they went anyway. Anymore, if there's even a minor possibility of a problem, the launch gets scrubbed.
In summation, NASA needs a whole lot of money and a pair of balls. Then we'd see some pretty sweet things.[/QUOTE]
[quote name='Drocket']There's 3 key problems with NASA right now:
1) The shuttle design is/was a bad decision. This is something that most experts in the field figured out shortly after they were originally built, but at that point, NASA couldn't/wouldn't change its mind because it had spent billions designing and building them.
2) NASA desperately needs to replace the aging and not particularly well designed space shuttles, but simply doesn't have the budget to do so. If NASA was given a mandate (much like 'go to the moon by the end of the decade' like they had in the 60's) and the budget to fulfill it, they would do a whole lot of sweet things. Instead, they barely have the cash to keep patching up shuttles that are 25 years old. The shuttles are actually older than their originally designed lifespan, even if their design had been perfect.
3) The US is focused way too much on safety anymore. When the moonlanding too place, there was a HUGE chance that it would end badly - and they went anyway. Anymore, if there's even a minor possibility of a problem, the launch gets scrubbed.
In summation, NASA needs a whole lot of money and a pair of balls. Then we'd see some pretty sweet things.[/QUOTE]
ZarathosNY
CAGiversary!
[quote name='Drocket']There's 3 key problems with NASA right now:
1) The shuttle design is/was a bad decision. This is something that most experts in the field figured out shortly after they were originally built, but at that point, NASA couldn't/wouldn't change its mind because it had spent billions designing and building them.
2) NASA desperately needs to replace the aging and not particularly well designed space shuttles, but simply doesn't have the budget to do so. If NASA was given a mandate (much like 'go to the moon by the end of the decade' like they had in the 60's) and the budget to fulfill it, they would do a whole lot of sweet things. Instead, they barely have the cash to keep patching up shuttles that are 25 years old. The shuttles are actually older than their originally designed lifespan, even if their design had been perfect.
3) The US is focused way too much on safety anymore. When the moonlanding too place, there was a HUGE chance that it would end badly - and they went anyway. Anymore, if there's even a minor possibility of a problem, the launch gets scrubbed.
In summation, NASA needs a whole lot of money and a pair of balls. Then we'd see some pretty sweet things.[/QUOTE]
What makes you say that safety had a lower priority in the past than now?
1) The shuttle design is/was a bad decision. This is something that most experts in the field figured out shortly after they were originally built, but at that point, NASA couldn't/wouldn't change its mind because it had spent billions designing and building them.
2) NASA desperately needs to replace the aging and not particularly well designed space shuttles, but simply doesn't have the budget to do so. If NASA was given a mandate (much like 'go to the moon by the end of the decade' like they had in the 60's) and the budget to fulfill it, they would do a whole lot of sweet things. Instead, they barely have the cash to keep patching up shuttles that are 25 years old. The shuttles are actually older than their originally designed lifespan, even if their design had been perfect.
3) The US is focused way too much on safety anymore. When the moonlanding too place, there was a HUGE chance that it would end badly - and they went anyway. Anymore, if there's even a minor possibility of a problem, the launch gets scrubbed.
In summation, NASA needs a whole lot of money and a pair of balls. Then we'd see some pretty sweet things.[/QUOTE]
What makes you say that safety had a lower priority in the past than now?
[quote name='ZarathosNY']What makes you say that safety had a lower priority in the past than now?[/QUOTE]
I've got a good example. Look at the Apollo 1 tragedy, it happened Jan. 27, 1967. By November of that same year, NASA launched Apollo 4 (there was never an Apollo 2 or 3). That means they did an inquiry and cleared the Saturn V rocket for flight within 10 months.
Now, take the Columbia explosion. It happened Feb. 1, 2003, which was almost 2 and 1/2 years ago. Its taken this long to even get a shuttle cleared to launch and now there's the fuel tank censor problem. At this point, the date of the next shuttle launch is indefinete at best.
I'm not saying that the increased concern with safety is a bad thing, but given the sheer amount of time its not difficult to see that safety at this point is much more of a concern than hurrying back into space.
I've got a good example. Look at the Apollo 1 tragedy, it happened Jan. 27, 1967. By November of that same year, NASA launched Apollo 4 (there was never an Apollo 2 or 3). That means they did an inquiry and cleared the Saturn V rocket for flight within 10 months.
Now, take the Columbia explosion. It happened Feb. 1, 2003, which was almost 2 and 1/2 years ago. Its taken this long to even get a shuttle cleared to launch and now there's the fuel tank censor problem. At this point, the date of the next shuttle launch is indefinete at best.
I'm not saying that the increased concern with safety is a bad thing, but given the sheer amount of time its not difficult to see that safety at this point is much more of a concern than hurrying back into space.
NASA needs to drum up the excitement. They need to get people involved again. NASA runs a lot off of grants and donations. They also need to scrap the shuttles. Get a new design. If they want to stay with an all-in-one, they need to make something more durable.
Quackzilla
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 5 (100%)
The Russian space program is better than NASA, in fact they even had to spend millions to bring 2 Americans down after our politicians left them stranded on the ISS after the Columbia disaster.
It's pretty sad what has become of the space program that used to be the best in the world. It's all dried up.
It's pretty sad what has become of the space program that used to be the best in the world. It's all dried up.
Drocket
CAGiversary!
[quote name='RedvsBlue']I've got a good example. Look at the Apollo 1 tragedy, it happened Jan. 27, 1967. By November of that same year, NASA launched Apollo 4 (there was never an Apollo 2 or 3). That means they did an inquiry and cleared the Saturn V rocket for flight within 10 months.[/QUOTE]
Yep, exactly the example that I would have given. Another good example is Apollo 13, which quite nearly killed the crew because of equpment failure. Never-the-less, Apollo 14 was launched about 9 months later.
Yep, exactly the example that I would have given. Another good example is Apollo 13, which quite nearly killed the crew because of equpment failure. Never-the-less, Apollo 14 was launched about 9 months later.
- Feedback
- 131 (100%)
anyone else remember those movies from school that used to tell you how we were going to colonize the moon by 2020?
FriskyTanuki
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 36 (100%)
[quote name='Drocket']There's 3 key problems with NASA right now:
1) The shuttle design is/was a bad decision. This is something that most experts in the field figured out shortly after they were originally built, but at that point, NASA couldn't/wouldn't change its mind because it had spent billions designing and building them.
2) NASA desperately needs to replace the aging and not particularly well designed space shuttles, but simply doesn't have the budget to do so. If NASA was given a mandate (much like 'go to the moon by the end of the decade' like they had in the 60's) and the budget to fulfill it, they would do a whole lot of sweet things. Instead, they barely have the cash to keep patching up shuttles that are 25 years old. The shuttles are actually older than their originally designed lifespan, even if their design had been perfect.
3) The US is focused way too much on safety anymore. When the moonlanding too place, there was a HUGE chance that it would end badly - and they went anyway. Anymore, if there's even a minor possibility of a problem, the launch gets scrubbed.
In summation, NASA needs a whole lot of money and a pair of balls. Then we'd see some pretty sweet things.[/QUOTE]
It costs NASA in the ballpark of $300-400 million dollars per flight, and months, if not years, to prep for the next flight. That is just too much money and too much time for NASA to be spending on these shuttles. I'm hoping to see where the SpaceShipOne will be headed as it's very impressive for costing about the same as a yacht. Bush has ordered another trip to the moon by 2020, so there's reason for them to either scrap the discovery or revamp it and fix its problems.
They also are keeping their eye on their rovers on Mars and making sure they don't get caught up for 5 weeks on sand dunes like Opportunity just did back at the end of April. They've done their job, though, finding lots of evidence of liquid water having been around on Mars many, many years ago.
1) The shuttle design is/was a bad decision. This is something that most experts in the field figured out shortly after they were originally built, but at that point, NASA couldn't/wouldn't change its mind because it had spent billions designing and building them.
2) NASA desperately needs to replace the aging and not particularly well designed space shuttles, but simply doesn't have the budget to do so. If NASA was given a mandate (much like 'go to the moon by the end of the decade' like they had in the 60's) and the budget to fulfill it, they would do a whole lot of sweet things. Instead, they barely have the cash to keep patching up shuttles that are 25 years old. The shuttles are actually older than their originally designed lifespan, even if their design had been perfect.
3) The US is focused way too much on safety anymore. When the moonlanding too place, there was a HUGE chance that it would end badly - and they went anyway. Anymore, if there's even a minor possibility of a problem, the launch gets scrubbed.
In summation, NASA needs a whole lot of money and a pair of balls. Then we'd see some pretty sweet things.[/QUOTE]
It costs NASA in the ballpark of $300-400 million dollars per flight, and months, if not years, to prep for the next flight. That is just too much money and too much time for NASA to be spending on these shuttles. I'm hoping to see where the SpaceShipOne will be headed as it's very impressive for costing about the same as a yacht. Bush has ordered another trip to the moon by 2020, so there's reason for them to either scrap the discovery or revamp it and fix its problems.
They also are keeping their eye on their rovers on Mars and making sure they don't get caught up for 5 weeks on sand dunes like Opportunity just did back at the end of April. They've done their job, though, finding lots of evidence of liquid water having been around on Mars many, many years ago.
ZarathosNY
CAGiversary!
[quote name='RedvsBlue']I've got a good example. Look at the Apollo 1 tragedy, it happened Jan. 27, 1967. By November of that same year, NASA launched Apollo 4 (there was never an Apollo 2 or 3). That means they did an inquiry and cleared the Saturn V rocket for flight within 10 months.
Now, take the Columbia explosion. It happened Feb. 1, 2003, which was almost 2 and 1/2 years ago. Its taken this long to even get a shuttle cleared to launch and now there's the fuel tank censor problem. At this point, the date of the next shuttle launch is indefinete at best.
I'm not saying that the increased concern with safety is a bad thing, but given the sheer amount of time its not difficult to see that safety at this point is much more of a concern than hurrying back into space.[/QUOTE]
Well, there is also another thing to consider. The shuttle is reuseable, and the Apollo's were not. Each of those missions were going up with new equipment, while the shuttles have repeat flights. This means there is going to be wear and tear on the equipment that would not be present in the Apollo missions. There's also a lot more equipment on the shuttle, so there are more things to break down.
Now, take the Columbia explosion. It happened Feb. 1, 2003, which was almost 2 and 1/2 years ago. Its taken this long to even get a shuttle cleared to launch and now there's the fuel tank censor problem. At this point, the date of the next shuttle launch is indefinete at best.
I'm not saying that the increased concern with safety is a bad thing, but given the sheer amount of time its not difficult to see that safety at this point is much more of a concern than hurrying back into space.[/QUOTE]
Well, there is also another thing to consider. The shuttle is reuseable, and the Apollo's were not. Each of those missions were going up with new equipment, while the shuttles have repeat flights. This means there is going to be wear and tear on the equipment that would not be present in the Apollo missions. There's also a lot more equipment on the shuttle, so there are more things to break down.
GuyWithGun
CAGiversary!
What we really need is some evil country that wants to go to the moon again, and compete against them. We could push a shitload of propaganda and the "Space Race" will be up and running again. ***sniff*** Boy I miss fighting those damned commies.
Oh, and a side note about the title of this thread: I think the most damning evidence that the moon landing was fake appears in GTA: Vice City.
Oh, and a side note about the title of this thread: I think the most damning evidence that the moon landing was fake appears in GTA: Vice City.
BigSpoonyBard
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 93 (100%)
[quote name='E-Z-B']I don't believe anything Bush says anymore.[/QUOTE]
Yes, but the whole fascination with going back to the moon is so absurd, I think he actually means it.
And what's with believing the moon landing was fake? Is scrubking actually Carl Everett in CAG disguise?
Yes, but the whole fascination with going back to the moon is so absurd, I think he actually means it.
And what's with believing the moon landing was fake? Is scrubking actually Carl Everett in CAG disguise?
Drocket
CAGiversary!
[quote name='BigSpoonyBard']Yes, but the whole fascination with going back to the moon is so absurd, I think he actually means it.[/QUOTE]
Why? Its something he trots out occasionally when he wants to look like a man with a 'vision'. Aside from a few mentions now and then in some speeches, Bush has done absolutely nothing to push for another visit to the moon.
Why? Its something he trots out occasionally when he wants to look like a man with a 'vision'. Aside from a few mentions now and then in some speeches, Bush has done absolutely nothing to push for another visit to the moon.
mykevermin
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 34 (97%)
I know what George's been watching...
'cause he was disappointed with Baghdad Cafe
'cause he was disappointed with Baghdad Cafe
[quote name='BigSpoonyBard']And what's with believing the moon landing was fake? Is scrubking actually Carl Everett in CAG disguise?[/QUOTE]
No, he isn't Carl Everett, but he is still a dumb
. Scrubking, E-Z-B, and PAD all need to shut the up. You are all way too outspoken for your political parties. Whenever someone has a legitimate point about an issue, one of you have to shit on their thread and point out how EXTREME or RADICAL they are. Take a look at yourselves. You are the most left-wing and right-wing people I have ever seen. You mold everything that anyone says to fit your stupid political propaganda. All three of you (and there are more, I just can't think of them) are like little ADHD kids, kicking and screaming for some goddam attention.
"Commie" this, and "Red Neck" that. "He's a terrorist", or "He's a radical." "You're a hippie", and "You're ruining this country."
It is a bunch of bullshit that you guys spew to make yourselves look smart, heroic, and important. You are corrupt and idiotic. Stop polluting the boards with your sensless crap.
No, he isn't Carl Everett, but he is still a dumb
. Scrubking, E-Z-B, and PAD all need to shut the up. You are all way too outspoken for your political parties. Whenever someone has a legitimate point about an issue, one of you have to shit on their thread and point out how EXTREME or RADICAL they are. Take a look at yourselves. You are the most left-wing and right-wing people I have ever seen. You mold everything that anyone says to fit your stupid political propaganda. All three of you (and there are more, I just can't think of them) are like little ADHD kids, kicking and screaming for some goddam attention."Commie" this, and "Red Neck" that. "He's a terrorist", or "He's a radical." "You're a hippie", and "You're ruining this country."
It is a bunch of bullshit that you guys spew to make yourselves look smart, heroic, and important. You are corrupt and idiotic. Stop polluting the boards with your sensless crap.
GuyWithGun
CAGiversary!
[quote name='Greetard']No, he isn't Carl Everett, but he is still a dumb. Scrubking, E-Z-B, and PAD all need to shut the up. You are all way too outspoken for your political parties. Whenever someone has a legitimate point about an issue, one of you have to shit on their thread and point out how EXTREME or RADICAL they are. Take a look at yourselves. You are the most left-wing and right-wing people I have ever seen. You mold everything that anyone says to fit your stupid political propaganda. All three of you (and there are more, I just can't think of them) are like little ADHD kids, kicking and screaming for some goddam attention.
"Commie" this, and "Red Neck" that. "He's a terrorist", or "He's a radical." "You're a hippie", and "You're ruining this country."
It is a bunch of bullshit that you guys spew to make yourselves look smart, heroic, and important. You are corrupt and idiotic. Stop polluting the boards with your sensless crap.[/QUOTE]
And some of us are just joking around. And some of us need to lighten up a bit...
. Scrubking, E-Z-B, and PAD all need to shut the up. You are all way too outspoken for your political parties. Whenever someone has a legitimate point about an issue, one of you have to shit on their thread and point out how EXTREME or RADICAL they are. Take a look at yourselves. You are the most left-wing and right-wing people I have ever seen. You mold everything that anyone says to fit your stupid political propaganda. All three of you (and there are more, I just can't think of them) are like little ADHD kids, kicking and screaming for some goddam attention."Commie" this, and "Red Neck" that. "He's a terrorist", or "He's a radical." "You're a hippie", and "You're ruining this country."
It is a bunch of bullshit that you guys spew to make yourselves look smart, heroic, and important. You are corrupt and idiotic. Stop polluting the boards with your sensless crap.[/QUOTE]
And some of us are just joking around. And some of us need to lighten up a bit...
BigSpoonyBard
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 93 (100%)
[quote name='Greetard']No, he isn't Carl Everett, but he is still a dumb. Scrubking, E-Z-B, and PAD all need to shut the up. You are all way too outspoken for your political parties. Whenever someone has a legitimate point about an issue, one of you have to shit on their thread and point out how EXTREME or RADICAL they are. Take a look at yourselves. You are the most left-wing and right-wing people I have ever seen. You mold everything that anyone says to fit your stupid political propaganda. All three of you (and there are more, I just can't think of them) are like little ADHD kids, kicking and screaming for some goddam attention.
"Commie" this, and "Red Neck" that. "He's a terrorist", or "He's a radical." "You're a hippie", and "You're ruining this country."
It is a bunch of bullshit that you guys spew to make yourselves look smart, heroic, and important. You are corrupt and idiotic. Stop polluting the boards with your sensless crap.[/QUOTE]
I wasn't sure how someone could follow up after Mars Needs Women, but I guess that's how you do it :lol:
. Scrubking, E-Z-B, and PAD all need to shut the up. You are all way too outspoken for your political parties. Whenever someone has a legitimate point about an issue, one of you have to shit on their thread and point out how EXTREME or RADICAL they are. Take a look at yourselves. You are the most left-wing and right-wing people I have ever seen. You mold everything that anyone says to fit your stupid political propaganda. All three of you (and there are more, I just can't think of them) are like little ADHD kids, kicking and screaming for some goddam attention."Commie" this, and "Red Neck" that. "He's a terrorist", or "He's a radical." "You're a hippie", and "You're ruining this country."
It is a bunch of bullshit that you guys spew to make yourselves look smart, heroic, and important. You are corrupt and idiotic. Stop polluting the boards with your sensless crap.[/QUOTE]
I wasn't sure how someone could follow up after Mars Needs Women, but I guess that's how you do it :lol:
E-Z-B
CAGiversary!
[quote name='Scrubking']
Do you expect us to believe you ever did??
[/QUOTE]
I actually did believe that Iraq had WMDs, tried to obtain yellow cake from Nigeria, and was ready to unleash chemical weapons on our soldiers. Fool me once, shame on ... shame on ... me; fool me ... twice... Fool me, can't fool me again!
Do you expect us to believe you ever did??
[/QUOTE]I actually did believe that Iraq had WMDs, tried to obtain yellow cake from Nigeria, and was ready to unleash chemical weapons on our soldiers. Fool me once, shame on ... shame on ... me; fool me ... twice... Fool me, can't fool me again!
alonzomourning23
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 26 (100%)
[quote name='E-Z-B']I actually did believe that Iraq had WMDs, tried to obtain yellow cake from Nigeria, and was ready to unleash chemical weapons on our soldiers. Fool me once, shame on ... shame on ... me; fool me ... twice... Fool me, can't fool me again! [/QUOTE]
No, no, no, that's all wrong.
"There's an old saying in Tennessee, I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee...... that says, fool me once,......... shame on...... shame on you........................................................................................ Fool me.. you can't get fooled again."
That's one of my favorite quotes.
Great clip explaining bush's speech, with andy dick as the man responsible for it (as presidential "speachialist"). http://politicalhumor.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ&sdn=politicalhumor&zu=http%3A%2F%2Fsuccessblog.biz%2Fbushwriter.html
[/QUOTE]No, no, no, that's all wrong.
"There's an old saying in Tennessee, I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee...... that says, fool me once,......... shame on...... shame on you........................................................................................ Fool me.. you can't get fooled again."
That's one of my favorite quotes.
Great clip explaining bush's speech, with andy dick as the man responsible for it (as presidential "speachialist"). http://politicalhumor.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ&sdn=politicalhumor&zu=http%3A%2F%2Fsuccessblog.biz%2Fbushwriter.html
E-Z-B
CAGiversary!
[quote name='alonzomourning23']No, no, no, that's all wrong.
"There's an old saying in Tennessee, I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee...... that says, fool me once,......... shame on...... shame on you........................................................................................ Fool me.. you can't get fooled again."
That's one of my favorite quotes.
Great clip explaining bush's speech, with andy dick as the man responsible for it (as presidential "speachialist"). http://politicalhumor.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ&sdn=politicalhumor&zu=http%3A%2F%2Fsuccessblog.biz%2Fbushwriter.html[/QUOTE]
lol, I was trying to recall it from memory.
"There's an old saying in Tennessee, I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee...... that says, fool me once,......... shame on...... shame on you........................................................................................ Fool me.. you can't get fooled again."
That's one of my favorite quotes.
Great clip explaining bush's speech, with andy dick as the man responsible for it (as presidential "speachialist"). http://politicalhumor.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ&sdn=politicalhumor&zu=http%3A%2F%2Fsuccessblog.biz%2Fbushwriter.html[/QUOTE]
lol, I was trying to recall it from memory.
http://www.cheapassgamer.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1148911&postcount=38
My apologies for the first post. Click for an explanation.
My apologies for the first post. Click for an explanation.
zionoverfire
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 133 (100%)
I wonder what will become of this forum when that big gun of his finally jams......
Professor Oreo
CAGiversary!
Am I one of the only people around here that thinks spending money to launch anything into space that doesn't benefit the common man is a complete waste of time and money? So let's say we launch another group of dudes to the moon... to do what? What in the hell are they possibly going to accomplish that can justify spending $500 million that could have gone into our nations ailing school systems? There's not a single solitary reason to spend that much of our already strapped nation's cash to get no useful results.... Like that whole martian rover business. Great we now have really cool pictures of a bunch of red rocks. Do you think your average everyday tax-payin' American really gives a shit if there is water on Mars? How does that information help him or make his life any better?
It's nice that the great minds over at NASA can geek-out about that shit, but they need to start using their great intellects to develop things that can help their fellow man rather than use their tax dollars to simply ponder the workings of the universe. You want to spend privately donated capital to fund those "search for answers/information" type pursuits, go right ahead, but as soon as you start spending tax dollars you better start trying to better the lives of the common man and start thinking about the greater good.
Bottom line: NASA needs to make more useful things like memory foam-matresses, and spend less of its time and our money shooting robots into space that hump rocks and take 300 million dollar pictures of dirt.
It's nice that the great minds over at NASA can geek-out about that shit, but they need to start using their great intellects to develop things that can help their fellow man rather than use their tax dollars to simply ponder the workings of the universe. You want to spend privately donated capital to fund those "search for answers/information" type pursuits, go right ahead, but as soon as you start spending tax dollars you better start trying to better the lives of the common man and start thinking about the greater good.
Bottom line: NASA needs to make more useful things like memory foam-matresses, and spend less of its time and our money shooting robots into space that hump rocks and take 300 million dollar pictures of dirt.
zionoverfire
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 133 (100%)
[quote name='Professor Oreo']Am I one of the only people around here that thinks spending money to launch anything into space that doesn't benefit the common man is a complete waste of time and money? So let's say we launch another group of dudes to the moon... to do what? What in the hell are they possibly going to accomplish that can justify spending $500 million that could have gone into our nations ailing school systems? There's not a single solitary reason to spend that much of our already strapped nation's cash to get no useful results.... Like that whole martian rover business. Great we now have really cool pictures of a bunch of red rocks. Do you think your average everyday tax-payin' American really gives a shit if there is water on Mars? How does that information help him or make his life any better?
It's nice that the great minds over at NASA can geek-out about that shit, but they need to start using their great intellects to develop things that can help their fellow man rather than use their tax dollars to simply ponder the workings of the universe. You want to spend privately donated capital to fund those "search for answers/information" type pursuits, go right ahead, but as soon as you start spending tax dollars you better start trying to better the lives of the common man and start thinking about the greater good.
Bottom line: NASA needs to make more useful things like memory foam-matresses, and spend less of its time and our money shooting robots into space that hump rocks and take 300 million dollar pictures of dirt.[/QUOTE]
Because an extra $500 million is going to fix our school systems.
The "tax-paying" american didn't see much initial benefit from early satelites either, it doesn't mean he's not benefiting now.
It's nice that the great minds over at NASA can geek-out about that shit, but they need to start using their great intellects to develop things that can help their fellow man rather than use their tax dollars to simply ponder the workings of the universe. You want to spend privately donated capital to fund those "search for answers/information" type pursuits, go right ahead, but as soon as you start spending tax dollars you better start trying to better the lives of the common man and start thinking about the greater good.
Bottom line: NASA needs to make more useful things like memory foam-matresses, and spend less of its time and our money shooting robots into space that hump rocks and take 300 million dollar pictures of dirt.[/QUOTE]
Because an extra $500 million is going to fix our school systems.
The "tax-paying" american didn't see much initial benefit from early satelites either, it doesn't mean he's not benefiting now.
[quote name='Professor Oreo']Am I one of the only people around here that thinks spending money to launch anything into space that doesn't benefit the common man is a complete waste of time and money? So let's say we launch another group of dudes to the moon... to do what? What in the hell are they possibly going to accomplish that can justify spending $500 million that could have gone into our nations ailing school systems? There's not a single solitary reason to spend that much of our already strapped nation's cash to get no useful results.... Like that whole martian rover business. Great we now have really cool pictures of a bunch of red rocks. Do you think your average everyday tax-payin' American really gives a shit if there is water on Mars? How does that information help him or make his life any better?
It's nice that the great minds over at NASA can geek-out about that shit, but they need to start using their great intellects to develop things that can help their fellow man rather than use their tax dollars to simply ponder the workings of the universe. You want to spend privately donated capital to fund those "search for answers/information" type pursuits, go right ahead, but as soon as you start spending tax dollars you better start trying to better the lives of the common man and start thinking about the greater good.
Bottom line: NASA needs to make more useful things like memory foam-matresses, and spend less of its time and our money shooting robots into space that hump rocks and take 300 million dollar pictures of dirt.[/QUOTE]
Oh yeah. All of this shit NASA contribued to isn't needed at all. Link
It's nice that the great minds over at NASA can geek-out about that shit, but they need to start using their great intellects to develop things that can help their fellow man rather than use their tax dollars to simply ponder the workings of the universe. You want to spend privately donated capital to fund those "search for answers/information" type pursuits, go right ahead, but as soon as you start spending tax dollars you better start trying to better the lives of the common man and start thinking about the greater good.
Bottom line: NASA needs to make more useful things like memory foam-matresses, and spend less of its time and our money shooting robots into space that hump rocks and take 300 million dollar pictures of dirt.[/QUOTE]
Oh yeah. All of this shit NASA contribued to isn't needed at all. Link
FriskyTanuki
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 36 (100%)
[quote name='Professor Oreo']Am I one of the only people around here that thinks spending money to launch anything into space that doesn't benefit the common man is a complete waste of time and money? So let's say we launch another group of dudes to the moon... to do what? What in the hell are they possibly going to accomplish that can justify spending $500 million that could have gone into our nations ailing school systems? There's not a single solitary reason to spend that much of our already strapped nation's cash to get no useful results.... Like that whole martian rover business. Great we now have really cool pictures of a bunch of red rocks. Do you think your average everyday tax-payin' American really gives a shit if there is water on Mars? How does that information help him or make his life any better?
It's nice that the great minds over at NASA can geek-out about that shit, but they need to start using their great intellects to develop things that can help their fellow man rather than use their tax dollars to simply ponder the workings of the universe. You want to spend privately donated capital to fund those "search for answers/information" type pursuits, go right ahead, but as soon as you start spending tax dollars you better start trying to better the lives of the common man and start thinking about the greater good.
Bottom line: NASA needs to make more useful things like memory foam-matresses, and spend less of its time and our money shooting robots into space that hump rocks and take 300 million dollar pictures of dirt.[/QUOTE]
Because it has no immediate benefits, we should give up exploring Mars and the Moon? The best way to learn about an unknown place is to explore and learn, which goes along with NASA's overall mission, which is to explore and inform. If you can't handle that, then don't worry about them doing their jobs. They work towards the future, not the present.
It's nice that the great minds over at NASA can geek-out about that shit, but they need to start using their great intellects to develop things that can help their fellow man rather than use their tax dollars to simply ponder the workings of the universe. You want to spend privately donated capital to fund those "search for answers/information" type pursuits, go right ahead, but as soon as you start spending tax dollars you better start trying to better the lives of the common man and start thinking about the greater good.
Bottom line: NASA needs to make more useful things like memory foam-matresses, and spend less of its time and our money shooting robots into space that hump rocks and take 300 million dollar pictures of dirt.[/QUOTE]
Because it has no immediate benefits, we should give up exploring Mars and the Moon? The best way to learn about an unknown place is to explore and learn, which goes along with NASA's overall mission, which is to explore and inform. If you can't handle that, then don't worry about them doing their jobs. They work towards the future, not the present.
Trancendental
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 4 (100%)
[quote name='FriskyTanuki']Because it has no immediate benefits, we should give up exploring Mars and the Moon? The best way to learn about an unknown place is to explore and learn, which goes along with NASA's overall mission, which is to explore and inform. If you can't handle that, then don't worry about them doing their jobs. They work towards the future, not the present.[/QUOTE]
LOL, true. Someone needs to play Civilization again, we'll never colonize alpha centuri with Prof. Oreo's attitude!
LOL, true. Someone needs to play Civilization again, we'll never colonize alpha centuri with Prof. Oreo's attitude!
Professor Oreo
CAGiversary!
[quote name='Kayden']You're all missing the point! As Americans its our duty to demand instant gratification and disreguard anything we cant profit off of in a day!
[/QUOTE]
Precisely.
[/QUOTE]Precisely.
FriskyTanuki
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 36 (100%)
[quote name='chubs189']im all for the moon and the stars and stuff but we also have alot of oceans on this place we call earth i think we should also be doing something bout finding out what the hell is down there to maybe they will finally find the loch ness monster.[/QUOTE]
That's where Homeland Security comes in.
That's where Homeland Security comes in.
I just noticed this retarded thread.
If you want to confirm the moon landings for yourself, why not do the Lunar Laser Ranging Experiment?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Laser_Ranging_Experiment
This should be proof enough, unless you're either too stupid to understand it, or you don't believe your own senses (in which case you can't even tell if the earth is real).
If you want to confirm the moon landings for yourself, why not do the Lunar Laser Ranging Experiment?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Laser_Ranging_Experiment
This should be proof enough, unless you're either too stupid to understand it, or you don't believe your own senses (in which case you can't even tell if the earth is real).
bread's done