bnw%Nosc@crash.UUCP (05/04/85)
From: <bang!crash!bnw@Nosc>
Dale Amon states:
>Regardless of what Sagan may have said in print, he and others are lobbying
>hard at this moment to make sure the space station and not their pet
>projects get the knife.
and then adds:
>The combined efforts of nearly ALL the other space organizations is lobbying
>AGAINST his Carl's efforts.
This is all new to me, so I'd appreciate a clearer idea as to whom the
principal players referred to are, and what projects are pushed by Dr. Sagan
and company in preference to the space station project. Do these other
projects lack validity?
In the same vein, if the funding for the space station is cut back so far
that nothing meaningful can be done, is there any sense in tying up the money
in futile semi-work instead of using it on a smaller project that can make
meaningful use of the money?
What I am suggesting is that space station project supporters are as
prone to tunnel vision about their pet project as everyone else. This does
not, however, mean that they are more right or more wrong than those with whom
they disagree. Let us remember that there is more than one Important Project.
/Bruce N. Wheelock/
arpanet: bang!crash!bnw at nosc
uucp: {ihnp4 | sdcsvax!bang}!crash!bnwmae@weitek.UUCP (Mike Ekberg) (05/07/85)
In article <1662@mordor.UUCP>, bnw%Nosc@crash.UUCP writes: > > This is all new to me, so I'd appreciate a clearer idea as to whom the > principal players referred to are, and what projects are pushed by Dr. Sagan > and company in preference to the space station project. Do these other > projects lack validity? As an aside, Dr. James A. Van Allen(yes, the discover of the radiation belts around the Earth) seemed to lament the current emphasis on manned space endeavors. He seemed tp prefer the cheaper, un-manned space probes. This appeared in either the 5-MAY-85 or 28-AP-85 San Fransisco Examiner/Chronicle. The article it appeared in was mostly a nebulous discussion of the pros and cons of a manned Moon Base. Dr. Van Allen was not explicitly quoted. Mike Ekberg
dls@mtgzz.UUCP (d.l.skran) (05/11/85)
REFERENCES: <1662@mordor.UUCP>, <167@weitek.UUCP> You have correctly identified Dr. Van Allen as one of the "big name" scientists who oppose manned space flight. He has spoken against both the space shuttle and the space station. For a history of a scientist who started out against the space shuttle and switched sides, read Dr. Brian O'Leary's "Project Space Station." Dr. O'Leary is now one of the foremost advocates of the space station. The time has come to ask: What do we need more - scientists studying the atmosphere of Titan or scientists developing resources in space for Earthly benefit? I'd love to have both, but ... Speaking for himself, Dale Skran