PHOTOSHOPPED! I CAN TOTALLY TELL BY LOOKING AT THE PIXELS!
that two-dimensional surface of the moon totally had it coming. i mean, if nasa didn't want people thinking that it was filming the production with two separate light sources, it would have filmed on a 3-d, real surface of the moon.
It's pretty amazing how fast they've progressed from rockets exploding on the launch pad to successfully placing a payload in orbit and returning it safely to Earth.
Supposedly they're going to start doing supply runs to the International Space Station in 2011, and start ferrying astronauts to it a couple years after that. In the meantime, we'll have to pay the Russians to take Americans to the ISS, once the shuttle fleet is retired next year.
Paying SpaceX to handle the work that the space shuttle has been mostly relegated to in the last 10 years should save NASA quite a bit of money, and let them focus on more cooler missions (manned mission to a near-earth asteroid, then to Mars, bigger and better unmanned probes and space telescopes, etc.).
Manned space exploration is, I think, overrated. We get much better data at a much lower cost by using robot probes.
I say if NASA exists for any reason (and it shouldn't), it is the "pure science" mission of gathering astronomical knowledge. If it's worth spending money to put people on other celestial bodies, the marketplace will both discover that profitable use and figure out how to make it happen.
Note: The ISS is arguably an integral part of NASA's mission as outlined above, since it might be more cost efficient to just put astronauts up there to do those kinds of experiments.
And that's just from data collected during its first 4 months of operation. Basically overnight, it more than tripled the number of known extrasolar planets, which were discovered over the last 15 years.
54 of them are in their stars' habitable zones. And of those, 5 are about the size of Earth. Most of the others are gas giants, but that doesn't preclude the possibility that they have habitable moons. Oh, and because of how Kepler detects planets (the transit method, meaning it can only detect planets that pass directly between their stars and us), it can only detect a relatively small percentage of the planets in its field of view.
This srongly suggests that habitable planets are ridiculously common in the galaxy, let alone the rest of the universe.
This is fucking huge!
*planet candidates - but most scientists think 80-90% of them will eventually be confirmed
And maybe now they'll stop cancelling all the planned space telescopes that could directly image these planets.
Wouldn't count on it. Republicans think science is waste of money. Democrats want to spend any money they could spend on science on funding ever more social entitlements.
Hey, maybe another country will do it. There's hope.
In other news, the governor of New Mexico is looking into privatizing their spaceport. I see this as only a good thing. I don't see why taxpayers should be on the hook to launch rich people into low orbit.