Deception Point discussion

I would probably have children's education higher because children are the future!!!! :P

I'd probably go for NASA... but then, I am not an American...

hmm. i would say childrens education thats important but then again if it cost more it would be a huge stuggle to send there kids to school, then it is now.

I'm not from USA, but I say that NASA should continue. A lot of important research goes on in NASA. I like the idea that NASA is working on space travel. It's always good to have a plan B for when (when, not if) we screw up our planet.

Badgerlord wrote: "I'm not from USA, but I say that NASA should continue. A lot of important research goes on in NASA. I like the idea that NASA is working on space travel. It's always good to have a plan B for when ..."

yeah thats very true...

It depends how strong the privatized space industry would be in this scenario. But if one day NASA was no more, then we would have many disappointed aspiring NASA astronauts that have studied so hard to be part of an incredibly romantic organization. We have all said as children, "When I grow up, I'm going to be an astronaut."

A world without NASA.

I would rather live in a world without books like this one. LOL

If NASA was eliminated education costs wouldn't be higher. All the budgeted money for NASA could be spent on education instead.

A world without NASA and an education payed by it's users and not payed with robbed money

A TEMPORARY world without NASA, for lower education costs. A lot of important stuff NASA can do from Earth sitting in a chair (making sure meteors aren't going to collide with us, alert us of awesome solar eclipses, etc), but it's not necessary that they hog millions of dollars to travel to space to discover, that once again, Mars has no water YET. (haha, as in someday water will appear there; who knows). Space travel, although cool, is just way time and money consuming, and would be like donating millions of dollars to churches, instead of something that will better benefit Americans.... and the rest of the world.

I think NASA soaks up WAAAY too much money that could be better spent elsewhere- like, maybe reducing our insanely high national debt....... what a concept!

its more safe if its from NASA..

Bryn wrote: "I think NASA soaks up WAAAY too much money that could be better spent elsewhere- like, maybe reducing our insanely high national debt....... what a concept!"

Haha, I agree. But our current govt system is so moronic, that if they cut spending in one place, they will increase spending somewhere else. I recall from a past President saying that around World War 2, when the govt is out of money, they cut back on spending, stop spending, stop buying, and the whole Country just deals with it til they're back on their feet. I understand if we did that in this century, we'd have a lot of boycotting crybabies though...

NASA must continue – but they need better long term goals that are stuck to and not continually changed by different governments.
If there was no NASA, other nations would begin to eclipse America and west in all technologies – not just space.

Just my humble opinion, but you know I am right…

a world with NASA

Juan wrote: "A world without NASA and an education payed by it's users and not payed with robbed money"

WHaaaaa...t?

07jazlyn wrote: "hmm. i would say childrens education thats important but then again if it cost more it would be a huge stuggle to send there kids to school, then it is now."

Obviously, judging by the horrible grammar used in this post, we definitely need to spend WAY more money on education!

I am dying to see how the US media respond to the Chinese moon landing. I get the impression that their space program hasn't had much coverage within the US yet, but with the success of their manned space program so far it can only be a matter of time. They plan to land men on the moon by 2020 and they're also working towards a manned Mars mission.

My guess is that whoever is US President when the Chinese land on the moon, he (or she?) will be giving NASA a colossal cash injection to make sure the first person to walk on Mars is not Chinese.

I'd go for NASA. I am an cosmology enthusiast. Education is necessary and so is NASA.

Hmmmm... Neither should be cut.

How about just improving the quality of education by 1) creating more challenging curriculum -- kids are smart 2) upgrading teachers with more interesting ongoing training requirements, and 3) downgrading or capping spending on sports programs as well as school administration costs (at the college level also) across the board. Costs would come down dramatically and it would keep the 'playing field' level on the extra-curricular programs.

In the meantime, NASA could use some support. At least one or two other heavily-funded government agencies are trying to help out. One might ask how these guys got two of them, but in this case it might just be better just to say "thank you" and ask no questions.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/nationa...

Children's education costs ! NASA is important (:
- yet i'm not americain -

I honestly don't understand this question. Why would one affect the other? Besides, the NASA budget is tiny.

Silliness, as if the two were mutually exclusive. The book, in this sense, does demonstrate the ease with which people and ideas are pitted against one another in black/white, all or nothing, false dichotomies that are continually used to manipulate and divide. One more reason, Logic ought be taught beginning at a young age and carried on through-out education. Too many logical fallacies run amok and unchallenged.

Daniel wrote: "I honestly don't understand this question. Why would one affect the other? Besides, the NASA budget is tiny."

waiting for this statement lol

I am teacher, retired after 44 years. While one might think that I would place education as foremost, I think that space is vitally important. Arthur C. Clarke, the well-known science fiction writer (credited with conceiving the communications satellite) talks in one of his non-fiction works about the idea of frontiers as coinciding with nearly every age of progress. Whether the renaissance or the 19th century American expansion westward, people seem to do their best when they have the unexplored and unknown to urge them onward and outward. On earth, we have exhausted our land frontiers, and the ocean is a closed container that will one day cease to be a frontier. To Clarke, space is the only real frontier left for humnankind. Though space exploration is very expensive, it provides an on-going stimulus for the human mind and imagination. The spinoffs from space technology will thus continue to help make the continuation of life possible, whether on earth or elsewhere.

Daniel wrote: "I honestly don't understand this question. Why would one affect the other? Besides, the NASA budget is tiny."I think that the idea of the question is based upon Dan Brown's story and, of course, it is a hypothetical question asking us to do a kind of either/or response. My own response is just above.

The defense budget is something us humans cannot ignore, if only we got along better there would be huge savings right there :-(

I believe education for children. We have poverty and uneducated kids money should be spent on earth before it is spent in the space. Well educated society will be better for survival of NASA.

How can we produce any astronauts if we don't educate and take better care of our children as a nation? Who are we going to send up into space, the under-educated child from an impoverished ghetto?

Well, not like these are two independent events. Each one of this will, help the other. So, I go for both :D

I'm sorry, but really: what a ridiculous question. Like asking, "Which do you choose, yellow or caramel?" The two simply aren't -- or at least shouldn't be -- connected. It's not either/or; it's *and*. If you want to talk spending priorities, okay: how about sticking looking at the second largest category of expenditure: defense. Maybe ask, "Would you accept one less battleship in the world if it would mean 5,000 more preschools for underserved kids"? At least that leads to a productive discussion...

How about we cut all foreign aid and spend that money on America's poor?

Michael, we spend something less than $23 billion a year on foreign aid -- that's less than 1% of the federal budget. We spend 11% on welfare (the poor), and less than 3% on education (which can help people stop being poor). But we spend 25% on Defense and Protection -- more than the next ten (or more, I forget) countries COMBINED. Once again: it's not either/or between the poor and NASA or Foreign Aid. More than HALF the budget is spent on defense and health care, in that order. Single Payer would reduce the health portion by double digits. Only political will can reduce the defense budget. So again: false unities, false associations, the wrong questions to ask to begin with.

i will live and send my kids to NASA run schools for education

But how corrupt is NASA ?

http://www.siriusdisclosure.com/

The NASA Conspiracies: The Truth Behind the Moon Landings, Censored Photos & the Face on Mars

What do you think ?

Saw another one : Apollo 20. the Disclosure

Just how many more are there ..