The End of the Future

Post image for The End of the Future

by Featured Guest on August 2, 2011

By Petra Gajdosikova

 

I’m not known for overt sentimentality, but watching the TV coverage of the last Space Shuttle returning to earth last Thursday morning was one of the saddest moments I can recall. Once Atlantis touched down it was all over; there would never be another Shuttle.

I’ve always had a penchant for all things space related. As a child I dreamt of space ships, aliens and far flung galaxies, religiously followed every NASA mission, and was glued to the TV screen each time a Shuttle rocketed into the sky or landed. I’d often wished to have been born some years earlier, to have witnessed the thrill of watching Neil Armstrong step onto the moon. (Undoubtedly influenced by my dad’s recollection of that incredible event as one of the most memorable of his lifetime). It didn’t matter that we were in the then Eastern Bloc; we watched the various US advances into space with awe and pride, just as millions of Americans did. It was yet another milestone for Western civilization and human achievement. The greatest of human adventures.

I was convinced some years later we’d get to Mars and beyond. Alas, it was not to be. I suppose it’s fitting that all this is over now. The US (and the West) have given up. The end of manned space flight is just one more symptom of the cultural, moral and economic decline.

The space program was an expression of the energetic, vigorous, optimistic, united America of the late 1950s. It symbolized the country’s ambitions, aspirations and hopes for a better future, its belief that Americans can achieve great things and do them better than anyone else. All that is history now. Today’s America lacks a sense of identity and vision, its confidence is on the wane, exceptionalism has become a nasty word, unity has been replaced by tribal rancor, idealism and pioneer spirit are long gone, substituted by all-pervasive bureaucracy and political correctness.

Is it surprising that instead of reaching out to the stars manned space flight is returning to where it started – science fiction?

The landing of Atlantis ended the 30-year Space Shuttle program. The entire US space age lasted just five decades: it was May 5, 1961 when Alan Shepard’s 15 minute sub-orbital flight made him the first American in space. Just eight years later Apollo 11 blasted off for the Moon.

The Space Shuttle fleet began setting records with Columbia’s launch on April 12, 1981 and continued with Challenger, Discovery, Atlantis and Endeavor. The Shuttle has, during its 135 missions, carried people into orbit, launched and repaired satellites, conducted cutting-edge research and built the largest structure in space, the International Space Station. One of its key successes was the deployment of the Hubble Space Telescope (launched into space aboard Space Shuttle Discovery in 1990); the Shuttle and its astronauts were also crucial for each repair and servicing Hubble needed over the years. (Hubble, aside of giving us hundreds of thousands of awesome images, has revolutionized our knowledge of astronomy.)

Countless technological innovations we take for granted today are also result of the US space program and Shuttle research. The Space Shuttle program alone has generated more than 120 technology spinoffs, including miniaturized heart pumps that save lives, thermal protection system materials, bioreactors (help chemists design new drugs and antibodies), compact laboratory instruments, sensitive hand-held infrared cameras, light-emitting diodes for treatment of cancerous tumors, lighter and stronger prosthetic limbs, an extrication tool to remove accident victims from wrecked vehicles, and many more. (NASA has an entire website dedicated to spinoff technology.)

Now the Shuttle is gone and there is nothing to take its place. The US no longer has the ability to put astronauts into orbit. NASA will have to rely on the Russians to hitch a ride to the International Space Station – on the old-fashioned Soyuz spacecraft, at some $50 million per ride.

It wasn’t supposed to end like this. A few years ago George W. Bush announced the return to manned space exploration with the Constellation program. Missions to the Moon (by 2020) were to be followed by a manned flight to Mars and beyond. Then came Barack Obama who, believing in social programs and wealth redistribution rather than science and exploration, promptly cancelled Constellation, the country’s only chance at continuing with human space flight.

In any case the space program no longer seems appropriate for today’s America. Space exploration was a symbol and inspiration for Americans who believed in excellence, courage, self-reliance, achievement, science (hard science, not the politically correct pseudo-science of today). That country no longer exists; its spirit has been broken. The “virtues” America, and the West, worship today – equality, diversity, feminism – are a fast-track to a third world status, not to the stars.

As much as we may want to convince ourselves otherwise, it seems clear we no longer have the ability to achieve great things, space flight or otherwise. I suspect Bruce Charlton is onto something when he writes that “human capability reached its peak or plateau around 1965-75 – at the time of the Apollo moon landings – and has been declining ever since”.

“This may sound bizarre or just plain false, but the argument is simple. That landing of men on the moon and bringing them back alive was the supreme achievement of human capability, the most difficult problem ever solved by humans. 40 years ago we could do it – repeatedly – but since then we have *not* been to the moon, and I suggest the real reason we have not been to the moon since 1972 is that we cannot any longer do it. Humans have lost the capability.

The US space program started on its downward trajectory in the early 70s, slowly drifting away from further development of deep space missions and new technologies. (The Shuttle itself is 1970s technology and should have been replaced by a new generation of spaceships years ago.) NASA has been gradually taken over by technologically and managerially inept bureaucrats lacking any vision and imagination. Instead of attracting the brightest engineers, scientists and innovators, the agency has cared more about politics and displaying its commitment to ‘diversity’. Well, at least now that manned space flight is no longer, NASA can work on its preferred mission – Muslim outreach.

Those who claim the US could no longer afford its space program would be well advised to look at the actual NASA budget. While during most of the 1960s NASA spending came to between 2-5% of the annual federal budget, since mid 70s it’s been less than 1% and in the last few years only about 0.50% of the federal budget ($17-18 billion p.a.).

So you can’t afford to spend a minuscule share of the annual fed budget – one half of one percent! – on space exploration, but consider it a good use of money to waste a couple of trillions on entitlements and welfare programs and $700 billion on stifling bureaucracies (i.e. various executive departments and agencies, most of which would serve the nation best by being abolished)? Not to forget the estimated $3 trillion cost of ObamaCare.

And what about the supposedly too expensive Space Shuttle program itself? The total cost of the Shuttle program over its entire four decade lifespan (including 10 years of R&D) was just under $200 billion. Expensive? Well, the US federal government, at present rate, spends $200 billion every three weeks!

I don’t see anything that has brought taxpayers a comparable return in industrial and technological advancement, increased understanding of our world and universe, as well as prestige, pride and inspiration as the manned space program.

But this isn’t about money or savings… it’s about a nation’s priorities. An America that spends trillions of dollars a year on welfare, entitlements and bureaucracy is an America that lacks any purpose, identity or belief in future; a space program is something such a nation has no use for.

Mankind has always felt the call to explore and push back the boundaries of human capability. I have no doubt there were people in Columbus’s day who wanted to find a ‘better’ use for the money that was to finance his voyages. Thankfully King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella of Spain had more vision and sense than Barack Obama.

We can only hope that a more enlightened people, perhaps the Chinese or Russians or Indians, are going to take over space exploration and become a beacon of hope and inspiration to those in the rest of the world, as America once used to be.

—-

Thank you, Space Shuttle, for all the memories.

—-

NASA – The Shuttle Program: A tribute in pictures (mission by mission)

Major moments in the Shuttle program (incl video)

NASA’s Space Shuttle pages

Hubble website (awesome images)

Atlantis – final landing (video)

{ 145 comments… read them below or add one }

AfOR August 2, 2011 at 09:50

I *did* see the first moon landing, live, via the aussie dish.. lol

The shuttle was a cluster-fuck from day one, attempting to be a servant to too many masters.

NASA vs USAF from day one has been responsible for everything bad in the US space programme, and the old adage of USA v Russia was “Our german rocket scientists are better than your german rocket scientists”

However……….. as far back as 1972 I can remember the annual NASA budget being compared to for example annual USA spending on tampons, or cat foot, and it wasn’t even a drop in the ocean.

Losing space capability means losing all the attendant industry and skills to, just look at the local history of gloucestershire and swindon, the former for aviation and the latter for trains…. once it’s gone, it can’t ever be brought back.

And finally esther, did you know that the size of the solid rocket boosters is determined by the width of a horse’s ass?

Roman roads and cart axle width was denoted from the with of a horse, and then trains came alone and stephenson adopted the same width, 4 foot 8.5 inches, (Brunel did it properly, wide gauge, but there we go) which of course denotes the size of a train, which denoted the size of a train tunnel, which denoted the maximum load , and since the boosters were made far enough away (pork) from the VAB and pads that train transport was the only way…..

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 36 Thumb down 3
Opus August 2, 2011 at 09:55

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 53
mananon August 2, 2011 at 09:55

Putting men on the moon and bringing them back alive is possibly the greatest single human endeavor ever.

No bull, I believe that. And can you believe, looking back to the 70s that some people became complacent, or even cynical, about this magnificent human triumph?

No doubt China, Japan or India will put their own astronauts on the moon in the coming decades but speaking as a Brit it’s a real shame the US will not be repeating that achievement for some time to come.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 40 Thumb down 5
Kyo August 2, 2011 at 09:55

A great post and a beautiful eulogy for an organization that inspired millions of kids (and adults) all over the world to look up at the stars.

I thought we’d be on Mars by now — but instead we’re more inward-looking than ever.

I sure hope the Russians or the Indians or even the Chinese can keep humanity moving forward. What a tragedy that progress that should propel us into the next age is being discarded so that some money-redistributing do-gooders can feel better about themselves.

I’d gladly pay double my taxes if it meant seeing people go back to space. I just hope I live long enough to see some nation or company or even private enthusiasts succeed.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 15 Thumb down 8
Benjamin August 2, 2011 at 10:01

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 76
Royce Geist August 2, 2011 at 10:04

It will come back no doubt about it. There has just been a lull but once everyone raised on heavy doses of sci fi and video games starts getting of age we will see a resurgence

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 12 Thumb down 10
NMH August 2, 2011 at 10:06

Im all for the space program as long as we can pay for it. When other countries grow the fuck up, so we dont have to be spending money to either support them or invade them, then we might have enough money for the space program.

As long as there is islamic extremism which reproduces faster than the people whose views are more moderate, than we can never have another space program.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 23 Thumb down 18
Firepower August 2, 2011 at 10:15

The actual end of space exploration will prove to be a boon to all those believing that America is #1!

WE ARE WINNING

War is peace

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 15 Thumb down 23
Uncle Elmer August 2, 2011 at 10:23

Interesting post.

I’ve always admired Russian aviation and space technology. One of my favorite teevee shows was “Wings of the Red Star”, narrated by Peter Ustinov. Example : “Small Soviet Cargo Aircraft of the 1950′s Part IV”. Mesmerizing.

If you look at the progress between 1949-1975 you notice that the U.S. and Soviets routinely stole or copied each other’s ideas. Also of note is that German rocket scientists of WWII were “recruited” by each superpower to build up their space programs. I have also heard that the P-51 Mustang was designed by expat German engineers who designed the ME-109.

Not sure if NASA’s “diversity marketing” layers have cause that agency’s downfall but it’s a damned annoyance. I mean, “Sojourner Truth” for crying out loud, vs. “Gemini”, “Apollo”, or “Hubble”.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 3
SingleDad August 2, 2011 at 10:28

I wouldn’t try to produce anything of quality in the US. Smart move by the Powers That Be ™.

I wonder who will replace us?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 2
Quartermain August 2, 2011 at 10:29

Anybody remember Major Matt Mason?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_Matt_Mason

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
Quartermain August 2, 2011 at 10:31

Anybody remember Major Tom?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D67kmFzSh_o&feature=related

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
Wulf August 2, 2011 at 10:40

Apollo vs Dionysus

Lunar Landing vs Woodstock

http://www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?pagename=reg_ar_apollo
was published in “The New Left: The Anti-Industrial Revolution ”

http://www.amazon.com/New-Left-Anti-Industrial-Revolution/dp/0452011256

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2
David V August 2, 2011 at 10:41

This is a very insightful and well argued post that illustrates beautifully the wreckage in aspiration that cultural marxism has inflicted on society. It is always refreshing to read articles from women that understand the well concealed decadence of current entitled feminism.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 50 Thumb down 3
Fourmyle of Ceres August 2, 2011 at 10:49

Yes, the Space Shuttle is dead, but good riddance. It was an expensive, pork-ridden boondoggle of a clusterfuck. And it had a lousy safety record. And NASA proved quite decisively, with their “even worse than the Shuttle” Ares program, that they had lost the ability to ever design anything better.

Everything else in the post is wrong though. Mourning the end of the American presence in space because of one government spacecraft being decommissioned is like mourning the death of American flight because they stopped making the B-52; or mourning the loss of American naval dominance because they stopped using coal-fired steam ships.

Check out the following companies-

SpaceX. Can put serious tonnage in orbit for 1/10th the cost of Shuttle. They have also flown hardware into orbit that can take seven passengers. Their Falcon Heavy can reach LEO for $1,000/lb, which is insane.

Bigelow Areospace. They’re building space stations that will be larger than the ISS, again for substanially less cost. They already have signed agreements with foreign governments (like Japan and Singapore) to lease space on these stations.

United Launch Alliance. An amalgam of old-school aerospace companies, but they’re launching hardware.

Armadillo Areospace.
Virgin Galactic.
Blue Origin.
Masten Areospace.
Mojave Spaceport.

There is a renaissance in American space activity going on around you right now. Just open your eyes and notice that it’s in the private sector, and not a centrally planned government program.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 62 Thumb down 10
Uncle Elmer August 2, 2011 at 10:49

At a couple of aerospace corporations I worked for there seemed to be whole divisions devoted to producing diversity/motivation propaganda.

With the advent of internet and color print technology it provided great opportunity for hacking the wall posters. Doing it in a subtle, professional way was a great challenge. Trick was to make it so clean you had to do a double-take to get the gag.

Like inserting a cravat-wearing Austin Powers in the “Special Ops” clip-art abomination. Or for the “Command Communications Center”, have the foreground terminal-operators surfing a porn site or engaging in online poker.

When I saw the Black History Month poster with the “Hollywood Squares” matrix of African-American space heroes I couldn’t resist, and inserted Mr.T front and center. My supervisor said “That’s going too far Elmer”. Though seriously I never meant to be mean-spirited, just funny.

I was among the first to be “let go” during the next “census reduction”. Took my 401K and booked a flight to SE Asia for 6 weeks.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 36 Thumb down 2
Firepower August 2, 2011 at 10:50

SingleDad August 2, 2011 at 10:28

I wouldn’t try to produce anything of quality in the US. Smart move by the Powers That Be ™.

I wonder who will replace us?

Why, of course it will be our self-esteem-filled younger generation brimming with confidence!

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 18 Thumb down 6
BoxANT August 2, 2011 at 10:57

It’s an end of an era, but just because NASA is shutting down, does not mean the fire that burns in the heart of men, to push the boundaries of the known, is dead. Boys will still dream of space, and they will grow up into men who will strive to reach it.

Of course, the question is, will our society act as fertile soil for such boys, and allow them to reach their potential? Or will we continue down this path of oppressive “equality” and “social justice”, which sole purpose seems to be to reach some miserable stagnant dystopia, the *new* “American Dream”.

I’m worry that it will take some time for us to reach for the stars again. There will have to be some great changes here on Earth first, and those changes, like the movements of solar bodies, take time.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 1
AntiFeminist August 2, 2011 at 11:02

“The US no longer has the ability to put astronauts into orbit.”

They have, but they prefer wasting a s**tload of money on bombing third world countries and feeling “powerful” because of it. Think of Mike Tyson beating up a 5 years old kid and then acting though. How delusional and silly… isnt it?

Its funny that this deluded chick blames the “social programs” for the demise of the space exploration. As if keeping a perennial warmongering army wasnt a “social program”, that steal tax-payers money so that some President Chicken-in-Chief can act “though” on Tv, and his little slaves can act “though” on bars telling their “war stories” in third world countries (as if anyone really cares…).

The real “social programs” are the US military bases disseminated in the whole world, but you wont see any “right-winger”, except maybe Ron Paul, say that. The other Fox-News brainwashed right-wingers will always be obsessed with the social programs that actually gives back through services to the tax-payers some of their tax money.

While the military social programs are bleeding the country to death, they still point the finger at other little civil social programs. They dont notice the elephant in the room, because in the US Christianity as a religion has been replaced by Militarism. I remember Randy Couture, after a UFC fight, saying that “US soldiers” were like the second coming of Jesus Christ, angels dying for “our sins”… after all, Christianity is a Middle East religion, Jesus was a “sand nigger”, you cant expect anglo-saxon (which invented feminism) people understand such a religion in its deepest meanings. They have to dumb it down to some sort of “Captain America” militaristic cartoon.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 35 Thumb down 38
Mr. Stricter August 2, 2011 at 11:05

Even though I regard manned space travel as a waste of money, that was a touching piece.

One big reason we could do that in the past and we cannot now are related to economics and culture

The US in that period was generally free,mostly racially homogeneous and had a broad based distribution of wealth.

The current US is well #1 in incarceration ,racially heterogeneous and an oligarchy . None of the those traits are conducive to a society with the ability to solve complex problems.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 29 Thumb down 6
Things Are Bad August 2, 2011 at 11:13

The only way to ensure the survival and prosperity of the human race is to venture into space. It’s probably best that we aren’t the ones doing it since we have a cancer eating away at us, and we shouldn’t perpetuate it to other planets.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 25 Thumb down 4
Anglo in Abitibi August 2, 2011 at 11:25

The western`s world capability peaked in 1970 because the US lower-48 oil production peaked (hit it`s max. daily rate measured in barrels per day)

No cheap hydrocarbons means no escaping of the Earth`s gravity well.

In 50 years we`ll be happy to have car rides for funerals and weddings.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1
Robert August 2, 2011 at 11:26

Get ready. Once I have rested in my “coffin” and have had my coffee I will make serious statements AND ask serious questions. How long did feminism exist before the U.S. space programs? I want to see responses from feminists.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 3
Robert August 2, 2011 at 11:34

Get ready. Once I have rested in my “coffin” and have had my coffee I will make serious statements AND ask serious questions. How long did feminism exist before the U.S. space programs? I want to see responses from feminists.

1. How long did it take?

2. Why didn’t >>YOU<< DO SOMETHING BEFORE the space program beging to put women/womyn on the moon first?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
Robert August 2, 2011 at 11:35

begiing should be; began.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2
Robert August 2, 2011 at 11:38

begiing should be; began.

Did you invent the idea firts?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4
Robert August 2, 2011 at 11:40

firts should be first. Do not condmen me I am tired but not exhausted.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 6
MSFM August 2, 2011 at 11:50

Quartermain August 2, 2011 at 10:29
“Anybody remember Major Matt Mason?”

Yes, I do.
A friend of mine had the space station complete with flashing beacon and all the other cool accessories.
Good memories, thanks.

I checked the manufacturer’s website to see if they still make this.

The new version in in the works: Major Melissa Martel-Morgensen space commander extraordinaire.

She is strong, sassy, and sexy. Ruthlessly running the intergalactic command post with an iron fist. The all female officers oversee the male labor staff (comprised of men who demonstrated a willingness to sacrifice to their overloads without question and those men deemed unsatisfactory for use as pleasure drones) as they dutifully perform the “dirty work” that keeps the station and the space program operational.

The new beacon flashes a blinding signal broadcasting a message of empowerment through dominion to those enlightened life forms across the universe willing to accept the conditions of submission.

Apparently there is a backorder of undefined duration on this exciting new training tool due to a marketing hold up.
The design team is unable to reach a consensus regarding the colors of the spacesuit / helmet / and boots for the commander and staff figurines.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 30 Thumb down 0
keyster August 2, 2011 at 11:56

There’s a difference between achievement for achievement’s sake and doing something that actually results in something useful to Mankind. We can explore space “because it’s there”, but doing so up to this point has resulted in us learning that exploring beyong what’s reasonable, such as Mars, is not really practical.

Unmanned exploration (think drone aircraft) is much cheaper and we’ve learned how to do it through technological advancement. Space exploration has obsoleted itself. We learned it’s there and how to get there and be there. Other than some technical innovation off-shoots, bragging rights, a cool telescope, a flag on the moon and some satellites, what have we gained?

Persuing space exploration any further is beyond man’s reach (life expectancy) and the stuff of science fiction. It was exciting at first, but then so was exploring the Arctic regions, the ocean floor or climbing Mount Everest. Now what?

If we’ve learned anything from space exploration it’s that what the Universe has to offer is beyond our limits to get there and be there. It’s beyond our meager scope to comprehend it’s enormity and power. It’s God.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 15 Thumb down 11
UncreditedSource August 2, 2011 at 12:00

Madeleine Dahlgren, the wife of Admiral John Dahlgren (father of modern Naval Ordnance), and a Senator’s Daughter, once wrote a piece speaking against women’s suffrage.

See it yourself:

http://sceti.library.upenn.edu/sceti/printedbooksNew/index.cfm?TextID=19950_O_16&PagePosition=10

On pages 7 and 11-12, she says:

“The advocates of female suffrage claim that if women had the right to vote they would purify legislation of many abuses. But, on the other hand, we hold that the new status will prove to be the worst kind of Communism. The relations between the sexes, now so carefully guarded by religion and by parents, by law and by society, will become common and therefore corrupt. The family, the foundation of the State, will disappear. The mothers, sisters, and daughters of our glorious past will exist no more, and the female gender will vanish into the epicene. Involved in one common ruin from our present proud preeminience, we shall become a laughing-stock and a by-word to the nations of the world.”

“This question of female suffrage is an outcropping of socialistic doctrines, and here we are answered by the many and confused voices of its teachers. Communism is an essential part of their grand scheme. The family relation, the inviolability of marriage, the home-life, these, for them, are effete. The new heaven – the Shibboleth – is the State. Let all be made productive for [The State] alone.”

“Female suffrage – the mischievous aspiration of the hour – is the political cloak, the means to attain an end; but the clear end will be social disorganization. The proposed change, should it ever occur, cannot fail to prove the greatest curse that has ever visited any nation.”

All this sound familiar?

If a woman can forsee all this in 1875, how do so many of us STILL not see it?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 52 Thumb down 1
UncreditedSource August 2, 2011 at 12:00

Madeleine Dahlgren, the wife of Admiral John Dahlgren (father of modern Naval Ordnance), and a Senator’s Daughter, once wrote a piece speaking against women’s suffrage.

See it yourself:

http://sceti.library.upenn.edu/sceti/printedbooksNew/index.cfm?TextID=19950_O_16&PagePosition=10

On pages 7 and 11-12, she says:

“The advocates of female suffrage claim that if women had the right to vote they would purify legislation of many abuses. But, on the other hand, we hold that the new status will prove to be the worst kind of Communism. The relations between the sexes, now so carefully guarded by religion and by parents, by law and by society, will become common and therefore corrupt. The family, the foundation of the State, will disappear. The mothers, sisters, and daughters of our glorious past will exist no more, and the female gender will vanish into the epicene. Involved in one common ruin from our present proud preeminience, we shall become a laughing-stock and a by-word to the nations of the world.”

“This question of female suffrage is an outcropping of socialistic doctrines, and here we are answered by the many and confused voices of its teachers. Communism is an essential part of their grand scheme. The family relation, the inviolability of marriage, the home-life, these, for them, are effete. The new heaven – the Shibboleth – is the State. Let all be made productive for [The State] alone.”

“Female suffrage – the mischievous aspiration of the hour – is the political cloak, the means to attain an end; but the clear end will be social disorganization. The proposed change, should it ever occur, cannot fail to prove the greatest curse that has ever visited any nation.”

All this sound familiar?

If a woman can forsee all this in 1875, how do so many of us STILL not see it?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 2
PeterTheGreat August 2, 2011 at 12:05

” Bruce Charlton is onto something when he writes that “human capability reached its peak or plateau around 1965-75 ”

Two things happened during this time frame that were disasters for Western Civilization.

The first was the subversion and takeover of the Catholic Church evidenced by Vatican II and the loss of the will which drove Western Civilization.

The second was the “liberation” of women, who only wanted more consumer goods, and didn’t give a darn about the future of mankind.

A side thought – The idea of “sustainable technology” is a downward spiral. Only an expanding economy creates true sustainable technology through innovation.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 2
SingleDad August 2, 2011 at 12:07

@ US

It was seen, analyzed decided on and accomplished.

You don’t see half the population complaining. And half of the one complaining does it doing it half heartedly because they are still eating eggs the chickens produce.

Let’s see, that’s 50% + 25% or at least 75% of the people enthusiastically support the current situation.

I hope someone is getting rich here.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Renee August 2, 2011 at 12:21

AWESOME POST.

I am heartbroken myself that the space program is all over. I absolutely love science fiction and anything involving, aliens, visiting other worlds, and advanced space travel; examples being the show Serenity and the anime Cowboy Bebop. I have always hoped that there will be some type of advancement in space travel towards the near future, but with the ending of the space program, who knows.

I mean, COME ON! It’s 2011, and the only technological advancement that’s consistant and sure are phones, video games, computers, and cars (somewhat – we’re STILL using gas).

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 15 Thumb down 16
Ken August 2, 2011 at 12:30

Refreshing to read this topic here :)
I agree with the writer’s premise as to the root-cause and the inevitable result of America cancelling its reach into Space (among other more “aggressive” moves of progress) to make way for “social programs” and the redistribution of wealth that cultural-marxism mandates, all the while real men fade into history like the brave Apollo and Shuttle Astronauts. Say what you want, the ending of America’s Space Program is but one more clarion call for the end of Western Civilization as we’ve known it.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 1
Commander Shepard August 2, 2011 at 12:31

Not once was feminism discussed in NASA’s decline. Was I the only one who picked up this omission? Remember Lisa Nowak? The diaper wearing female astronaut who embarrassed NASA when her romantic involvement with a colleague resulted in her attempt to kidnap her ex’s new girlfriend? Funny how this female author didn’t include that in her essay but took plenty of shots at everything and everyone else.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 34 Thumb down 4
Anonymust August 2, 2011 at 12:36

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 27
SingleDad August 2, 2011 at 12:39

Now with boys no longer allowed in college and vilified once they get there, and an official push to have women only scientists, I guess you can’t trust the male ones, research and space exploration are about to enter a new heyday:

http://www.aauw.org/learn/research/upload/whysofew.pdf

There has never been a better time to not do space.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1
ahamkara August 2, 2011 at 12:47

My understanding of the retirement of the shuttle is that we are allowing private corporations to step into the role of delivering payloads to low-earth orbit, so that NASA can get back to pushing the envelope of space travel – i.e. going to Mars and beyond. Low earth orbit is a solved problem, and there is no reason for NASA to be running a shuttle service. It makes sense to me.

What doesn’t make sense to me is why bleach-blonde “Money Honey” has an article posted on the Spearhead, using a sentimental over-simplification of an issue to push a political agenda. She seems disingenuous, unsurprisingly.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 4
DogFace Soldier August 2, 2011 at 12:49

@Commander Shepard 12:31

Thank you for pointing out what few men choose to acknowledge!

I wish men stopped welcoming women to the MRM. Women have proven that they poison everything they touch. There are a lot of fraudulent MRAs’ who act like white knights. There are many MRA websites where criticism of a female MRA will get you blocked. I refuse to embrace any woman who has anything nice to say about men. These women have ulterior motives. There are four main reasons for women flocking to the MRM:

1. They want to get on the men’s side so they don’t experience the backlash that is inevitable against women because of feminism.

2. Since women are followers, they want to follow the latest “trend.” They view the MRM as they would the latest fashion trend.

3. They know that most so-called MRAs’ will praise them for speaking out against feminism. Most women women who speak up against feminism are treated as royalty.

4. Women flock to the MRM because they have started to be personally affected. If they weren’t affected, they would still be kicking dirt in the faces of men.

NEVER trust women!

If anyone thinks differently, I respectfully await your point of view.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 46 Thumb down 10
AfOR August 2, 2011 at 13:05

so, how many of you hear remember the true story of the lunar astronaut, and his neighbour when he was a boy, and the blowjob and “good luck” wish?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 2
Norden August 2, 2011 at 13:25

We started to fail years ago.

http://spacebombardment.blogspot.com/2005/05/bad-law-vs-manifest-destiny.html

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Snark August 2, 2011 at 13:29

OT

Does anyone know where I can find the book of bonecrkr? This used to all be up online in several places I’m sure, I can’t find it any more though.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Jeb August 2, 2011 at 13:36

The Book of Bonecrcker

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0
Paradoxotaur August 2, 2011 at 13:38

@Commander Shepard: ” Remember Lisa Nowak? The diaper wearing female astronaut who embarrassed NASA when her romantic involvement with a colleague resulted in her attempt to kidnap her ex’s new girlfriend?”

Nowak is back in the news- forced to retire out of the Navy with an “other than honorable discharge”: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2020039/Disgraced-astronaut-Lisa-Nowak-attacked-love-rival-booted-Navy.html

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0
Snark August 2, 2011 at 13:39

Jeb,

Fantastic. Thanks a ton.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
Anonymous August 2, 2011 at 13:49

@Antifeminist

I too am no fan of the military-industrial complex but you can’t blame it for the sum of our financial woes.

Federal spending for United States (Combined Federal, State, Local)

Healthcare: 18%
Military spending: 16% (3 wars) (including Veterans benefits)
Pensions: 16%
Education: 14%
Welfare: 11%

www (dot) usgovernmentspending (dot) com (slash) us_budget_pie_chart

Defense is just 25% of the Federal budget, we spend 57% of the budget on health care, pensions and welfare.

America isn’t stumbling because of the military-industrial complex that has hijacked key politicians. America is stumbling because people are voting to grant benefits to themselves by making serfs of their children.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0
Anonymous August 2, 2011 at 13:49

@Antifeminist

I too am no fan of the military-industrial complex but you can’t blame it for the sum of our financial woes.

Federal spending for United States (Combined Federal, State, Local)

Healthcare: 18%
Military spending: 16% (3 wars) (including Veterans benefits)
Pensions: 16%
Education: 14%
Welfare: 11%

www (dot) usgovernmentspending (dot) com (slash) us_budget_pie_chart

Defense is just 25% of the Federal budget, we spend 57% of the budget on health care, pensions and welfare.

America isn’t stumbling because of the military-industrial complex that has hijacked key politicians. America is stumbling because people are voting to grant benefits to themselves by making serfs of their children.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
TFH August 2, 2011 at 14:01

People have a lot of misconceptions about the space program.

For starters :

1) Comparing the 1969 Moon Landing as the pinnacle of accomplishment often ignores the fact that the Apollo Program cost 1% of US GDP for 8 years. The only things that should be compared to the Apollo Program are those that cost a similar sum of money. Today, 1% of GDP for 8 years would be $140B for 8 years. A lot of programs much grander than that could be done for less money (manned missions to Mars, which is 100 times further than the Moon at its closest point, for one).

2) The Space Shuttle was an inefficient program that bottlenecked private space development for decades. Now that the Shuttle has ended, private programs will achieve the same for much lower cost. Just wait and see.

3) Manned missions cost 50-100 times more than unmanned missions. Symbolism aside, we learn much more than manned missions. I am vastly more excited about the Kepler Space Observatory (which has already found 1235 Earth-like planets in just the first year) than if the same money extended the Shuttle for 2 more years.

So no, the end of the Space Shuttle is not sad. And 1969 was not the pinnacle of manned spaceflight, just the peak percentage of GDP that the US was willing to spend on a space mission.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 6
Epoetker August 2, 2011 at 14:10

To those who think that the wars are the primary cause of space funding dropping off-what exactly are you smoking? Would we have HAD a space program without all the rockets we were building in WWII? Would such teams of scientific minds that worked on the Manhattan Project, as well as several others in their respective countries, have EVER have come together without the war? Would those public and private contractors who build all those, to mangle a Fredism, “whiz-bang ooh-rah pyrotechnics” that often led to new scientific advances from their component parts? Would science and its public understanding be advanced? Would we have the Internet?

War is the greatest driver of human intellectual advancement in history, simply because it FORCES at least some men to use their brains at maximum capacity while simultaneously in an all-male environment that can provide maximum cooperation. The threat of starvation is a poor substitute for war’s innovative driving force, yet that, coupled with female shaming toward whatever the nearest clerical career is, has so far been the best we’ve come up with in peacetime ASIDE from the space program.

Yes, other careers can make more money in the long term, Raytheon and Lockheed are crony capitalist contractors, blah dee blah dee blah.

But let me guarantee you one thing:

No young boy EVER wanted to grow up to work for Goldman Sachs.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 20 Thumb down 7
TFH August 2, 2011 at 14:11

Mr. Stricter,

The US in that period was generally free,mostly racially homogeneous and had a broad based distribution of wealth.

In the 1960s, Italians, Jews, and Slavs were not considered ‘white’. In the 1960s, someone would have made the same statement you made, about the 1920s. Catholics were considered the ‘other’ by Protestants – surely you recall the controversy of JFK being the first Irish Catholic President in 1963…

And today, the left is busy trying to classify Asians as ‘white’ to mask the fact that a minority has succeeded, as that would draw attention to programs for blacks. Your statement above totally neglects how often the definition of ‘white’ gets redrawn.

Broad based distribution of wealth? Only because from 1946-73, no other country had much manufacturing capacity, and the US could export a vast number of cars, planes, and electrical goods to the rest of the world. It is amazing that such a bubble lasted even 27 years. That a factory worker could make so much was as much a bubble as 23-year-old dot-com millionaires in 1999.

America’s wealth appeared broad-based because the rest of the world was poor. A huge concentration of wealth in one country was great for that country, but anyone who thought that could last forever was delusional. That 2 billion people have risen out of poverty since 1991 is not a bad thing either, as this will ultimately weaken US feminism due to simple market forces…

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 17 Thumb down 8
Towgunner August 2, 2011 at 14:17

The author cites feminism. Of course, because it’s not feminine to venture into outer space, it’s dangerous there and you have to mind what you’re doing, no time for gossip. Again, feminism rises with the rest of the cultural marxism muck and we see the decline and eventual fall of the space program and with that America too. This is a stark example of the failure of feminism and cultural marxism and the validation of what we have known all along. As I read I got sad too, having experienced the shuttle as a kid and being an aviation enthusiast. For whatever reason I kept thinking that instead of reaching for the stars, today, people “would rather just go for another fix of their daily dose of endorphins.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 0
MWPeak August 2, 2011 at 14:19

“Today’s America lacks a sense of identity and vision, its confidence is on the wane, exceptionalism has become a nasty word, unity has been replaced by tribal rancor, idealism and pioneer spirit are long gone, substituted by all-pervasive bureaucracy and political correctness.”

I would say that part of problem is the propaganda campaign, which was really loud around the 1960s, that effectively convinced Americans that they should be ashamed of their country and the exceptionalism of the West. Guilt was sown with accusations of college-manufactured terms like “racism” and “sexism” and, my personal favorite, “anti-America-should-fail-ism.”

Instead of Americans being proud of their country, they hung their heads and admitted that they done criminal things for centuries, as defined by the culture courts of liberal socialists, and no longer felt they had the right to try. They were convinced to simply give up.

A damned shame, really.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 1
Vortac August 2, 2011 at 14:29

Why do people seem to think that ‘space’ is something extra, something that exists beyond the actual reality, something that is so distant that it’s treated like just some kind of fantasy?

We are in space. Just because we are on a planet, doesn’t mean that we are somehow excluded from space. This planet is our spaceship, and it is moving at high speed all the time. Just because we don’t feel that movement, doesn’t mean we aren’t all moving through space every second of our lives, at incredible speed.

It is a natural phase for any planet’s developmental process to have space exploration. The moon is there to entice our interest in space travel (among other reasons). First a young planet’s civilization learns to make small leaps to the moon(s) of the planet and back. Then to other planets. After awhile, they can reach even other solar systems. When they advance enough, distance between galaxies is no more a problem than a distance between continents.

But this planet Terra has always been a problem-child. Here the progress hasn’t been the way it should have been. It’s only natural to reach beyond the ‘usual’ – but on this planet, innovation is usually destroyed quickly to maintain the status quo. Anti-gravity, zero-point energy, superior propulsion systems – these would all be already mankind’s everyday treasures, if it weren’t for big corporations. Geniuses have invented things, which the power structure of this planet have silently taken away from them, destroyed or stifled to death in one way or another.

This planet’s progress has been of weapons, wars, pollution, starvation – cruelty, greed, ‘elite’ powerlusty madmen and praising of obsolete technology. Space is all around us, and it’s only natural to visit it – some day every human being can freely travel in space, not just the ‘trained astronauts’ chosen by the elite.

Aside from NASA being founded by ex-Nazis, and it being part of the very control scheme that keeps people so hopelessly enslaved, the point of all this is, that while space is something we should – and will, given enough time – explore and travel freely in, we should take care of our own planet first.

It’s not wise to build nuclear weapons, pollute our oceans, kill alternatives to polluting cars, use who knows how old technology for the airplanes in the daily life etc. — and then think it’s ok to just pour all the money into space exploration while people are actually starving to death in great numbers. It’s insanity that we could stop the wars, the starvation and the misery – the polluting and the nuclear contamination of this planet relatively easily – but we choose to rather keep obsolete space technologies that require vast amounts of money just to malfunction anyway. NASA and other similar ventures are a scam. They use technologies, which the elite has long known to be completely obsolete – but they continue(d) using them so that the masses would think that’s the latest “state of the art” technology, and that NASA is doing something “good for all humanity” in space.

Since when did ANY institution or ‘government agency’, corporation or similar structure EVER have the “good for all humanity” in their interests, or express it in their actions?

You cannot trust corporations, because it’s in their best interests to keep people enslaved, not set them free by allowing them to travel to other planets.

So what it all boils down to is a clueless, emotional, nostalgic NASA-fan mourning for the end of using expensive, obsolete technology to do ridiculously miniscule things that do not improve anyone’s (let alone the whole planet’s) life, while people are starving, there are wars going on and pollution increases every day. Sorry, but I do not see this very sad. Existence or non-existence of NASA is pretty meaningless in the larger scheme. It can have meaning as helping the power elite enslave the masses, but it’s mostly just a meaningless figurehead instead of something actually really powerful that helps and inspires people.

After knowing about the movements of any UFO-type spaceship (yes, I know what UFO really means, please do not be smart-asses about this), how can anyone be inspired by something so clumsy as a rocket anyway? There are better propulsion systems out there, and with our current technological level, it could be easily utilized – if only the power elite, the corporations, the evil cancer of this planet didn’t stop and reverse all progress to it’s most primitive and clunky level possible.

(Just as a sidenote – check out the battery technology, and how it absolutely ‘refuses’ to progress much further, but compare it to CPU technology and see that rapid progress would be possible – it’s just not wanted. With the same token, I suggest you look at passenger airplanes (vs. military airplanes, for example), car engine technology that consumes almost exactly as much gas per mile as the first cars did <- no progress there.. I wonder why.. – for at least some answers, you can watch the movie "Who killed the Electric Car?")

So in conclusion; crying about NASA is equivalent to sitting in a sandbox and crying about a toy rocket while in the real world, people are learning to levitate.

- Vortac

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 16 Thumb down 22
Carnivore August 2, 2011 at 15:15

I tend not to believe self-serving government proclamations such as “all the spinoff technology due to NASA”. Any government agency will try to justify its existence and increase its budget. The question would be if those technologies could have been discovered more efficiently and economically in the private sector.

Putting that aside, every great civilization and nation has had its massive public works project – some more impressive than others. It displays a vitality and energy even if it is, perhaps, wasteful. The lack of such programs and the decay of the results of previous programs are signs that a nation is no longer at its peak.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 0
Anonymous August 2, 2011 at 16:18

Too bad Bill Gates is married instead of a MGTOW. A sufficiently rich MGTOW (Carlos Slim?) could afford to assemble a spaceport and a better “silbervogel” aka space plane. The basic idea is shown in “When Worlds Collide” when humanity is saved by building a space plane to get the new planet, launched by rocket sled up an Evel Knievel style jump ramp built up the side of a mountain.

Google “sky ramp technology” and you’ll find a whole web site about just this concept. The concept is actually old. Eugen Sanger, a German rocket scientist during WW2, first conjured up the idea for a fractional orbital bomber called the Silbervogel (Silverbird) or Antipodal Bomber. After the war, both sides grabbed copies of the blueprints for this thing. The Space Shuttle was in fact a distant descendant of the Silbervogel. The USAF “X 20 Dyna-Soar” project was a space plane design that would be launched atop an ICBM. We should have gone with that. It would have avoided both shuttle accidents.

Unfortunately, Bill Gates is pussy-whipped into having devoted his money to forward the feminist agenda. If he got divorced, he’d lose at least 3/4 of his money so he’d no longer be rich enough. The only reason he hasn’t been divorced on is Melinda Gates wants to get the ENTIRE fortune, not a mere 3/4. It would be funny is Melinda dies first while driving her corporate jet (complete with tax cut).

Just for fun, I named my used cop car Crown Vic the USS Silbervogel after the theoretical aircraft.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 1
BeijaFlor August 2, 2011 at 16:27

@ Quartermain August 2, 2011 at 10:29

Anybody remember Major Matt Mason?

Damn. I was just a little too old for those toys. But I did get a “Men In Space” space helmet, with McCauley printed above the hinged visor, when I was six years old and reading about the Mercury program in Science Digest.

It may be up in my aunt’s attic, with the “Steve Canyon” jet-pilot’s helmet I got at age five.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
continent August 2, 2011 at 17:32

@Paradoxotaur August 2, 2011 at 13:3

Thanks for the update. What kind of sentece would a man gotten for doing the same thing. Also adultery is a crime in military and she was married, but it does not say if she had sex with the male “Naut”

Nowak was sentenced in 2009 to a year of probation in the attack after pleading guilty to burglary charges, as aprt of a plea agreement.

Since her dismissal from the astronaut corps, Nowak has been working at the Chief of Naval Air Training station

and also

Seven months later, she got into her husband’s blue BMW, drove nearly 1,000 miles from Houston to Orlando -

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2020039/Disgraced-astronaut-Lisa-Nowak-attacked-love-rival-booted-Navy.html#ixzz1Tv96oZhs

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
spocksdisciple August 2, 2011 at 17:47

I posted this as a reply on a different topic on the MGTOW forum but it makes senses here.
Remember that the US is now spending more money than ever turning the country into one giant prison camp. The money which would’ve been spent in space exploration in the 1960s is now spent in housing an ever growing population of inmates.

“The sun is setting on the horizon for the American space program and night is falling, with the ending of the Space Shuttle program comes the ending of American manned missions and technical leadership and expertise. From now on Americans will be strictly back of the bus, they’ll be hitching rides on Russian and possibly Chinese rockets as passengers but not for long.

Around 1000 years ago The Vikings pulled off the equivalent of what the Americans did with the moon landings, they reached a distant foreign land and colonized it with primitive technology five centuries before Columbus. So the Americans have followed the Viking model and will soon disappear as the Vikings did in Newfoundland and Greenland and will all be considered fluke.

In 1421, A Chinese admiral put together one of the most technically advanced trading and exploration fleets in the world, he sailed this fleet far beyond what was even capable of ships from other nations. The point of this fleet was to demonstrate the technical, military and economic prowess of the Chinese Empire to the rest of the “barbarians”.

In the latter half of the 21st century, the Chinese will once again take the leap into the great unknown, they’ll have the manpower, the skills and most of all the will to explore, innovate and create as they did centuries before the rise of the West.

During this era, the American space program and NASA will be relics left over from a prior era of forgotten glories. With the demise of the American space program on a national scale all that will be left is to dismantle and decommission NASA. Then only private space corporations will have any access to space and they’re not in it for the science but the profits. Unmanned missions will be stopped, it already looks like the successor to the Hubble Space Telescope(the James Webb telescope) will be cancelled, many unmanned missions are also on hold and look to be cancelled. All the while the Dems are looking to fund even more “diversity” and “social” programs and to reconstruct American society along socialist lines.

My crystal ball says the Chinese and possibly the Russians will have a lunar base plus orbital faculties by the 2050s, America will have abandoned space exploration altogether with many of their facilities derelict and their technology obsolete. Most of America will resemble parts of Somalia as the bankrupt federal gov’t pretends to be control of the country but have long since been ignored by what’s left of the country. Regional States and smaller alliances will have arisen in the place of he old United States with minor constant warfare over land access and resources. America will be remembered as a fairy tale which turned into a nightmare and Obama’s name will be associated with the failure of the old America.

It could also be at this time that America might be on the cusp of a second Civil War between the factions supporting outright Marxist Socialism and those who want to restore the country to the model the founding fathers had envisioned and to restore the Constitution.
Obama will not be recalled kindly by future historians, he will be judged as a man who was so controlled by special interests that he was called the “Empty Suit” because he never did govern with any originality.

Man will continue into space, Americans more then likely will be left behind to watch on their TV screens, and Asian or Middle Eastern man might be the first person to set foot on Mars. American’s will be able to go to the Smithsonian and marvel at the old Space suits of the Apollo astronauts and wonder what might have been…”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 2
spocksdisciple August 2, 2011 at 17:49

” That corporations are developing space access are a positive side of the equation, however they are not focused on developing anything which isn’t directly related to their corporate goals. Their shareholders would kill them if they went off track into space research and planetary exploration.

The military are also a special interest group with objectives which are strictly controlled by their hierarchy, now I have to admit that the USAF were scientific pioneers when it came to space research and development, you are correct in that they have broadminded enough leaders to understand covering their “bets” in areas as diverse as auroral research, solar monitoring(space weather) and geophysical projects based in space.

However I don’t think the funding will be the main issue in coming decades(as the US dollar becomes worthless in real terms), I think the lack of qualified American technical and scientific expertise which will kill NASA in the future will also affect the USAF programs as well.

STEM subject funding is shrinking while “diversity” and “gender/social” related funding is expanding. As a result less and less highly educated and technically qualified men are going to be available to the Space Program, and these men are going to be highly sought after in fields outside of space research, many corporations are realizing they have two choices. Hire a foreigner(not possible to use in the USAF top secret programmes) or do without, because frankly Americans shot themselves in the foot in the 1970s when it came to science education and funding. The reason I say men here is because women in STEM fields are notoriously unreliable when it comes to career longevity, when you looked at the Space program and the project people on many of these missions they were men who stuck it out for 20, 30 even 40 years! while most women tend to get bored and leave after 10-15 years in the field.

And don’t look for private corporations to take the lead in space research not directly related to their bottom line, Intel isn’t going to devote billions to pure space exploration, they may invest billions in zero g, vacuum based manufacturing of it’s proven to give them an economic and technical edge.

What is see is an America being lead down the path to “green” living (aka a peasant and serf level society), otherwise termed a anti-technological “utopia” by those people who hated everything the US stood for in the 20th Century.
Obama is very active in leading the way and his socialist backers would love nothing more then to scrap the military/industrial partnership which has been the backbone of American science and innovation for the past 60 years.

Stick a fork in America, the country is turning into the Mike Judge film Idiocracy with the help of people like Obama and his feminist friends.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 0
Renee August 2, 2011 at 20:02

Commander Shepard,
Not once was feminism discussed in NASA’s decline. Was I the only one who picked up this omission? Remember Lisa Nowak? The diaper wearing female astronaut who embarrassed NASA when her romantic involvement with a colleague resulted in her attempt to kidnap her ex’s new girlfriend? Funny how this female author didn’t include that in her essay but took plenty of shots at everything and everyone else.

Ummm, because it didn’t have anything to do with the discussion at hand. I fail to see how a diaper wearing female astronaut or females astronauts in general have anything to do with the government sanctioned ending of space exploration.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 6 Thumb down 17
3DShooter August 2, 2011 at 20:07

“I’d often wished to have been born some years earlier, to have witnessed the thrill of watching Neil Armstrong step onto the moon. ”

As one of the older posters on TS, and one who has followed it from the beginning, this is one of the times I get to remember something with fondness most of the younger readers don’t . I remember watching Armstrong step out on the moon on the school B&W television (my kids can’t imagine B&W) – and over and over when I got home. Hitting a golf ball was just icing on the cake (golf is a sport I only recently learned to appreciate and can’t imagine doing that right in a space suit even in 0.18g). The whole nation was glued to the accomplishment. It was definitely a different time where in spite of this country’s racial bigotry and phony SE Asian war we had a right to be proud at the accomplishment.

Back then you could still be proud to be an American – today, amerika is a different and foreign place. The younger folks probably don’t understand that – they’ve never known anything different.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1
Anonymous August 2, 2011 at 20:10

A peasant/serf existence would be better described as a dystopia. But you could have a technical dystopia (with imported everything) like with a Civil War 2 ensuing. If there’s no Civil War 2, you might see being white being deemed a treatable illness using the same procedure for treating vitiligo but “whole body vitiligo from birth”. A Civil War 2 will surely result in a scenario like a Mad Max flick with everyone fighting for the crumbs while the rich evacuate with their wealth.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 3
Twenty August 2, 2011 at 20:33

@Fourmyle of Ceres

… like mourning the death of American flight because they stopped making the B-52 …

Hey … at least the B-52s are still flying!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
Gx1080 August 2, 2011 at 20:45

China I dunno, but Russia is a rotten carcass. They aren’t going to be “leading the way” for anything anytime soon.

A truly sad moment. The future is more favelas and less dreams.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1
Charles Martel August 2, 2011 at 21:42

About 12 years ago I worked for a company that made a type of component for space launch vehicles that was only made in two places in the USA. Lots of proprietary know-how, big capital investment. Without going into too much detail, and I really don’t know any of the details, my company was working with NASA and the USAF on key components for single stage to orbit vehicles.

The US military does NOT leave itself with zero capability to launch military payloads. It’s a virtual certainty there’s a Mach 8 spy plane powered by pulse detonation engines flying out of Groom Lake. So what else do we have? I think it’s probable that the US still has a space launch capability – of the space plane variety.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Things Are Bad August 2, 2011 at 22:03

If we stay on this planet, we die sooner rather than later.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 3
evilwhitemalempire August 2, 2011 at 23:08

Sorry but I call bullshit on this one.

For decades NASA and their proponents have shamelessly exploited the publics naive, romantic fervor for space travel to support white collar welfare. (And they are completely shameless in doing this even going so far as to fabricate evidence of life on Mars. Recall that 90′s b.s. about a meteor slamming into Mars causing a fragment to be ejected into space which then just happens to get sucked into Earth gravity and falls to Earth to be discovered to contain fossilized microbes?)

Space travel would be nothing like Columbus discovering the new world. Nothing! When explorers reached the Americas there was plenty of food, air, water, GRAVITY and very sound economic incentives for being there. None of that exists for space travel!
People think it would be soooo cool to live on mars! Think it would be soooo cool to spend the rest of your life on a nuclear sub? (Moreover one where your health is all fucked ’cause of living in different gravity) Morons!

“Is it surprising that instead of reaching out to the stars manned space flight is returning to where it started – science fiction?”

No.
Not anymore than the idea of human level artificial intelligence.
Or anti-gravity propulsion.
Or phaser guns.
Or teleportation.
Or warp drive. (Without this one manned space travel is POINTLESS btw.)
Or time travel.
There is a reason it’s called science fiction and not science!
There is no law of the universe that say’s that just ’cause you religiously watched Star Trek growing up that the future is supposed to happen that way.

Space ain’t no final frontier folks.
For all practical purposes this blue ball we all sit on IS the universe.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 13 Thumb down 14
E August 3, 2011 at 00:15

Vortac

Just as a sidenote – check out the battery technology, and how it absolutely ‘refuses’ to progress much further…..you can watch the movie “Who killed the Electric Car?”

*rolls eyes*
Oh great an ignoramus who believes in an internet conspiracy.
I’ve never seen the movie because I’m waiting for the sequel, “Who killed the Electric Car – part 2″ You know what that movie is going to be about?
It’s the story of how the current Nissan Leaf will share the same fate as the EV1. ha ha ha

Nissan advertised a 100 mile range when the car first came out, but they certainly didn’t advertise the fine print which is That’s 100 miles based on the LA4 test cycle which is a laboratory test averaging only a speed of 20 mph.
Put the car in “real world” conditions like drive 65mph on the freeways and your range drops in half to only 50 miles. An unpleasant surprise to current owners who were dumb enough to buy the car.

The funniest part is that electric car advocates within their own delusional mind truly believe they belong to the elite 20% “educated” class and it’s just the other 80% of us who are too “stupid” to realize that they are the truly smart ones. This is a common psychological trait of a conspiracy theorist.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 5
evilwhitemalempire August 3, 2011 at 00:50

DogFaced Soldier

“2. Since women are followers, they want to follow the latest “trend.” They view the MRM as they would the latest fashion trend.”

I bet that a lot of women were once that way with feminism. Just goin’ with the tide.
I predict that in ten years feminism will be GONE save but a few dykes here and there.
Instead there will be a lot of ‘non-feminist’ women acting EXACTLY like feminists.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0
Opus August 3, 2011 at 01:12

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 19
DevilDog August 3, 2011 at 01:15

The American spirit of adventure is dying.

Ambitious exploration isn’t a luxury, it’s a priority. It’s about survival.

I am utterly disappointed in NASA and the U.S. Government, and can only hope private companies are able to match up and fill the void. I have high hopes for SpaceX.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0
Masculist Man August 3, 2011 at 01:30

OT

Dr. Phil to host SAVES advocates and other things: http://mensrightsboard.blogspot.com/2011/08/couple-of-things-from-saves.html

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3
crella August 3, 2011 at 01:58

“As a friend of mine put it, if they can land and take off again perfectly, without a hitch on a distant planet – seven times -, then how come when they return to earth they have have to parachute into the sea? ”

You did notice that the landing craft for each planet was different? And that the moon has no water? :-D The difference in gravity between the earth and the moon was not a factor, nor the fact that much of the earth is populated? These are just a few things that popped into my mind when I read that question…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 8
AfOR August 3, 2011 at 02:46

@ opus and crella

it’s also pretty fucking difficult*** to aerobrake on a planet or satellite with no fucking atmosphere, eg the moon

it’s also pretty fucking difficult*** to land and take off a non aerodynamic body, eg the LEM, from orbital velocity and down again in a fucking atmosphere.

Your “objections” to the possibility of the moon landings being real are based on nothing more than your remarkably huge and all encompassing ignorance of even basic physical laws… in fact your ignorance is so vast it isn’t even possible to talk to you…. no wonder you ended up being a lawyer.

*** eg flatly fucking impossible

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 5
Robert August 3, 2011 at 03:00

evilwhitemalempire August 3, 2011 at 00:50
DogFaced Soldier

“2. Since women are followers, they want to follow the latest “trend.” They view the MRM as they would the latest fashion trend.”

I bet that a lot of women were once that way with feminism. Just goin’ with the tide.
I predict that in ten years feminism will be GONE save but a few dykes here and there.
Instead there will be a lot of ‘non-feminist’ women acting EXACTLY like feminists.

When I look around here in Nastyville, I see lots of women who have no clue what feminism is but, they act/talk/behave just like feminists.

I have a question that should be easy to answer; what did feminism ever do to help or enhance the space program?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 0
Robert August 3, 2011 at 03:41

How many feminists have travelled into outer space (without the use of drugs or imagination/fantasy)?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
Robert August 3, 2011 at 03:42

I cannot resist asking this;

How many feminists does it take to launch even a bottle rocket?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1
Robert August 3, 2011 at 03:43

Before you look to see what a bottle rocket is, it’s a firework not a type of space craft.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
Opus August 3, 2011 at 04:59

@AFoR

When Newton, and Einstein and Heisenberg are no longer being read I am sure the works of AFoR on Physics will be known by all – but not until a day before.

You can always spot believers by the offensiveness of their nonsense.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 13
AfOR August 3, 2011 at 05:08

@ Opus

You sir, are a fucking idiot.

http://wimminz.wordpress.com/the-experience-gap-walk-a-mile-in-those-shoes/

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 3
Ollie August 3, 2011 at 06:53

@UncreditedSource:

Holy sh**t. To figure that one out as early as the 1800′s?
Dahlgren was incredibly prescient.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Ollie August 3, 2011 at 06:55

*Or rather, the late 19th century. Still, I am amazed.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
keyster August 3, 2011 at 07:31

“I fail to see how a diaper wearing female astronaut or females astronauts in general have anything to do with the government sanctioned ending of space exploration.”

You might be right, but let it be known that NASA had become an extremely “Diversity Sensitive” work environment. Affirmative Action was a really big deal there. Not hiring the best and brightest mind you, but hiring the “good enough”, based on sex and race. Like all government agencys and most corporations, keeping up “diversity aware” appearances was a big deal.

Those that believe ongoing manned space exploration is a good idea don’t understand science or physics. If the Chinese want to waste all the interest we’re paying them on our debt by “claiming” Mars let them. We’ve got plenty enough to keep us busy down here just perpetuating our species into the next century.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2
SingleDad August 3, 2011 at 07:42

OT

Why do they put articles on the “Today Show”? One of the reasons I have seen is to make annoucments. IMO the Today Show has become the public square of feminist America. A sort of “Hear Yeh, hear yeah” place for the United States.

This morning there was an article on “Sugar Babies” paying for college with older richer friends with benefits.

So, here we have it. The death of marriage, no more women going to college to get their MRS degree, now they go to college to get their PROSTITUTE degree, or PRO. In 40 short years we’ve progressed from MRS to PRO.

Way to go team woman!

Interestingly the article was aimed toward parents, or older women I suppose.

Like it’s a news flash. I suppose this is what mothers tell their daughters today. I’m not with your father….find a sugar daddy or take loans.

I think we can sink alot deeper based on this news. I never thought I’d see this day. Open slavery? Why not.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
Norm August 3, 2011 at 08:02

The space shuttle was based on a German design from the 1930s, though I wouldn’t want to be in one in the 30s if it was ever made. It wouldn’t surprise me if the US and other countries have secret manned flights around the earth and possibly to the moon they don’t want the public to know.

BTW Obama said he want to create jobs. Of course he didn’t say where. ;) . Can you spell Chindia.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2
SingleDad August 3, 2011 at 08:20

OT

The conclusion on Today is that it’s not prostitution, and legal experts confirm, so it’s full speed ahead young ladies….you have the “Today Show” stamp of approval.

Interestingly, the ladies of Today think the 1 trillion in student loans that women get should be paid by older men.

They say it’s a systematic problem and that “friends with benefits” is the way to go with a very vague “guilt” may be felt.

Then the ladies of “Today” including Arianna Huffington, felt that the women should get more money, the started negotiating price…350.00 is too little, the ladies of today are trying to negotiate for $500.00 per meeting?

Arianna Huffington pimping college women for tuition on national TV.

Hot off the press.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0
Ken August 3, 2011 at 09:36

“A peasant/serf existence would be better described as a dystopia. But you could have a technical dystopia (with imported everything) like with a Civil War 2 ensuing. If there’s no Civil War 2, you might see being white being deemed a treatable illness using the same procedure for treating vitiligo but “whole body vitiligo from birth”. A Civil War 2 will surely result in a scenario like a Mad Max flick with everyone fighting for the crumbs while the rich evacuate with their wealth”>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Personally I think it is heading in the direction of (noticable) decline in GDP and personal wealth in the next ten years with the US economy compltely tanking in the 2020s BEYOND REPAIR if the current trend of economics continues. Civil War II? Not in the sense you might think…Americans will be far too “Greeked” by then and too soft and sissy to wage such a civil disturbance beyond home-invasions and throwing rocks in the streets.
Sounds cynical yes, but I think the “Justin Bieber” males of the younger generation won’t carry a torch beyond the trunk of heir twink partner’s new Hugo (right next to their book of recipes stolen from Mommy)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Firepower August 3, 2011 at 09:41

Masculisp Man

OT

Dr. Phil to host SAVES advocates and other things:

Very OT.
But, keep fixating on our most important enemy: that evil “Dr. Phil.”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 7
Opus August 3, 2011 at 10:11

@AFoR I am flattered to have made it to your Blog,- though I really think you should have put a shirt on before sharing your copy of Playboy with your baby.

You are certainly right about one thing, Lawyers (who are usually pretty stupid) do not need a high grasp or indeed any grasp of the laws of Physics, to practice Law successfully or otherwise – although you might notice I have not anywhere advanced any particular Law or Particular view of any law of Physics – but merely my friend’s observation, and he is a managing director of a Computer Software company.

What is useful however is an ability to sniff out Bull-Crap, to see the flaws in an arguement, and observe the implausible – one gets a nose for it. Of one thing we can both agree – on that famous day, when man walked upon The Moon for the first time, there was no -one there to witness the event, and there is no-one there now to confirm the event.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 9
Uncle Elmer August 3, 2011 at 10:32

SD

“Arianna suggested that these so-called “sugar babies” are selling themselves to cope with the failure of the American Dream. “You play by the rules, you work hard,…”

Translation : You bought every lie sold to you by the college industry hook, line, and sinker. You did not critically examine the implied payoffs that taking on huge debt so you could get a degree with poor market value might actually materialize.

To further absolve yourself of responsibility, you join with your sisters to hear that men should be responsible for bailing you out.

By the way, Arianna, women have been doing the sugar-daddy thing since forever. In less sexually repressive cultures it’s common and openly accepted.

Further off-topic :

Our old friend from the 70s, Susan Brownmiller :

Accused rapists don’t need more protections

A lack of conviction doesn’t make a person innocent. And sex crime victims are still held to an impossible standard

http://www.salon.com/news/crime/index.html?story=/mwt/feature/2011/07/28/rape_assange_dsk_response

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
Joeb August 3, 2011 at 10:50

Space tec. has brought us some really cool stuff , I pray for the day when men can just go to the store and pick out an embryo then raise the child without a female to ruin him.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1
Charles Martel August 3, 2011 at 10:55

@Opus

As a friend of mine put it, if they can land and take off again perfectly, without a hitch on a distant planet – seven times -, then how come when they return to earth they have have to parachute into the sea? Follow the money is one of your expressions, and one that would explain your Lunar Triumphs.

It is always cruel to puncture a countries beliefs and prejudices about itself, but Moon Landings are as fanciful as any Theologian attempting to deduce the number of Angels on the point of a Needle. As with religion if you are a believer no evidence or lack thereof is persuasive, but once you see it (as with realising as a child that Santa Claus is an adult invention) you wonder how you or anyone else could ever have fallen for it in the first place.

AfOR got here first, but I’ll be more polite. A little.

To paraphrase AfOR, a man should know his limitations. You’ve just exceeded yours. Your stock has also gone down. A lot.

The reason the returning Apollo missions parachuted into the sea is because that was the best engineering solution to that particular problem. The Earth’s gravity is about six times that of the moon’s – a negative – but the Earth also has an atmosphere – a positive. Given the design of the Apollo missions required the means of landing on Earth be taken to lunar orbit and back, three lightweight parachutes make a hell of a lot more sense than the weight and technical complexity of a descent engine capable of overcoming Earth’s gravity and the fuel to operate it. Oh yeah, your friend is an ignorant muppet who learned his space science from Thunderbirds. Or was it Fireball XL5?

As far as the moon landings being fake – no chance. All the standard objections to the moon landings – Van Allen radiation, wavy flags, shadow directions, etc., etc. – are based on a lack of understanding of simple science and physics and were generally dreamed up by American trailer trash with no other way to get a little attention.

NASA’s Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter has recently imaged several of the lunar landing sites. But the most compelling evidence for the lunar landings – not that it’s needed – is the presence on the moon of optical reflectors , placed there by the Apollo astronauts.

Your misplaced skepticism does a great disservice to the twelve extraordinarily brave MEN who walked on the moon, to the countless dedicated MEN who put them there and to astronauts Grissom, White and Chaffee who made the ultimate sacrifice in the intense effort to make it happen.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1
Uncle Elmer August 3, 2011 at 11:05

“Fireball XL5″

Ah, brings back the memories to an old geezer.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
Hayden Hanna August 3, 2011 at 11:18

Thank you for your blog Uncredited Source. I am going to print your article entitled,”Women in a Nutshell” to use in my birds and bees talk with my son when he is a couple of years older.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Hermitcrab August 3, 2011 at 11:27

A note of discord:

why do so many US commentators seem hell-bent on accusing Obama -and only him- of bankrupting your nation? Last I checked, it took TWO presidents to bring things to the present cliffhanger, and one of them had eight years in which to inflict the wounds.

The present one is failing as a medic… yet people are acting like the fault belongs to the bad repairman instead of the homicidal idiot who pushed you all off a cliff.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 4
Charles Martel August 3, 2011 at 11:35

@keyster

You might be right, but let it be known that NASA had become an extremely “Diversity Sensitive” work environment. Affirmative Action was a really big deal there. Not hiring the best and brightest mind you, but hiring the “good enough”, based on sex and race. Like all government agencys and most corporations, keeping up “diversity aware” appearances was a big deal.

Yeah, I realized NASA was finished while watching a 2003 press conference after the Columbia disaster. It was not just the actual sequence of events, where the engineers were obviously subordinate to the NASA political commissars, but the fact that the female Program Manager knew next to nothing about the vehicle. And then there was the fact that all the NASA personnel present were wearing Italian suits with silk ties and looked like refugees from some corporate management retreat. It was clear that no-one in the room had a clue.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
crella August 3, 2011 at 11:45

I wrote to Dr. Phil Plait (The Bad Astronomer) this morning about the landing vs. splashdown question, and bless him, I got an answer!
My mail (minus greeting and comments about his web site)
…”The question is- ‘If they were able to land on another planet with no problems seven times, how come they had to splash down when they returned to Earth?’
My first thought was simply that the crafts were completely different with different purposes, that the lunar lander was not designed for extended flight and life support (nor designed to withstand reentry),and the capsule was of course perfectly designed for reentry, a time-tested design and landing method…they each had a purpose and not landing with a lunar lander-type craft when coming back to Earth is no indication that the moon landings were faked. I have searched the internet unsuccessfully for information on why each of these methods was utilized, despite finding plenty on the nuts and bolts aspects, the how. ”

Dr. Plait’s answer-
“As you guessed, it’s very different to land on the Moon (low gravity, no air) than it is on the Earth (lots of gravity and air). Parachutes won’t work on the Moon, of course, but do a great job on Earth, and are far easier to use than a rocket to land. Apollo was still the early days of exploration, so why make such a difficult task even harder? So they used the easiest option they could while still keeping the astronauts safe.”

The fact that different landing modalities were used in no way indicates fakery.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 4
Charles Martel August 3, 2011 at 11:56

Dr. Plait’s answer-

Mine was better.

The real problem is not that so many people don’t know the answer to this question, but that so many people think it’s a reasonable question to ask.

If you don’t know what that means, you’re part of the problem. So much education, so little real knowledge.

Sir John Glubb tells us the 9th Century Arab Empire built universities in every city – right before it collapsed and disappeared.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
crella August 3, 2011 at 12:03

Afor, aren’t you mistaken about my position? I was frankly surprised that someone would say that different landing craft = fakery. Just flabbergasted. In no way at all does ‘different landing craft/methods’ = ‘fake’. My reply was a bit sardonic I admit, but I am really disgusted with the number of people who jump on every conspiracy bandwagon without even trying to look something up. I wasn’t objecting, far from it.

I was half-joking when I said ‘you realize there’s no water on the moon’, inferring that splash-down was not an option…and so the LEM was used.

To say all that was faked is a tremendous insult to those who braved the trip, and those who lost their lives in the process. I don’t blame Buzz Aldrin in the least for puncing the reporter who called him a liar for saying he’d walked on the moon.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 7
Opus August 3, 2011 at 12:36

This thread is like a religious revival meeting.

Not one good argument, ad-hominem attacks, circular reasoning and outrage that anyone could take a different view. No one has asked me why I take the view that I do – that might have been interesting – you might have learned something. Had I doubted the existence of say The War of Independence you would have either laughed at me or thought I was losing it. The reason for the assertions and outrage is because like say the factuality of the Old Testament or The Historicity of Jesus you all know – deep-down – that you believe in the moon-landings because you want to; that to cease to believe would remove a big-plank of your belief in America – indeed the entire article rests on it.

I am afraid that as the believers in moon – landings never seem to be able to resort to anything other than insults, ad-hominems; appeals to authority, and circular reasoning of the ‘we went there so you must be mad or bad – how can you doubt it’ variety my views (which are scepticism of the event) remain unchanged. As I indicated, believers are always the most intollerant, as I see from this thread from the crudity of AFoR to the pomposity of Charles Martel. As for Crella going to Bad Astronomy, I always thought their name spoke for them only too well.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 11
crella August 3, 2011 at 12:49

‘Mine was better.’

Yes it was.

Opus, you obviously don’t understand the name of the site. He debunks the Gawd-awful astronomy in movies and TV (Independence Day etc). And, all you had to do was post your reasoning, not wait to be asked for it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 5
crella August 3, 2011 at 12:52

And, Charles, I like to be sure of things before I say anything, I see no harm in asking for the opinion of someone who knows more about a subject than I do.

I admit I’m not a rocket scientist, unlike so many ‘Hoaxers’, who claim to hold the knowledge that exposes NASA as a fraud…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 5
Charles Martel August 3, 2011 at 12:52

@Opus

I am afraid that as the believers in moon – landings never seem to be able to resort to anything other than insults, ad-hominems; appeals to authority, and circular reasoning of the ‘we went there so you must be mad or bad – how can you doubt it’ variety my views (which are scepticism of the event) remain unchanged.

I thought you were a smart guy. Oh well.

There’s a metric crapload of evidence that the moon landings took place. I offered a straightforward engineering argument, and convincing proof, for anyone with half a brain. The problem is, as AfOR says, you have no idea what you don’t know. Dunning-Kruger , my friend.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0
Jameseq August 3, 2011 at 13:15

Thinking wealth redistribution killed the space program is incorrect. Space and the middle classes were killed by the LACK of wealth redistribution since the oil shocks of the 70s, when the fuck-society im-not-paying-no-stinking-taxes freeracketeers gained control of economic policies in the west

From the 40s to the 70s higher rate taxes were between 70 to 90% in the west. It was this heavy wealth redistribution that funded the usa space program, and also greatly expanded the middle classes in the west

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 4
E August 3, 2011 at 13:34

Charles Martel

I thought you were a smart guy. Oh well.

You’re giving Opus more credit than he deserves.
I immediately wrote him off as an idiot after reading his first paragraph, rightfully so.

He clearly suffers from the Dunning–Kruger effect.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0
GS Jockey August 3, 2011 at 13:39

@Charles Martel

Hahahahahahha!………Bwaaaaaaahahahahah!!

Aw man, you are killin’ me, you gotta stop picking on Opus. It’s not even fair–the dude is a fool and he is standing there with his arms at his sides. He doesn’t even know what day it is. I think we need to just let him go on his way and he’ll eventually wander back to his room up in the attic.

On the other hand, maybe this exchange is something we can all learn from–another example of the dangers of our Feminist society and the results of excessive study of “soft-sciences”, to include law? You know, where people (mostly women and Opus) go to school and receive a degree that supposedly represents an “education”, but they actually can’t DO anything?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
Charles Martel August 3, 2011 at 13:43

@Jameseq

From the 40s to the 70s higher rate taxes were between 70 to 90% in the west. It was this heavy wealth redistribution that funded the usa space program, and also greatly expanded the middle classes in the west

You keep right on believing that. Socialism creates wealth, that’s the ticket!

Root cause of USA primacy, 1945 to 2000? Winning WW2, fuck yeah, and having more than 50% of the world’s functioning industrial capacity. With a shout out to the rule of law and a commitment to free market capitalism.

Root cause of the USA’s current economic malaise? The entry of a billion Chinamen into the global labor market. Aided by the rise of crony capitalism and changing voter demographics.

Any questions?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2
Charles Martel August 3, 2011 at 14:05

@GS Jockey

Aw man, you are killin’ me, you gotta stop picking on Opus. It’s not even fair–the dude is a fool and he is standing there with his arms at his sides. He doesn’t even know what day it is. I think we need to just let him go on his way and he’ll eventually wander back to his room up in the attic.

My pleasure. GS – Gulfstream? I’m jealous.

Opus’s hero – Ralph René – the leading proponent of the faked moon landings theory.

René is an equal opportunity debunker, believing himself smarter than Einstein, Newton and Archimedes, among others.

In addition to believing that the moon landings never occurred, René, who dropped out of Rutgers University, also believed – and I quote:
Einstein’s theory of relativity is not valid
The Earth’s Equatorial bulge is smaller than that predicted by Isaac Newton
Newton’s law of universal gravitation is erroneous.
That Pi is equal to 3.146264
Fluorescence, not Rayleigh Scattering, causes the sky to be blue.
Archimedes’ principle requires revision.
Coulomb’s law requires revision after experimentally ‘proving’ plates with like polarity and charge will repel, however plates with like polarity and different charge can attract.
The force that holds the solar system together is electrostatic.

It’s said you’re known by the company you keep. I would say Opus is in good (appropriate) company.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
Jameseq August 3, 2011 at 14:09

Charles, i deliberately said the west and not the usa, as im live in the uk.

The same expansion of the middle clases happened here in the uk and in western europe. So thinking those boom years between the 50s to the 70s in the usa was primarily due to the usa not having its manufacturing destroyed during ww2, is incorrect

western europe, destroyed during ww2, boomed too. And the reason was western governments used the wealth redistribution toheavily invest in infrastructure, education, health

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2
Charles Martel August 3, 2011 at 14:22

@Jameseq

The same expansion of the middle clases happened here in the uk and in western europe. So thinking those boom years between the 50s to the 70s in the usa was primarily due to the usa not having its manufacturing destroyed during ww2, is incorrect

Dude, I was born in the UK. I lived there until 1983. Same argument applies for the UK, except for the fact that British politics is so heavily influenced by the British class system. British prosperity came from a huge post-WW2 boom, just like the USA. Until the 1970s, which I remember clearly. Fuck you, Arthur Scargill.

It’s all circling the bowl now, thanks to your beloved wealth redistribution. I guess it wouldn’t be too harsh of me to point out that the wealth redistribution is primarily from MEN to WOMEN. We don’t like that much here at The Spearhead. Can’t remember why.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0
Opus August 3, 2011 at 14:24

@ AFoR et el

Boy (as you Americans say) I do seem to have hit a very sore spot. It has perhaps inadvertantly told me more about you than I might have found out by direct questioning.

I am afraid I find your attitudes (obviously) not merely offensive – you were hardly intending to flatter me by attacking my intelligence and judgement (but that’s is a matter for you) – but Gullible. Surely you can do better than that though. You cannot surely be satisfied that attacking me proves your belief. It may give you temporary relief, but later on today will you not have that niggling doubt, that the best you could do was attack me personally? Surely readers of The Speahead deserve better than merely an attack on my brainpower. I thought freedom of speech was one of your proud boasts, but it would seem that is not the case where a majority view is doubted. My point was to negate the force of the article by your newely arrived american female citizen. If I were right (as I maintain I am) then the tenor of the arguement fails, and far from retrenching from space, space exploration continues as before and the suggestion that the money is being put into women’s studies fails. (I suggested you follow the money – hint: Vietnam). Surely you would want to get that right to know that things were not as bad the harpie was suggesting. But, apparently, no, what matters is the belief. I always maintained we sent our religious nutters to the American colonies, (and our criminals to Australia) and it seems little has changed. Lord, how you all believed, as I saw (when like De Tocqeuville) I spent the better part of a year in your country.

You go to the moon seven times between 1969 and 1972 having been second to the Russians before that (and they never go). The Russians then build the space station and your last president was promising to return to the moon by 2035!!! Wow anyone would think technology was going backwards. I realise it is painful (though obviously not for me) as I have nothing invested in this. I have no dog in this fight. I’d be quite happy if you colonised the entire solar system, but if as it seems this is just bad 1950s sci-fi, I have to conclude that is what it is. No one likes to admit they have been conned. Sorry.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 12
only known as Joshua August 3, 2011 at 14:43

Three things that doomed had American Space Program. rampant foolishness, Greedy cronies and feminism.

It’s possible to revive, despite how remote and improbable it may be.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Jameseq August 3, 2011 at 14:56

Why would someone who claims to have been british and alive at the time offer the very usa argument that the post war boom was due to the usa having the sole manufacturing capacity? Americans dont appreciate that w. Europe boomed too-just like you didnt.

ive just told you where the postwar boom came from in the west eg the gi bill in the usa. From heavy wealth redistribution

The marshall plan was the foundation. The expanded middle class were the house, that heavy redistribution built. Got it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3
LaughOrCry August 3, 2011 at 18:09

*sigh* I was wondering when the Moon landing hoaxers would turn up…

The hardest thing about landing a man on the Moon is building a sufficiently large rocket capable of hauling itself off the ground without blowing up – just ask the Russkies:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N1_rocket

Once you have such a rocket the rest is, if not exactly a piece of cake, relatively straight-forward.

There are several thousand witnesses to the fact that in the late ’60s and early ’70s, in Florida and full public view, a number of Very Large Rockets with American flags painted on the side were successfully launched and flown very high up into the sky… unless of course you think that was all some mass delusion or a magic trick on a scale to make David Copperfield look like a clown making balloon giraffes at a kids’ party.

Speaking of the Russkies, the Space Race was of course a competition between two superpowers to demonstrate manufacturing, and hence idealogical (or perhaps rather, military) superiority. In the end, it turned out that the Soviets weren’t quite as good as the Americans at building very large non-blowing up rockets. However, if there is one thing the Soviets were good at it was espionage. If the landings had been faked you can be pretty darn sure that the Soviets would know… in fact, they wouldn’t have even needed espionage; their own radio telemetry developed for their unmanned probes would have at the very least tipped them off.

Nevertheless, despite the fact that the Soviets lost the “race” and therefore had nothing to lose and everything to gain from discrediting the Americans, there has never been even the slightest hint from them that the thing was a hoax.

So maybe the Americans paid off the Russians to keep quiet… but what would have stopped them from taking the money and then spilling the beans anyway? The Americans going, “Hey, you promised you wouldn’t say anything!”

So, in short, if you don’t believe the Americans you better believe the Russians.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
3DShooter August 3, 2011 at 18:17

@EWE

“There is a reason it’s called science fiction and not science!”

There’s a lot of science fiction that has become an everyday part of your life. I’m willing to be you carry a ‘communicator’ around with you in your pocket :) That was purely science fiction in the ’60′s. And imagine putting a small square device (USB key sound familiar?) into a computer terminal to retrieve data, back then data storage was the size of a washing machine.

@Opus

I’m certain that in the future they will be reading the logically inconsistent rantings of many an ignorant predator attorney – no doubt you will be prominent among them. If you think the moon landing was faked you probably still believe the earth is flat too . . . I still suspect you’re just a (s)limey poser hanging out here looking for arguments to attack men with in the court room.

The only thing we can know with any certainty is that we don’t know what we don’t know – fear of seeking that knowledge, and the change it might bring, has stifled and subjugated mankind for thousands of years.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2
GS Jockey August 3, 2011 at 18:37

OT:
@ Charles Martel

My pleasure. GS – Gulfstream? I’m jealous.

Ha! You and I both would be jealous. I am a private pilot, but not of a Gulfstream… The “GS” merely refers to my motorcycle. “Best Bike In The World” as the magazines claim and they are not far off.

Cheers!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
3DShooter August 3, 2011 at 18:46

Still working through the posts . . .

@Opus

“Surely readers of The Speahead deserve better than merely an attack on my brainpower. I thought freedom of speech was one of your proud boasts, but it would seem that is not the case where a majority view is doubted.”

In the paraphrased words of Mark Twain – sometimes it is better to keep one’s mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt. I think you’ve done the latter in spades in this thread – what else would one expect from a man who would walk away from his kids if he had them (your words from your coming out of the predator closet).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
LaughOrCry August 3, 2011 at 18:50

The Saturn V – now *that’s* a rocket! 150 tons to LEO, 30 tons to the Moon (that’s the entire 3rd stage), and it runs on the same stuff that grandma puts in her paraffin heater!

Forget that white elephant POS Space Shuttle. So the Shuttle Orbiter is “resuable”. Well, the most expensive part of the Orbiter are the engines, and they can only be used 5 times before they have to be replaced. But the Shuttle can only lift 30 tons… so it takes 5 Shuttle flights to achieve what the Saturn V could do in one, and you still end up with a bill for 3 horrendously expensive “reusable” engines!

If you were trying to put a lot of stuff into orbit like the ISS, you could do it a whole lot easier and quicker with a bunch of Saturn Vs than with the Shuttle… furthermore, the Saturn V proved to be as reliable as grandma’s heater, unlike a certain other vehicle…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
TFH August 3, 2011 at 18:51

I am afraid that as the believers in moon – landings never seem to be able to resort to anything other than insults

So this is what you think about 99% of the adult population?

I am surprised that people doubt the Moon landings. The vast USSR had a huge interest in discrediting the Moon landings, yet could not do it, nor could they duplicate it. Even today, wouldn’t China like to claim that they are the first to the Moon when they get there?

And the fact that the unmanned Voyager 2 went as far as Neptune (about 16,000 times further than the Moon) means that the Moon landing is hardly the most technologically advanced space mission we have done.

Unless they doubt that Voyager 2 reached Neptune and other Jovian worlds, which means all those photos are fake, which means…….

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0
LaughOrCry August 3, 2011 at 19:19

I’m going to leave the last word to Buzz Aldrin, second man on the Moon: (second comes right after first!)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UUFO8AGMwic

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Cantillon August 3, 2011 at 21:07

What Petra grasps but has not explicitly spelled out is that the end of manned space travel is significant because this represents the epitome of what Spengler in 1918 understood to be the Faustian basis of Western Civilization. I believe there is a decent chance this is now played out and exhausted. Other civilizations (based on other cultural principles) will take our place, but it is an open question as to whether they will be able to mobilize intellectual curiosity and individual freedom in the same way as the West once succeeded in doing. Let us hope we only need a period of a few decades of rest and repair before the West is once again recharged and can rise once again even if it is not destined ever to attain its former relative ascendancy. Because the alternative hardly bears thinking about.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Decline_of_the_West

“Faustian Civilisation began in Western Europe around the 10th century and according to Spengler such has been its expansionary power that by the 20th century it was covering the entire earth, with only a few Regions where Islam provides an alternative world view. The world feeling of Faustian civilisation is inspired by the concept of infinitely wide and profound space, the yearning towards distance and infinity.”

By the way, women may tend to be followers. But it would be a mistake to think that all followers appear late in a movement. The Reaction against cultural marxism has barely begun, and I hardly think an air of suspicion towards those that share your basic values and goals is likely to help you get there faster.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
3DShooter August 3, 2011 at 21:21

@LOC

Yep, buzz has the right stuff . . . only way to deal with predators :O

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
evilwhitemalempire August 3, 2011 at 22:27

@Opus
“This thread is like a religious revival meeting.

Not one good argument, ad-hominem attacks, circular reasoning and outrage that anyone could take a different view. ”

Go fuck yourself moron.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
E August 4, 2011 at 01:52

evilwhitemalempire

Go fuck yourself moron.

When Opus first opened his mouth my first gut reaction was to say this guy must be a Troll. However upon further investigation that is not true. You see a Troll is a person who says stupid crap to get people working. But here’s the key point: A troll technically speaking does not really believe in what he supposedly claims. It’s all just an act.

However the problem with Opus is deep down inside he truly believes in what he says. So technically speaking he’s a fucking moron, NOT a Troll. In fact calling Opus a troll would be a compliment. It would be giving him credit for understanding the difference between shit from Sherlock and unfortunately he doesn’t even deserve that much.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2
Opus August 4, 2011 at 03:40

More ad hominem attacks, straw man arguments (blinding with – irrelevant – science), justifications of violence (Crella), circular reasoning, obscenties (evilwhiteempire) and appeals to authority . Still not one question to learn as to why I might be sceptical (and thereafter to correct me) – but then that is all about par for the Internet.

You saw it on the telly, and because what you saw showed the technical superiority of your country, (once but – apparently – no longer, which is why some posters are saddened) it is true, is I am afraid the gist of all these posts.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 11
crella August 4, 2011 at 03:56

‘justifications of violence’…..good Lord, words fail me…..

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 6
Opus August 4, 2011 at 04:40

@Crella

You seem to have forgotten that at 12.03 you wrote ‘I don’t blame Buzz Aldrin in the least for punching the reporter’. The last time I looked, punching was violence.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 9
Kyo August 4, 2011 at 06:30

@Opus –

because what you saw showed the technical superiority of your country

There’s no nationalism involved, Opus; we’re proud of the moon landings because they showed the technical achievement of our species.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1
Ardia August 4, 2011 at 07:07

You can downvote all you want, but there are good solid reasons why the moon landing was a hoax. Consider it conspiracy factist.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 14
Opus August 4, 2011 at 07:20

@Kyo

I think if you (re)read the article and the comments made here you will see that what upsets is a reduction (perceived) in American Space Ability, with money being syphoned-off from that to women centered social programs. I refer you to posts here by Boxant, Renee (who is heartbroken ) and others in similar vein. I don’t immediately recall any post suggesting that it was a non-step or backward-step for mankind. I don’t recall anyone bemonaning (if such be the case) that the Russians are letting the species down by not constructing a lunar colony.

My own view is that the Condorcet-like view that Humanity is progressing to some unspoken Utopia, whether in Space or here on Earth (which usually leads to a Dystopia) is an illusion. Space is cold, isolated, vast and not a place for humans to thrive – even if we could get there which (I maintain) so far we haven’t. When all illnesses have been eradicated and we all live somewhat decrepid Methusalah-like and Testosterone-free past one hundred years of age the only cause of death will then be suicide. Space is a dream, and clearly one that appeals to the uniquely American pioneering spirit. I would suggest that the popularity of Sci-Fi which is essentially the only politically motivated (Utopian) Genre of Literature is what motivates the sadness over the end of space exploration. Of course, perhaps as you wish, the Indians, the Chinese, or even the French (all of whom have sent rockets up) can return to The Moon, but the question must puzzle you as to why (even using – the obviously perfect – fifty year old technology) none of those countries nor The Russians have done so. Can you imagine what a boost – not for mankind but for that country being second on the Moon – and the first this Millenia would be! It has not been done and no one is planning to do so, not even your good selves. I am going to suggest that there is a good reason for that.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 11
crella August 4, 2011 at 12:58

@ Opus-

Somehow I fear for you out in the real world…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 5
Opus August 4, 2011 at 15:24

Bye

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 6
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) August 4, 2011 at 15:56

DogFace Soldier August 2, 2011 at 12:49
“I wish men stopped welcoming women to the MRM.
NEVER trust women!”

QFT. And seconded-

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 9
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) August 4, 2011 at 16:01

LaughOrCry August 3, 2011 at 18:09
“*sigh* I was wondering when the Moon landing hoaxers would turn up…”

Dude…it took me less than 2 hours, using photos supplied by NASA itself, to be convinced that at least SOME of the video and images claimed to be taken on the moon were not. Does that mean the whole thing was a hoax. Maybe, maybe not.

William Cooper demonstrated that there were large portals on the moon and that there must be internal bases. He also proved this from photographs provided directly by NASA.

There is MUCH more going on with the moon than people are aware of.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 13
Renee August 4, 2011 at 17:45

SingleDad,
The conclusion on Today is that it’s not prostitution, and legal experts confirm, so it’s full speed ahead young ladies….you have the “Today Show” stamp of approval.

Interestingly, the ladies of Today think the 1 trillion in student loans that women get should be paid by older men.

WAIT. Did we watch the same thing??? Out of the 3 celebrity and legal commentators, the only one who was nonjudgmental was the male commentator (saying that it was their business and who are we to judge). The other two, who were ladies (one being Star Jones) – while saying that it was legal – were completely against it. Jones even referred to the “Sugar Babies” as hoes.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 7
Renee August 4, 2011 at 17:47

Sorry, the second sentence is a quote too.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 6
3DShooter August 4, 2011 at 18:51

@Opus

“Still not one question to learn as to why I might be sceptical (and thereafter to correct me) – but then that is all about par for the Internet.”

When you first came out of the predator attorney closet I had a couple questions for you – still waiting for an answer. Pardon me if I don’t really expect any . . .

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2
crella August 5, 2011 at 02:07

“Dude…it took me less than 2 hours, using photos supplied by NASA itself, to be convinced that at least SOME of the video and images claimed to be taken on the moon were not. ”

Seems really brainless to me to put photos that would prove the moon landings a hoax out on the internet. “Conspiracy” usually means that the damning evidence is *hidden* does it not!? Think about what you just said……’photos supplied by NASA itself’ so obviously fake that you figured it out in less than 2 hours?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 6
Traveller August 5, 2011 at 04:40

“TFH August 3, 2011 at 18:51
And the fact that the unmanned Voyager 2 went as far as Neptune (about 16,000 times further than the Moon) means that the Moon landing is hardly the most technologically advanced space mission we have done.”

The Moon landing IS the most advanced operation ever done by humanity.
There were MEN on the ship, and after this, the ship RETURNED BACK to Earth.

Usually, the stupids who think it is a hoax have no problem believe some guy 2000 years ago resurrected deads and walked on water.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4
leper August 6, 2011 at 05:54

>But this isn’t about money or savings… it’s about a nation’s priorities. An America that spends trillions of dollars a year on welfare, entitlements and bureaucracy is an America that lacks any purpose, identity or belief in future;

I notice you ignore the main reason that America can no longer afford a space program. It’s endless wars.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3
ardia August 7, 2011 at 00:44

The moon landing was just Stanley Kubrick running around a desert, probably in Arizona, with a camera.

Stupids who never look at the evidence like to think otherwise.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 8
Anonymous August 7, 2011 at 21:00

People believe the moon landing was a hoax but believe the tripe about a hippie carpenter turned cult leader. People really are that gullible.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 8
R7 Rocket August 16, 2011 at 12:32

This article is nothing but a political hackjob writing. One of the ways I check for political hacks is their position on manned spaceflight. How do I know if a conservative Republican actually believes in small government and free markets? Simple, I check his position on private manned spaceflight. Does he approve the efforts of private companies like SpaceX and Virgin Galactic (which were not even mentioned in this sorry article)? If so, then he is probably sincere in his politics. If not, then he is a fake.

If manned spaceflight is over, Virgin Galactic, SpaceX, Armadillo Aerospace, ULA and other private companies that are building commercial passenger spacecraft didn’t get the memo.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
Lee Raconteur August 18, 2011 at 06:23

If manned spaceflight is over, Virgin Galactic, SpaceX, Armadillo Aerospace, ULA and other private companies that are building commercial passenger spacecraft didn’t get the memo.

None of which have 1/10th of the lift capability of the SS.

We cannot send men to the moon as the USA could 43 years ago, cannot lift large payloads into orbit, service them and bring them back. All the commercial spacecraft are sub-orbital hops because of the vastly increased expense of orbital speeds and orbital re-entry speeds and energy dissipation needs.

Since it costs too much to design, build, service, prep and launch a true re-usable orbital vehicle the size of the Shuttle, the companies you mention have to be content with ballistically launching a very very small craft briefly (90 seconds) to 110km and then it letting it fall back to earth.

The USA has taken a huge step backwards towards what the USSR could do in 1957.

This is not progress.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

Leave a Comment

{ 2 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post: