Mars rover

[kstaven]

I believe this can be discussed and different points of view be forwarded without taking shots at others, insulting and inferring they are stupid. Agree to disagree and move on. Much of our science and technology was developed because people could do that very thing. "You try it your way and I'll try it mine" has allowed us to move forward to many great advances. Something more of us need to practice.

 

[chickened]

NASA budget in 1964 4.41 % of fed budget
NASA budget in 2012 0.48% of fed budget "scrapped"

 

[hemet dennis]

NASA budget in 1964 4.41 % of fed budget
NASA budget in 2012 0.48% of fed budget "scrapped"

NASA budget in 1964 $4,171,000,000
NASA budget in 2012 $18,000,000,000 "not scrapped"

Just because other things in the budget have grown out of control doesn't mean NASA was scrapped.

 

[hemet dennis]

U.S. navy ships in 1964 - 859
U.S. navy ships in 2012 - 250



U.S. navy scrapped ?

 

[Q9]

U.S. navy ships in 1964 - 859
U.S. navy ships in 2012 - 250



U.S. navy scrapped ?

And a lot of those 250 ships are basically big floating computers with a gun slapped on it. Have you seen the crap that passes for a warship now?

 

[Matthew3590]

And a lot of those 250 ships are basically big floating computers with a gun slapped on it. Have you seen the crap that passes for a warship now?

Hey now, my dad worked on those computers for those ships. They are downsized because they are a lot better than what a human can do, 1000rps laser guided turret designed to shoot torpedoes before they hit the ship. Warships now are also a lot stronger in firepower.

 

[hemet dennis]

And a lot of those 250 ships are basically big floating computers with a gun slapped on it. Have you seen the crap that passes for a warship now?

In a fight I would bet on the 250 against the 859.

 

[chickened]

NASA budget in 1964 $4,171,000,000
NASA budget in 2012 $18,000,000,000 "not scrapped"

Just because other things in the budget have grown out of control doesn't mean NASA was scrapped.

Without the shuttle program we are back to rockets and that IMO is going backwards.

The shuttle was very expensive to fly although.

 

[hemet dennis]

Without the shuttle program we are back to rockets and that IMO is going backwards.

The shuttle was very expensive to fly although.

But now we have a permanent space station. The shuttle did it's job and it's time to move on. Lets see what's out further then the shuttle could go.

 

[Q9]

In a fight I would bet on the 250 against the 859.

Give a single Iowa class battleship the same tech, and it'll be worth twenty of our modern "cruisers." A fancy targeting system won't do you any good when your 5 inch shell bounces off of several feet of steel. Give a fancy targeting system to a ship with 9 16 inch cannons and who-knows-how-many 5 inch guns, though, and you've got a ship that can take on a fleet. Factor in the sheer number of anti-aircraft and anti-missile systems a ship that big could hold, and it'd be darn near untouchable. Seriously, we're capable of building far better ships than we are now. Missiles can be shot down, a constant barrage of shells can't.