In a message dated 99-07-28 12:01:06 EDT, alvinjsminavich@hotmail.com (Todd Huffman) wrote:
> I am in favor of cutting all funding to NASA. Not just because of the
> extortion they use to get funding. If NASA were eliminated I think we
would
> see a huge increase in the amount of knowledge produced. The scientific
> talent that NASA has is stifled by beurocratic red tape. Incompitent
> politicians decide what programs deserve money. No NASA means that all
the
> people in its employ will be quickly grabbed up by the private companies
and
> the free market will guide the industry to the best methods of space
travel
> and research. I have little knowledge of the internal working of NASA,
but
> I am confident that the free market can come up with something much
better.
> NASA only serves to keep promising researchers from reaching thier
> potential.
I'm sorry, I don't usually do this sort of thing, but I can't help it here. You say that you "have little knowledge of the internal workings of NASA" but make the assertion that "The scientific talent that NASA has is stifled by beurocratic [sic] red tape." This sounds like a statement of fact that could only be based on "knoweldge of the internal workings of NASA."
Greg Burch <GBurch1@aol.com>----<gburch@lockeliddell.com>
Attorney ::: Vice President, Extropy Institute ::: Wilderness Guide
http://users.aol.com/gburch1 -or- http://members.aol.com/gburch1
"Civilization is protest against nature;
progress requires us to take control of evolution."
-- Thomas Huxley