Comments on: Neil Armstrong Slams Obama’s Space Plan; President Will Defend It Tomorrow

By: Kris Casey

Kris Casey — Fri, 23 Sep 2011 17:12:21 +0000

FACT: Who ever occupies the “high ground” on the Planet Earth will rule the people of the Earth.
If a nation state,or corporation or international body occupies the L points and the Moon they can drop rocks on anybody who offends them below until the groundlings give up.
Militarize Space NOW!
We need orbital weapons platforms with nuclear reactors (to power the lasers) so that we can deny launch capability to our foes. IF we have that , then all we need is neo’s or “rocks” and motors to deliver those rocks to the desired orbit for impact on the foe of our choosing. Who ever gains supremay in these things will rule the future of Humanuty.
Let that be the free peoples of the world, USA, UK, Canada, Australia, Japan, Holland , ROK, and our real enduring allies who can provide either $$ or technical expertise
Othwer wise it will be the PRC or India or less likely Ruissia.

By: Simon

Simon — Mon, 15 Aug 2011 12:55:50 +0000

P.S- The cause of our population boom has been oil. And the oil is going to be gone very soon.

It’s like life in a pool of water (nevermind the size of the pool), when there is a boom in energy (food in the case of sea creatures, oil in ours), there is a boom in poulation. But when the energy runs out, there is a die off.

Humans are not above this fact of nature.

By: Simon

Simon — Mon, 15 Aug 2011 06:29:53 +0000

Hey Nick, learn grammer.

Laura, your obviously a moron. Think of the big picture. This isn’t about you, or your immediate family, this is about humanity.

For the first time in our history we can really see the future.

Our population is now over 6 billion (thanks to mindless breeders like yourself). Through the course of our species, we have maintained a steady 2 billion+, until about a hundred years ago.

Now,after “a” century (versus the 3.6 million years humans are estimated to have been here), we have tripled our numbers. Do the math.

By: Laura

Laura — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 21:31:55 +0000

I’d rather have affordable health care for small businesses than a stupid space program. I could care less about going to the moon, but I’d like my family, me, and all other small business owners to stay healthy and not lose everything we own if we get sick.

By: Paul Levinson

Paul Levinson — Mon, 19 Apr 2010 00:08:20 +0000

I agree with Armstrong – ending the Moon program is not only bad for America, it hurts the whole human race http://paullevinson.blogspot.com/2010/04/armstrong-lovell-and-cernan-are-right.html

By: Bob Dean

Bob Dean — Fri, 16 Apr 2010 18:47:03 +0000

We wanna go to Mars but have no launch or orbit capability. We want the private enterprise to put us in orbit but if they actually make any money at it, we will tax as sales, VAT, income, capital gains and dividend. Ironic that the only government enterprise that has actually contributed to the economy, through funding of basic scientific research, is getting dismantled. Maybe we should all start taking transcendental meditation classes to levitate ourselves to Mars.

By: Lucas

Lucas — Thu, 15 Apr 2010 14:49:14 +0000

[Moderator's note: This comment has been removed because of its virulent racism.]

By: JMW

JMW — Thu, 15 Apr 2010 09:09:57 +0000

What people need to realize is that this isn’t the 50s, or even the 90s, anymore.

In the 50s, the United States had an economy that was more than 50% of the global economy.

In the 90s, it was the world’s only superpower, and still had an economy that was 30% of the world’s.

Today that figure is down to 20% – not so much because the US economy hasn’t grown, but because the rest of the world has grown faster (Brazil, India, China, etc).

In this environment, it will be impossible for the United States to maintain leadership in everything. Or even, likely, anything.

So is President Obama’s plan bad, or just realistic?

By: Lauren D

Lauren D — Thu, 15 Apr 2010 05:43:12 +0000

Hey cgray,

BLACK MARXIST DEMOCRATS???

Wait, Obama turns over the space-mission to the PRIVATE SECTOR, and that shows he’s a marxist ? Are you suggesting Nasa is a firewall against government centralization, and a capitalist’s paradigm? Think about it.

And along similar lines, let me guess, Obama’s administration bailed out the banks because,…. uh, because they are tools of the working class. :-|

Pick some epithets that make sense next time, k?

- Lauren D
P.S. What exactly is the relevance of the President’s being (half) BLACK?

By: cgray

cgray — Thu, 15 Apr 2010 01:56:12 +0000

Second or third rate stature is exactly what Obama wants. It’s exactly what all black Marxist Democrats in this country want. They have a seething hatred for everything American, and would love to see this country brought to its knees. Why nearly half the country can’t see this is mystifying. Hopefully one day soon the decent people of this country will rise up and take America back.

By: nick

nick — Wed, 14 Apr 2010 21:07:32 +0000

Sorry Mr. Armstrong, you may be the first man on the moon but you don’t have the first clue as to the monetary efficiency of space exploration.

Not only have we wasted that 10 billion, but every dollar we threw after that idiocy monstrosity they call Constellation would have been wasted as well.

How do I know? Russia manages to launch quicker and cheaper than us and has done so for quite a long time, yet here we are in 2010 arguing over designing a new, yet still grossly inefficient transport mechanism to get people into space. Why? Because with unlimited government money there is no need for efficiency. With commercial space launches there is every need for efficiency.

Imagine if NASA had invented the transistor. ^.^