LOUNGE all new asksnapzu ideasforsnapzu newtribes interesting pics videos funny technology science technews gaming health history worldnews business web research entertainment food living internet socialmedia mobile space sports photography nature animals movies culture travel television finance music celebrities gadgets environment usa crime politics law money justice psychology security cars wtf art google books lifetips bigbrother women apple kids recipes whoa military privacy education facebook medicine computing wildlife design war drugs middleeast diet toplists economy fail violence humor africa microsoft parenting dogs canada neuroscience architecture religion advertising infographics sex journalism disaster software aviation relationships energy booze life japan ukraine newmovies nsa cannabis name Name of the tribe humanrights nasa cute weather gifs discoveries cops futurism football earth dataviz pets guns entrepreneurship fitness android extremeweather fashion insects india northamerica
+42 42 0
Published 2 years ago with 8 Comments

Join the Discussion

  • Auto Tier
  • All
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Post Comment
  • MAGISTERLUDI
    +1

    Odd for the man who GUTTED NASA.

    • twoBits (edited 2 years ago)
      +2

      This hardly sounds like gutting NASA does it? Making plans to go to Mars doesn't sound like he is gutting NASA to me.

      • MAGISTERLUDI
        +1

        You might read your offering.

        LOL .

          • MAGISTERLUDI (edited 2 years ago)
            +1

            Or: "That represents a slight decrease from the overall $19.3 billion NASA received in the current fiscal year. The decrease is partly due to Obama's proposal to cut $840 million - or 20% - from deep-space exploration programs and $100 million from planetary science while increasing funding for Earth science by more than $110 million".

            "Earth Science", LOL

            NASA is essentially now funding single private contractors rather than the consortium of experts in this field as in the past which provided our expertise and leadership. These jobs at NASA have been eliminated, and replaced by private contractors who drive NASA, not the other way around.

            Nothing wrong to me concerning private enterprise as NASA space exploration has always been dependent on their resources, but the current arrangement makes NASA a spectator rather than director.

            NASA's past history indicates to me that they did well when in control. One is throwing proven success out, for unproven, untried even high earth orbit capabilities the private sector here is yet to provide.

            • twoBits (edited 2 years ago)
              +3

              The words. "Slight decrease", "allows them to meet their goals", "proposed cut wouldn't slow planned work". This does not indicate "gutting" as you suggest.

              You're being just a tad sensationalist.

            • MAGISTERLUDI (edited 2 years ago)
              +2
              @twoBits -

              NASA's budget is in the hands of private contractors. Are you truly ignorant of the separation of NASA engineers, and other professionals/experts a few years back?

              Their budget while essentially the same in dollar amounts has been diverted to all manner of things, leaving space exploration especially manned out of the question. One recipient of this change is NASA's climate change mandate, which falls under the category of "planned work"/"meet their goals" nothing however to do with space exploration in any manner or form.

              You may keep repeating vague quotes as to "meeting their planned work/ goals/ mission(s)", I am simply stating that the "goal"/"mission" has changed radically.

              If you wish a NASA that monitors climate change, etc at the expense of space exploration then you have what you want, and there is no need for discussion.

            • twoBits
              +4
              @MAGISTERLUDI -

              The point here is your comment stated he "gutted" NASA. That's what I was responding to and based on what I have read and quoted from NASA above - gutted is a sensationalist comment. NASA seems to be a excellent organization to help monitor climate change. They do have a birds eye view.

              There is nothing vague about my quotes - they come directly from the article I link to.

Here are some other snaps you may like...