http://www.evlbi.org/evlbi/te024/arecibo.jpg

The Arecibo telescope (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arecibo_telescope#Other_usage) telescope used in the movie golden eye (James bond) and contact

link (http://www.space.com/news/070601_ap_arecibo_threat.html)

I remember that movie. I loved it! :D

What budget cuts have to do with the telescope? :bugeye:

WHHHHHHAAAAAAAA!!!!

We NEED radio telescopes! They should cut their spending on stupid missions instead! Like going back to the freakin' moon just to collect more rocks! WTF are they thinking!?!?!?! :bugeye:

The National Science Foundation funds the Arecibo radio telescope, not NASA. It is the NSF, and not NASA, that is threatening to defund Arecibo.

http://cornellsun.com/index.php?q=node/19730

from D H's Link
The report was given by a committee of astronomers

I would be very surprised if those people didn't have bonds with NASA and I'm somewhat puzzeled why this isn't comming from NASA's budget...

from D H's Link


I would be very surprised if those people didn't have bonds with NASA and I'm somewhat puzzeled why this isn't comming from NASA's budget...

They are completely separate and distinct agencies. There's no interconnection between their respective budgets. Their assigned missions are also totally different even though both contain elements of space exploration.

Arecibo isn't for NASA...Arecibo is Astrophysics ok?!!...Arecibo is for people who only dream and look at the stars. NASA is about actual space travel not some useless alien hunting.

God (if you exist) thank you for stopping the fund to this useless Arecibo project.

in matters of space you have 2 sorts of people astronomes, who sit at home and use their brains and astronauts who'l sit on top of a million littre fuel tank that if all things works well blows you out of the sky.

Seti is pretty much important yust as the Arecibo telescope if only because they are pretty famous... considering fundings popularity is quit important.

Arecibo isn't for NASA...Arecibo is Astrophysics ok?!!...Arecibo is for people who only dream and look at the stars. NASA is about actual space travel not some useless alien hunting.

God (if you exist) thank you for stopping the fund to this useless Arecibo project.

Incorrect statements! Once again you step forward to show your ignorance of scientific things. :bugeye:

Evidently you are thinking of SETI and it's goals. Arecibo is a radio-telescope which performs much the same functions as an optical telescope but in other parts of the EM spectrum than visible light. Yes, it has been used by the SETI people on very short occasions but that is NOT it's primary function - far from it!

Perhaps you'd actually like to learn something for a change? (It sure wouldn't hurt you and would make you appear to be much smarter in the future.) Take a look at their mission statement here: http://www.naic.edu/global/naic_mission.htm and then spend a little time looking around their site to see what they REALLY do.

Well, if they want to build a new one that is 20 times as powerful, then I guess the cuts are a wise decision after all. I was just amazed because Arecibo has been the best radio telescope for a long time... And we need radio telescopes...

It has a nice history though. I hope they don't demolish it or something... LOL! :D

Evidently you are thinking of SETI and it's goals. Arecibo is a radio-telescope which performs much the same functions as an optical telescope ... Yes, it has been used by the SETI people on very short occasions but that is NOT it's primary function - far from it!

I'm surprised Dragon didn't also mention scrapping the VLA as it is featured in the movie 'Contact', as he seems to get all his 'knowledge' from such flawed sources!

I'm surprised Dragon didn't also mention scrapping the VLA as it is featured in the movie 'Contact', as he seems to get all his 'knowledge' from such flawed sources!

I see telescopes as waste of money. I see spaceflight as practical.
What flawed sources? :bugeye: phlogistician?

I see telescopes as waste of money. I see spaceflight as practical.

How do we know where to fly to unless we look first?

What flawed sources? :bugeye: phlogistician?

Your posts range from the abstract to technically incorrect. I don't know where you get your information from, maybe you just make stuff up.

NASA's budget cuts are getting annoying they've got 0 missions planned like Galileo or cassinie and the've scrapped some good projects like the terrestrial planet finder (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrestrial_Planet_Finder)... The most futuristics missions that show some potential are that next mars rover and that ion ship that will visit multiple asteroid

NASA's budget cuts are getting annoying they've got 0 missions planned like Galileo or cassinie and the've scrapped some good projects like the terrestrial planet finder (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrestrial_Planet_Finder)... The most futuristics missions that show some potential are that next mars rover and that ion ship that will visit multiple asteroid

seems like Bush wasn't telling the truth. :shrug: Anyways, did you know Roskosmos is planning a Mars mission by 2020-2040?

NASA's budget cuts are getting annoying they've got 0 missions planned like Galileo or cassinie and the've scrapped some good projects like the terrestrial planet finder (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrestrial_Planet_Finder)... The most futuristics missions that show some potential are that next mars rover and that ion ship that will visit multiple asteroid
The terrestrial-like planet hunt is alive and well, did ya know?
Not long ago, they found a very similar planet in a brown dwarf system close-by....

The terrestrial-like planet hunt is alive and well, did ya know?
Not long ago, they found a very similar planet in a brown dwarf system close-by....

Yeah, but that doesn't count at all according to dragon. Why? because they used - gasp! - telescopes! And he says they are useless.

Yeah, but that doesn't count at all according to dragon. Why? because they used - gasp! - telescopes! And he says they are useless.

I think you mean draqon. ;) :p

I think you mean draqon. ;) :p

Yep, typo.

the "terrestrial planet finder" was a/chould have been a space telescope rivalling the european Darwin telescope.

Not long ago, they found a very similar planet in a brown dwarf system close-by....

...Maybe... I don't now but take in mind that most exoplanets that get discovered are not discovered by americans, as far as I know most are detected by Europeans.

the "terrestrial planet finder" was a/chould have been a space telescope rivalling the european Darwin telescope.



...Maybe... I don't now but take in mind that most exoplanets that get discovered are not discovered by americans, as far as I know most are detected by Europeans.

So? Does it matter who/what nationality found them? Sure doesn't to me and it has nothing at all to do with the topic of this thread - NASA budget cuts (but of course that was a mistake from the very beginning) and NASA has nothing to do with planet finding.

So? Does it matter who/what nationality found them?
No! Only if they are American.

So? Does it matter who/what nationality found them?
I find myself annoyed by reading articles telling the american satelite [enter name] has discovered/proofed/etc VS satelite [enter name] has discovered/proofed/etc. Especialy Yahoo annoys me abouth this...
But your right it's not the point unless you go argueing that NASA's relative reluctants to coörperate with some other nations could have saved it some costs for example whas it wreally necesairy to make Mir crash the ISS would proberly been a lot cheaper if they could have reused certain even if the modules where condemed as crap the structural beams solar panels etc chould have certainly be worth something considering the relative little costs of transportation but then again that's only one example out of many and who cares where the tax money goes to annyway unless some projects gets scrapped

House Committee on Science and Technology Chairman Bart Gordon (D-TN), Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee Chairman Mark Udall (D-CO), and Energy and Environment Subcommittee Chairman Nick Lampson (D-TX) have issued the following statement in response to the Administration's letter rejecting their request for a meeting of Members of Congress with President Bush to discuss NASA's budgetary situation:
"We are deeply disappointed that the President has decided not to seize the opportunity to meet with Members of Congress to discuss how best to ensure that NASA will have the resources needed to carry out a balanced and robust program of science, aeronautics, and human space flight and exploration initiatives."

"We intend to work with NASA supporters on both sides of the aisle in Congress to try to give NASA the resources it will need to carry out the tasks that the nation has asked it to undertake. However, the President's disengagement will make that effort immeasurably more difficult."