Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Curiosity is at Mars and we are still sitting in our chairs

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #46
    Originally posted by khmorgan View Post
    Sorry, but I must disagree. Nixon's War on Cancer is a good example. He allocated $10B to cure cancer in the early '70s. They did a lot of good work, but they didn't cure cancer.

    Certainly, allocating some of the $2B spent on Curiosity would have helped SCI research a lot, but money doesn't cure disease, people do. More money would attract more good people -- as well as more hangers on.

    Also, this country really needs more mathematicians and engineers than walking SCIs. I don't like it, but the US has lost its technical edge. We turn out more MBAs than engineers.

    What I like about the Mars missions is that they are not spending many more billions trying to send people. They are solving problems by creating smart machines, not by sending people to solve them.

    Frankly, I suspect if they had scraped the Mars mission and reallocated the money to medical research, SCI research wouldn't have seen a penny. Cancer, heart disease, Alzheimer's, etc. are far better organized.

    If you want something at NASA to complain about, what about the International Space Station. That has a U.S. budget of about $2B / year.

    Of course, for the Department of Defence, that is pocket money. So, why not look to the DoD for more SCI funding?
    Totally agree - excellent points.
    2010 SCINet Clinical Trial Support Squad Member
    Please join me and donate a dollar a day at http://justadollarplease.org and copy and paste this message to the bottom of your signature.

    Comment


      #47
      Originally posted by t8burst View Post
      ...The sad fact is Paolo is people really don't get excited about curing SCI, but do get excited about a robot SUV with lasers on Mars. Hell, people care more about saving dogs and cats than they do about us. Like Fiesty I would rather stop pouring money down the drain in Afghanistan and Iraq to fund things like SCI research that take it from stuff that NASA does that actually does do some good (even if that good is hard to quantify). I think I said it before, what we need someone like Brad Pitt to end up with SCI before we have a chance of getting the money we need to get serious about curing SCI. Until then we are just a fringe group that people would rather forget about.
      So true. (See underlined).
      Not sure about Brad Pitt; wasn't Christopher Reeve a good enough celebrity. Then, in fairness, the thought alone, of actually curing SCI was radical back then.
      2010 SCINet Clinical Trial Support Squad Member
      Please join me and donate a dollar a day at http://justadollarplease.org and copy and paste this message to the bottom of your signature.

      Comment


        #48
        Originally posted by chris arnold View Post
        So true. (See underlined).
        Not sure about Brad Pitt; wasn't Christopher Reeve a good enough celebrity. Then, in fairness, the thought alone, of actually curing SCI was radical back then.
        Since I am still sitting in a wheelchair and digging crap out of my ass with my finger (not at the same time) I would say no. We need Clooney or Pitt power celebrity.

        Comment


          #49
          Originally posted by paolocipolla View Post
          Yes, good scienze is not the only factor.

          Nasa has good scientists, a good organization, it is GOAL driven and has money too.
          This way they went to the moon and now landed one more robot on mars etc.

          Paolo
          Remember the Apollo program was carried out by approx. 200 Universities. I thought you was against Multicenter studies.

          Comment


            #50
            Originally posted by Leif View Post
            Remember the Apollo program was carried out by approx. 200 Universities. I thought you was against Multicenter studies.
            ... but they were all goal driven by NASA...

            Leif, have a glass of wine & relax.... just don't read my posts after the wine as you seem to do most of the times just to miss the most important concepts I write in my posts.

            Paolo
            In God we trust; all others bring data. - Edwards Deming

            Comment


              #51
              Originally posted by paolocipolla View Post
              ... but they were all goal driven by NASA...

              Leif, have a glass of wine & relax.... just don't read my posts after the wine as you seem to do most of the times just to miss the most important concepts I write in my posts.

              Paolo
              I take you are pro Multicenter studies then, Okay and great, but you are not easy to understand since you are a bit contradictory on this. But you write about important concepts? What are these and what is the status of these important concepts of yours? Please elaborate without dodging behind some excuses like things take time and so on.

              Comment


                #52
                Originally posted by Leif View Post
                I take you are pro Multicenter studies then, Okay and great, but you are not easy to understand since you are a bit contradictory on this. But you write about important concepts? What are these and what is the status of these important concepts of yours? Please elaborate without dodging behind some excuses like things take time and so on.
                If you are really interested just read back my past posts carefully and keep reading my posts in the future.

                Smiles!

                Paolo
                In God we trust; all others bring data. - Edwards Deming

                Comment


                  #53
                  Originally posted by paolocipolla View Post
                  If you are really interested just read back my past posts carefully and keep reading my posts in the future.

                  Smiles!

                  Paolo
                  Thing is, it is often difficult to grasp what you mean, - first you condemn Muliticenter studies and collaboration and then you cheers it, what’s it gonna be? As for you’re important concepts - since you will not elaborate on it and dodge the question - I must ask, is it just some thoughts in you’re head, how materialized is it? Maybe you need to evaluate what you writes more carefully, maybe you need to hire a communication expert?

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X