Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bluesdave
I think that a small base on the Moon does make some sense, and at the time NASA was pushed to build the ISS there were many people at NASA who argued against the expense, saying that they could build a Moon base for less money, and do more robotic/automated research. Politics *did* override logic, but that does not mean that "man" has not benefited from the tools and materials that NASA has developed.
|
Most of those 'benefits' would exist anyway - with or without a manned space program. More useful spinoffs come from robotics and other technically more advanced missions.
Meanwhile. a small moonbase may have benefits for the same reason that Hubble needs periodic visits. Putting man in a moon base for six month visits makes no sense since even the ISS cannot (yet) perform any science for same reasons. What makes a small (temporary quarters) moonbase useful? Only if it becomes part of a larger science objective and only if constructed so that men can do something other than maintenance.
Currently no objective exists nor is defined. Decision for a Moonbase is really part of this 'need' to put a man on Mars - again without any strategic objective defined.
Tremendous science is ongoing in unmanned (robotic) missions only because the little people are defining questions and problems AND then top management (ie politicians) provide the support. This is how science prospers in places such as JPL and Greenbelt MD. That same story is made so obvious in "Apollo 13" (by Ron Howard). The murder of seven Challenger astronauts is a classic example of what happens when top management knows better than 'people who get the work done'. In Challenger, these MBA types could not find an engineer to approve the launch. So they only let 'managers' vote. Murder of seven people.
Same symptoms for destruction of science are apparent in this Moonbase complete with ongoing canceling of satellites and research programs in large numbers. Even trashed was the next LEO weather satellite so necessary for 10 day weather forecasting. Even that last 10% of NASA's budget where almost all NASA science occurs is being trashed only for a Man to Mars agenda.
Believe me. It I thought for one minute that this exploration was done for the advancement of mankind, I would be calling for it louder than anyone. I worked in that industry. Items that I designed (rescued) were even involved in Shuttle missons.
Wonderful science is being performed by science superstars such as Solar Max, Compton, Chandra, Hubble, and Spitzer. Neither space shuttle nor ISS is doing anything because both were created for agendas other than science. Space Shuttle has been an impediment to science, in part, because it barely gets out of earth's atmosphere - too pathetically low for most science work. Most science satellites are on their own because Shuttle meant an astronaut could provide neither service nor support. Just another example of hype causing impediment to science and the advancement of mankind.
Worse, the superstars are getting old. Comptom had to be abandoned - again because shuttle could not help. Few new birds are available to replace our aging fleet of superstars - thanks to money getting suck up by manned spaceflight and a silly manned Mars mission. And other useful birds (ie ultraviolet or frequencies between light and radio) cannot even be proposed.
So how many even knew of these superstars before assuming a moonbase would have a purpose?
A president with intelligence would have asked some inciteful questions such as Kennedy did in 1960. But as Iraq weapons inspector David Kay noted and Bob Woodward reported, "Kay left the meeting almost shocked as Bush's lack on inquisitiveness. Kay had a PhD and had taught at high levels, and he was used to being asked challenging, aggressive questions."
Bush cannot ask as a leader would do. He and his adminstration do not have grasp of reality. Somehow they know more than those who do the work. It explains why a Moonbase would be only for a poltical agenda as the constellation of superstars in science die without replacement.
Cited is but one constellation of science - deep space observatories. So many other constellations are also required by mankind. All unmaned. All function quite well without humans. All doing things that man cannot. All that need replacement. Any yet money is being sucked from all science for a manned spaceflight program that has no science purpose.
Why is this so relevant to The Cellar? Because 'common man' ignorance leaves science cannibalized by extremist politicians who are more worried about their legacy. Moonbase and Man to Mars is a creation of the White House; not of science. That is common konwledge. We all well know intelligence levels and 'appreciation of science' in that House. Still that alone is not enough to worry. What makes these manned spaceflights even more worrying is that reasons for those missions (the strategic objective) does not even exist.
Again we go right back to a fundamental concept in all management. What is the strategic objective? None is provided that promotes America, science, or mankind. Therein lies the symptom of a president more interested in his own legacy.