OK fine about the microscope I suggested, but that's not really the point. My point was that incremental planning and exploration stages are at the very least in part designed to produce progress checkpoints that will help make the argument for continued funding for the science. As I stated before, Viking was an example of a high-risk, single-shot mission that failed to find life (at least in the eyes of the public) and resulted in a couple decades of zero Mars exploration. That is an undeniable fact.
I would absolutely never be someone to say scientists are stupid or greedy. Scientists care deeply about their projects and want them funded, and they also know they are on the taxpayer dollar. So do the bureaucrats who run NASA. As I stated before, budgetary considerations driving low risk incremental missions in finding life is not an idea I came with on my own.
In fact it seems so obvious I find it hard to believe I have to convince anyone here about it.
Space/Science » in reply to Read "Life as no one knows it"
You're reading me wrong
The whole thread (21 posts)
- Dragonfly mission to Titan
- Believe me, NASA knows what its doing.
- To be fair
- Dude...?
- Bro...?
- Microscopes are designed to identify EARTH microbes,
- NASA oversold the prospect of life on Mars in the 1970s
- Again, not a conspiracy
- Microscopes are designed to identify EARTH microbes,
- Bro...?
- Dude...?
- To be fair
- Believe me, NASA knows what its doing.