Because they won't fight back...

[bluesdave]

Originally Posted by tw

And so we blame the Shuttle and ISS to further victimize science - doing more 'glory for no purpose' manned spaceflights to the moon.

You seem to refuse to accept the point that both I and Bruce have tried to put forward - that there is an emotional aspect to space exploration. At the risk of being flamed by you, yet again, I agree with much of what you say. There *is* a huge wastage of money being spent on projects that return a questionable level of benefits, and more deserving projects are canned because politicians want to gain points for supporting the "glory" missions.

As Bruce has pointed out, the public will choose a widescreen plasma TV, over a new space probe, every time. You can't fight human nature. Yes, you can try educating them, but experience shows me that the public wants to hear about the sparkle and flashy coloured lights, and are less interested in the science. The politicians know this, and use it against us. Welcome to my world.

I don't know how we can convince the public that scientific research is worth the money. They think it is great that a sports star gets paid millions of dollars a year, yet they are reluctant to spend more money on scientific research (I realise I am talking about different pools of money, but it is the public's opinion that I am targeting).

Nothing will change until the public realises that a good scientific research project is worth more to their lives, than a sports star's multi-million dollar salary. It is the same issue that you are raising about NASA.

[tw]

Originally Posted by bluesdave

You seem to refuse to accept the point that both I and Bruce have tried to put forward - that there is an emotional aspect to space exploration. At the risk of being flamed by you, yet again, I agree with much of what you say. There *is* a huge wastage of money being spent on projects that return a questionable level of benefits, and more deserving projects are canned because politicians want to gain points for supporting the "glory" missions.

As Bruce has pointed out, the public will choose a widescreen plasma TV, over a new space probe, every time.

Therefore you should be calling for more Hubbles, Martian Explorers, probes to Saturn, etc. Fabulous science AND better pictures comes from these. We have plenty of fireworks on 4th of July.

The only emotion from manned space is created in spin and myths. How quickly all that emotion faded after Apollo 11. Apollo 13 was completely ignored by the networks.

Meanwhile, tell me about this emotion? Tonight the Space Shuttle will be launched in a trajectory that might be viewable all up the East Coast. Notice how everyone is excited and talking about that unusual and so exciting event? Where is all this emotion? I don't see a single post here reminding everyone from FL to Maine to watch for the space shuttle. Where is this excitement and emotion? Where is this extremely rare and visible Space Shuttle launch attracting everyone’s excitement – if manned spaceflight is so emotionally important?

This 'emotion' attached to manned space is myth as even demonstrated by how we totally ignored Apollo 13 - until an event made real science necessary.

But again, what made Apollo 13 both exciting AND made that disaster into a success? In every case politicians were silence and people who come from where the work gets done both defined each problem AND initiated each solution. Even Lyndon Johnson was forced to sit outside in the car because astronauts wives demonstrated proper contempt for political games. All this science and success accomplished without any White House interference. And yet the White House suddenly knows a Moonbase is needed?

That lesson about manned spaceflight has been repeated continously. Instead, manned spaceflight should be integrated into a science program that has a strategic objective. Is emotion a strategic objective? Obviously not. Emotion only comes after a strategic objective is first defined. Frustration - the current emotion attached to Space Shuttles and ISS - is the emotion we have because politics (not science) created both missions.

BTW, what is the strategic objective of ISS? It has one. Do you know what the strategic objective of ISS is? The answer creates emotions. What is that answer? What is the purpose of ISS?

[bluesdave]

Originally Posted by tw

Meanwhile, tell me about this emotion? Tonight the Space Shuttle will be launched in a trajectory that might be viewable all up the East Coast. Notice how everyone is excited and talking about that unusual and so exciting event? Where is all this emotion? I don't see a single post here reminding everyone from FL to Maine to watch for the space shuttle. Where is this excitement and emotion? Where is this extremely rare and visible Space Shuttle launch attracting everyone’s excitement – if manned spaceflight is so emotionally important?

I agree - the public is fickled, and have a short attention span. What can you or I do about that?

I don't remember what the official mission statement was for the ISS, but at the time I was also *against* it. Interestingly, I cannot see a mission statement on the ISS Home Page.

[tw]

Originally Posted by bluesdave

I don't remember what the official mission statement was for the ISS, but at the time I was also *against* it. Interestingly, I cannot see a mission statement on the ISS Home Page.

ISS mission statement will not be on a NASA web site. Its purpose was to create a project that both US and Russia could cooperate on. Remember, this was end of the cold war. America needed a project that could build trust between these cold war adversaries. Winner - ISS. Back then it was called Space Station Freedom or something like that. Its design was so defective that Freedom was on the verge of being scrapped. Project name was changed to International Space Station to represent its new mission.

So why no science? ISS was hyped as a science project. But as eventually leaked to the press; even Freedom would require so much maintenance as to leave no time for science.

Reason for Mission Control in Russia? Again to promote trust. ISS intended only for political reasons.

One final part: Russian and American sections can be separated. But only the Russian part has an IMU and other functions to fly independently.

Meanwhile, Russia was also supposed to supply source code for that station so that Americans could learn how ISS works. Last I heard (and that was many years ago), Russia still had not provided that code many years after it was supposed to be delivered.

But again, ISS is not for science. ISS was created for politics. We can appreciate why ISS was created. But again, the 'by far' largest part of NASA's budget is attached to a political trophy. Now we are talking about man to Mars only for political reasons. What is worse - that Mars mission (and Moonbase) is now cannibalizing the little science that NASA does.

Like it or not: Shuttle, ISS, and now Man to Mars (and a Moonbase) all only for political reasons; at the expense of science and of mankind's most important objectives.

Well at least something profitable may come from a Moonbase. It may create a launch vehicle so that man (and science) can operate in MEO. As I understand it, MEO (Medium Earth Orbit) was what shuttle was supposed to do before politics redefined the Space Shuttle. (How's that from someone who does not read.)

[bluesdave]

Originally Posted by tw

(How's that from someone who does not read.)

Well, I would say that you are doing very well. I think that Bruce and I have achieved much improvement with our new pupil.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Yes, but still to emotional. Why he's even been seen cracking jokes in some threads.

[tw]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

Yes, but still to emotional. Why he's even been seen cracking jokes in some threads.

We are human. We made mistakes.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Absent from anything tw put in here, though hinted at by bluesdave, is any acknowledgement that what it will take to colonize space -- in any timeframe -- is, in a word, the passion. Tw deprecates that very idea, and ends up with a low and groundling frame of mind, which he somehow imagines is perfection. Ha!

"Earth is too small and fragile a basket to carry all our eggs in." -- Robert A. Heinlein.

I'll take the visionary over the alternative, thanks. Those are the ones that actually make the progress.