Successful Landing on Mars!

The Curiosity rover just safely landed on Mars! This rover has 10 times the scientific equipment/capability of previous rovers. It has the ability to test rocks and soil for signs of microbial life. Scientists hope to discover whether Mars ever could, or ever has supported life. This is a huge step forward in planetary exploration!

OMG, I just realized: your user pic is a MARTIAN ball.

The conspiracy guys are going nuts on this. Apparently it is outfitted with headlights but NASA says there will be no night time exploration.

I hate conspiracy theorists. If it is solar powered how could it run at night? They may be to illuminate areas in shadow behind rock. Also, did it land in a completely flat plain? If it is hill there may be places that are fairly dark. As a biologist, I would totally volunteer for a one way trip to a new planet if life was found, on Jupiter's frozen moon, Europa. I'd go under the ice in a vessel to see what life is there, and I am convinced that there has to be!

Yey! I watched on TV last night, cool stuff!:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gsarchie

I hate conspiracy theorists. If it is solar powered how could it run at night? They may be to illuminate areas in shadow behind rock. Also, did it land in a completely flat plain? If it is hill there may be places that are fairly dark. As a biologist, I would totally volunteer for a one way trip to a new planet if life was found, on Jupiter's frozen moon, Europa. I'd go under the ice in a vessel to see what life is there, and I am convinced that there has to be!

---

It's not solar like the other rovers. It's nuclear powered similar to the Viking craft from the 70's.

NASA has been behind the curve for years on Mars. The EUSA (European Space Agency) discovered water on Mars years before NASA admitted it. So hopefully this "SUV is space" will help rebuild NASA's credibility.

I think this was an amazing feat! I'm saddened that it was not hailed by the wider public in America as a great scientific achievement. When I was a kid, I remember it seemed EVERYTHING stood still while the world watched Apollo 11 mission and the steps on the moon. Today's news was covered, but it just didn't seem to have the hype that it deserves. I think that is bad news for science. This was truly a fantastic day for science and I look forward to seeing more reports from Curiosity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MasonC2K

The conspiracy guys are going nuts on this. Apparently it is outfitted with headlights but NASA says there will be no night time exploration.

---

I can't believe conspiracy theorists have never heard of shadows. :rofl:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gsarchie

I hate conspiracy theorists. If it is solar powered how could it run at night? They may be to illuminate areas in shadow behind rock. Also, did it land in a completely flat plain? If it is hill there may be places that are fairly dark. As a biologist, I would totally volunteer for a one way trip to a new planet if life was found, on Jupiter's frozen moon, Europa. I'd go under the ice in a vessel to see what life is there, and I am convinced that there has to be!

---

Batteries. :P

But, as noted above, it has a plutonium nuclear reactor on board. :)

I think it's fantastic and well worth doing whether they find signs of life or not. :bow:

Go NASA!!!! :salute:

Yo, did y'all see the picture of the parachute descent, taken from above by the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter?

http://twitpic.com/ag8j1w

http://www.planetary.org/blogs/emily...parachute.html

- - - Updated - - -

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MasonC2K

The conspiracy guys are going nuts on this. Apparently it is outfitted with headlights but NASA says there will be no night time exploration.

---

Goal is apparently 24 hour science, but no movement at night.

They have a bad habit of stopping to take a sample at every danged rock on the way to the actual science goal (in this case, the layered mountains that look like water-based sedimentation filling up the middle of the crater), so the 24-hour science means the geologists can poke and prod all the silly boulders along the way, without taking away too badly from the daytime forward movement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MasonC2K

NASA has been behind the curve for years on Mars. The EUSA (European Space Agency) discovered water on Mars years before NASA admitted it. So hopefully this "SUV is space" will help rebuild NASA's credibility.

---

Say what? Nobody has achieved more than NASA with space exploration or Mars in particular. ESA did confirm the existence of water on the south pole with the Mars Express in 2004, but their lander the Beagle 2 was a failure. And that was after NASA confirmed the presence of water on the martian north pole with the orbiting Odyssey (2002) and predicted that water existed from the Viking missions in the 70s. NASA did have a their share of failures, but more recently the Spirit and Opportunity missions were huge successes as well as the multi-national Phoenix mission.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dr.Del

But, as noted above, it has a plutonium nuclear reactor on board. :)

---

Not really a nuclear reactor, but a much safer thermoelectric generator. ;) Here's a link that describes all the details of the Curiosity lander. Lots of cool stuff... I'm really looking forward to video of the descent taken by the Mars Descent Imager (MARDI). I'm very impressed that NASA pulled off the landing considering how complicated it was compared to previous missions. :gj:

Hey Y'all! The first pictures are in:

https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphot...32201988_n.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don

Hey Y'all! The first pictures are in:

https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphot...32201988_n.jpg

---

Noooo wayyy, there he is!

wast of time and money.. who cares what could have been there,,,,, whats there now? dust. The biggest thing that has been done by NASA is the moon landing, and what has that got us, dust... How about spending the effort in the ocean. There are living things there, and water.....
spooky

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mr.spooky

wast of time and money.. who cares what could have been there,,,,, whats there now? dust. The biggest thing that has been done by NASA is the moon landing, and what has that got us, dust... How about spending the effort in the ocean. There are living things there, and water.....
spooky

---

Well, for one thing that temp gun you use to check temperatures in your snake racks came directly from a NASA invention. There are many more inventions and innovations that came from the space program that improved the daily lives of millions of people. Here are a few articles that mention the things that have come out of our space program:

http://curiosity.discovery.com/topic...inventions.htm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/s...nventions.html

And, those are just a few. The space program didn't just improve the lives of millions, but saved lives. If you did not click on those links, CAT scan was one of the inventions that came out of NASA. From that, obviously came the MRI.

I understand why people see it as a waste of money, but I find that most of those people really do not understand that it is man's destiny to reach beyond our everyday lives and explore. And, by doing so we reach new discoveries that make us all better. We've also reached depths of the ocean that we did not know was possible, so one does not exclude the other.

Yeah, all that waste creates jobs, and those jobs create more jobs.

And we wouldn't know quite how bad we were messing up the planet, let alone what we could do to curb it, if we didn't have all those oceanic and atmospheric satellites monitoring from above. That's a direct product of the space race. We learned about global warming first from Venus, and that's as dead as dead gets.

And we thought Mars was dead, too, but now it turns out there's water after all, a whole lot of it, and a very distinct possibility some of it could be liquid some of the time. We might not find Marvin, but what we learn could be a lot more useful.

I agree somewhat with the last 2 post, BUT,, the temp gun, and the cat scan were invented here, on earth. They just used them on the moon/ outer space.
Im not so convienced on "global warming". Global warming is a trend in temps that happens here on earth. Theres records to prove it.
I DO apreciate the satellites, and they are a positive, USEFULL product of NASA I suppose, but like I said, we should understand whats on and beneath our planet first. It just seems more promissing for the greater good to me.
spooky

That is the same as the people in America that say "we should take care of our own before helping other HUMAN BEINGS elsewhere on the planet," and I disagree completely.

The scientific community is prety much in agreement that the current "trend" of "global warming" on earth is like nothing that has been seen before. The temps are climbing much faster as a result of humans dumping millions of pounds of CO2 into the atmoshpere every day! And while the CAT scan and MRI were developed on earth, they were developed because of programs going to other bodies in space. If there hadn't been that need they wouldn't have been developed.

We (Americans) should be taking care of our own first and formost. We have been trying to take care of others for quiet a few years now and look what thats got us. But thats another subject.
Im just saying that in times like these, we dont need to be dumping millions of dollars on "what MIGHT be, and what iffs". When theres extra money to spend, then thats the time for toys. But now (in the real world) people are starving, and our boarders are being invaded. Meanwile, we landed a giant tin can on a planet just to say we could:confusd:..
spooky

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gsarchie

That is the same as the people in America that say "we should take care of our own before helping other HUMAN BEINGS elsewhere on the planet," and I disagree completely.

The scientific community is prety much in agreement that the current "trend" of "global warming" on earth is like nothing that has been seen before. The temps are climbing much faster as a result of humans dumping millions of pounds of CO2 into the atmoshpere every day! And while the CAT scan and MRI were developed on earth, they were developed because of programs going to other bodies in space. If there hadn't been that need they wouldn't have been developed.

---

I would say that, in a lot of ways, I am one of those people that say we should help America first. We have people here in need. Why should we help another country over our own first? If we had enough to help everyone at the same time or have fixed our issues already, then I wouldn't have a problem with helping the world. Excluding disaster relief obviously. In a disaster we all need to come together and help. I understand we are all human and one species, but its not so cut and dry. We can't save the world if our own country is falling apart. Its a priority game...

Back on point. I think space exploration is important. I don't think it was underplayed necessarily. I think they used new ideas to spread it to a new generation. They used YouTube, the internet, and even made a game on Xbox live about the Rover landing. It was a good strategy to get younger people interested...

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using Tapatalk 2

Another picture was sent today!

https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphot...03807577_n.jpg

My problem is not with space exploration or the money spent, or whether this is an american thing or what ever. Because we have the ability to reason, we (humans)need to make ourselves feel like we are something greater than we are, so we push ever outward. Albeit a futile effort, as we will very likely annihilate ourselves before the inhabiting of another celestial body would ever be feasable.

No, my issue with this kind of so called "great accomplishment" for mankind, is that its a slap in the face for anyone of reasonable intelligence. Watching the advances that flight has made in the 106 years since the Wright Bros were in Kitty Hawk, and being told in that same time, we still can't get a combustion engine that gets over 50 miles to the gallon with power. 106 years ago, two guys flew 150 yards on canvas and wood. Since then we have sent a spacecraft, traveling 17,000 mph, outside the Kuiper belt while sending back radio transamissions, and I am supposed to accept that 40 MPG is great.

Pay no attenttion to the man behind the curtain, Dorothy.

Yea! Go Mars rover.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mr.spooky

We (Americans) should be taking care of our own first and formost. We have been trying to take care of others for quiet a few years now and look what thats got us. But thats another subject.
Im just saying that in times like these, we dont need to be dumping millions of dollars on "what MIGHT be, and what iffs". When theres extra money to spend, then thats the time for toys. But now (in the real world) people are starving, and our boarders are being invaded. Meanwile, we landed a giant tin can on a planet just to say we could:confusd:..
spooky

---

The amount that NASA gets to spend is minuscule compared to other parts of the government's budget (like the military). Space exploration isn't just a "cool toy", it's the future of the human race. We didn't land a "giant tin can" on Mars just to say we could, we landed a mobile science lab on Mars to see if life ever has or ever COULD be supported on Mars. The more we understand about our neighboring planets, the better we can understand the Earth. The further science develops, the more capability we will have to conquer things like disease and hunger.

I just don't understand how people can't see the immense benefits that space exploration has provided the human race with. Just because it's not a blatantly obvious benefit like being able to grow corn on the moon doesn't mean it's not valuable.

And frankly if you're in this hobby....sell all of your snakes and fancy equipment, donate that money to charity, and then feel free to tell NASA what it should and shouldn't do with its limited funding.

- - - Updated - - -

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rlditmars

My problem is not with space exploration or the money spent, or whether this is an american thing or what ever. Because we have the ability to reason, we (humans)need to make ourselves feel like we are something greater than we are, so we push ever outward. Albeit a futile effort, as we will very likely annihilate ourselves before the inhabiting of another celestial body would ever be feasable.

No, my issue with this kind of so called "great accomplishment" for mankind, is that its a slap in the face for anyone of reasonable intelligence. Watching the advances that flight has made in the 106 years since the Wright Bros were in Kitty Hawk, and being told in that same time, we still can't get a combustion engine that gets over 50 miles to the gallon with power. 106 years ago, two guys flew 150 yards on canvas and wood. Since then we have sent a spacecraft, traveling 17,000 mph, outside the Kuiper belt while sending back radio transamissions, and I am supposed to accept that 40 MPG is great.

Pay no attenttion to the man behind the curtain, Dorothy.

Yea! Go Mars rover.

---

Frankly, it's a slap to the face for anyone of reasonable intelligence to see people whining about space exploration and then comparing it to the things that they think are wrong with the world. This isn't remotely related to the MPG your car gets.

Right, NASA dosent spend alot :

In the year-by-year breakdown listed below, the total amounts (in nominal dollars) that NASA has been budgeted from 1958 to 2011 amounts to $526.18 billion dollars—an average of $9.7 billion per year. By way of comparison, total spending over this period by the National Science Foundation was roughly one-fourth of NASA's expenditures: $101.5 billion, or $2 billion a year. NASA's FY 2011 budget of $18.4 billion represents about 0.5% of the $3.4 trillion United States federal budget during the year, or about 35% of total spending on academic scientific research in the United States.
According to the Office of Management and Budget and the Air Force Almanac, when measured in real terms (adjusted for inflation), the figure is $790.0 billion, or an average of $15.818 billion dollars per year over its fifty year history.


"Space exploration isn't just a "cool toy", it's the future of the human race" ARE YOU SERIOUS? Lay off the space dust!!! And believe me, the only way mars ever COULD support life is if NASA could figure out how to hook a chain to it and place it in orbit behind Earth.
Other than satalite radio and GPS's I cant really think of much good that has come out of it compaired to the money (as mentioned above) that has been dished into it.
And your last paragraph,,,,,,, HAHAHAHAHAHAHA apples to oranges.
spooky

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by meowmeowkazoo

And frankly if you're in this hobby....sell all of your snakes and fancy equipment, donate that money to charity, and then feel free to tell NASA what it should and shouldn't do with its limited funding.

- - - Updated - - -




Frankly, it's a slap to the face for anyone of reasonable intelligence to see people whining about space exploration and then comparing it to the things that they think are wrong with the world. This isn't remotely related to the MPG your car gets.

---

How is selling your snakes remotely related to space exploration?

Kettle meet Pot

$15 billion over a year is not that much in terms of what our government spends. It is just a drop in the bucket. The federal budget for 2010 was $3.55 TRILLION!

I guess all the lives saved by CAT scans and all the misery of injuries repaired with the assistance of CAT scans means nothing? The spin-off of the MRI has saved thousands of lives. I guess that means nothing as well? If not for space exploration, the CAT may have never been invented. It was invented for the specific purpose of space exploration.

In this article (http://www.space.com/11272-nasa-spac...-spinoffs.html) It tracks what are called spin-off inventions from the primary inventions of space exploration. There are over 1,723 inventions that are a spin-off of space exploration. What you may not realize is that you use things everyday that are a direct result of our investment in space exploration. The money spent in testing these boundaries have led to products that make better lives for all of us.

You cite sea exploration as a better use of money. Well, they are not mutually exclusive. Over the last several years, we have gone deeper and seen more of our ocean bottoms that ever thought possible just a decade ago. I think we are a poorer country for shutting down our space program. It was one of the things that made us what we are. You may not be old enough to remember the words "One small step for man, one big step for mankind" as they were spoken live. I still get goosebumps from remembering "Houston, the Eagle has landed." I was watching on a black and white TV in our classroom. I also remember the deep sorry I felt and where I was when the Challenger was lost. These people who went into space are heroes. Some of them gave their lives for the advancement of science. I respect that and appreciate that. The Mars exploration is just an advancement of their work. I'm glad we're there and happy for the scientist that made it happen. We will probably see some more inventions coming out of this mission to better mankind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don

$15 billion over a year is not that much in terms of what our government spends. It is just a drop in the bucket. The federal budget for 2010 was $3.55 TRILLION!

I guess all the lives saved by CAT scans and all the misery of injuries repaired with the assistance of CAT scans means nothing? The spin-off of the MRI has saved thousands of lives. I guess that means nothing as well? If not for space exploration, the CAT may have never been invented. It was invented for the specific purpose of space exploration.

In this article (http://www.space.com/11272-nasa-spac...-spinoffs.html) It tracks what are called spin-off inventions from the primary inventions of space exploration. There are over 1,723 inventions that are a spin-off of space exploration. What you may not realize is that you use things everyday that are a direct result of our investment in space exploration. The money spent in testing these boundaries have led to products that make better lives for all of us.

You cite sea exploration as a better use of money. Well, they are not mutually exclusive. Over the last several years, we have gone deeper and seen more of our ocean bottoms that ever thought possible just a decade ago. I think we are a poorer country for shutting down our space program. It was one of the things that made us what we are. You may not be old enough to remember the words "One small step for man, one big step for mankind" as they were spoken live. I still get goosebumps from remembering "Houston, the Eagle has landed." I was watching on a black and white TV in our classroom. I also remember the deep sorry I felt and where I was when the Challenger was lost. These people who went into space are heroes. Some of them gave their lives for the advancement of science. I respect that and appreciate that. The Mars exploration is just an advancement of their work. I'm glad we're there and happy for the scientist that made it happen. We will probably see some more inventions coming out of this mission to better mankind.

---

Agreed, 15 billion is a drop in the bucket compaired to the government, but we all also know that our government LIES, CHEATS, and STEALS,,, so that point is kinda void.
I have nothing bad to say about the lives saved because of the CAT scan, BUT the CAT scan was not found on the moon,,, it was founded here on earth as a tool to use in space (from what I understand). I truly dont know, so could someone tell me one thing that has physicaly came from the face of the moon that has benifited man? there are things EVERY DAY that are being discovered here on earth, eigther in the seas, or in the trees that are moving us forward in science and medacine.

When Neil Armstrong said"One small step for man, one giant leap for man kind", that was important, and a GIANT feat,, and thats what Im getting at. Sense then, nothing has really hapened.

Spooky

Don, I just read the link that you posted, and that just proves a point. First of all, I was always under the impression that NASA invented Tang. Im dissapointed to find out that they dident. It mentions sunglasses that block harmful ultraviolet light. Are these the same ones that I see for sale on TV for $10 for 2 pairs, or are these just a useless spinn off of the 25k dollar pair that NASA uses? Also, isnt infant formula under scrutiny right now for not being as great as we once thought? And the better weather forecasting:rolleye2:HA!!! 80% chance of rain today, and it ws drier than a sheeps ass in march.
Im still not convienced.
spooky

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mr.spooky

Right, NASA dosent spend alot :

In the year-by-year breakdown listed below, the total amounts (in nominal dollars) that NASA has been budgeted from 1958 to 2011 amounts to $526.18 billion dollars—an average of $9.7 billion per year. By way of comparison, total spending over this period by the National Science Foundation was roughly one-fourth of NASA's expenditures: $101.5 billion, or $2 billion a year. NASA's FY 2011 budget of $18.4 billion represents about 0.5% of the $3.4 trillion United States federal budget during the year, or about 35% of total spending on academic scientific research in the United States.
According to the Office of Management and Budget and the Air Force Almanac, when measured in real terms (adjusted for inflation), the figure is $790.0 billion, or an average of $15.818 billion dollars per year over its fifty year history.

---

So how exactly is 0.5% such a huge threat to your solutions for poverty and hunger?

Quote:

---

"Space exploration isn't just a "cool toy", it's the future of the human race" ARE YOU SERIOUS? Lay off the space dust!!! And believe me, the only way mars ever COULD support life is if NASA could figure out how to hook a chain to it and place it in orbit behind Earth.
Other than satalite radio and GPS's I cant really think of much good that has come out of it compaired to the money (as mentioned above) that has been dished into it.
And your last paragraph,,,,,,, HAHAHAHAHAHAHA apples to oranges.
spooky

---

Why exactly should I believe you on any of this? The only thing you've proven is that your knowledge of the space program is meager at best, and you only care about scientific advancement if it directly benefits you. :rolleyes:

As for my last statement....if you feel so strongly about NASA giving up their funding to help the poor and the needy, why don't you set a good example? Your snakes are even less important to humanity than you seem to think NASA is.

- - - Updated - - -

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rlditmars

How is selling your snakes remotely related to space exploration?

Kettle meet Pot

---

If you willfully choose to misunderstand my points because you have no real argument against them, it's no skin off my back. :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mr.spooky

Agreed, 15 billion is a drop in the bucket compaired to the government, but we all also know that our government LIES, CHEATS, and STEALS,,, so that point is kinda void.
I have nothing bad to say about the lives saved because of the CAT scan, BUT the CAT scan was not found on the moon,,, it was founded here on earth as a tool to use in space (from what I understand). I truly dont know, so could someone tell me one thing that has physicaly came from the face of the moon that has benifited man? there are things EVERY DAY that are being discovered here on earth, eigther in the seas, or in the trees that are moving us forward in science and medacine.

When Neil Armstrong said"One small step for man, one giant leap for man kind", that was important, and a GIANT feat,, and thats what Im getting at. Sense then, nothing has really hapened.

Spooky

---

Just because the government lies, cheats, and steals, his point regarding their budget is invalid? On what planet does that make sense?

Just because something was not invented ON THE MOON doesn't mean it's not a product of the space exploration program. Do we need to build factories on the moon for manufacturing CAT scans before you can understand the connection?

Why was Neil Armstrong landing on the moon more important than this? Because they made movies about it, so it must be important? If they make a movie about the Curiosity rover would that make it important, too?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by meowmeowkazoo

So how exactly is 0.5% such a huge threat to your solutions for poverty and hunger?




Why exactly should I believe you on any of this? The only thing you've proven is that your knowledge of the space program is meager at best, and you only care about scientific advancement if it directly benefits you. :rolleyes:

As for my last statement....if you feel so strongly about NASA giving up their funding to help the poor and the needy, why don't you set a good example? Your snakes are even less important to humanity than you seem to think NASA is.

- - - Updated - - -



If you willfully choose to misunderstand my points because you have no real argument against them, it's no skin off my back. :rolleyes:

---

uuuuuhhhhhhhh,,,,, the 0.5% translates to $18.4 billion as clearly stated. Im thinking that that would put a good dent (per year) in poverty and hunger, but I dunno.
Im willing to learn!!!! I previousaly ask, "so could someone tell me one thing that has physicaly came from the face of the moon that has benifited man"? Educate me please. I truly dont know anything about NASA or space exploration. Can you name a few?
Thanks
spooky

- - - Updated - - -

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by meowmeowkazoo

Just because the government lies, cheats, and steals, his point regarding their budget is invalid? On what planet does that make sense?

Just because something was not invented ON THE MOON doesn't mean it's not a product of the space exploration program. Do we need to build factories on the moon for manufacturing CAT scans before you can understand the connection?

Why was Neil Armstrong landing on the moon more important than this? Because they made movies about it, so it must be important? If they make a movie about the Curiosity rover would that make it important, too?

---

YOU are NUTS... Im done
spooky

I understand what some of the people here are trying to say. While we SPECULATE that Mars can/has supported life at one time, we KNOW that Earth can. It's a fact. So really, a LOT more effort should be expended using NASA's amazing accomplishments to fix what we KNOW we'll be able to live on, rather than keep exploring a hypothetical "what if we could" with Mars.

Then again, it's amazing that they're trying to understand our universe more. I'm sure it will benefit us somehow, I just wish people would be more interested in our OWN planet more. I mean, think of how much of the ocean is unexplored! Every time they do a deep dive, they discover something new. Or in the jungles. I personally find it more fascinating to see what lurks in the unknowns of our own planet.

This landing is the one of the greatest scientific achievements in my life time. Landing a man on the moon was a cake walk compared to this. The planet Mars is 33,926,867 miles away from earth when it is at its closest. At their farthest, Mars is 249,169,848 miles away. Think about those distances. Watch the video of how precise the science has to be: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2I8A...eature=related BTW, the moon is only about 238,000 miles away from the earth.

The fact that we are even having this discussion is proof to me that our school systems have lost focus on science. We spent $46.7 Billion on the department of Education in 2010. Much more than NASA, and from the sound of this conversation a real waste of money.

Upset about Tang not being a NASA invention? Really? That makes you question the validity of the contributions of the US space program? Yes, those $10 sunglasses with UVB protection are a spin off of a NASA invention. What a great example of helping man. It has been proven that wearing UVB protection reduces the incidents of cataracts when one ages. NASA is saving the eyesight of millions of people world-wide with that invention and it doesn't even cost a lot of money. I hope you never get cataracts, but live long enough to understand how serious they can be for those who develop them.

NASA is one of the few US government agencies that has moved forward science that has helped people all over the world. The money spent on NASA has not been wasted and has not prevented the oceans or other regions on earth from being explored. We aren't starving people because of money spent on NASA. The food stamp budget in the US for 2012 was $144 Billion. NASA's budget is still a drop in the bucket compared to that.

Whoa. So I just discovered that the Summer Olympics of 2012 cost $14.5 billion to put on.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Su...pics#Financing

That's 6 times the cost of sending that rover to Mars!

I think we can all agree that while some people feel the Olympics are a waste of money, other people definitely do not. Therefore we have the Olympics.

It's the same way with Mars: Some people don't want to waste money on it, but plenty of Americans think it's important, and would gladly pay $20 or $50 more with their annual tax return to fund it.

Surely that's fair? There are plenty of things that my tax money gets spent on that I think are a waste, but someone else thinks is very, very important. And this is just 1/6th the price of the Olympics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by loonunit

Whoa. So I just discovered that the Summer Olympics of 2012 cost $14.5 billion to put on.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Su...pics#Financing

That's 6 times the cost of sending that rover to Mars!

I think we can all agree that while some people feel the Olympics are a waste of money, other people definitely do not. Therefore we have the Olympics.

It's the same way with Mars: Some people don't want to waste money on it, but plenty of Americans think it's important, and would gladly pay $20 or $50 more with their annual tax return to fund it.

Surely that's fair? There are plenty of things that my tax money gets spent on that I think are a waste, but someone else thinks is very, very important. And this is just 1/6th the price of the Olympics.

---

Actually, the funding of the Summer Olympics are paid for with sponsor donors and private money. The US Olympic Committee raises private funds for the Olympics. So, that really isn't an apples to apples comparison. If the Olympics is a waste of money, then it is not US tax money that is being wasted.

Here is an article on how the US Olympic Athletes are funded: http://www.america.gov/st/washfile-e...0.9387018.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don

Actually, the funding of the Summer Olympics are paid for with sponsor donors and private money. The US Olympic Committee raises private funds for the Olympics. So, that really isn't an apples to apples comparison. If the Olympics is a waste of money, then it is not US tax money that is being wasted.

Here is an article on how the US Olympic Athletes are funded: http://www.america.gov/st/washfile-e...0.9387018.html

---

Yet the host countries/cities usually end up going broke after the Olympics.