Monday, March 29, 2004
Friday, March 19, 2004
Our own dear Miss Ehlmann wormed her way into a recent press release:
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/releases/2004/88.cfm
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/releases/2004/88.cfm
Thursday, March 11, 2004
CNN.com - No 'showstoppers' for humans on Mars - Mar. 4, 2004: "'From the medical standpoint, there is further research to be done, but we don't see any showstoppers out there,' Mohler told the President's Commission on Moon, Mars and Beyond."
Funny... that's what WE said!
Funny... that's what WE said!
Saturday, March 06, 2004
Yahoo! News - Mars Critics Say Billions Are Ill-Spent
I agree here that there are many exciting discoveries to be made still in the oceans, but as an oceanographer who receives funding from NASA, I can't agree that their funds are misspent -- at least, not all of them. Many (most?) oceanographic studies are not funded through NOAA, but through the NSF -- funding from NOAA is not preferred because (as I understand it) programs must be re-approved by NOAA and Congress every year, making multi-year projects difficult to sustain, and political whims can easily interfere with the science. I would heartily agree in a doubling... trebling... quadrupling of the NSF budget -- nothing but good could come from it -- but I don't think it should come at the expense of NASA's budget, which includes money for myriad terrestrial-based and Earth-observing research programs. Space has its own set of exciting discoveries to be made, and due to the size and scope of the entire rest of the universe, it seems probable that this 'set' is very large, indeed.
I agree here that there are many exciting discoveries to be made still in the oceans, but as an oceanographer who receives funding from NASA, I can't agree that their funds are misspent -- at least, not all of them. Many (most?) oceanographic studies are not funded through NOAA, but through the NSF -- funding from NOAA is not preferred because (as I understand it) programs must be re-approved by NOAA and Congress every year, making multi-year projects difficult to sustain, and political whims can easily interfere with the science. I would heartily agree in a doubling... trebling... quadrupling of the NSF budget -- nothing but good could come from it -- but I don't think it should come at the expense of NASA's budget, which includes money for myriad terrestrial-based and Earth-observing research programs. Space has its own set of exciting discoveries to be made, and due to the size and scope of the entire rest of the universe, it seems probable that this 'set' is very large, indeed.
