Quote:
Originally Posted by Cloud
rebellion in the astronaut corps?
|
Back then, George Jr's administration was using science for their greater glory. One political agenda was to redirect all space programs; to put a man on the moon and 'Man to Mars'. Numerous other space projects were being killed or canceled (including eight satellites to perform earth atmospheric research - one that was soon to launch) to pay for that political agenda.
When Columbia was destroyed (the only shuttle that did any science), the administration had plenty of reason (excuses) to eliminate the expensive Hubble rescue / upgrade.
Deep inside NASA, hundreds (mostly astronauts) began a campaign to save Hubble. What you now see is the all but outright rebellion in NASA to save science. These people were rumored to divert funds at any opportunity to fund studies on how to save Hubble. Of course, it had to be performed covertly because a political agenda had replaced science as the important objective.
Meanwhile, science no longer uses man for its greatest discoveries. Best space science is now done by machines. In fact, almost all NASA's science is done in the less than 10% of budget spent only on non-manned missions. Mars Rover being a perfect example. ISS being the perfect example of massive expenditures and almost no science.
In deep ocean research, Ballard also came to the same stunning concluson while maybe a mile under the ocean. He suddenly noticed crew members would rather view outside on cameras rather than use viewing ports. Even deep sea research is better conducted by machines - not by man.
Same applies to sub-atomic research. Or space. Even astronomers no longer go to the telescopes. Work is better conducted elsewhere while telescopes - machine operated - do the work.