backtop


Print 68 comment(s) - last by 4wardtristan.. on Dec 11 at 9:29 PM

NASA will try in the Martian Spring to contact Phoenix

NASA missions on Mars have been used to conduct a wide variety of scientific experiments. Much of the scientific scrutiny from NASA and other space agencies centers on Mars.

NASA launched Mars Phoenix lander in August of 2007 and sent it speeding towards Mars. In May of 2008, the Phoenix touched down and began its mission on the red planet. One of the tasks that Phoenix was sent to Mars to accomplish was to find out if water ice was present in the Martian soil.

Phoenix did find evidence that ice was in the Martian soil and after its three-month mission ended, NASA decided to keep Phoenix working. In November of 2008, NASA officially closed the mission Phoenix was conducting when it lost communications with the lander after it lost power and could no longer sustain itself.

NASA had expected Phoenix to lose power during the harsh Martian winter, though it continued to try to get the rover to respond to commands sent from satellites orbiting Mars to no avail. This week NASA reported that controllers have stopped trying to use the pair of probes orbiting Mars to communicate with Phoenix.

NASA says that Phoenix last communicated with the Mars Odyssey orbiter on November 2. Controllers tried on November 29 to raise Phoenix one final time. The advancing Martian winter is depriving the lander of the solar energy it needs to maintain working power levels.

NASA says that there is a remote chance that Phoenix could survive the -150 degree Martian winter and will try in the Martian springtime to re-establish contact with the lander.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

OohH!
By ZaethDekar on 12/5/2008 12:58:59 PM , Rating: 5
I hope it lives up to its name.




RE: OohH!
By omgitsLong on 12/5/2008 1:30:11 PM , Rating: 2
Engulf by the flame?


RE: OohH!
By jadeskye on 12/5/2008 1:32:14 PM , Rating: 1
This is one phoenix that won't be reborn from the ashes...


RE: OohH!
By Chipper Smoltz DT on 12/5/08, Rating: 0
RE: OohH!
By Seemonkeyscanfly on 12/5/2008 2:44:13 PM , Rating: 2
Errrr... well it was just a 50/50 chance that Mars winter would coincide with either the northern or the southern hemisphere or am I missing something?

RIP Phoenix till you come again...


RE: OohH!
By Expunge on 12/5/2008 3:09:57 PM , Rating: 5
Send the damn Energizer Bunny to charge that thing up. That way we can continue to research and get rid of those annoying commercials. Win/Win for everyone.


RE: OohH!
By AnnihilatorX on 12/7/2008 9:46:00 AM , Rating: 2
I'd rather like a bunny girl to charge me up


RE: OohH!
By TennesseeTony on 12/6/2008 11:45:14 AM , Rating: 2
Apparently your missing Spring and Autumn.


RE: OohH!
By SpaceJumper on 12/5/08, Rating: 0
RE: OohH!
By Chipper Smoltz DT on 12/5/2008 3:47:18 PM , Rating: 2
Well, we could always wait for summer hehehe. Or maybe we could use this as a learning experience for our next genration of rovers. Hopefully, all of these "mistakes" could be turned into something positive in the future. Look on the brightside guys, lots of info was gathered then maybe someday we could create the "perferct" rover or whatever it is we're gonna use to gather additonal data


RE: OohH!
By danrien on 12/5/2008 4:22:08 PM , Rating: 4
This wasn't a mistake, it was expected.


RE: OohH!
By PrinceGaz on 12/5/2008 8:26:12 PM , Rating: 2
Don't you think it was designed with those sort of temperatures in mind when they decided to shut it down over the Martian winter, and try to reactivate it in the spring when more solar-energy is available?

I'd guess that the circuitry is kept within a suitable temperature range by being very highly heat insulated, and having a heater to keep the critical circuitry and associated power-supply components within a functional temperature range. That heater will almost certainly receive priority before all other circuits (as they will fail if the heater is shut down instead). Just because the rover is no longer responding doesn't necessarily mean it has no power, it may just be using the limited power it has during the Martian winter to "keep itself alive".


RE: OohH!
By deeznuts on 12/5/2008 9:48:49 PM , Rating: 2
That wasn't the plan. The mission is over. THe mission was designed for 3 months, that's it. everything after that was just extra icing on the cake. Trying to coax extra value out of it. But it was designed for 3 months, and now they're seeing if it'll survive the winter.


RE: OohH!
By toyotabedzrock on 12/7/2008 2:35:16 AM , Rating: 2
Well it would be rising from ice cubes. It would interesting to see if the circuity can survive. If they managed to taper off the heat slow enough it might just make it.

Isn't some of the LHC circuitry kept at really low temps? They should have collaborated to create a system that could survive it.


RE: OohH!
By Davelo on 12/7/2008 4:21:19 PM , Rating: 3
It's now being reconfigured by ET's. It will be like Veejer from Star Trek and will attempt to destroy Earth! Too bad Nasa lost contact before it could send the self destruct signal.


RE: OohH!
By deeznuts on 12/5/2008 9:47:17 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
I hope it lives up to its name.
Become the capital of Arizona?


Future Ebay hot sale
By kontorotsui on 12/5/2008 2:15:58 PM , Rating: 5
I bet in 40 years there will be an Ebay auction for that.




RE: Future Ebay hot sale
By BadAcid on 12/5/2008 2:45:56 PM , Rating: 5
I bet it's sniped by the Chinese space program.


RE: Future Ebay hot sale
By Seemonkeyscanfly on 12/5/2008 2:46:11 PM , Rating: 5
Why not ebay it now.... Just make sure you state, buyer must pick up unit themselves. No shipping provided.


RE: Future Ebay hot sale
By kontorotsui on 12/5/2008 3:53:58 PM , Rating: 2
Yes...

"Shpping from Mars: US$4,000,000"


RE: Future Ebay hot sale
By Motoman on 12/5/2008 3:57:11 PM , Rating: 2
...$4M for shipping from Mars? Now that, my friends, is a bargain. I bet FedEx would charge at least a billion.


RE: Future Ebay hot sale
By SiliconAddict on 12/5/2008 8:20:15 PM , Rating: 3
And DHL would loose the package...oops sorry it got dropped off at Saturn....our bad.


RE: Future Ebay hot sale
By deeznuts on 12/5/2008 9:50:21 PM , Rating: 2
DHL just lost my package this week. They're the worst company ever, but my GF's company (Farmers) uses them. They lose shit all the ime for her. But she missed Fedex that day and sent it DHL. it was a barebones going back to shuttle, and they fucking delivered it to a residence.


RE: Future Ebay hot sale
By SpaceJumper on 12/5/2008 3:03:29 PM , Rating: 2
Good idea. NASA can recover some of its money.


RE: Future Ebay hot sale
By 4wardtristan on 12/11/2008 9:29:17 PM , Rating: 2
haha

"nasa phoenix, as new, unwanted gift"


Excellence in Engineering
By mikeblas on 12/5/2008 3:02:21 PM , Rating: 3
The interpipes are full of clowns who couldn't engineer a paper bag, but show no hesitation when they have the chance to critize projects or products. It's sad to me that these comments are full of nothing more than dumb jokes, so far.

The Mars probes are incredible feats of engineering; highly successful, well-executed, over-delivered and at or under budget. I hope the NASA teams involved are deeply proud of their accomplishments and emboldened to try even more amazing things to help us learn about ourselves and the universe around us.




RE: Excellence in Engineering
By SpaceJumper on 12/5/2008 3:15:41 PM , Rating: 3
I believe next version of the Phoenix will have the spider legs with it. I hope NASA will find human bones on MARS.


RE: Excellence in Engineering
By uhgotnegum on 12/5/2008 3:39:14 PM , Rating: 5
I agree that very few clowns are good at engineering.

I also agree that all NASA teams should be proud of their accomplishments (and I'd also throw in that they shouldn't hang their heads when things don't turn out perfectly)

I further agree that people shouldn't be so quick to criticize what they don't know; knowledge does not come from watching the nightly news, either.

I disagree, however, and only if my insinuation is correct that you meant it in this way, that people who post "dumb jokes" as comments fall into the category of people who are too quick to criticize. Dumb jokes are not, primarily, intended to represent the actual opinion of someone; they are intended to be...well...dumb. People who are quick to criticize don't really care about delivery of the comment, generally.


RE: Excellence in Engineering
By kickoff877 on 12/6/2008 9:17:12 AM , Rating: 3
I guess I'm not a clown, just engineered a functional paper bag out of a sheet of paper. Small, compact and lightweight, perfect for a Mars mission. Kept dry, will even survive the Martian winter.


RE: Excellence in Engineering
By JKflipflop98 on 12/7/2008 2:15:26 PM , Rating: 2
Now, can you engineer your way out?


Phoenix
By L1011 on 12/5/2008 2:01:07 PM , Rating: 2
It was an interesting program while it lasted. I'm sure in twenty years we'll send someone onto the planet to pick up the Phoenix :-)




RE: Phoenix
By SpaceJumper on 12/5/2008 3:05:54 PM , Rating: 2
I went through the worm hole and Phoenix is now in my living room with the battery disconnected.


Rover?
By Solandri on 12/5/2008 5:05:10 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
NASA had expected Phoenix to lose power during the harsh Martian winter, though it continued to try to get the rover to respond to commands sent from satellites orbiting Mars to no avail.

I thought it was a stationary lander, not a rover?




Does anyone know what it is?
By Belard on 12/5/2008 11:09:45 PM , Rating: 2
For the Phoenix to be a ROVER... it has to have the ability to MOVE!

The Eagle that landed the first man on the moon was not called a ROVER. It was the Lunar lander. Calling Phoenix the rover has been confusing in the past with your titles "Rover stopped working" something like that, and it had nothing to do with the two only rovers on mars which have been operating for years. Was that article written by the same guy as this one?

Next, some artile writer is going to say that all these stars we see are SUNS.




Suggestion
By uhgotnegum on 12/5/08, Rating: -1
RE: Suggestion
By marvdmartian on 12/5/2008 4:30:53 PM , Rating: 2
That's some crummy VOIP plan they've got, if they can't even call long distance to two states over!! ;)


RE: Suggestion
By uhgotnegum on 12/5/2008 4:59:31 PM , Rating: 2
A "4" for pulling the 'ol "Ebay that thing" comment and I get my comment put in timeout/"negative ratings land" because I pull the 'ol "Dial 9" comment.

Is there any way I can ever show my comment again?! And on a Friday, when I figure everyone is already in a slapstick mood...

at least I got my bonus check today


RE: Suggestion
By Parhel on 12/5/2008 5:35:31 PM , Rating: 2
It's a long story, but after Phoenix slapped the restraining order on NASA things went downhill.


RE: Suggestion
By uhgotnegum on 12/5/2008 5:43:19 PM , Rating: 1
I'm sorry Parhel, you're obviously being hit with stray droplets coming from the spite-spray directed at me.

It's always the innocent ones that suffer the most...if there were some way I could "worth reading" you, I totally would!

Watch out for the stray spite-spray!


RE: Suggestion
By A Mad Pole on 12/8/2008 8:21:39 AM , Rating: 1
And then NASA has to remember to "press 1 for English"


NASA is wrong
By BibleForever on 12/5/08, Rating: -1
RE: NASA is wrong
By deeznuts on 12/5/2008 9:53:26 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
It really bothers me that NASA exists. Hundreds of people are starving around the world and Bush spends money on a silly little science fiction project. Science needs to grow up and work on real problems like terrorism and starvation.
Hundreds of people that's all?

Shit lets pass the hat around right here and get them fed!

"Do they know it's christmas time at all?

Feeeeeeeed thheeeee wooorrrrld! ..."


RE: NASA is wrong
By BibleForever on 12/5/08, Rating: -1
RE: NASA is wrong
By Belard on 12/6/2008 9:56:51 AM , Rating: 2
Hmmmm... NASA uses a budget that is very tiny. The fake war started by the fake-so-to-be-gone President has blown $10billion dollars a month, costs over 4,000 American lives (over 20,000 severely wounded) and anywhere from 150,000~500,000 dead in Iraq.

The Space Shuttle is not small. Its far bigger than your truck. Its not looking for Star Trek... you can go to your local WalMart and get Star Trek for $15~60 depending on what you buy. It's a delivery truck for space, for the most part.

And its SPACE technology - things that are developed for space or discovered about things beyond our planet, that has advanced America (or used to)in Science, tech and medical. Check out your WalMart shoes with the Velcro straps - yep, space tech. The computer you're working on? The need for faster and better computers, Yup - Space (and military).

Also, exploration teaches us about our home, where we come from and where we may go. Because in the big scheme of things... our little planet is all we have and we're not going anywhere else, soon. (Give it scale, lets say the Earth was the size of a mouse, our planet still wouldn't be the size of a galaxy.) If you live in the city, drive out of town at night and look up on a clear night. Those little white dots we call "stars" are mostly galaxies. In case you don't know what they look like, here's a crappy picture showing some at various distances in one photographic shot:
http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h1/annas890/c86f...

Here is a close up view of one:
http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h1/annas890/40eb...

The time it has taken for our solar system (and earth) to make a revolution, the Dinorsaurs and come and gone and we're brand new.

Are there far more reasons to be ashamed to be an "American", you betcha!


RE: NASA is wrong
By Belard on 12/6/2008 10:08:10 AM , Rating: 2
Okay, found a better picture of some Galaxies from Hubble. Very cool photo. http://space.about.com/library/graphics/galaxiesga... (2400x3000)

There are billions, even hundreds of billions of stars in many Galaxies (That is more stars than Bill Gates worth in pennies) and there are about 100 billion Galaxies.

To Learn more: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galaxies

Enjoy!


RE: NASA is wrong
By nineball9 on 12/6/2008 4:15:42 PM , Rating: 2
Those little white dots we call "stars" are mostly galaxies.

No, only a few objects outside our galaxy are visible to the naked eye and they are all pretty dim. A few of the galaxies of the Local Group such as Andromeda (M31) and the Large and Small Magellanic Clouds in the Southern Hemisphere can be seen with the naked eye. Very dim, the Triangulum Galaxy (M33), also part of the Local Group, is generally considered to be the most distant object visible to the naked eye. Bode's Galaxy (M81) can be seen with binoculars, though some can see it without an aid. Gobular Clusters outside the plane of the Milky Way can be seen though they are part of the galaxy.

There are only about 8,000 stars visible to the naked eye (8,479 according to this site http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/visible_from... , about 2,500 from at any given spot and time with perfect viewing conditions.)

However, the Hubble Deep Field and the Hubble Ultra Deep Field images are amazing!


RE: NASA is wrong
By jlips6 on 12/6/2008 12:13:47 PM , Rating: 2
Looking for star trek?
No, for that, they fly these silly little ships called "auto-mobiles", these strange devices that utilize a strange scientific abuse of geometry called a "wheel", that then takes them to a place called a video store, whereupon they use the advanced navigation controls known commonly as asking the clerk where they keep the star trek dvd's, and then spend more of their frivolous money, and leave, having succesfully found star trek, utilizing the same wacky vehicle they arrived by.
of course, you wouldn't have much of that stuff under your bridge would you? I'm keeping my goats away from you.


RE: NASA is wrong
By TheSpaniard on 12/7/2008 12:53:20 PM , Rating: 2
OMG I loved the goat reference thank you for reminding me about childhood stories!


RE: NASA is wrong
By FactNotFiction on 12/6/2008 9:03:27 PM , Rating: 4
BibleForever, you stated that it "really bothers" you that NASA exists and that NASA makes you "ashamed" to be an American. Wow, do you really know what you’re saying? I suspect not, but let’s find out:

You’re not proud that it was America that developed the satellite technology that routinely relays pagers, cell phones, dish television signals, as well as vital emergency, medical and nation defense information to Americans at home and abroad? You’re not proud of the American Global Positioning Satellite system that safely guides our civilian and military vehicles, and is used by search and rescue teams to save hundreds of lives each year? Are you not proud that advanced American weather technologies save thousands of lives each year through early warnings of coming hurricanes, floods and tornados?

I guess you don’t ever fly in airplanes? Because if you did, I would think you’d actually be proud of the advanced American technologies on board like wind sheer detection and collision avoidance systems. I suppose you or your family never travel on freeways in the rain? If you did, you might be proud of the simple, but life saving American invention of thin groves in the concrete that makes driving in bad weather much safer for millions of Americans every day.

And what if you or a loved one’s house was on fire, and a firefighter was able to rescue them because of the advanced life saving equipment they use (including specialized clothing, advanced communications, cooling and respiration systems)? Would you ashamed of that? And are you ashamed that American Air and Space based agriculture imaging is allowing our farmers to feed far more people with the same amount of land? How about our microprocessor technology? Are you ashamed of the computer in front of you, or the data compression technology that you’re using right now? (If yes, why are you doing it)?

And are you ashamed that America developed the IR and VL image enhancement technology that helps our police and military to catch the bad guys, while helping doctors around the world to provide early and accurate diagnosis of hundreds of problems? Are you ashamed that these American technologies are saving American lives every day? Have you ever known anyone with a pacemaker? If so, are you ashamed of them (and the technology that is sustaining them)? Are you ashamed each time American developed robotics detonates a device that would have otherwise killed or injured our brave soldiers and law enforcement personnel, (or when the same technology is used in delicate micro surgery to save the lives of ordinary people like your friends and neighbors)?

Let me ask, do you have any smoke detectors or carbon monoxide detectors in your home? If yes, are you ashamed of them? Do you use – or know anyone who uses – cordless phones, toothbrushes, screwdrivers, drills, hand vacuums or other cordless devices? If so, are you ashamed of them too? Based on your post, you should be ashamed of everything I mentioned.

Why? Because all of the above are not just the result of American science, they are the direct result of NASA science! And all this for less than 8/10th of one penny of every American tax dollar! Maybe you didn’t know all this. If so, may I suggest you’re initial post was a tad bit misinformed. But if you still say you’re ashamed of the above NASA technologies, then you should sell your computer and disconnect those smoke detectors right now. No? Then it would seem you don’t have much faith in your own beliefs.

As Americans, NASA is one of the things we should all be the MOST proud of. It "really bothers" me when people that don't know what they're talking about, talk anyway (and with such strong conviction). It's no wonder we’re currently in such trouble as a nation.


RE: NASA is wrong
By Parhel on 12/7/2008 12:29:59 AM , Rating: 2
That's a mighty long response for someone who:

a) is a troll
b) is almost certainly a fake
c) will probably make about a dozen posts and never be seen again

Well written post, though. I hear many people object to NASA for all sorts of reasons, and I can't wrap my head around it. I'm very skeptical regarding the existence of extraterrestrial life. But, no matter what's out there, we should be investing 10 times as much as we do into NASA. We've become content and lazy, and lost touch with the explorer spirit. If our generation was around 500 years ago, we probably still wouldn't have discovered America.


RE: NASA is wrong
By kontorotsui on 12/5/2008 10:00:52 PM , Rating: 2
Dear BibleForever you hit the record of wrong statements here.
1) Hundreds of THOUSANDS of people are starving, probably millions, not hundreds.
2) If they are starving is not of lack of science, but because their countries are plagued by war and corruption.
3) NASA is neither silly nor science fiction, it is real science and engineering and human race should be proud of our achievement in space, even if still limited.
4) Terrorism nowadays is not due to lack of science, but usually because of people that blindly believe in some evil guys who shape religion and ignorance for their schemes. Religion fanatism should be well know to you, as your username proves.
5) Bush, I mean USA, probably spends 100-1000 times more money on military budget, why don't you complain about that?


RE: NASA is wrong
By Belard on 12/5/2008 11:00:39 PM , Rating: 2
Or perhaps in such countries where there are no jobs (including in he USA) that are starving - STOP HAVING BABIES! Jesus!!!

In the wild, when the habitat can no longer support the amount of life, the natural thing is to NOT create more resource eating machines.

So... that woman that is starving and has 5 starving kids? Perhaps if she had NO children, she'd have food in her stomach. Its a fact, the earth only has SO MUCH space to feed humans. DUH!


RE: NASA is wrong
By Ringold on 12/6/2008 3:06:27 AM , Rating: 1
Malthus was wrong.

The 'Population Bomb' theory was wrong.

Welcome to 2008, where shrinking and aging populations promise to be the largest fiscal threat to ever face western civilization within 20 years. It's also sad to think that, one day, France, Berlin and Rome will be populated almost entirely by people who don't share at all the ancient cities original culture, because all those who did chose to not have kids.

Over population is only an issue in the poorest regions of the world; when they start to gain wealth, birth rates plummet. Even starvation isn't a resource depletion issue, it's a distribution, government, and financial issue.

So lets not pretend fewer babies will fix anything. If anything, the West needs more of them. At least be honest with the anti-human agenda; environmental whacko's want fewer humans simply because humans are vile infidels corrupting the sacred biosphere, crushing beautiful cockroachs and poisoning innocent rats where ever we build our cities.


RE: NASA is wrong
By Belard on 12/6/2008 9:32:56 AM , Rating: 2
Er... lets see, Fishermen have to go out deeper into the ocean to find FISH... because of over-fishing is deleting the oceans.

What used to be forests in the USA is mostly farms. Ever fly in a plane? Leave a major city and its farm after farm... to feed people. The amount of Fresh water needed is also becoming problematic. Desalination factories of course will be required.

One thing this planet doesn't need, is more people (And I do have a son).


RE: NASA is wrong
By Jim28 on 12/6/2008 2:57:52 PM , Rating: 1
Then you are a hypocrite. Congrats on having a son, but saying others can't have one is stupid.
If you think there are too many people on this planet then do us all a favor and do something about it. Reduce it by one. (Yourself) otherwise be quiet.
Look at popluation trends and you will understand Ringold's statements.


RE: NASA is wrong
By Belard on 12/8/2008 5:53:33 PM , Rating: 2
I adopted... and I didn't say that people shouldn't have kids. But with how things are, people need to control themselves.

And theres a difference between 2 people having 1 child and compared to a single mother who has 5 kids from 3-5 different men,.who they themselves have kids with other women.

And yes, I know there are different population trends in different parts of the world. But in general, there are more people than the Earth can support.

Worst yet, people who are more educated/intelligent have less or no children (in general). They'll look at the world and their finances and say no kids, or not until they're in their 30s.


RE: NASA is wrong
By kickoff877 on 12/6/2008 9:33:29 AM , Rating: 2
Yes, less people! How about we get the World Health Organization to engineer some sort of human-only birth control drug, dump it in all of the world's water supplies, and make people prove they are qualified to become parents (stable lifestyles, financial responsibility, no addictions or severe mental health issues); then, and only then, their government's health agencies can provide them with an antidote and they can have their children.

As a teacher I had said: "Imagine a world populated with children who were all wanted, loved and cared for by parents who truly cherished them."

Plus, I hear that they can get the birth control drug from Mars, maybe that's what the lander is looking for.


RE: NASA is wrong
By BikeDude on 12/7/2008 4:52:28 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
So... that woman that is starving and has 5 starving kids? Perhaps if she had NO children, she'd have food in her stomach.


People who live under rough conditions have more children because the child mortality is high. More kids means bigger chance of propagating one's genes. Pure evolution at play.

But logically speaking, I do agree with you. The population growth need to be controlled. We should look to progressive countries like China, where the government successfully dictate a one-child policy.

I think it has been proven that a capitalistic system won't manage to keep the world fed (farmers make more money growing flowers, tobacco or opium compared to food).

...and neither will a state subsidized system. (prime example: EU subsidized production of milk -- which generates a surplus of milk -- that then is turned to powdered milk and shipped off to third-world countries -- where local dairy farmers cannot compete with dirt cheap european milk = more poor people to feed)

We need new technology. We need new ideas. We need... so many things.

...or we should start deciding which people to kill. Because the next wave of famine is going to be nasty and there will be many desperate people crossing all sorts of borders.

My vote is on killing obese americans and europeans. Anyone weighing more than 100kg need to be terminated. That should leave more than enough food for the rest of us for quite some time.

I thank you for your kind attention.


RE: NASA is wrong
By BibleForever on 12/5/2008 11:34:35 PM , Rating: 2
You are wrong on every point. Science is murder and those who practice it are murderers. The Bible says so twice. I think you have a lot of growing up to do young man. That said, I forgive you.


RE: NASA is wrong
By Falloutboy on 12/6/2008 1:27:56 AM , Rating: 2
fly away little troll


RE: NASA is wrong
By kickoff877 on 12/6/2008 9:38:56 AM , Rating: 2
Seriously? Murder? How many drugs have you ever taken? Cars have you driven? How many times a day do you use the results of a work done by scientists? Say.... the scientist that engineered the computer you typed your ignorant thoughts on?

HEATHEN!! HELL AWAITS!! But I forgive you too.


RE: NASA is wrong
By nineball9 on 12/6/2008 4:30:43 PM , Rating: 2
Hypocritically, you wrote your post using technology developed by scientists. Read about physicists Ampere, Ohm, Hertz and Volta among others. You may not know who they were but you may recognize the names!


RE: NASA is wrong
By TheSpaniard on 12/7/2008 12:56:17 PM , Rating: 2
so when can we expect you to sell off your computer, home, and car. as well as any other modern day item, all of those things, including food purchased from stores, were made by murderers

and use that money to purchase a farm and feed the hundereds of starving people in the US?


RE: NASA is wrong
By gumbi18 on 12/7/2008 5:36:05 PM , Rating: 2
I'm not a religious person, but I have read the bible and if my memory serves me correctly nowhere does it state that science is murder.


RE: NASA is wrong
By kickoff877 on 12/6/2008 9:21:41 AM , Rating: 2
I have a problem with point #5. The military budget should be even higher, that's where I get paid from!!


RE: NASA is wrong
By Jim28 on 12/6/2008 3:25:25 PM , Rating: 1
At the very lest folks need to know what else the government spends OUR money on.
Some folks gripe about the billions spent in this country on the military. what about trillions spent every year on in entitlements? What about the 1 to 7 trillion dollar bailout pricetag that we are going to print money in order to pay for. Maybe folks get confused by all of those zeroes but I will do a small comparison.
We spend approximately 1.5 Trillion on SS/Medicare and other entitlements. That is 127 Billion a month.
We spend 626 billion on defense. That is 52 billion.
Add the 10billion a month extra for the war appropriations the defense budget is still 62 billion a month.
Out of a federal budget of approx 2.7 trillion.

So tell me where is the money going eh? And folks bitch about 10 billion a month. Admittedly the cost of defense and the iraq war is not cheap but together they are far less expensive than the entitlement sections of the budget. I guess the hardcore liberals want a country with no credible military, and all of us on an entitlement program. I was too lazy to make the numbers exact as you can see with the link to wikipedia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal...


RE: NASA is wrong
By Pavelyoung on 12/7/2008 5:35:18 AM , Rating: 1
You know, who really gives a damn about the people that are starving in Africa? Tell them to move out of the DESERT! Don't they know that nothing grows in the desert?

Honestly, exactly how many people do you expect to feed with the 0.1% of the budget that NASA gets?


RE: NASA is wrong
By Regs on 12/8/2008 8:43:48 AM , Rating: 3
We cannot help people that don't want to be helped. Africa? They sit on vast lands filled with the most precious minerals and metals in the world. Though they rather trade them for guns to slaughter their own people in tribal wars. Giving them any kind of money will just fuel the fire.

It's like giving a bum 10 dollars. They'll either spend it on booze, smokes, or drugs.


"It looks like the iPhone 4 might be their Vista, and I'm okay with that." -- Microsoft COO Kevin Turner














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki