VisorCentral.com - Space Shuttle Columbia

Pages (3): « 1 [2] 3 »
Show 20 posts from this thread on one page

VisorCentral.com (http://discussion.visorcentral.com/vcforum/index.php)
- Off Topic (http://discussion.visorcentral.com/vcforum/forumdisplay.php?forumid=6)
-- Space Shuttle Columbia (http://discussion.visorcentral.com/vcforum/showthread.php?threadid=31931)

Posted by Tom LaPrise on 02-12-2003 02:40 AM:

I still find it incredible (when I really think about it) how far science has come in the last 30-40 years--but even modern science can't conquer death.

I was just thinking about that. We had people walking around on the Moon almost 34 years ago, and somehow we've let this happen...

__________________
"Yeah, he can talk. It's gettin' him to shut up that's the trick!"
-Shrek

Posted by Madkins007 on 02-12-2003 03:39 PM:

Re: alternatively

quote:
Originally posted by K. Cannon
I remember being in Tenth Grade Biology class watching the Challenger.

In researching a 'geeze, that made me feel old' comment to this, I discovered something very odd-

Columbia happened Sat., Feb. 1, 2003
Challenger happened Tues., Jan. 28, 1986
The Apollo 1 launch pad fire happened Fri., Jan. 27, 1967

These events happened in a six day window an average of 18 years apart.

(The 'made me feel old' part is that I was in 4th grade when the Apollo 1 fire happened)

__________________
Do what you can, with what you have, where you are at!

Posted by jhappel on 02-13-2003 04:27 PM:

quote:
The 'made me feel old' part is that I was in 4th grade when the Apollo 1 fire happened

Think how you make some of us now feel - I was in my junior year in high school when Apollo happened.

__________________
Jonathan

Posted by Digisane on 02-13-2003 04:35 PM:

Did some digging.

What was originally thought to be a high-res picture was actually a very low-res one taken by a conventional telescope and an 11-year old Macintosh computer 10 minutes before the break-up. So the picture that was released was about as good as it gets.

See the news.
http://www.space.com/missionlaunche...ire_030212.html

-----------------

quote:
Originally posted by Tom LaPrise
So far, only the one image has been released to the public. I found it on yahoo.com's front page; by now, you might have to do a little looking.

I'm still in shock about it. I remember watching Columbia's first launch in a college dorm room (with one of the guys who went on to help design the patch the final crew wore). Hard to believe it's gone...

__________________
I'm just a dreamer..

Posted by Madkins007 on 02-13-2003 09:33 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by jhappel

Think how you make some of us now feel - I was in my junior year in high school when Apollo happened.

There are people older than ME here?? And still able to type?

__________________
Do what you can, with what you have, where you are at!

Posted by John Nowak on 02-14-2003 01:13 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by yardie
Is there really a *need* for humans to go to space? Its not that we are venturing very far out of the earth's atmosphere anyhow.

One of the ways archaeologists distinguish between caves occupied by Neanderthal man and their contemporary modern humans is that the modern humans tended to go deep into caves, just to see what was there, while Neanderthals stayed in the comfortable mouth of the cave, because that's all they needed.

I'd rather see us act like Homo Sapiens than Neanderthals.

Posted by yardie on 02-14-2003 02:49 AM:

Neanderthals did not go to deep into the caves because they did not need to. I do not think there is a need for us to go into space, especially since we are just going outside the earth's atmosphere. it would make a lot more sense if there was real space travel. Then you can discover new planets etc. On the flip side, I can see the arguement that we have to take baby steps before we start to walk or run.

Interestingly, one of the experiments the crew were working on was to create a scent in space for a perfume company.

quote:
Originally posted by John Nowak

One of the ways archaeologists distinguish between caves occupied by Neanderthal man and their contemporary modern humans is that the modern humans tended to go deep into caves, just to see what was there, while Neanderthals stayed in the comfortable mouth of the cave, because that's all they needed.

I'd rather see us act like Homo Sapiens than Neanderthals.

__________________
My life is in my Treo... Where is yours?

Posted by John Nowak on 02-14-2003 08:09 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by yardie
On the flip side, I can see the arguement that we have to take baby steps before we start to walk or run.

So what was your point again?

Posted by K. Cannon on 02-14-2003 08:36 PM:

I reckon he was just trying to explain why he might feel ambivalent about the space program. Frankly, I kind of agreed with his, maybe yes, maybe no---do we really *need* to be doing this, yet can we really judge *this* by what we are capable of now?

Posted by yardie on 02-15-2003 02:01 PM:

Kelly,

You got the thrust of my position. I am not oppose to the space program. I am just wondering if it is worth the money or needed.

quote:
Originally posted by K. Cannon
I reckon he was just trying to explain why he might feel ambivalent about the space program. Frankly, I kind of agreed with his, maybe yes, maybe no---do we really *need* to be doing this, yet can we really judge *this* by what we are capable of now?

__________________
My life is in my Treo... Where is yours?

Posted by K. Cannon on 02-15-2003 06:47 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by yardie
Kelly,
You got the thrust of my position. I am not oppose to the space program. I am just wondering if it is worth the money or needed.

I wonder that myself, although I guess we would run the risk of some "unfriendlies" (and, let's leave the Iraq discussion in that other thread

) deciding that it is worth the money/needed and developing a space program that we then look at in hindsight and say "Damn, why didn't we think of that."

I perfectly understand your ambivalence--it's a hard call to decide where to spend the dough, I guess.

Posted by jhappel on 02-16-2003 08:54 PM:

Originally said by Madkins007 There are people older than ME here?? And still able to type?
I just turned 53 (born when Truman was President). And I can type as long as I don't need more than 2 fingers on each hand and as long as my glasses are on.

__________________
Jonathan

Posted by Madkins007 on 02-17-2003 02:58 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by jhappel
Originally said by Madkins007 There are people older than ME here?? And still able to type?
I just turned 53 (born when Truman was President). And I can type as long as I don't need more than 2 fingers on each hand and as long as my glasses are on.

Oh, god, its true. I just got bifocals a few months ago and I still am having trouble adjusting- hard to see things around my feet, finding good angles for soldering, etc.

__________________
Do what you can, with what you have, where you are at!

Posted by Madkins007 on 02-17-2003 03:18 PM:

As far as spending money in space...

1. I'd rather spend it there than a lot of the idiot places our government spends it. While NASA's budget seems large, we have gotten a lot for our investment in terms of technological advances. Of course, this argument has been used since the Apollo program when the same questions were brought up after Apollo 1 and 13.

2. I actually wish NASA had MORE money so they could have done things right- not tried to expand the life or role of the shuttle, been more aggressive in other programs, etc.

3. One of the things I would ask of NASA is a better media dept. How on Earth can someone take something as cool as a space program and present it so weakly that no one pays any attention to it? The scene in the movie 'Apollo 13' where no one is actually watching the 'pre-accident' footage from the capsule is sadly true.

__________________
Do what you can, with what you have, where you are at!

Posted by K. Cannon on 02-17-2003 04:31 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Madkins007
3. One of the things I would ask of NASA is a better media dept. How on Earth can someone take something as cool as a space program and present it so weakly that no one pays any attention to it? The scene in the movie 'Apollo 13' where no one is actually watching the 'pre-accident' footage from the capsule is sadly true.

yep, no one pays attentions to anything but the disasters--which is true for many other topics, too, though.

Posted by MarkEagle on 02-17-2003 05:12 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Madkins007
1. I'd rather spend it there than a lot of the idiot places our government spends it.

'nuff said!

quote:

2. I actually wish NASA had MORE money...

3. One of the things I would ask of NASA is a better media dept.

These 2 points are valid as well, but like #1, if better media comes at the expense of the program itself, I can live with what they currently provide.

__________________

God bless America, my home sweet home...

Posted by MarkEagle on 02-17-2003 05:20 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by K. Cannon
no one pays attentions to anything but the disasters

Sad, but true.

Back in the Apollo days, I could understand it since live TV wasn't all that great, but there's no excuse with today's technology. The nightly news is filled with live reports from all over the globe; would it be too much to ask to get a 30 second blurb from above?

When I first heard about the Columbia disaster, and I made sure the rest of the family knew about it, my 13 yr old daughter looked at me and said "what shuttle? I didn't know we had launched one"... now that's sad.

__________________

God bless America, my home sweet home...

Posted by K. Cannon on 02-17-2003 10:26 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by MarkEagle
Sad, but true.

Unfortunately, bad things sell papers/get viewers/etc.

Even The Weather Channel blows potential storms out of proportion to get viewers. It's all about market share and, unfortunately, "NASA launches X Shuttle for it's 20th time" just isn't as exciting as "Michael Jackson: Unmasked"

Posted by yardie on 02-23-2003 02:28 PM:

You guys should not blame the messenger (the media). You guys should blame the receiver (you and I). They are just showing us and telling us what we want to hear to make money.

quote:
Originally posted by K. Cannon

Unfortunately, bad things sell papers/get viewers/etc.

Even The Weather Channel blows potential storms out of proportion to get viewers. It's all about market share and, unfortunately, "NASA launches X Shuttle for it's 20th time" just isn't as exciting as "Michael Jackson: Unmasked"

__________________
My life is in my Treo... Where is yours?

Posted by Tom LaPrise on 02-23-2003 03:45 PM:

No, they ARE showing us and telling us what THEY think will sell papers and airtime. I don't know ANYONE who really gives a rat's you-know-what about Michael Jackson's nose or his private life, but they sure shoved it down our throats this past month because it's ratings sweeps month and they want to get the headlines and the "news breaks."

__________________
"Yeah, he can talk. It's gettin' him to shut up that's the trick!"
-Shrek

All times are GMT. The time now is 10:41 PM.

Pages (3): « 1 [2] 3 »
Show 20 posts from this thread on one page