You might have covered this before, but there’s a question I need to ask. The Saturn picture that Carolyn Porco showed was of Saturn totally eclipsing the Sun (as it had to be in order to resolve the Earth). That means that we were looking at the dark side of Saturn. So where did the light come from to take the picture? I can understand the rings on the side, but the picture shows so much more. Is it a composite picture where the dark side was a super long exposure lit by starlight?? I’m just curious.

~TSP, FCD

Especially love the second photo. That’s the beautiful country of New Zealand in the background, with the upper half of the South Island taking up most of the space, and the lower half of the North Island at the top middle (yes…not highly original names…we know). Unfortunately, the mast at the top of the equipment is blocking a view of Wellington, but Christchurch is visible at the base of the bay on the left. In fact it almost looks like the astronauts are aiming a giant cannon at it….

Phil, you forgot to mention that Adam Savage scored a perfect three-from-three on the life of Bram Stoker. Who else would have guessed that he’d stolen Oscar Wilde’s girfriend?

phil i am suprised you posted about col-bert, considering he attacked micheal shermer- remember

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D3kFn_3xRY

ohhh but its comedy, (i say while rolling eyes)

Remembered when Bush’s daddy got the shivers when he wanted to go to Mars and NASA told him it would cost 500 billion? Why, that would buy you a nice little war.

Anyway, I could be convinced that NASA should focus on developing new, breakthrough, technology and turning it over to the private sector. This would entail tests in live flights, with and without crews.

In that scenario, if NASA need to go to the Moon to test something, they would. If not, they wouldn’t.

The simple truth is we really need a really fast propulsion system, something to replace the controlled explosions we now use. We need to throw a few billion in that direction.

If we had a balanced budget, a stable economy, and weren’t occupying a large country, I’d be all for space exploration. As it stands, educating our kids so they can deal with these problems has to be a priority. Maybe it’s a depressing thought, but we have to be honest about the situation. The Bush administration spent our generation’s elective expense money in Iraq. Maybe our kids will eventually pay off our debts and get us back into space if we educate them.

The whole point of the Colbert Show is that nothing is taken seriously. I have watched from day one, and I haven’t seen him do anything serious yet.

It’s entertainment.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/theessay/pip/myqyu/

(plus Ian McMillan has the most wonderful voice)

On #2: I don’t know if Obama will destroy the space program, but he certainly seems unimpressed with the human space program since the end of Apollo. He’s not alone in that. Whether Obama would sustain Bush’s Vision or not, NASA needs to be given one basic encompassing human space flight mission, the funds to do it, and the same protection from shifting political wins that is afforded major weapons systems development at the Pentagon.

It was wicked funny, though!

What I especially liked was that Colbert asked Garrett to do some seemingly stupid things (spinning the bracelet, doing the flip) but that stuff is so awesome to us poor earthbound folks, that it was great to watch it.

I’m also glad to know that in space nobody can hear you scream.

AAAUUGGHH!!

CJSF