NASA knew Columbia crew could die but chose not to tell them, page 3


Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 40 times


reply posted on 1-2-2013 @ 03:49 PM by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by WaterBottle



while that may be true, it is unthinkable that the decision would be made without you.


reply posted on 1-2-2013 @ 03:52 PM by Rezlooper
Originally posted by TrueAmerican




Boggles the fricken mind, if this is true.

When it became clear that the orbiter was seriously damaged and likely wouldn’t survive re-entry, Flight Director Jon Harpold said to Hale and others at the meeting, “You know, there is nothing we can do about damage to the TPS (Thermal Protection System). If it has been damaged it’s probably better not to know. I think the crew would rather not know. Don’t you think it would be better for them to have a happy successful flight and die unexpectedly during entry than to stay on orbit, knowing that there was nothing to be done, until the air ran out?”


My God. I mean you figure that something else might have been attempted, like a rescue of some sorts?

And I think this speaks highly of theories that NASA WOULD NOT TELL US, if there were indeed a deadly asteroid inbound, and instead would choose to let those die in ignorance of their upcoming fate.

Keep playing God, NASA.
THE PEOPLE HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW. After all, it is with our tax dollars that you function at all. Fricken jerks!

www.rawstory.com
(visit the link for the full news article)


At first as I read this I believed as well that if there wasn't anything they could do, then not telling them probably was the right choice, bu then again, you raise a very important specter here...the idea that NASA wouldn't tell us if there was in impending disaster from an asteroid impact. I can vision it now...NASA's top brass sitting around some observation room tracking an inbound rock that was miscalculated or missed entirely heading for some major city and them discussing how there's not enough time to evacuate the 3 million people in harm's way, so let's not tell them so as to avoid a panic. "It's better to let them die happily living their lives rather than spend the last 5 hours killing each other in a mass exodus from the city!" Whoa, the decisions. I have to agree with you here that there is a high probability that they would allow people to perish and decide for themselves they are doing the right thing, but they aren't...people would have a right to know so they can choose for themselves how they want to spend those last hours. Maybe they would have their own escape plan. In the case of these astronauts who they knew would have to face re-entry or run out of air, that's a tough call, but I think if there was any chance that re-entry might have been successful, it was worth the try. I would have hated to been in on that decision whether to tell them or not.



reply posted on 1-2-2013 @ 04:08 PM by captainpudding
reply to post by sylent6



You may want to read up on your history. The damage occurred during launch, they had no way of knowing the shuttle would have been damaged before it was damaged


reply posted on 1-2-2013 @ 04:41 PM by MarioOnTheFly
reply to post by Ramcheck



I love it when you say it like that...cost millions.

That trumps lives.


reply posted on 1-2-2013 @ 04:50 PM by Ramcheck
Originally posted by MarioOnTheFly
reply to
post by Ramcheck



I love it when you say it like that...cost millions.

That trumps lives.


I never said it was the right thing, in fact I believe it's the complete opposite.

2nd.


reply posted on 1-2-2013 @ 04:59 PM by Baddogma
reply to post by TrueAmerican



It's easy to pass judgement on people's actions when one wasn't there.

These people knew each other very well and had to make a judgement call, if the story is accurate.

The real issue here might be funding to have back ups for trouble/rescue in orbit... but the participants all knew the danger. Still, our priorities suck.


reply posted on 1-2-2013 @ 05:39 PM by Phage
reply to post by FoosM


Wasn't the ISS up there?
They could have redocked with it and waited for a new shuttle.
No. They couldn't. The shuttle never docked with the ISS on that mission, was in a different orbit (much lower and with a very different inclination), and did not carry enough fuel to do so.

edit on 2/1/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)

Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>    ^^TOP^^



Israel angered over IAEA vote on nuclear arsenal
  Posted 13 days ago with 79 member flags
Neil Armstrong dead at age 82 - report
  Posted 17 days ago with 63 member flags
Judge orders release of detained Marine veteran
  Posted 19 days ago with 58 member flags
Birds hold \'funerals\' for dead
  Posted 10 days ago with 55 member flags
TSA agents swarm Ron Paul\'s plane, demand explosives check
  Posted 11 days ago with 47 member flags
Mysterious Changes in Ocean Salt Spur NASA Expedition
  Posted 1 days ago with 36 member flags
Ga. Murder Case Uncovers Terror Plot by Soldiers
  Posted 15 days ago with 32 member flags