The future of NASA

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Yeah, I really don't know much of anything about what science our gov't bankrolls.

Originally Posted by Alex

But it is also saddening that CP and others look at the manned space program and thinks "why doesn't the government do more science funding." It makes me wonder if manned space flight promotes actual science funding or instead gets the government off the hook to a degree from funding real science since we're all oohing about people living in low earth orbit for a few months at a time and the beautiful photos of a shuttle launch against a pre-dawn sky.

I agree with this. Perhaps if instead of spending billions on sending people into space, they could hire some decent PR firms to educate the public on what real science the gov't is promoting, and make it palatable and exciting? I understand that "pure" science is a hard sell, but the more practical stuff should be marketable.

I suspect that many of these agencies don't actually want too much light of day on their projects, because if the teabaggers hear about them they are going to start screaming about tax money being wasted.

The more I think of it, the more the idea of gov't PR in all areas sounds smart, especially in an era of supposedly increasing transparency. Along with visibility comes the requirement of relateability. If our society is truly moving in a progressive direction, it needs a bit of polish to get people on board.

[sleepyjeff]

Originally Posted by Cadaverous Pallor

I suspect that many of these agencies don't actually want too much light of day on their projects, because if the teabaggers hear about them they are going to start screaming about tax money being wasted.

And if they start wasting money on PR campaigns the Tea Party members won't scream?

Besides, it looks like at least one government agency has decided to let the people create their own propaganda.......gotta give them props for saving money if nothing else

http://www.examiner.com/x-25061-Clim...ent-regulation

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Originally Posted by sleepyjeff

http://www.examiner.com/x-25061-Clim...ent-regulation

Every now and then I click one of your links to see just how slanted it is. The answer is still "very".

Oh, and I know the Tea Party will scream, regardless. That's all it does.

[sleepyjeff]

Originally Posted by Cadaverous Pallor

Every now and then I click one of your links to see just how slanted it is. The answer is still "very".

"Slanted?"

So, are you suggesting that the EPA is not conducting a contest promoting regulation? Because that's all I was asserting here??

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Thank you to Alex.

Seriously, from the very first sentence, that article is a joke. I learned about fact-to-assertion ratios when I was 15 years old. Admittedly, it was an excellent teacher who taught me this. Not everyone was so lucky, it seems.

The fact that people from both sides of the spectrum link to obviously slanted drivel such as this as if it were a valid, factual reference point is the most godawful thing that's happened to the world. Aren't you embarrassed?

You should be glad that I stay away from the political threads because I'd have to post this every time I saw anyone here link to such bullsh.t masquerading as a news source. Even if I do read biased stuff I know what I'm reading and I don't pretend that it's a worthy reference point.

Stop it. All of you.