ABC NEWS HAS LEARNED THAT NASA WILL SCRUB THE SHUTTLE LAUNCH SCHEDULED FOR

ABC NEWS HAS LEARNED THAT NASA WILL SCRUB THE SHUTTLE LAUNCH SCHEDULED FOR MAY
http://abcnews.go.com/

Just the breaking news headline. They must be taking pointers from Raw Story!

Waste of money like Iraq and about as useful.

Keeping this program going defunds research and development of a new, more efficient, cheaper and safer platform. It is not like the B-52 which actually does more today than 50 yrs ago when it was first deployed. The Space shuttle is what 30 yrs old? I suspect we can do better now.

the 4th generation of rodents inside.

The future of the James Webb space telescope isn't looking too good right now with the budgetary limitations at NASA. If Hubble isn't serviced, and falls out of the sky in 2007/2008, God knows when we'll finally get a successor into space. On the other hand...ground based telescopes aren't doing too poorly lately...the combination of multiple exposures and computer assistance to compile and sharpen the images may eventually make space based telescopes obsolete.

event in history. Now that it and other instruments attached to it are educating the masses, despite Kansas and other efforts, we really cannot afford to let it fall.

carries people into orbit. No need for one vehicle to do both.

but manned space exploration...never. Aside from the benefitds to science and civilization... manned space exploration defines the human race.. the search for life, either like our own or otherwise, the desire to go to a place simply because it is there, has been embedded in mankind's DNA since time itself began.

Go there in an efficient, cost effective way for sure, but go. So little of romance is left in the world, the search for knowledge is a flame we cannot afford to extinguish.

The argument that the money could be spent to solve probelms here on earth is specious... the money saved by ditching the space program, wouldn't go to feed the hungry... it would disappear into the special interest hole all money seems to fall into.

The beauty and majesty of space is a thing to behold. If they're taking volunteers to go, I'll be first in line.

claim that man should not explore space in person. Those kind also argued against Columbus trying to find people to enslave and torture, not to mention gold to steal. They argued against brave souls seeking the north and south poles. They argued against deep sea explorers visiting abysal plains so deep that the sun sheds no light on the inhabitants.

The search for knowledge is indeed a flame, flickering under Bush, but ready to be stoked and fed and fueled anew - all it takes is a leader with vision, and people like you Liberal, to press forward. Creativity, discovery and exploration are what humans are truly meant to do. WHo was that author with a series of three books, The Creators, the Discoverers and I forgot the third book. A wonderful series.


If I had a chance, would I jump on the moon or mars? in a heartbeat. Not for the fame or misfortune, but to have gone there.

...don't for a minute believe that money would go to feed the poor.. in fact, thanks to technological advances fostered by the manned space program, we now have the means to ensure no human being in the world need go to bed hungry.

The problem is we don't care if they're hungry or not. The primary National attitude is simply, if they're that hungry then should get a G*dd*mn*ed job! It has nothing to do with the manned space program... or even the costly war in Iraq for that matter.

Your agument is basically, our government should conitnue to explore space because if it stopped spending money on plans for manned space exploration it wouldn't go to address crucial human rights issues here at home or around the world.

But that's not a response to my argument. That may be a response to "SOME" argument. Just not mine. You're argument is saying that since our goverment is doing the wrong thing, its ok that we explore space. My argument is that I don't support the goverment when it is doing the wrong thing, thus I don't support the current prioritization of exploring space placed above concern for basic human rights.

My argument is that the appropriate prioritization of our govement is addressing human rights issues at home first, and a just and humane policy toward the rest of our brothers and sisters around the globe first, then "space exploration." When those things do not happen in that order, I will never support them. When our goverment spends 50 billon on a space exploration plan, but refuses to spend the 5 billion it would cost to garuntee that every child in America had enough to eat, something is terribly, morally wrong with the decision making of our government.

If our goverment can find a way to maintain its duty to carry out social and economic justice and put human rights domestically and internationally above all else and still have money to spare for space exploration, then I support it. I do not support space exploration while our goverment is getting a failing grade at its other moral obligations that are non-negotiable and primary. And neither should anyone else.

Humanity should create, explore and discover. But the only way to do that which remains just and moral in this world is to a) radically reprioritize our own country's spending priorities away from billions of dollars towarsd agression and war b) move to a completely collaborative world effort at space exploration as a human endeavor rather than a national endeavor, that way all countries can share in the expense of discovery while still maintaining their moral obliations to social and economic justice at home.

..all I'm saying is that I've been alive and on this earth for almost 55 years... and never, not once in my lifetime, has the United States government done what you say. YEs, indeed, we should all strive to elect officials who address "human rights issues at home first," and a execute a "just and humane policy toward the rest of our brothers and sisters around the globe first." All I'm sayin' is if history had followed that plan, we'd all still be walking to work in the tarpits, dark, cold and wet.

Sorry, that argument doesn't move me. Time and time again during the last thirty years, we've heard well-meaning progressives saying that money for manned space exploration ought to be used to feed the poor. Time and time again, we've seen money siphoned away from the space program (Usually NOT by progressives, but by self-centered "conservatives") and spent on war machines and more recently tax cuts for the super-rich.

I believe that great nations ought to do great things. In addition to the US doing such things as helping to rebuild infrastructure at home and abroad (As we did during the days of real foreign aid), I think that the US ought to pursue manned space flight.

I would suggest that progressives look over Nathaniel Phlibrick's Seas of Glory about the 1840's round-the-world US expedition and compare it to Team Shrub's attitude towards the sciences and exploration. The only thing that space exploration seems to be good for as far as Dear Leader is concenred seems to be photo backdrops.

In addition, there's the meteor peril. I strongly believe that the US needs at least some deep space capacity so we can move threatening meteors or asteroids away from Earth orbit. Impacts like the Winslow meteor or the Tunguska strike could kill millions or tens of millions. The lack of preparation is treasonous.

...I suspect that, if the shuttles are mothballed, we're probably not going to see an effort in manned space exploration for a long, long time. (After all, there isn't a U.S.S.R. with which to get in an all-important symbolic "race" anymore.) And whatever efforts are made for placing humans in space will probably be restricted to military purposes for the near future. :-(

Though I agree that shuttles should be phased out in favor of newer launch vehicles...

to have a secret military payload instead. google Rods From God for more info.

The shuttles are crap at this moment, but I do hope space exploration continues far after these vehicles have been retired. Unfortunately this administration's anti-science policies are certainly going to try to do their best to destroy this permanently.

What would an astronaut doing on mars tell us that the satellites, rovers, and other craft we're sending there not have already told us. Would some manned capsule zipping around Saturn tell us more than the Cassini Huygens missions? Manned space flight is a joke until we develop warp drive. Till then, probes are what provide invaluable scientific data, not astronauts growing crystals in a pod and playing around withthrowing gobs of water at each other.

I'm all for robotic sateliite landers, space tlescops, but to spend billions on shooting people into orbit instead so they can do such laughable "science" that not one peer-reviewed journal publishes it seems like the real waste of resources.

The first man on mars will bring us closer to permenant human colonization of the planet. It's a logical first step, the only real question is the timeline.

has decided not to drive his 1980 Datsun 280 ZX to his grandmother's house in Grand Rapids, it (the car) being too fucking old to make the trip.

Jeezus.

:rofl:

"Pyrrhic reusability".

Wish I'd said it.

It's been known that the issues that caused the last failure haven't been fixed yet.

It will fly thousands of soldiers to space stations where they will await deployment to the next terror area...

:sarcasm:

The Space Program only has so many Shuttle flights left.

A sensor failure in a fuel tank doesn't seem like all that difficult to fix, although in this case NASA claims it will take 3 weeks which screws up the launch window, since this is a rendezvous mission.

BTW folks....the only thing old school about the Shuttle is it's appearance. Nearly every component in the Shuttle has been updated over it's lifetime. It only looks the same.