[Moonbase-discuss] Good logic about Hubble

Sat, 24 Apr 2004 13:40:40 EDT

--part1_be.adff159.2dbc0098_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

 I'm too busy right now to do much more than pass this along.  I hope you can 
do more.

 --JA

--part1_be.adff159.2dbc0098_boundary
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline

Return-Path: <hubblemail@apu.telescopetime.com>
Received: from  rly-xg02.mx.aol.com (rly-xg02.mail.aol.com [172.20.115.199]) by air-xg02.mail.aol.com (v98.19) with ESMTP id MAILINXG24-455408a70c5154; Sat, 24 Apr 2004 09:51:12 -0400
Received: from  apu.telescopetime.com (64.124.57.135.n315.telescope.com [64.124.57.135]) by rly-xg02.mx.aol.com (v99.9) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINXG29-455408a70c5154; Sat, 24 Apr 2004 09:51:01 -0400
Received: from apu.telescopetime.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by apu.telescopetime.com (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id i3ODp0Wa024082
	for <JonAlexandr@aol.com>; Sat, 24 Apr 2004 09:51:00 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from hubblemail@localhost)
	by apu.telescopetime.com (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) id i3ODp0lY024081;
	Sat, 24 Apr 2004 09:51:00 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <200404241351.i3ODp0lY024081@apu.telescopetime.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="_----------=_1082814660929516291"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: MIME::Lite 3.01_03 (F2.71; B2.12; Q2.03)
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 2004 09:51:00 -0500
From: Save The Hubble <hubble@slooh.com>
To: JonAlexandr@aol.com
Subject: Savethehubble.org
X-AOL-IP: 64.124.57.135

--_----------=_1082814660929516291
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Length: 1761
Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary
Content-Type: text/plain

Dear 38,000 Hubble Petitioners,

April 24th is National Astronomy Day, and a good time to make waves on
Hubble's behalf. 

No logic can support the notion that while the Space Shuttle is safe enough
for multiple flights to the Space Station over the next decade, it is not
safe enough for even one flight to Hubble.  It is disingenuous to announce
bold plans for a risky manned flight to Mars while at the same time
retreating from a flight to Hubble just a few hundred miles away. NASA's
leadership should either defend the risk of the loss of life as justifiable
given the overall benefits to mankind, or it should retreat from manned
missions altogether. We can ill afford to spend another decade funding
manned projects such as the Space Station and the trip to Mars, only to have
them shelved when NASA realizes it has no appetite for the inherent risk. If
the shuttle can not be made safe enough at any cost, then abandon it and the
Space Station, and spend more resource developing a robotic solution to fix
Hubble, and to launch future scientific missions.  The impact of Hubble on
society and the enlightening new discovery of water on Mars make it clear
that for the foreseeable future there is much more to be gained, in terms of
science and political capital, from robotic initiatives (Hubble is an
optical robot after all) than from projects that require NASA to make the
environment safe enough for a man. Let's get back to manned flights when
either we as a people have decided to accept the inevitable loss of life, or
at such time as we have designed a space ship that is capable of traveling
at near the speed of light. Only then will the benefits outweigh the risks.

Spread the word,

Michael Paolucci
President
Savethehubble.org
Slooh.com

--_----------=_1082814660929516291--

--part1_be.adff159.2dbc0098_boundary--