Just to turn this thread into even more of a ******* waste of electrons:

I find it funny that 'Christianity' is constantly blamed for the dark ages entirely. Rome was Christian, and overrun by hordes who worshiped a variety of other gods. This ushered in the dark ages more or less. Monks were the main means by which a lot of the old knowledge was retained.

And then the church launched a buch of wars and tried to keep said knowledge from the people, untill the Renaisance. And here we are.

But the 'Christians' did not cause the dark ages. If anything they failed to prevent them being caused by other peoples.

The best part of modern culture is that everyone has someone to blame. Wall Street and Corporations, The Government, Religion, Guns, Tom Cruise. Pick your flavor Personally I blame TV.

 

All right 2nd, time to try to make you understand what is so absolutely ridiculous about what you are arguing - and why both I and others have repeatedly said your arguing tactics are flat out stupid.

In essence, you are asking me to prove god does not exist (Technology would not exist without NASA).

The burden of proof in this case is absolutely not on me. It's impossible to prove that god does not exist - or that this technology would not exist without NASA. I can get close, but you have effectively created an impenetrable argument out of ignorance - I could very well ask you to prove you were a man and not a woman over the internet. Guess what? You can't prove it 100% over the internet either.

The burden of proof is on you. You have three things to prove if you want to argue this, and then it is up to the other side to try to disprove any of the three.

First: The technology would exist without NASA. This is easily provable, unlike the statement "This technology would not exist without NASA". It is also logically equivalent, as unlike Mg's inversion, it's a contrapositive. Or, they mean the same thing logically.

Second: That the technology would exist in a time frame similar to what would have happened if NASA had not existed.

Third: That the economic loss from the later discovery would be less than what we spent on NASA.

All of which are far, far more provable than proving God does not exist - or, in this case, the technology would not exist without NASA.

http://www.hermes-press.com/DAtruth.htm

And that's from about as much of a pro-Christian as you can get. Granted, to blame it all on Christianity is silly, but Christianity was the singularly most exacerbating factor involved in the Dark Ages.

 

"Employment" is a horrible argument for spending money. There are much better arguments for why this is a good thing.

The only better option that I can think of for spending $2.5B is to fund a public media campaign educating the country on the benefits of eliminating federal minimum wage and wealth redistribution.

 

I'm sure no great advances from NASA have ever trickled down to help any other field. Why anyone would be upset about the US making advances in science just shows how lost some people in this country are. God forbid we spend money on science when I need to get my welfare check. I want to get fed by the GUVMENT. How dare they spend 2.5 billion dollars on science when I don't have the latest iPhone and no one has given one to me yet.

Sad. So so sad.

 

Thread drgging on with a totaly off-topic sub-subject? Check.
Sub-topic acting as a catalyst to bring back points from previous pages? Check.
Your welcome, world.

 

It's very difficult for people on earth to randomly think of something that hasn't been invented and start working on that rather than hitting an obstacle while on a mission and having to overcome it. I'm another all for Nasa

 

Radio Interview with University of Central Florida space policy experts Dale Ketcham and Josh Colwell about the Mars mission's ramifications for Florida's Space Coast, which lost thousands of jobs after the shuttle program ended.

Anyone with even a passing interest in this subject should take a listen. Very interesting perspective on the topic, including the benefits of ending the NASA-based shuttle program. They speak on how allowing the private sector to pick-up the "taxi service" to the ISS frees up NASA to do what they do best: pure exploration and research.

 

NASA Helps Hatch Robots for Drilling Oil Without Humans: Energy - Bloomberg

Curiousity = precursor to oil-drilling robots?

 

 

Its a documentary on a mission to mars and how it would play out.