starman2003 wrote:The moon may be a good source of he-3 for fusion.
And who or what is ultimately to blame for that? Democracy, and the masses it empowers. They won't accept even modest sacrifices for space. In one year about four times more was spent on tobacco alone than on NASA's budget.
I blame the politicians. There is a time when you're the level that the voters use to move rocks and there are times when you are the rock... I guess the polling was something like 60/40 to shut down the Apollo program.
Think about the 41% in 1979....That means that 59% were against it or 6 out of 10 people.
As a politician, do you really think that
6 out of 10 people just plucked off the street and asked "do you think it is worth it" could formulate an informed opinion--on the spot--of what was at stake in terms of economics (the Internet, worldwide instant communications), communication itself, data transfer so companies can work on projects all day every day, GPS for our troops and our ships at sea, the money we save by being able to see storms weeks in advance instead of days...etc...
I would say no--it would be hard to expect 6 out of 10 to have studied all of these things and arrive at that conclusion.
As a politician, you're supposed to have some elevated insight into the world at large. Not to mention the retarded (pun intended) effects the shuttering of NASA had on the scientific community in the nation. You don't see a shortage of kids trying out for the NFL or NBA. Why? Because at the very basic need of a human--a job--the jobs are there in playing, coaching, scouting, commentating, administration, etc... The money is there. The opportunity is there. You leave the space program in a robust trajectory and those who have the skills in engineering, mathematics, and the associated sciences can pursue the degrees with confidence that the jobs will be there.