House bill seeks to gut NASA’s Artemis plan, resurrect Journey to Mars
- Thread starter JournalBot
- Start date
He rarely does. He uses weird comments to make it about him. It's vintage Gary.
Upvote
-13
(7
/
-20)
I kept out for a while, but after determining it was Gary, its a rare treat in small doses.
Upvote
-18
(4
/
-22)
Are you new on the internet or something? Sanctimonious bullshit about "don't feed the trolls" predates the first troll who didn't go away when effortfully ignored by about ten minutes.
Upvote
-17
(4
/
-21)
theradicalmoderate
Ars Tribunus Militum
Given that the chairwoman of that committee is who introduced the bill, and it was co-sponsored by a bipartisan set of members on the committee, that's a bit dubious.
Upvote
13
(13
/
0)
A troll can only hijack a thread insofar as people engage with it.
Like you've been doing.
Upvote
33
(33
/
0)
So a factual observation that "conservative" politicians claim that lowering taxes on large corporations will lead to them hiring more people because they can afford to, instead of just meaning they can pass more of their profits to their shareholders because you dont hire more people unless you believe doing so will help generate more revenue than their wages and benefits cost? You found THAT offensive?
Upvote
3
(10
/
-7)
The current generation of trolls is uninteresting. Anyone remember that person who was convinced that the XS-1 Phantom Express was actually a cover for a flyback booster, which would replace the solid boosters on SLS and create some sort of super-rocket that would be better and cheaper than Starship? Whatever happened to that person? At least those arguments focused on weird technical issues and showing that their ideas were unfeasible.
The recent cancellation of XS-1 must have hit them hard.
The recent cancellation of XS-1 must have hit them hard.
Upvote
23
(23
/
0)
My originally (downvoted) comment "You need massive funding to get a crew to and from Mars." over the idea of SpaceX doing it themselves.
It was suggested that I was wrong, that it would only take "10s of billions".
It has been stated that "10s of billions is significant to SpaceX."
I admit that "significant" isn't literally "massive"; but it seems that the people arguing with me are agreeing with me.
Space X is awesome.
I own every type of product Tesla makes (solar, battery, car).
Boeing has become terrible.
Modern US government is not doing its job (while I'm a huge advocate of government and its ability to help, it has to a large degree, become a method for taking money from the poor and giving it to the rich.
And getting a manned mission to Mars take a lot of money.
And there's not much money to be made in the first manned trip to Mars (relative to the cost), or, really, the 50th.
As such, a Mars trip is far more likely to be publicly funded than privately.
Upvote
-3
(3
/
-6)
I wouldn’t be so sure that space pork is over.
Pork spending is one of the main goals for Senators and House members. In a federal model where politicians are chosen from regions, their success in elections is often decided by the amount of money and jobs they can claim having brought to the region. Irrespective if this is wise use of government money - they try to get as much pork shipped back to their home state as they can.
Pork is pretty much unavoidable.
Upvote
9
(9
/
0)
Upvote
15
(15
/
0)
Upvote
5
(5
/
0)
I said Pork LAUNCH not space pork, there is a difference. Space Pork includes payloads, the things that actually have the tech that isn't likely to get developed without gov funding, and can back feed into the economy.
Upvote
4
(4
/
0)
This move by the House truly does signal the end of the slim hope that NASA would put people back on the Moon. We've heard that for years, watched HSF stagnate in LEO, while projects like the X-33, Delta Clipper and Constellation came and went. That's not to say those were necessarily great projects, but they aimed to actually DO something. When Artemis was announced, and RFPs were put out for manned and unmanned missions, it seemed that finally we might see something happen. But no, Lucy pulled the football away once again, and we are now going to spend X number of years watching Boeing screw up yet again, come in late and overbudget, receiving performance bonuses they didn't earn, and then failing to deliver.
If it weren't for the fact of SpaceX actually pushing the envelope and flying newer and better things year after year, I'd despair of the US ever going beyond LEO with humans.
If it weren't for the fact of SpaceX actually pushing the envelope and flying newer and better things year after year, I'd despair of the US ever going beyond LEO with humans.
Upvote
17
(17
/
0)
I would think both Mars and the Moon would be similarly difficult to sustain life. The saving grace for the moon is there aren't any planet wide dust storms to worry about. I also feel like the the lack of atmosphere would make building on the moon easier. Though I haven't read up on anything on either case, if you do have any info I'd love to read/watch it.
Also are the Ars comments usually this trolly? I haven't posted here in a while.
Upvote
-6
(2
/
-8)
The Ulterior was amazing. He managed to be wrong about nearly everything. If I found myself agreeing with something he wrote, I knew I needed to do some research to figure out what I got wrong.
Upvote
27
(28
/
-1)
Significant, but not outside the range of other private aerospace projects. Airbus spent $25B developing A380. Boeing typically spends $15B developing a new airliner.
Upvote
10
(10
/
0)
With local resources alone Luna CANT sustain life, it lacks the required elements in meaningful quantities and easily accessible forms to do so. Mars however has those resources in relative abundance and doesn't have the temperature and pressure extremes most other non-Earth bodies that have said resources in quantity have.
Upvote
15
(15
/
0)
Whiskey was a 'gateway' drug.... congress want's him to go to the next step.
Upvote
-1
(0
/
-1)
This is incorrect. What talks is a vote. If you are a constituent you will be listened to far more than most. Yes, a vote plus a campaign donation helps. But that also goes the other direction: a suggestion that a campaign donation to an opponent in the next election can also carry weight.
One of the most impactful things you can do is actually setup a meeting with your rep's local office and spend some time face to face with a staffer. You could even sign up for this and join us in Washington:
https://www.eventbrite.com/e/march-stor ... 0279950493
Upvote
9
(9
/
0)
theradicalmoderate
Ars Tribunus Militum
Despite the fact that Boeing is the 500-lb lobbying gorilla, I can't quite figure out why the Democrats would go this way for their first crack at writing an authorization bill since they came to power.
While Boeing aircraft is largely a blue state operation, Boeing space stuff is mostly in the South, which is solid red state territory. If we start from the premise that Congress thinks that the space program is merely a conduit for rewarding your friends with pork and punishing your enemies by denying it, this bill doesn't do that.
Instead, it deemphasizes commercial operations, which would be mostly manufactured in California and Washington, in favor of more Boeing stuff in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama. It further reduces launch rates, which doesn't help a region of Florida that's sorta-kinda blue, and where even marginal gains could make a big difference this November.
There's a case to be made that House members care more about campaign contributions than they do about actual constituencies, and Boeing can deliver the cash more effectively than the lobbying newbs at SpaceX and BO. There's also a case to be made that the leadership cares more about giving Trump the finger than they do about consolidating voting blocs for the upcoming election. But that would make the Democrats stupid, which...
Oh.
While Boeing aircraft is largely a blue state operation, Boeing space stuff is mostly in the South, which is solid red state territory. If we start from the premise that Congress thinks that the space program is merely a conduit for rewarding your friends with pork and punishing your enemies by denying it, this bill doesn't do that.
Instead, it deemphasizes commercial operations, which would be mostly manufactured in California and Washington, in favor of more Boeing stuff in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama. It further reduces launch rates, which doesn't help a region of Florida that's sorta-kinda blue, and where even marginal gains could make a big difference this November.
There's a case to be made that House members care more about campaign contributions than they do about actual constituencies, and Boeing can deliver the cash more effectively than the lobbying newbs at SpaceX and BO. There's also a case to be made that the leadership cares more about giving Trump the finger than they do about consolidating voting blocs for the upcoming election. But that would make the Democrats stupid, which...
Oh.
Upvote
6
(8
/
-2)
Nothing wrong with that. There's undoubtedly a lot for us to learn on Mars.
Upvote
5
(5
/
0)
Upvote
0
(5
/
-5)
Nope, no rage. He couldn't affect me emotionally in a million years. I'm doing it on purpose so we can get him out of here for good.
No raging now. Just respond in good grace with carefully exacting veracitude. Save on cost an at 25 cents a letter.
So you admit to deliberately disrupting the thread just as much as what's-his-name.
Thus reducing you to his level. Well done.
Upvote
16
(16
/
0)
Agree. I'm all for space pork if the end result is something worthwhile and it actually helps the many not the few. Artemis, SLS/Orion, Gateway ain't it.
Upvote
2
(3
/
-1)
Artemis tries to be with the commercial partners aspect, SLS/Orion bog that down.
Upvote
6
(6
/
0)
Statistical
Ars Legatus Legionis
If that's your opinion, you're welcome to it. If you knew this guy, you might have a different one. I am resorting to tactics that will hopefully get him banned sooner than later. You'll soon know I am nothing like him. Think what you will. Watch and learn.Nope, no rage. He couldn't affect me emotionally in a million years. I'm doing it on purpose so we can get him out of here for good.
No raging now. Just respond in good grace with carefully exacting veracitude. Save on cost an at 25 cents a letter.
So you admit to deliberately disrupting the thread just as much as what's-his-name.
Thus reducing you to his level. Well done.
Or the mods see your posts and don't ban him. I mean you are openly stating you are actively trying to get someone banned if I were a mod that would lean me against banning someone.
How about report the post and move on. Instead you have turned the thread into a dumpster fire. Good job.
Upvote
31
(31
/
0)
I think we need a good old-fashioned space race to focus the mind. That's why I'm rooting for China to start making noises about going to the moon.
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
Statistical
Ars Legatus Legionis
I already "discovered" who he is by the first post, reported him to the mods and ignored him. He is a troll and hopefully banned and when he comes back hopefully banned again and again and again until he gives up. Until that happens however thanks to your vigilante efforts I get to see all the posts you quote while you shit on the floor because he is also shitting on the floor and you think if two people are shitting on the floor instead of one then the house will fill up with shit sooner or something. Good job.
Upvote
28
(28
/
0)
That is literally the only way NASA will get the money to go to the Moon on their terms. More likely, Congress will see Chinese taikonauts on the Moon, go into full Sputnik mode, and demand to know why their is a "moonbase gap", while blissfully ignoring their massive contribution to the perceived gap. What will make things different this time is that SpaceX will likely have a vehicle that can do the job faster than NASA alone, and do it in awe-inspiring style. Nothing says "America is still #1" than a big ol' Starship with a couple dozen astronauts looking down on a puny Chinese lander with a couple of taikonauts.
Upvote
9
(9
/
0)
Upvote
6
(6
/
0)
ToplevelpoT
Ars Scholae Palatinae
That works for Long-timers. Any new person looking at the comments for further information will only see stevegreen's comments without rebuttal and either think:
A. if no one has corrected him, he may be right.
or
B. Wow, no one cares that stevegreen is shiposting all up and down these threads.
The digression he has caused has annoyed me immensely, however I cannot fault the other participants for disabusing him of the notion he can spread FUD, freely.
Upvote
1
(6
/
-5)
It was a learning experience for me. That guy is literally the first person I have ever used the Foe designation for. Live and learn.
Edit: and can anyone tell me how to block this guy so I can't see his drivel?
Upvote
2
(4
/
-2)