Comments on: Griffin speaks to the Mars Society

By: Donald F. Robertson

Donald F. Robertson — Tue, 08 Aug 2006 21:14:21 +0000

Gene: I think NASA is trying to do too many things. I think most Mars funding should be subsumed to getting scientists on site. Once we have biologists on Mars — and astrobiologists have some actual physical evidence to work with — there will be plenty of time to fund astrobiology at a higher level.

That said, I do think there should be some seed funding for astrobiological science on the Space Station and a small (supportable) number of biologists and graduate students to keep alive a few essential skills and theoretical work. But, until there is something to study, that should be seed funding, not an expensive scientific endeavor with large numbers of government supported scientists and students needing jobs, et cetera.

— Donald

By: Gene

Gene — Tue, 08 Aug 2006 20:33:17 +0000

Overall, Griffin’s remarks and attitude seem encouraging, even if he does not envision a Mars mission for another 15 years or so.

I was slightly disappointed Griffin did not express more entusiasm for astrobiology. I’ve gone to a couple of SETI seminars up here in Northern California, and this seems to be an exciting and promising field. It was a pity NASA gave up on it in the early 90s, though SETI appears to be doing very good work in private hands.

Don’t you think astrobiology should be at least a small part of whatever scientific package accompanies the first manned Mars mission (and, perhaps, earlier robotic recognissance missions)?

By: Donald F. Robertson

Donald F. Robertson — Sat, 05 Aug 2006 00:20:37 +0000

Jeff: I thought that would be obvious from the photo and the fact that the highlights focus on the Q&A portion of his appearance not included in the written transcipt of the speech itself.

Sorry, sometimes I can be dense. Thanks for the report though. I think the reception is important news, because Mars Society-types are an important part of the political coalition that will (or won’t) let this happen. As Dr. Griffin implied in his main speech, keeping all these groups pointed in more-or-less the same direction is vital to achieving the goals of the VSE. If the Mars Society listened with respectful, if not enthusiastic, support, that strikes me as a net positive.

— Donald

By: Jeff Foust

Jeff Foust — Fri, 04 Aug 2006 19:30:57 +0000

Donald: yes, I was in attendance (I thought that would be obvious from the photo and the fact that the highlights focus on the Q&A portion of his appearance not included in the written transcipt of the speech itself.) He got a warm reception from the audience; more than just polite applause, but also no standing ovation. I think many were happy that a NASA administrator was there talking about the concept of sending humans to Mars, even though the timelines and specifics (or lack thereof) might not be what many desire.

By: Rand Simberg

Rand Simberg — Fri, 04 Aug 2006 18:27:41 +0000

So any decision before then is by implication irrational?

No, not necessarily. At least not according to any rules of logic that I know.

By: Chance

Chance — Fri, 04 Aug 2006 17:42:34 +0000

“I think we would be poised by that point, the late teens or 2020, for a rational national decision to aim resources at going to Mars.”

So any decision before then is by implication irrational?

By: Donald F. Robertson

Donald F. Robertson — Fri, 04 Aug 2006 17:20:54 +0000

I’ve read the entire speech, and for the most part it seemed pretty reasonable — and very well presented. Jeff, were you there? How did it go over with it’s audience?

— Donald