Ahh money. Let me tell a little story about money. First, Moon-Mars is not a brainchild of bush, it is a brainchild of the previous NASA administrator Sean O'Keefe. It was just embraced by the Executive idea, so please don't give them credit for such a crappy idea. So why is it a crappy idea? No money. When the presidential directive came out it included no provisions for additional appropriations. NASA was just supposed to "figure it out." Since it arrived within shooting range of the next eleciton, everyone at NASA (most of which thought the "manned" at least was foolishly machismo and excessive) did their best to stall, praying someone else would land in office. After the reelection, NASA has been forced to rearrange their existing budget to shoot for a goal they know will NEVER happen without more money.
What they've done as a good-faith effort to fund this on their own coin is axe the entire Earth and Planetary Science office. That means all global-warming, remote-sensing based etc... academic research funding has been chopped unless it can spin a Mars connection. That's where I come in. As a grad student studying Cold Region Processes (and influence on global climate) who like most of my colleagues relied on funding from this source, I have been hit particularly hard. I can now thank Manned Moon-Mars courtesy of our hero Bush for my current credit card debt. So I take it a little perosnally.
As an administrative move though, thank god they got rid of O'Keefe. He was NOT a scientist, and he wanted to scuttle Hubble because he was paranoid about risking Astronaut safety (which, incidently, the astronauts who would be risking their lives were desperate to save it, so really his motivation was political fear of another PR disaster). I'm no Astronomer, but that would break even my heart to see that beauty burn. I like the idea of a new shuttle and all that stuff, but for god's sake don't axe good programs, just add more money.
Slashdot Mirror
Ahh money. Let me tell a little story about money. First, Moon-Mars is not a brainchild of bush, it is a brainchild of the previous NASA administrator Sean O'Keefe. It was just embraced by the Executive idea, so please don't give them credit for such a crappy idea. So why is it a crappy idea? No money. When the presidential directive came out it included no provisions for additional appropriations. NASA was just supposed to "figure it out." Since it arrived within shooting range of the next eleciton, everyone at NASA (most of which thought the "manned" at least was foolishly machismo and excessive) did their best to stall, praying someone else would land in office. After the reelection, NASA has been forced to rearrange their existing budget to shoot for a goal they know will NEVER happen without more money. What they've done as a good-faith effort to fund this on their own coin is axe the entire Earth and Planetary Science office. That means all global-warming, remote-sensing based etc... academic research funding has been chopped unless it can spin a Mars connection. That's where I come in. As a grad student studying Cold Region Processes (and influence on global climate) who like most of my colleagues relied on funding from this source, I have been hit particularly hard. I can now thank Manned Moon-Mars courtesy of our hero Bush for my current credit card debt. So I take it a little perosnally. As an administrative move though, thank god they got rid of O'Keefe. He was NOT a scientist, and he wanted to scuttle Hubble because he was paranoid about risking Astronaut safety (which, incidently, the astronauts who would be risking their lives were desperate to save it, so really his motivation was political fear of another PR disaster). I'm no Astronomer, but that would break even my heart to see that beauty burn. I like the idea of a new shuttle and all that stuff, but for god's sake don't axe good programs, just add more money.