It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The contrasts are stark. A Kerry administration would delay-if not doom-America's reach into space

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 06:52 AM
link   
Rather, as Mr. Bush declared in his memorial speech for the Columbia astronauts, "The cause of exploration and discovery is not an option we choose. It is a desire written in the human heart."
The contrasts are stark. A Kerry administration would delay — if not doom — America's reach into space

washingtontimes.com...

click on the link for the full story.

as I has said before I will stay with bush because of his space exploration vision. and the plans which kerry has with space exploration are ridicule and far out evil, which means what he wants is more of the same which we have after the end of the apollo program. we will not go out wards to the moon mars and beyond but only return to flight of the shuttle just what bush has said and completing the ISS just as bush but after that we wil not go to moon or mars and beyond. and that will slow down discovery.
because pushing the bounderies and going further in to space which is hard will bring discovery and bring new tech. because making it hard will do it. we have gone to ISS or MIR orbit for years it has become a routine.
a routine is easy and will not need new technology or technics ... only going further will need that. that will need new technology technics and discoveries on the way to the moon mars and beyond and Kerry will not do this with his plans.

[edit on 31-10-2004 by MarkLuitzen]




posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 09:11 AM
link   
US will not go to Mars or moon with Bush also, just look at the NASA budget, it is not posible. Just the Mars expedition would cost at least 150 billion, not to mention Moon colony. IMO NASA should cancel most of the science projects (like Gemini) and invest all available money into research for the better (and cheaper) ways how to get to the orbit. Thats the main problem limiting effective space exploration today.

[edit on 31-10-2004 by longbow]



posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 10:57 AM
link   
I think if we are really going to make it in space and build bases on the moon and mars more international collaboration is needed (I think Von Braun said something to this effect). I mean you have the US, China, Russia and the UK all working on different projects and some of them are similar or overlap. It would be better if we all worked together and shared information something that seems unlikely under Bush or probably even Kerry






[edit on 31-10-2004 by Sabre262]



posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 11:42 AM
link   
So far most of the money spent on space by the Republicans has been in the area of military intel and the groundwork for militarization of space without actually violating the existing treaties prohibiting that.

As far as peaceful space program --well, the decision was quietly made some time back that more scientific bang for the buck can be had using unmanned probes for interplanetary missions.

Although technically more advanced in several areas, and immensely wealthier, the US cannot currently put men into space at all, and must rely on Russian Soyuz capsules, the basic model of the 1960's Soviet manned space program [somewhat updated, one would assume].

But even assuming enough time and money can be given to NASA & its contractors to get astronauts into orbit , no work has been done on some of the technical problems that are involved in trying to put humans through and above the Van Allen belts.

Since the Apollo program ended in the early 1970's, the US has not even claimed to have put anyone outside the radiation safe zone of low earth orbit. The Russians never [that is publicly known] even attempted to try.

Of course, whether or not Apollo ever went to the moon as claimed is a whole 'nother thread, isn't it?!



posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 12:12 PM
link   
Even the USA can't fund it's entire space efforts alone and with Bush and his administration's contempt for anyone who dares disagree with them the necessary sharing and co-operative efforts are just not going to happen.

No matter what fine words he uses Bush is belligerently driving the USA to a more and more isolationist position in the world and IMO that applies just as much to the space effort as any other area.

Kerry might not have made the grand announcements but in practise I could imagine he will accomplish much much more over the time.

[edit on 31-10-2004 by sminkeypinkey]



posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 09:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by MarkLuitzen
Rather, as Mr. Bush declared in his memorial speech for the Columbia astronauts, "The cause of exploration and discovery is not an option we choose. It is a desire written in the human heart."
The contrasts are stark. A Kerry administration would delay — if not doom — America's reach into space
washingtontimes.com...
(snip)



This is about the only reason I would prefer Bush be elected.
But either way it doesn't matter. If you have done many
rocket design equations you know that specific impulse is a
measure of propellant performance. Existing common
propellants measure between 250 to 360 at sea level, with the
shuttle lox hydrogen combination over 400 in vacuum.
Rockets are big (and expensive) mostly because of the
limited specific impulse, and also because of the low density
hydrogen. If however that were increased to the 700 range or
better, and the propellant had a density comparable to water,
without special conditions to store it, then rockets able to
carry a person to orbit the size of a large car could be built.
There is research going on that will result in such propellants
in the foreseeable future, and then people will leave Earth
irregardless of governments.



posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 09:51 PM
link   
Good. I hope the federal government stops funding the space program altogether.

Honestly, it could get done better, faster, and cheaper for the Federal government to turn over all data and technologies to private industry.

Especially with the current events. The industry is doing is ANYWAY. Let's help them further our cause like every other American invention or quest.

Almost all of our military technologies are private designs. From missles to guns, planes and tanks. Hell, the Hovercraft was invented by a Professor of mine when they took an old Chevy and put 2 jet engines in it with no skirt.

They have video of this thing manuvering around a parking lot.

Amazing.

Let's give THEM the keys and really be put on the map.



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 06:02 AM
link   
John Kerry has a generally supportive view of NASA—as long as he doesn't have to get nailed down to specifics. This is not to say that he would not support the agency overall—indeed he has indicated that he would. But when it comes to the International Space Station, his voting record speaks resoundingly clearly:


In 1991, Kerry Voted To "Reduce Funding For The Space Station From $2 Billion To $100 Million," And Transfer Funds To Other Programs. (H.R. 2519, Congressional Quarterly Vote #132: Rejected 35-64: R 3-40; D 32-24, July 17, 1991, Kerry Voted Yea)


In 1992, Kerry Voted To Terminate Space Station "Freedom" Project. (H.R. 5679, Congressional Quarterly Vote #194: Rejected 34-63: R 4-39; D 30-24, September 9, 1992, Kerry Voted Yea)


In 1993, Kerry Voted "To Terminate The Space Station Program." (H.R. 2491, Congressional Quarterly Vote #272: Motion Agreed To 59-40: R 36-8; D 23-32, September 21, 1993, Kerry Voted Nay)


In 1993, Kerry Voted To Terminate Space Station Program And Divert Funds To Tax Cuts. (H.R. 3167, Congressional Quarterly Vote #335: Motion rejected 36-61: R 10-32; D 26-29, October 27, 1993, Kerry Voted Yea)


In 1994, Kerry Voted To Cut $1.9 Billion From Space Station Program, Thus Terminating It. (H.R. 4624, Congressional Quarterly Vote #253: Rejected 36-64: R 6-38; D 30-26, August 3, 1994, Kerry Voted Yea)


In 1995, Kerry Voted To Reduce NASA Funding By $400 Million. (H.R. 889, Congressional Quarterly Vote #105: Motion Agreed To 64-35: R 43-11; D 21-24, March 16, 1995, Kerry Voted Nay)


In 1995, Kerry Voted To Cut $1.8 Billion From NASA's Human Space Flight Program. (H.R. 2099, Congressional Quarterly Vote #463: Motion Rejected 35-64: R 12-41; D 23-23, September 26, 1995, Kerry Voted Yea)


In 1996, Kerry Voted To Cut $1.6 Billion From NASA's Human Space Flight Program And Terminate Space Station Program. (H.R. 3666, Congressional Quarterly Vote #267: Motion Agreed To 61-36: R 38-12; D 23-24, September 4, 1996, Kerry Voted Nay)

Given this rather blunt rejection of human space flight and a permanent human presence in space, one has to wonder: if Kerry is this strongly against the International Space Station, a multi-year, multi-billion dollar international program several hundred miles overhead, whether he'd be any more interested in a similarly large, long-term project that sent humans to the Moon or Mars.

www.spaceref.com...

ONE more reason why I am against Kerry



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join