Business, Economics, Media Criticism, Political Commentary, Space, Technology and Society

The Coalition For “Space Exploration”

13 Comments

If you were wondering how worthless/evil they are, they just praised the Senate mark up of the NASA budget.

Disgusting.

This is one of the reasons I’m on the warpath against the phrase “space exploration.” It’s so vague and meaningless that it can justify all manner of awful ideas.

[Update a while later]

The whole hog: Stephen Smith’s report on the NASA budget mess.

13 thoughts on “The Coalition For “Space Exploration””

  1. Maybe Sen. Nelson’s point about what the average American’s view of manned space is correct. That it ended with the last flight of the Space Shuttle….

  2. “Treason, treason, black as hell!” I think this was a comment by one Continental Army officer when he heard about Benedict’s Arnold’s defection to the British. Are these people Manchurian candidates working for Russia’s FSB or Chinese intelligence, not to mention ULA?

  4. For college I get the do a lab tonight the shows the budget of NASA, and NSF, though I rather see private firms, and hopefully someday an East Indian Company for the solar system.

  5. Space is the only thing in space that we don’t actually explore, other than noting how much radiation is zipping through it as we’re traveling to someplace that’s not space so we can see some actual, or to look at actual stuff that’s not space, from space.

  6. Super disappointing to see Wayne Hale on the board of advisors for the Coalition for Space Exploration.

  7. So what a good word for looking for something minable in space?

    Or is it the phrase “space exploration” rather than exploring for space resources, which annoys thee?

    1. If you’re looking for a reason to put humans in space, it has to be settlement. Human settlements have to be occupied by humans. Exploration can be done by robots.

      BTW, space miner is kind of my dream job. Like Sam Rockwell’s character in Moon.

      1. Exploration can be done by robots.

        By that logic, no one would ever visit Yellowstone or Yosemite. They can be “explored” by television.

        Except that’s not what exploration means.

        It’s like watching ESPN and calling it “exercise.”

  8. I don’t say much in these threads, because I find the argument useless unless you are pushing to reduce NASA to the role of FAA-AST only, in terms of human spaceflight. So long as NASA is any more than a regulatory agency, it will continue to push for projects that keeps its bureaucracy in cushy jobs. I worked with many of these people and there interest in space flight exists until payday. There are many there who really care, but they are outnumbered. I still remember, during ISS development, convincing engineers that it was ok for them to walk over to building 9 and look at the mock-ups of the station, so they knew what they were building. They didn’t care to do it, because it was a walk and they might have to ask permission first. Those hurdles to space flight still exist for these engineers, and you want them to think beyond big rockets?

Comments are closed.