My point was simple. TECHNOLOGY is changing the world.
Like the invention of spell check but I won`t get that cheap in my response.
Every decade, technology has replaced man in some aspect of science. The space program is no different. The cost to the goverment for the loss of 14 astronauts killed on two shuttle missions demonstrated that a new means of space travel (unmanned) was the future.
As was the human cost from the time our ancestors first walked away from their cave. And yet we still take risks to the day.
Its cheaper, more efficient and gets the U.S. more bang for the buck. The cost of supplying the means of survival for astronauts for journeys into the vast reaches of outer space is TOOO HIGH for a nation that has no money left to spend.
If we cut out the expenses that are detrimental to our society we would be flush 10x with money for more beneficial endeavors.
The cry's for smaller goverment were heard, NASA is a goverment funded program and it was cut, just like everyone asked for.
Thats an awful broad stroke of the paintbrush.
The only way for them to survive on the budget that remains is to create space vehicles that dont require humans. IN fact, even though the shuttles had "pilots", they really didnt fly the thing.
There`s a large group of shuttle commanders who will argue with you on that.
Its all computer programed. The "pilots" were merely backups to the flight as new equiptment was tested. The shuttle lands itself, the pilot is just along for the ride. This is technology and advancement.
As with above you might want to fact check your statements. You`re approaching Klein territory.
Dreams of space stations on the moon and the inherent cost to maintain them is "crazytalk" by scientists.
Like that "crazytalk" of a new round world over the horizon, a vessel that could take man across the water, light that didn`t come from fire, the ability to go higher than one could climb, that the human body could be cured through actual treatment rather than hopeful prayer, the ability to communicate at first over a wire and then without, machines that could help solve problems, a network where naked women are at your fingertips. Yea, crazytalk.
Setting foot on Mars by an american just for the sake of saying so (IMO) is not worth the 100's of billions of dollars it will cost to do it. There are people who dont want high speed rail to be built cause it will cost a couple of billion to build, yet they would spend 100's of billions of dollars of tax payer money to go to a planet with no NET gain on a one time ride with no guarantees of success.
I wonder if either one of us will live long enough to see the overpopulated planet that will be looking for an extra home.
This makes no sense, to you.
If a private company wants to build a spacecraft, put astronauts on it, fly it to mars, land, take some pictures, grab some dirt, lift off and return home all without one single dime of taxpayer money associated with it, then i say GO FOR IT.
And they will. As have every private company that has taken our governments invested achievements and run with them. But the initial investment and research on many things, like the very computer we are debating on, were something we have to bear as a country.
But our goverment funded space program isnt going to do that.
The new unmanned cargo shuttles are less expensive, more efficient and can stay in space for MONTHS.
This is the future.
With respect to what I said about former astronauts, try to get the message without the emotion, they served their purpose in history, and all americans can be thankful, but tomorrows astronauts who will make history will have to be recharged every now and then.
The greatest technology will still need man to guide it. Once it doesn`t we are all obsolete.
Peace.
