View Single Post
Old July 31 2011, 07:37 PM   #44
sojourner's Avatar
Location: I'm at WKRP
Re: International Space Station to be decommissioned in 2020?

Saquist wrote: View Post
sojourner wrote: View Post
It does in the context of your argument that the ISS was intended to be used as a stepping stone and crucial part of a mars mission.
The intent was already proven through NASA's projections of future ventures.
Then post a link to that. not some third party's dream of what the ISS should be used for.

So, then it is contributing to mars research? that goes against your argument then.
No it's in favor of your argument that research apparently worthy of loose spending practices. But it does confirm that this has not happened yet and EVEN THIS GOAL for Mars research hasn't occurred and was INTENDED. GOAL not achieved.

The arguement has always been the same.
NASA is not getting the job done.
Yeah, I think if I remember, we were going on this comment:
It is. The project just became a waste of tax payer dollars if the station doesn't accomplish it's goal. To have to construct another one to properly and effectively set up bases on the moon and Mars is exactly the kind of pork-barrel spending that was mentioned that killed NASA in the first place.
And the goal in that second link hasn't happened yet. You're right. But then again, it was just a proposal. Not INTENDED. GOAL not achieve because, derrrr, GOAL NOT ASSIGNED. Yep, I can capitalize words too.

That was not my intent. I was merely setting the definition for the sake of accuracy as is my practice.

Note, the following "dots" follow the "NASA is a joke" argument and share no context with th ISS's missionThe above "dot" relates to the entire aerospace industry and is not indicative of NASA spending.Only one?? Really? You have a poor memory.
Reitteration: The Argument (or more properly: The CLAIM is that NASA represents a meandering, financially, superflous organization that has done little or nothing at excessive cost for the last 40 years.

The ISS Mission:

As a product of NASA's excess spending the de-orbiting of the station would represent a massive loss to tax payers. It's has been and will be thoroughly criticized for it's high cost in assembly and maintenance and then of course having to eventually build another later.
NASA is not the sole owner of the station and does not make the decisions on the future of the station on it's own.

4th "DOT" as it were:

NASA has shared joint research on all of these projects. The aerospace firms shared a partnership in the research in order to shoulder the financial burden. NONE of those projects to progress space travel or stream line space travel have come to practical application in 40 years. One miles stone... Scrutiny is inevitable.
Name "these projects" that #4 is referring to for cost figures. Because as stated you are insinuating that NASA has it's finger in every dollar spent in aerospace. ooo! Sounds like a conspiracy!
Baby, you and me were never meant to be, just maybe think of me once in a while...
sojourner is offline   Reply With Quote