You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
Well, It's monday here in New Zealand and I'm back at work. I check out space.com on the high-speed connection during lunch, and read through two articles. The first http://www.space.com/news/griffin_nasa_050311.html]one, has me very excited. The http://www.space.com/adastra/adastra_tu … tml]second, has me a bit worried. Are we still arguing? Why can't we all just get along... In any case, I couldn't help but feel sorry for the author of the second article. Perhaps the original iteration of the presidents vision had created a sort of false hope; maybe some of you out there really beleived NASA could pull it off. I'm not trying to discredit the mans arguments, indeed it would be entirely possible for these things to happen. But I could never beleive it.
NASA will always do well when directed by teams of engineers and scientists, not revolutionists, not visionaries, and definately not, as we have seen, bureaucrats.
Bring back the engineers and the scientists to the forefront of NASA, and whatever happens will be good. Which is exactly why Mars should be the destination: That's where the scientists want to go, and that's where the engineers want to take them.
Just my two cents
-Mike
- Mike, Member of the [b][url=http://cleanslate.editboard.com]Clean Slate Society[/url][/b]
Offline
Pages: 1