(Viewed 1,139 times)

[Chicago Astronomer - Astro Joe]

Planetary Society Says The Bush Administration's proposed 5-year budget for NASA, just submitted to Congress, is an attack on science,

"The Bush Administration's proposed 5-year budget for NASA, just submitted to Congress, is an attack on science," states the opening line of The Planetary Society's statement submitted to the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Science, Thursday morning, February 16, 2006. Read the complete statement on the Society's website at www.planetary.org/programs/projects/space_advocacy/budget_statement.html .

The Society objects to numerous cuts or cancellations of such projects as a mission to Jupiter's ice-bound moon Europa, the Terrestrial Planet Finder mission, two Mars Scout missions, and more. The Society also criticizes the proposed budget for downplaying Mars as a goal for human exploration and cutting astrobiology research 50% and science research funding generally 15% across all Earth and space science disciplines.

Funding is being redirected to the shuttle program in order to complete the International Space Station. The Planetary Society, however, states that the commitment to 16 more flights of the shuttle for this purpose is the biggest danger to implementation of the Vision for Space Exploration. The Society asks what might be cut from the NASA budget in the future if there are more delays or higher costs?

In response to this budget, The Planetary Society has urged its members and interested members of the public to show their support for space science by writing to Congress and the Administration about the cuts. In the 2 days since the campaign began, more than 1000 messages have been sent to Representative Sherwood L. Boehlert and other members of Congress.

The Society statement concludes with the following: "The Planetary Society supports space ventures. We have supported the shuttle: it has been a great technical achievement, unequalled on Earth. We have supported the International Space Station: it should be completed as a pathway for human expansion into the solar system. And, from the moment it was proposed, we have strongly supported the Vision for Space Exploration, a long overdue redirection of human space flight beyond Earth orbit.

But we cannot support a proposal that hobbles, or eventually destroys, the NASA science program. Science guides not just robots but also humans into space. Science guides the public in creating a rationale for a $16 billion space program. Science guides exploration. And we ask, and hope, that support of science will guide you as you oversee the NASA program."

Full SpaceRef.com story here: www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=19031

And the entire statement from The Planetary Society here: www.planetary.org/programs/projects/space_advocacy/budget_statement.html

=========

The dark ages I tell you... #Thumbsdown#

[Maddad]

Spending has to be cut. The deficit is out of control, and so far our only answer has been, "Let our children worry about it."

[Chicago Astronomer - Astro Joe]

The High Cost of Boots on the Moon

Thu, 23 Feb 2006 - When President Bush announced his new Vision for Space Exploration in January 2004, he set NASA on a new course to return to the Moon, and maybe even set boots on the surface of Mars in the next few decades. Instead of a quick course change, NASA would work within a modestly increased budget to develop the new Crew Exploration Vehicle, while completing the International Space Station and retiring the Space Shuttle. Science, such as the Hubble Space Telescope, Mars rovers, and climate research wouldn't be affected.

President Bush suggested that this approach would be both ambitious and reasonable:

"Achieving these goals requires a long-term commitment. NASA's current five-year budget is $86 billion. Most of the funding we need for the new endeavors will come from reallocating $11 billion within that budget. We need some new resources, however. I will call upon Congress to increase NASA's budget by roughly a billion dollars, spread out over the next five years. This increase, along with refocusing of our space agency, is a solid beginning to meet the challenges and the goals we set today. It's only a beginning. Future funding decisions will be guided by the progress we make in achieving our goals".

While NASA's overall budget increases 3.2%, science will only go up by 1.5%, and future budget increases are expected to go up just 1.0% a year through 2011. Factored against inflation, this is essentially a budget decrease. New Scientist - www.newscientistspace.com/article.ns?id=dn8689&feedId=online-news_rss20 - gives a good breakdown.

NASA Administrator Michael Griffin dropped the hammer on February 8, explaining what impact this new budget would have on the agency, specifically for its various science programs.

Funding for Astrobiology will be cut to 50% of its 2005 levels.
Europa mission that would search for life under the moon's icy surface... cancelled.
The Terrestrial Planet Finder - an observatory capable of seeing Earth-sized planets around other stars, and even signs of life... cancelled.
The Space Interferometry Mission... delayed.
Two scout missions to Mars... cancelled.
Dawn mission to explore two asteroids... cancelled.
Ouch. The Terrestrial Planet Finder could make one of the most important discoveries in all of human history; that there's life on other planets. Please, Mike, anything but that.

What's insane about this whole situation is that NASA should even be forced to choose. If I were in Mike Griffin's shoes, I'd probably make many of the same decisions. What other decision can he make? The President and Congress have essentially said, "keep flying the shuttle to build the International Space Station, put humans back on the Moon, and figure out how to pay for it." Science is all that's left to cut from. If the new exploration vehicle goes over budget, science will have to pay for that too.

NASA shouldn't be forced to choose between science and exploration. Why not pick up all of NASA's science related activities and put them under the umbrella of the National Science Foundation? They're slated to receive $5.8 billion for FY2007.


More from Universe Today.com: www.universetoday.com/am/publish/high_cost_boots_moon.html?2322006

=============

An attack on common sense I say.