NASA, do we really need it?

[jakspar0w]

Re: NASA, do we really need it?

This reminds me of the Dan Brown book. Deception Point.
...
Good book!
On the other side...I think NASA is needed. if anything tha would be threatening to Earth (our solar system, etc.) we'd be lucky to have NASA, who would most likely have a heads up on it.
And why else would people want to visit my city? (Huntsville, AL)

[Lucky11]

Re: NASA, do we really need it?

Humans are a curious race and our curiosity knows no bounds. Some people look towards their neighbors, some to the past, some to the sea and its mysteries, but a few look to the stars and say whats out there. Is NASA necessary? Yes, for various reasons like, national defense, research and development of various things to better our living standards, not to mention communication, but yes it does spend a bit more then some would prefer and less than others would like. But thats always how progress is achieved because eventually space will become necessary for our survival.

[Samineru]

Re: NASA, do we really need it?

Define necessary.

[Kilgamayan]

Re: NASA, do we really need it?

Define necessary.

adj.

1. not your post

[devonin]

Re: NASA, do we really need it?

http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/necromancer.htm

[Samineru]

Re: NASA, do we really need it?

adj.

1. not your post

Yes it is, to understand the question we need to understand what the author meant by necessary, it could be any number of things, each with it's own debate associated.

[devonin]

Re: NASA, do we really need it?

Actually the OP said "needed" and made it quite clear what they were talking about.

They stated that NASA makes a habit of underbidding and buying out companies who want to offer private space programs, even if it means running at a loss, and was asking our opinions on whether NASA as an organisation is -needed- when there are clearly private companies who would -like- to do the same thing, but are consistantly prevented from doing so.

[Samineru]

Re: NASA, do we really need it?

Actually the OP said "needed" and made it quite clear what they were talking about.

They stated that NASA makes a habit of underbidding and buying out companies who want to offer private space programs, even if it means running at a loss, and was asking our opinions on whether NASA as an organisation is -needed- when there are clearly private companies who would -like- to do the same thing, but are consistantly prevented from doing so.

In your post you explain no better than the OP did, you merely give some background information that to me seems to illustrate that NASA hurts the gobal space effort more than help it. Need can still be interpreted many ways though. If you surveyed a couple thousand people living in third world countries right now you would probably be hard pressed to find one saying that the US government spending seven million dollars on space is nessecary. If you talk to scientists or politicians however you will get a vastly different response.

[Relambrien]

Re: NASA, do we really need it?

In your post you explain no better than the OP did, you merely give some background information that to me seems to illustrate that NASA hurts the gobal space effort more than help it. Need can still be interpreted many ways though. If you surveyed a couple thousand people living in third world countries right now you would probably be hard pressed to find one saying that the US government spending seven million dollars on space is nessecary. If you talk to scientists or politicians however you will get a vastly different response.

Your inability to use context clues to determine definitions is disappointing.

The OP explicitly asked that since other companies were trying to offer space exploration programs, is NASA necessary? This should scream at you that he is asking if NASA is required for successful space exploration, or can it be done without them and put into the hands of private organizations? Essentially, can private organizations do the job well enough that their benefits outweigh the benefits from having NASA do it?

[devonin]

Re: NASA, do we really need it?

Sometimes, (Fine, most of the time) the original posts that are made in Critical Thinking aren't exactly prime examples of the concept. This is why the forum regulars in the posts following, attempt to set the tone for the discussion in a more meaningful direction.

You'll notice that Kilroy_X and I tried to move the thread into a useful discussion of whether NASA should be allowed to persist as a monopoly, and whether the expenses it generates are worth any gains made, but as you should also have noticed, the thread managed to stay very random and non-useful.

You may also notice that you bumped a thread from a couple weeks ago that had clearly died, with a one line response to the original poster who almost certainly won't be along to look at it to answer your questions.

[Samineru]

Re: NASA, do we really need it?

First of all, I don't actually hold _all_ of the beliefs I state, I partially enjoy playing devil's advocate as well.

You . . . bumped a thread from a couple weeks ago that had clearly died, with a one line response to the original poster who almost certainly won't be along to look at it to answer your questions.

When I came to CT I saw maybe 3 or 4 threads semi-active and this was still on the first page so I figured it was fair game.
When I asked the question though I wasn't asking only the original OP I was asking anyone who was interested in discussing the topic further, just to see what direction they wanted to take it in.

[Relambrien]

Re: NASA, do we really need it?

First of all, I don't actually hold _all_ of the beliefs I state, I partially enjoy playing devil's advocate as well.


When I came to CT I saw maybe 3 or 4 threads semi-active and this was still on the first page so I figured it was fair game.
When I asked the question though I wasn't asking only the original OP I was asking anyone who was interested in discussing the topic further, just to see what direction they wanted to take it in.

In CT, most threads aren't really that active. There tends to be a few hot discussions until all ideas have been exhausted and the topic dies, then a new one is made.

Also, bumps in here aren't as blasphemous as in other forums, but it is expected that when a bump is made, it's with a well-thought out and valuable addition to the discussion, not just a one-line response.

[Samineru]

Re: NASA, do we really need it?

When I made that post I guess I saw it leading into something more instead of an argument about the post itself, sorry.

[Relambrien]

Re: NASA, do we really need it?

When I made that post I guess I saw it leading into something more instead of an argument about the post itself, sorry.

Just remember, the more you post about a specific direction you want the thread to go in, the more likely it is to go in that direction. So if you wanted this thread to delve into the differing costs for the government and private organizations to perform space exploration, you would post as much as is meaningful about that.

[madmatt621]

Re: NASA, do we really need it?

Was a two week bump really necessary?