“Can someone tell me, exactly, how one makes out a personal check to the JWST program? Seriously, does no one here understand how govt.-funded programs work?”

Apparently, one cannot.

http://nodis3.gsfc.nasa.gov/displayDir.cfm?t=NPD&c=1210&s=1G

“Seriously, does no one here understand how govt.-funded programs work?”

Apparently not. Even you didn’t offer up why.

“It’s bad enough libertarians prefer their utopian fantasy to the real world,…”

Um, I’m Independent. Colorful stereotyping you’ve got going on in there.

“…but they compound the frustration of those who are forced to deal with them by insisting the real world could conform to their fantasy now but for the inaction of communistic leeches.”

Ah, the “commie leech” stereotype offends your sensibilities? Why… you can dish stereotypes but can’t take em?

“Is it OK to tell these people to piss off here?”

Why? No echo?

” I’m all for spirited debate,…”

Not.

“…but one cannot argue with those who refuse to acknowledge the world as it is, vs. as they insist it must be.”

You think you’ll do better arguing with a mirror? It’s safer, no doubt.

True elements of ‘strength’, no doubt.

Here I am.

Right here.

Where are you?

Adopting a strategy of avoidance.

“Must. Not. Prove. I’m. A. Total. Intellectual. Wimp. In Public. By. Accepting.
Your. Challenge.

I. By. My. Natural. Talents. By. Definition. Am. Less. Then. That.”

What a surprise.

It’s not easy to ignore deluded paranoiacs sometimes, but, to paraphrase another wise individual, always worth the effort.

Low Math: “I can comprehend Christian fundamentalists far better than the libertarian mind, so completely divorced from reality does it seem to me.”

Not my problem. You seem to be more comfortable with a previously decided, well-defined social structure for the attractive predictability you hope if would offer you.

I’m comfortable with unpredictability and serendipitous innovation.

You prefer committees.

I prefer teams.

You prefer the voice of top heavy authoritarianism.

I prefer everyone having a voice, or no voice if they prefer.

You comprehen0d authoritarian Fundamentalism.

I comprehend being personally fundamental.

You think that you know better than me what my money should be spent on.

I think you should spend your own money on whatever you think is best for you, like everyone else.

You think that the weight of Government should relieve me of my own money because you can’t be bothered with the effort to intellectually persuade me that your own personal priorities should also be mine.

I think that you think I’m just going to bend over for you just because your goon squad has brought flowers.

My apology for calling you a ‘twit’. It was a cruder form of disrespect than I usually engage in.

Or against bloggers/commenters on a magazine website…?

“Would you want to live in a world where different science teams had to go directly to the public to pitch their proposals?”

Libertarians wouldn’t even think of suggesting it.

You would go to the people who wanted it and who will benefit from it – i.e. scientists and universities. Universities in turn would raise money by offering their teaching and consultancy services, and the profits earned from selling or exploiting their past inventions. As the best at deciding what gives the best cost/benefit, they ought to be able to out-compete industry easily.

What libertarians are saying is that if the general public wanted a particular project to go ahead, they ought to be able to set up a fund and purchase it, like any other business entity. Nobody is saying that’s the only way it can or should happen.

“Seriously, do these people think funding agencies and their associated infrastructure sprang fully formed from the foreheads of a pack of Marxist infiltrators in the NSF or something?”

Seriously, no.

Seriously, do these people think funding agencies and their associated infrastructure sprang fully formed from the foreheads of a pack of Marxist infiltrators in the NSF or something? That it’s all just some giant conspiracy to shield elites from the inconvenience of market forces? Jesus Christ, the reason market forces are kept out is because they do an ATTROCIOUS job of deciding what is the best basic science research to conduct in terms of cost:benefit. Look at industry now. Shareholder pressure is crushing basic research in the private sector, and in some places has eliminated it completely. The example of Bell Labs is excellent. You figure it’s a shadow of its former self because of govt. anticompetitiveness? What actual evidence does anyone have to support that?

It’s maddening, these people. Maddening! I can comprehend Christian fundamentalists far better than the libertarian mind, so completely divorced from reality does it seem to me. What part of actual, real-world evidence of human behavior and economics is so offensive to these self-proclaimed defenders of true liberty? I’ll never understand it.

“make out a personal check to the program…”

Hey, I’ve got a brilliant idea. Let’s fund all government programs via voluntary donations earmarked for specific programs!

There is actually a reason we don’t do that, you know.

Yeah, I know.

No one, not even you, would do it voluntarily.

“We” must strong-arm everyone else to get the $$$ to fund our brilliant ideas (that we just can’t seem to come up with the necessary funds all by our Rocket Scientist-selves all on our own. Too many stupid people standing in ‘our’ way. Clueless, inept bastards! They must do for us what we, their superiors, cannot do for ourselves ).

Twit
Twit.

My/your what? What are you talking about?

Libertarians would tell you that the way government programmes work is the reason you can’t (directly) save the telescope with your own money if you want to. Blame the way government programmes work.

@daniel: the way to get JWST into orbit is to privatize and revert back to the model which supported astronomy for many centuries – philanthropy. With a large share of the cost already absorbed (sunk) by the government, the remainder is doable. It won’t be easy but it is possible. And perhaps had there been better controls from the start the budget wouldn’t have spiraled so badly out of control. Those controls are far more likely when the government is not cutting the check. However, astronomy must also begin to consider that they too have reached the point of HEP, ie the SCSC. When one project takes the lion’s share of all the research monies avaiable there are problems.

The JWST is essential to the next generation of space science. Sending people into space has about as much to do with science as flagpole-sitting. Seems to me that the addition of this post weakens the previous two considerably — it reinforces the unfortunate impression that “funding for science” just means funding for stuff scientists think is cool.

Hey, I’ve got a brilliant idea. Let’s fund all government programs via voluntary donations earmarked for specific programs!

There is actually a reason we don’t do that, you know. And asking the government to do or not do something is typically called “lobbying”, not “whining”.

“These are difficult financial times. Brutal decisions need to be made. It is certainly conceivable that the United States (and the world) simply can no longer afford to finish off the James Webb Space Telescope. However, it is worth noting that this telescope in many ways symbolizes the best aspects of humanity: our thirst for knowledge, our desire for exploration, and our quest to find our place in the Universe. There is a reason that the Hubble space telescope captures the imagination of both practicing scientists and the general public. We cannot help but be moved and fascinated by images of the cosmos. Have we truly come to a point where we abandon this most noble and inspirational of pursuits?”

If you really want JWST to happen, make out a personal check to the program. Convince all of your family and friends to send their own checks. I’ll send a check, too.

Make it happen, or stop whining because Government can’t force uninterested parties to afford supporting your personal preference any better than can you.

It’s not rocket surgery.

I’ve always been a Shuttle fan, and have always closely followed the program’s every event.

Time for it to end.

Too expensive, and no longer needed.

And good that Constellation died stillbirth.

Space development by Government is thankfully over.

Too expensive, too retarded.

Take the Apollo program: A big rocket, full of fuel, to get a small capsule form the Earth to the moon, and back.

Now, think of traveling from one coast of the U.S. to the other exactly the same way. Anyone wanting to make the journey would have to do so in a fuel tanker truck.

Unless, all along the way, smaller (more affordable) vehicles with limited fuel capacity could find predictably located gas stations and motels between origin and destination.

You know, the Interstate Highway System model.