Donald Trump is the President Mark IV (Read Mod Warning in OP)

everlast75

Space Force? Well, let's get the reaction from someone who knows a little something about space, shall we?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HGFcC5IZyvs

jooksavage

mcmoustache wrote: »

So I take it you've no intention of discussing anything and instead choose to drop dishonest grenades of galloping gish proportions of pro-trump propaganda?

That's why they're on most posters' ignore list.


This Space Force thing though is the weirdest one yet. The national debt is threatening to smother the country - it will be 100% of GDP by 2030 and they're even considering this nonsense. If Trump gets a second term and the R's keep enabling this insanity, they'll end up like Maduro's Venezuela.

Hande hoche!

everlast75 wrote: »

Space Force? Well, let's get the reaction from someone who knows a little something about space, shall we?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HGFcC5IZyvs

How about a more recent reaction? The replies are hilariously over the top.


https://twitter.com/TheRealBuzz/status/1027928122778238976

Itssoeasy

Nox wrote: »

Imagine anyone in NASA being impressed with NASA's job being climate change.  I am sure that President Donald J Trump was a breath of fresh air for those who were actually concerned about the mission of the NA Space Administration.  Good job Mr. POTUS.

America already has a space force and has had it since the 1950's. You mention it twice. This new space force rubbish isn't needed. Why do you think the space shuttle just happened to have a cargo bay that perfectly fit military satellites ? It was because the DOD part funded it and then decided to go it alone after some mishaps.

Edit: just the boldest part. It stands for national aeronautics seeing as you didn't spell it out like the last two parts.

Itssoeasy

So I decided to rewatch that video on space force. Good god it gets worse. Everything those people said is already done by NASA. And exactly what is NASA lying about ?

Nox

pixelburp wrote: »

Nox wrote: »

Imagine anyone in NASA being impressed with NASA's job being climate change.  I am sure that President Donald J Trump was a breath of fresh air for those who were actually concerned about the mission of the NA Space Administration.  Good job Mr. POTUS.

If you're insisting on talking in generalisations, I'd wager NASA scientists, pilots and engineers are more acutely aware of the fragility of our planet than most, and certainly more so than politicians (or real-estate developers).

Politicising what should be a default approach of "hey, let's not turn our only home into an unliveable, poisoned dump" is a dangerous and irresponsible gamble to play. It's a sad reflection on US politics that basic environmentalism - which yes, includes weather and climate satellites that NASA administrate - has become a partisan issue.

At the risk of being banned for disagreeing with a mod …. I was not the first to make a generalization … the poster above me was.  Does that poster get accused of generalizing?  Hmmm … a set up to be banned.

Your point about those folks being knowledgeable is not one I will dispute.  I will say that the mission of NASA was changed by the previous administration to climate change versus space.  There are knowledgeable folks all over the world on subjects other than their own specialties … wonderful.  NASA should be concerned with space.  Climate folks should stick to the climate.

Lastly, you are correct about the politicization of everything.  I stand by my point of keeping NASA on its original mission.

Seems like every time I address an individual poster I get banned … will this be de ja vu all over again?

pixelburp

Nox wrote: »

At the risk of being banned for disagreeing with a mod …. I was not the first to make a generalization … the poster above me was.  Does that poster get accused of generalizing?  Hmmm … a set up to be banned.

Your point about those folks being knowledgeable is not one I will dispute.  I will say that the mission of NASA was changed by the previous administration to climate change versus space.  There are knowledgeable folks all over the world on subjects other than their own specialties … wonderful.  NASA should be concerned with space.  Climate folks should stick to the climate.

NASA's remit is not limited to deep space, never has, only that at the height of the era of the Cold War there was a literal race to the moon et al. They're authority includes low or geostationary orbit too, which would, yes, include satellites covering everything from weather, to climate, to communications and GPS satellites. Tracking climate patterns is exactly within their purpose but is latched onto by Red Staters in a deluded quest against environmentalism.

And I'm not a mod of Politics, it's quite clear what my own remit is below my username, spare the paranoia. I'm merely calling out faux fairness over accusing NASA of politics just for doing their job.

MadYaker

Nox wrote: »

At the risk of being banned for disagreeing with a mod …. I was not the first to make a generalization … the poster above me was.  Does that poster get accused of generalizing?  Hmmm … a set up to be banned.

Your point about those folks being knowledgeable is not one I will dispute.  I will say that the mission of NASA was changed by the previous administration to climate change versus space.  There are knowledgeable folks all over the world on subjects other than their own specialties … wonderful.  NASA should be concerned with space.  Climate folks should stick to the climate.

Lastly, you are correct about the politicization of everything.  I stand by my point of keeping NASA on its original mission.

Seems like every time I address an individual poster I get banned … will this be de ja vu all over again?

Nobody is going to ban you relax.

The scope of what NASA is as an organization is constantly changing. Learning about our climate requires studying, amongst other things, the outer layers of the earths atmosphere, which is in space. NASA is the national aeronautical and space administration so it falls directly under their remit. Besides, learning about our climate is important for our survival because if it ever changed drastically we could be fcuked. I’m guessing trumps space force will not have much interest in that though.

Nox

MadYaker wrote: »

Nox wrote: »

At the risk of being banned for disagreeing with a mod …. I was not the first to make a generalization … the poster above me was.  Does that poster get accused of generalizing?  Hmmm … a set up to be banned.

Your point about those folks being knowledgeable is not one I will dispute.  I will say that the mission of NASA was changed by the previous administration to climate change versus space.  There are knowledgeable folks all over the world on subjects other than their own specialties … wonderful.  NASA should be concerned with space.  Climate folks should stick to the climate.

Lastly, you are correct about the politicization of everything.  I stand by my point of keeping NASA on its original mission.

Seems like every time I address an individual poster I get banned … will this be de ja vu all over again?

Nobody is going to ban you relax.

The scope of what NASA is as an organization is constantly changing. Learning about our climate requires studying, amongst other things, the outer layers of the earths atmosphere, which is in space. NASA is the national aeronautical and space administration so it falls directly under their remit. Besides, learning about our climate is important for our survival because if it ever changed drastically we could be fcuked. I’m guessing trumps space force will not have much interest in that though.

What you say about changing is almost correct.  The previous administration took NASA funding a put us in a position to depend on Russia to get folks into space.  We substantially paid for their space program.  BTW … I have yet to see what the positive results of the NASA involvement in climate change.

Christy42

Nox wrote: »

MadYaker wrote: »

Nox wrote: »

At the risk of being banned for disagreeing with a mod …. I was not the first to make a generalization … the poster above me was.  Does that poster get accused of generalizing?  Hmmm … a set up to be banned.

Your point about those folks being knowledgeable is not one I will dispute.  I will say that the mission of NASA was changed by the previous administration to climate change versus space.  There are knowledgeable folks all over the world on subjects other than their own specialties … wonderful.  NASA should be concerned with space.  Climate folks should stick to the climate.

Lastly, you are correct about the politicization of everything.  I stand by my point of keeping NASA on its original mission.

Seems like every time I address an individual poster I get banned … will this be de ja vu all over again?

Nobody is going to ban you relax.

The scope of what NASA is as an organization is constantly changing. Learning about our climate requires studying, amongst other things, the outer layers of the earths atmosphere, which is in space. NASA is the national aeronautical and space administration so it falls directly under their remit. Besides, learning about our climate is important for our survival because if it ever changed drastically we could be fcuked. I’m guessing trumps space force will not have much interest in that though.

What you say about changing is almost correct.  The previous administration took NASA funding a put us in a position to depend on Russia to get folks into space.  We substantially paid for their space program.  BTW … I have yet to see what the positive results of the NASA involvement in climate change.

More information on how the climate is changing. As for a positive result. Well that would require us to actually take action.

Harika

It will never fail to amaze me that America is willing to pay for an imaginary Space Force in an imaginary Space War but thinks free healthcare for all is absolute madness.

pixelburp

Nox wrote: »

What you say about changing is almost correct.  The previous administration took NASA funding a put us in a position to depend on Russia to get folks into space.  We substantially paid for their space program.  BTW … I have yet to see what the positive results of the NASA involvement in climate change.

So now you accept NASA's remit of orbital deployments? Ok, well what 'positive' results do you expect here? Research, monitoring is its own reward and without the right information we can't possibly begin to understand the problem before tackling it. You wouldn't ask a doctor for 'positive' results after a CT scan, so don't move the goalposts over Climate satellites because actually yes, that's NASAs job to point camera back at the Earth and see what we see.

And I think it's fair to ask for citation over this 'substantially paid' claim: especially as the NASA budget accounts for 0.5% of the total federal budget. The space shuttle program was retired in 2011 and from my understanding of the numbers was always more PR exercise than a viable, cost effective way of delivering payload into orbit. IMO it a was a bit of a pork barrel project and was only meant to last 15 years IIRC (open to correction as my NASA history is a little spotty). The Colombia accident in 2003 was probably the nail in the coffin of the whole thing.

Without the shuttle, that left taking advantage of the treaties and arrangements with other countries (and latterly, with private companies such as SpaceX) to send payloads to the International Space Station; which, given the name, implies a resting state of cooperation between disparate Space bodies. The NASA budget is minuscule so if anything they deserve praise for making every cent count in working with other bodies.

Wanderer78

Harika wrote:

It will never fail to amaze me that America is willing to pay for an imaginary Space Force in an imaginary Space War but thinks free healthcare for all is absolute madness.

Many Americans aren't actually willing, but it's probably completely out of their control, the sociopaths and psychopaths are in control now

Nox

pixelburp wrote: »

Nox wrote: »

What you say about changing is almost correct.  The previous administration took NASA funding a put us in a position to depend on Russia to get folks into space.  We substantially paid for their space program.  BTW … I have yet to see what the positive results of the NASA involvement in climate change.

So now you accept NASA's remit of orbital deployments? Ok, well what 'positive' results do you expect here? Research, monitoring is its own reward and without the right information we can't possibly begin to understand the problem before tackling it. You wouldn't ask a doctor for 'positive' results after a CT scan, so don't move the goalposts over Climate satellites because actually yes, that's NASAs job to point camera back at the Earth and see what we see.

And I think it's fair to ask for citation over this 'substantially paid' claim: especially as the NASA budget accounts for 0.5% of the total federal budget. The space shuttle program was retired in 2011 and from my understanding of the numbers was always more PR exercise than a viable, cost effective way of delivering payload into orbit. IMO it a was a bit of a pork barrel project and was only meant to last 15 years IIRC (open to correction as my NASA history is a little spotty). The Colombia accident in 2003 was probably the nail in the coffin of the whole thing.

Without the shuttle, that left taking advantage of the treaties and arrangements with other countries (and latterly, with private companies such as SpaceX) to send payloads to the International Space Station; which, given the name, implies a resting state of cooperation between disparate Space bodies. The NASA budget is minuscule so if anything they deserve praise for making every cent count in working with other bodies.

First … Tell me what we've gotten from NASA's climate change.

Second … The quantity of our national budget is irrelevant.  2011 … Obama … cnx the space program and went for climate change … duh.  That is the point.  I'd use all caps to emphasize the point but it would make some of you folks angry.


Third … What a silly statement.  Just exactly what does "working with other bodies" mean and how does it justify its budget?

pixelburp

Nox wrote: »

First … Tell me what we've gotten from NASA's climate change.

Second … The quantity of our national budget is irrelevant.  2011 … Obama … cnx the space program and went for climate change … duh.  That is the point.  I'd use all caps to emphasize the point but it would make some of you folks angry.

Third … What a silly statement.  Just exactly what does "working with other bodies" mean and how does it justify its budget?

It means precisely what it sounds like: the International Space Station is a joint operation between NASA, Roscosmos, JAXA, ESA, and CSA. The space shuttle was retired in 2011 after exceeding its lifespan by 15 years and NASA used other avenues to launch payloads into orbit were available, such as launching from baikonur.

Obama didn't do anything, NASA continues to run its deep space satellites, space telescopes, as well as climate, communication, security, GPS satellite systems, not to mention the main priority of most space agencies in modern times: the International Space Station, which - again - NASA is part of maintenance, astronaut supply and so on.

Obama made no drastic changes to the space program, it's still as it always has been. Ticking along on a small budget.

https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/missions/

Here is a list of all active NASA missions within our solar system alone - including the Curiosity rover, possibly NASA's biggest achievement in decades with a huge viral, cultural impact (happened on Obama's watch too, given you're obsessed about the man). That 'space' enough for you?

Manic Moran

pixelburp wrote: »

So I see with Trump having incessantly rabbited on about a "Space Force", the DoD is finally going to compile a report into establishing such a Force, release it to Congress for approval. As far as I can see there are no details, no hints about what "Space Force" is going to involve, because let's not forget it's a Donald Trump idea and he's not a details kind of person. No doubt this report will cost much time and money.

I think it was Manic Moran who pointed out that technically there's already a similar branch in the military forces, so this announcement just stinks of a sop to the President so he might shut up about a Space Force. Stuff like this really does convince me he's a man-child, no fooling, no 'derangement' - I genuinely believe he has mentally regressed when you watch his speeches about "Space Force!". If I recall, 'space' was agreed through international agreement to remain outside the jurisdiction or claim of one nation, so it's more likely to be "Low Orbit Force", or Reagan's Star Wars all over again.

Not quite. At this time, Space Command does, indeed, cover the US's military needs in space. It's not that small, about three times the size of the Irish Defense forces. The idea of a separate branch of service to cover Space has been seriously proposed a few times over the last decade, and an instruction to create a Space Corps (related to the Air Force in the same way that the Marine Corps are related to the Navy) passed the House in the defense bill last year. The compromise bill between the Senate and House changed this to mandate that the Pentagon provide the report. Trump's announcement kindof overshoots what was actually being done already.

Kermit.de.frog

From the Russian embassy

https://twitter.com/RusEmbUSA/status/1027789812382793728

They openly mock the country. I'm looking forward to the day the moron in chief leaves office and the repercussions there will be for Russia then.

Let's enjoy it until then.

briany

Is Donald Trump still drinking 12 cans of Diet Coke a day?

ancapailldorcha

Nox wrote: »

At the risk of being banned for disagreeing with a mod …. I was not the first to make a generalization … the poster above me was.  Does that poster get accused of generalizing?  Hmmm … a set up to be banned.

Enough of this nonsense please.

robindch

BonnieSituation wrote: »

It's like a cult. "Trump will tell us the truth"

The Base has just divided by zero - here's the best headline you'll see today:

Flat Earthers Call Trump’s Space Force Idea ‘Impossible’

https://amp.thedailybeast.com/flat-earthers-call-trumps-space-force-idea-impossible

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Imagine being a NASA scientist or engineer and putting up with this administration?

If you were a real engineer or a real scientist, and you had to deal with the wide-eyed lunacy, panting idiocracy and red-meat hatred provided by #45's administration, you'd probably set up a twitter account like this one:

https://twitter.com/RogueNASA

BabyCheeses

Nox wrote: »

Imagine anyone in NASA being impressed with NASA's job being climate change. I am sure that President Donald J Trump was a breath of fresh air for those who were actually concerned about the mission of the NA Space Administration. Good job Mr. POTUS.

You're right, NASA really has no need of understanding atmospheres and climates. Could you imagine there being another planet in the universe? It would be mad.



You should send NASA the address to whatever planet you're on.

robindch

Manic Moran wrote: »

However, I am not saying that we should gleefully invite Russia to influence the US system.

Ah, that's nice

Though of course, #45 did gleefully invite Russia to influence the US system in the run up to the hacked election of 2016, when he invited Russia to attack Hilary Clinton:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jul/13/russians-hillary-clinton-email-server-trump-indictment

Manic Moran wrote: »

I am saying that the Russian influence is inevitable unless steps are taken which nobody seems willing to talk about, such as making the use of hacked information, or unattributable sources, etc, illegal, which comes with its own kettle of fish.

Well, many security experts would suggest that legislative time is spent protecting the gate, rather than enacting your extraordinarily odd suggestion - to legislate against the use of bolted horses.

Of course, during the week, the GOP voted not to provide an additional $250,000,000 of additional expenditure to bolster cybersecurity defenses and replace outdated voting equipment.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/republicans-block-250-million-election-security-measure-1533144561

Can anybody think of a reason why #45's party would vote down expenditure like this?

Manic Moran

I can’t read the article, paywall, but what I can see indicates that they already have given the States money on the matter, which apparently has not yet been spent. There is a truism in government budeting that if you have not yet spent what has been given you, you will not get more.

With respect to your gate/horse assessment, it is like saying that because people lock their door and turn on the alarm, there should be no need for any laws governing the black market in stolen goods. After all, because of the security system, there is no way anyone can burgle your house, right?

everlast75

Rumours abound Manafort may be looking to cut a deal.
The case abruptly stopped for recess and its reported that the defence often looks for a deal after the prosecution rests so they know the lady of the land in terms of what sentence they ar likely facing! Fingers crossed, although with Gates I'm not sure what Manafort has to offer apart from corroborating his evidence

Cheerful Spring

Itssoeasy wrote: »

So I decided to rewatch that video on space force. Good god it gets worse. Everything those people said is already done by NASA. And exactly what is NASA lying about ?

Space force has a lot to do with the UFO phenomenon too. General Mattis was Luiz Elizondo boss the guy who ran the Pentagon UFO study. They worked in the same unit in Iraq. Unidentified flying objects are considered a threat even though they have not shown hostile intent yet. You need a specialized force to deal with this, but they probably not going to tell the public that's why they are doing in space. Why would you need a space force to deal with threats from a foreign government in space? Norad is there for that.

Cheerful Spring

Manic Moran wrote: »

Not quite. At this time, Space Command does, indeed, cover the US's military needs in space. It's not that small, about three times the size of the Irish Defense forces. The idea of a separate branch of service to cover Space has been seriously proposed a few times over the last decade, and an instruction to create a Space Corps (related to the Air Force in the same way that the Marine Corps are related to the Navy) passed the House in the defense bill last year. The compromise bill between the Senate and House changed this to mandate that the Pentagon provide the report. Trump's announcement kindof overshoots what was actually being done already.

Well if this is happening and only occurred 10 years ago you need a space force to deal with it.

This is an official Pentagon Executive paper on the Nimitz battle group UFO encounters.

https://media.lasvegasnow.com/nxsglobal/lasvegasnow/document_dev/2018/05/18/TIC%20TAC%20UFO%20EXECUTIVE%20REPORT_1526682843046_42960218_ver1.0.pdf

NASA can't deal with threats from space like this.

Harika

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Well if this is happening and only occurred 10 years ago you need a space force to deal with it.

This is an official Pentagon Executive paper on the Nimitz battle group UFO encounters.

https://media.lasvegasnow.com/nxsglobal/lasvegasnow/document_dev/2018/05/18/TIC%20TAC%20UFO%20EXECUTIVE%20REPORT_1526682843046_42960218_ver1.0.pdf

NASA can't deal with threats from space like this.

Gas lighting, reflections and weather balloons? Yeah for that you need high tech battle ships with fire power in space and not scientists on the floor.

amandstu

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Well if this is happening and only occurred 10 years ago you need a space force to deal with it.

This is an official Pentagon Executive paper on the Nimitz battle group UFO encounters.

https://media.lasvegasnow.com/nxsglobal/lasvegasnow/document_dev/2018/05/18/TIC%20TAC%20UFO%20EXECUTIVE%20REPORT_1526682843046_42960218_ver1.0.pdf

NASA can't deal with threats from space like this.

It may explain Trump's lack of deference to academic qualifications. He may be in touch with the commanders in the sky and they may be feeding him all the information he needs.

Maybe they hacked the election too? (and fill up his rallies)

Cheerful Spring

Harika wrote: »

Gas lighting, reflections and weather balloons? Yeah for that you need high tech battle ships with fire power in space and not scientists on the floor.

So are you saying you know more than the US military? It was a Pentagon UFO study. They had their own scientists looking into this phenomenon and determined it was real.

UsedToWait

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

So are you saying you know more than the US military? It was a Pentagon UFO study. They had their own scientists looking into this phenomenon and determined it was real.

There's a whole forum (and you know it) for your ufo sh1te.
Kindly stop trying to stink up this thread with it.