J/P=?

Colbert is about showing that humor, too, can not just be a thing of this Earth.

I also think that Serenity is a more appropriate name for the new node. The site was very upfront about how the voting would be used as advice and stated clearly that, “The name should reflect the spirit of exploration and cooperation embodied by the space station, and follow in the tradition set by Node 1- Unity- and Node 2- Harmony.” They are not in the wrong for turning down a write in vote that doesn’t fit this scheme. Serenity fits beautifully with or without the fantastic show behind it. (By the way if you’ve only seen the movie don’t think you are informed enough to give an opinion on the whole show.) While I would rather see Serenity naming something more grand, in this instance it is definitely the better option.

which is only slightly less interesting than a baby Bald Eagle.

Are we talking about the whole Colbert naming thing, or the views of many scientists of the ISS itself?

Take the money spent on ISS, how many robot probes to the planets or orbital telescopes does that buy? Why invest it in the ISS? Because nobody throws ticker-tape parades for robots…

Summer Glau was/is an amazing young actor.

GAry 7

See, now this is the perfect response from NASA, and in exactly the right spirit. There is no reason why NASA can’t have as much fun with this as Colbert and not have to listen to any of this nonsense that they must abide by the result of the contest.

My favorite quote from the article: Agency spokesperson John Yembrick demurred on the subject but couldn’t resist cracking a joke himself. “As for the toilet rumor,” he told space.com, “we don’t want to flush away any goodwill by announcing something before we are ready.”

J/P=?

It is not referencing something that is offensive, nor is it a blatant mockery of NASA. The clause being used to filter out winners OTHER than these is a misuse.

No, Sierra, it’s not offensive or a mockery, but it is a joke. Sure, it’s been a very successful stunt by a comedy show, but from its conception through its execution, it was still nothing more than a joke conceived by someone on the paid Colbert Report writing staff. It would have been one thing for Colbert fans to spontaneously start voting for the name and garnering grass roots support through the Internet, but this was a coordinated effort from a commercial enterprise as a joke and a stunt (albeit a very funny one) aimed at one thing and one thing only — entertaining the viewers of the Colbert Report.

So why should NASA respect something that’s nothing more than a joke and a stunt? What if Rush Limbaugh had decided to badger his listeners into voting for his name to be attached to the new ISS module? He would have easily garnered three or four times as many as Colbert, and pissed off a whole lot more people in the process if NASA had decided that the majority must be respected.

The team at the Colbert Report deserve a lot of kudos for coming up with the idea of hijacking the vote, and it has and will continue to result in a lot of hilarity, but the idea that NASA has to abide by the results of a contest that was successfully gamed by a comedian is simply ridiculous. (And do you really believe that Colbert and his team thinks for one second that NASA owes them, or their viewers, the name of their module?)

Just enjoy it for what it is. A cute joke, nothing more.

Is that REALLY a good reason to stick all space names in a little category of how they have to be?

If they do not go with Colbert, I will actually be a little pissed. It is not referencing something that is offensive, nor is it a blatant mockery of NASA. The clause being used to filter out winners OTHER than these is a misuse. Winning by that much, and a write in candidate at that, should illicit respect from the contest coordinators.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29863574/