>>>
>>>> ( Watch the line wrap )
>>>
>>>> Hillary Clinton Declares War on Space Exploration
>>>
>>>> To be brief and to the point, Hillary's agenda would be terrible news
>>>> for anyone who supports space exploration and space commerce.
>>>
>>> Hello Andre,
>>>
>>> I'm not targeting you by saying this, but I find it interesting that
>>> those who claim that the U.S.A. isn't a leader often turn around and
>>> proclaim that due to American actions against stem-cell research, or
>>> global warming taxes, and in this case, space exploration will cripple
>>> these initiatives.
>>
>> Some technologies are so capital intensive, that the entry cost is
>> higher than most nations can afford.
>
> Indeed! _CALIFORNIA_ has a larger economy than Canada.
>
> But while it's reasonable to argue that the moon launch was clearly an
> massive investment of capital (even today, manned space launches are
> hideously expensive), fetal (pardon my omission above of that critical
> prefix) stem cell research and global warming is something the rest of
> the world can start on their own.
If Europe wants to start becoming
> more efficient as Al Gore proclaims flying around in a big 747, they
> could set an example. Oh, wait, they're already cheating on the Kyoto
> treaty.
The Kyoto treaty was a form of economic warfare and in fact the largest
pollutors like China weren't even included.
>
> Even so though, it's possible for a single nation to take on a single
> initiative. Maybe they can't be as great as the USA in doing all of
> these things at once, but even Venezuela has the funds to do a moon
> launch if they wanted. It's just a lack of national will.
If the government wasn't involved in the space program private companies
would pool their money and do it. Even France launches more satellites than
the US.
>
>> Test it out for yourself: Start your own car company. On your own $.
>
> You've apparently never been to a strip club and used "beaver dollars"
> :-)
>
> And car companies are a particularly interesting example for you to use.
> There are literally hundreds of small car companies around. Well, in
> California at least...
>
>>> What about Brussels? Or Moscow? Or China? Are they all just a bunch
>>> of nerf herders?
>>
>> Given that the ESA sent the ONLY western probe to Halley's Comet, and
>> that the Russians are the sole path for private space tourists to the
>> ISS,
>> well, what the US fails to do, may well be done by others.
Of course. The US just happened to have the funds after WWII but there are
plenty of scientists in other countries who have the knowledge to build
rockets and spacecraft. And don't forget that it was Russia that launched
Sputnik which got the US all excited about building spacecraft.
>
>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_tourism
> "More affordable suborbital space tourism is viewed as a money-making
> proposition by several other companies, including Space Adventures,
> Virgin Galactic, Starchaser, Blue Origin, Armadillo Aerospace, XCOR
> Aerospace, Rocketplane Limited, the European "Project Enterprise",[14]
> and others.[citation needed] Most are proposing vehicles that make
> suborbital flights peaking at an altitude of 100-160 kilometres.[15]
> Passengers would experience three to six minutes of weightlessness, a
> view of a twinkle-free starfield, and a vista of the curved Earth below.
> Projected costs are expected to be about $200,000 per
> passenger.[16][17][18][19][20][21] The total duration of a trip is
> expected to be about an hour.[22] Companies competing in the field have
> formed in Russia, Europe and the United States.[23]"
>
> Currently, as you pointed out, the Soviets are selling trips aboard
> their Soyuz for a cost of $30 million per trip.
>
> It's clear that privatization in the long run is producing a much more
> cost-effective flight (1/150th of the Soyuz cost).
>
>> Don't you want your land to stay competitive in one of the few areas
>> where you actually do build stuff ?
>
> Apparently, we still make enough stuff for us to be able to kill (pardon
> the pun) fetal stem cell research by just refusing to fund it.
>
>>> And of course, the lumber rocketeers of Canada! :-)
>>
>> Laugh as you will, but Canada was the third nation to build a
>> satellite.
>
> LAUNCHED by the United States.
>
>> And, ask astronauts, like the Chief of International Space Station
>> Operations
>> for the NASA Astronaut Office at the Johnson Space Center in Houston.
>>
>> His name is Chris Austin Hadfield, (born August 29, 1959) is a
>> Canadian
>> astronaut from the Canadian Space Agency who was the first Canadian
>> to
>> walk in space.
>>
>> Or, ask the guy who, from 1987 to 1993, he was program manager of the
>> Advanced Space Vision System (SVS). In July 1992, NASA agreed to
>> outfit the shuttle fleet with an operational version of the Orbiter
>> Space Vision
>> System (OSVS) which will give eyes to the Canadarm on board the space
>> shuttle, and the Advanced Vision Unit (AVU) which will be used with
>> the
>> Mobile Servicing System (MSS).
>>
>> His name is Steven Glenwood MacLean (b. December 14, 1954), a
>> Canadian astronaut. He was born in Ottawa, Ontario.
>>
>> So, without us, your space endeavours would be arm and eyeless.
>
> I think we got to the moon without it. :-) But yes, it is a worthwhile
> contibution to a world power's space program.
>
> Seriously though: I'm aware of the role that government does play in
> exploration (after all, look at Columbus! :-) Exploration is a
> difficult commodity to privatize unlike patents.
>
>>> Sorry, I couldn't resist. Andre, it's rather funny that the left is
>>> now
>>> the most anti-scientific and religious people around. The end is near!
>>> Global warming! Don't use any fossil fuels! Or Nuclear power either!
>>
>> Or, " The End Days are here and Evolution is a tool of the Devil. "
>
> Indeed! They are remarkably similar aren't they? Except that the
> atheist religion is about pretending that it isn't. (Just don't tell
> that to the IRS. The Atheist churches would have to pay taxes :-)
>
> "Let us all bow down and pray that the world will recognize that praying
> doesn't work."
>
>>> Unless it's possible to fuel spaceships with fetal stem cells, forget
>>> about it (unless Al Gore is flying a ship to talk about global warming
>>> on the moon, then we can chop down the whole rain forest.)
>>
>> As the main fuels of the SSMEs are liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen,
>> this is all furious handwaving.
>
> Great! Can you tell me where I can pump liquid hydrogen out of the
> ground?
>
> Andre... as YOU KNOW, it takes MASSIVE amounts of energy (probably from
> oil if we're talking about the Soyuz) to produce liquid hydrogen and
> then to store it.
>
>>>>>> "In my lifetime, we've gone from Eisenhower
>>>>>> to George W. Bush. We've gone from John F. Kennedy
>>>>>> to Al Gore. If this is evolution, I believe that
>>>>>> in twelve years, we'll be voting for plants."
>>>
>>>>> That was the best one.
>>>
>>>> Hes a funny guy, and, as the old saying goes, its funny because
>>>> its true.
>>>
>>>>> Btw, the Democrat party frontrunner is a triffid.
>>>
>>>> Well, I'd say that both parties' fields need quite a bit of watering.
>>>> But, not at night...
>>>
>>>>> :-)
>>>
>>>>> America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to
>>>>> work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards.
>>>>> On the road to tyranny, we've gone so far that polite
>>>>> political action is about as useless as a miniskirt
>>>>> in a convent.
>>>
>>>>> Claire Wolfe, _101 Things To Do 'Til The Revolution_
>>>
>>>> One could at least hope for/work towards less dumb bastards.
>>
>> And, Keith Olbermann kicks Bill O'Liely's ass.
>
> Yeah, he has 1/3 as many viewers. Rock on!
>
> regards,
> PolishKnight
