Kennedy already answered this in his speech in 1962:

OK, but two wrongs don't make a right. (and to whomever writes 3 rights make a left, fuck you :p) I don't have a problem with the Space Station or most of NASA's budget but going past the moon doesn't make sense to me.

Where's your child-like wonder?

It's all about priorities though. Right now, space exploration, IMO, isn't one of them.

What two wrongs are you pointing out?

I was just saying that most people think NASA consumes an incredible amount of money, but they don't when compared to other government agencies. People threw their arms up when The Hubble Space Telescope failed -- "Oh my GOD. How in hell could anyone build a one-ton mirror and have an error at the edge of .002mm! We should take away their funding and ground the program! They wasted 2.2 billion dollars of our money!" 2.2 billion is nothing when compared to what the gov't spends elsewhere.

And what we've learned in correcting Hubble has been amazing. I think that we stand a lot to gain through space exploration and it isn't always measurable in terms of profit.

...and despite all of this, I actually do have a problem with the ISS, but it is in other countries' treatment of it.

Okay -- lets say we limit NASA to nothing but launching satellites for-profit every year and that they have to support themselves. We'll get ~12 billion dollars back every year.

Just out of curiosity, what would you do with the money? Where would you budget it and make it be put to use?

We can't seem to give NASA the money it really needs right now anyway, so as I see it, there's no sense in half-assing it, especially in light of the Columbia disaster. Let's limit NASA for at least 2 years, put the money saved towards the deficit, and let Congress review the program in the summer of '05.

Yes we could fix up the earth, and then we can all sit around the campfire singing john lennon songs. What background or knowledge do you have to make negative statements concerning space exploration. Exploration is one of the cornerstones of human existence. If you’re going to withhold your “nickel”, then I suggest you learn something before doing so.

Personally, I like the "two Wrights make an airplane" version, but that's just me. Hmm.. where's the shrug smilie?

Well I think there are at least three good reasons for going out there.

1) Lots of raw resources out there. Some day we're going to need them.

2) Room. I don't see the population dropping anytime soon. The urge to procreate is built into our psyche from our much more hazardous past. We're going to need a place for all those people to go.

3) The last is harder to quantify, but the more important. I think that mankind needs a frontier. I think if we don't, the whole human race will be like the old guy that retires and just sits in his rocker. Pretty soon he just dries up and blows away.

You know, I actually agree with this and I think they're kind of taking a similar path at this moment -- no manned launches have left either of the pads since the loss of the Columbia. Its not a bad time to step back and re-think some of the safety procedures.

And just what the fuck makes you think you know what I do or don't know? And since you have yet to contribute anything positive in any thread, You're dismissed, boy.

Simple… your comments

By the way… who said you get to determine what “positive” is

If you asked a majority of the regular posters here, I think they'd say you are, thus far, a negative.

Yep, sorry jimf747. If the majority of people here think you're an asshat, you'll have to leave. "Majority Rules." :rattat: