You pick: NSA/DoD, NASA or GASA, proficient research simply can't afford to have two, let alone all three.
NASA on 10%, survival of the fittest in spite of NSA/DoD concerns.
If you perceive there's simply no good resolve as to the above (being every man woman and child for themselves), then perhaps ESA should be taking over before the UN does. China is obviously more then capable and most certainly welcome by my account, as well as Cuba could easily accomplish a great deal of what's at stake, making the US look almost as bad as it really is.
Regarding the NASA budget:
Actually, the NASA budget is really not all that bad nor all that much, in fact, if you were to exclude the NSA/DoD slice or bite, that's another 75% bonus as for worthy space science and all of humanity. Once NASA obtains 100% control over it's allocations, by no longer having to share with it's partners in crime, now we're cooking with gas. Best yet is, we don't have to waste so much effort and talents upon that costly "nondisclosure" policy enforcement crap and, those costly flak suits as for the rest of us, those may no longer be required.
Only because my discovery opposition apparently wants to further my easily diverted attention, as to dwelling upon the past, as for what I believe has been most affecting why there's so little focus upon Venus, for that I'll oblige those willing to play "tit for tat", as I love returning the favor, especially if in turn that somehow helps to break the ice, as otherwise, I would rather focus upon the future but, if necessary and all that essential, first things first.
The true waste has unfortunately become the old guard's 30+ years of Apollo ruse and subsequent cold-war considerations, that's essentially trillions worth and not all that much to show for it except for our loosing a few tall buildings and airplanes loaded with not so willing folk that might have wanted a second chance, but all that's nothing as compared to lives lost and technology drain due to our prolonged "cold-wars", as perpetrated primarily against the USSR as well as affecting other technology losses, simply because so much other got pushed aside and/or altered for their ulterior cold-war missions.
Seems NASA/NSA/DoD have managed to place all of us a good century behind where we could have been, and for some of us dead at that because, it'll take another half century just to sort out and compensate for all the carnage and damage done, then perhaps from that point we can advance, hopefully without further killing anymore for the sake of political power, greed, arrogance and lately, oil. If America is so good and "all knowing", then why do we even need to import a drop of oil? (oh I forgot, we actually hate every other country and, we're going to use up all that oil before others even get a chance and, I suppose that shouldn't piss any one off).
By the way folks; Where exactly is our nuclear power technology, besides in the toilet. It seems the French as well as others have long had that one nailed and as being serviceable and refueled underway, then glassified spent fuel has been for decades nothing but a win-win, yet we seem to be struggling with essentially a few medieval reactors and still no waste storage resolution in sight, at least not in my back yard.
If we ever became sufficiently nuclear and as a result imported little or no oil, that spot oil market would soon collapse to 25% of the current price, which would allow poor nations without the nuclear option as to affordably purchase such cheap oil and become globally competitive, which I'm guessing we're not about to let that happen, so therefore, our nuclear is not going to happen (at least not in our lifetimes). That collapse in oil prices would also hit the pocket books of those having said oil, so that their purchassing power as for obtaining weapons of "mass distruction" would become seriously limited, obviously we don't want that one to happen either.
Since we, not even I, can't alter the past, at least we can start over without all the baggage, without the cloaking and without having to pay off thousands of self deserving folks in order for having them keep replacing and reinforcing lids upon every issue that could compromise the old guard's view of and plans for moderating the historical truth, as well as for molding our futures, as in order to manipulate those outcomes as to suit their hidden agendas...
It seems ESA offers one of their versions of NASA's "space.com", as BBC represents quite a similar discussion board site, one which is closely moderated against "truth". What sites like "space.com" and BBC or their BBCI discussion boards do offer is the sort of information or "info-commercials" that makes NASA and perhaps ESA look as good as possible, accomplishing such by moderating those opposing the "status quo" of disinformation. Basically ESA supporters soon realized the "cash cow" capabilities by which NASA flourishes under, so much so that the majority of funding can go into hidden agendas and, thereby no strings attached. Right now, still because of 9/11, BBC is going to side with everything NASA, irregardless of the repercussions and/or collateral damage (in other words, screw the taxpayers, as well as those flying into tall buildings).
October 17; I've discovered (to no surprise) that Hubble, as well as TRACE, SOHO and even of every optical instrument aboard ISS, that all of the sudden these fine instruments and of those opperating them can't seem to locate nor lock onto Venus and, even if they could, as according to official NASA "spin", it's most likely well beyond the capability of these instruments, which I find this extremely odd, especially regarding that TRACE can't manage, sort of equally odd that even though Venus has been and well remain sufficiently offset from having to view the sun within the same frame, that even Hubble's magnification which is easily capable of imaging upon as little as 4.25% of the diameter of Venus (thus excluding any solar influence) has become strangely "off limits". SOHO will soon become 0.26AU from Venus and SOHO certainly can't be impacted by directly looking at the sun (as it monitors Mercury crossing the solar face all the time), and yet Venus is so much larger and closer, as equally I find that TRACE offers a similar capability except that TRACE can greatly magnify and track other objects, plus (unlike SOHO) apparently TRACE can capture or accept a somewhat greater degree of contrast and/or realize upon greater ratios of illumination, thus offering supposedly better sensitivity should there be anything artificially illuminating from Venus. Basically TRACE is a somewhat smaller Hubble, capable of viewing upon Mercury as it's crossing the sun and obviously more then capable of tracking and then magnifying upon big old Venus, which is nowhere near crossing the solar surface, imaging of Venus is not even near to being affected from most solar flares. So, where the hell's Venus?
Who the hell made NSA/DoD God?
It seems as though, with all the other bad news going about, we deserve to discover and hopefully benefit from something overlooked for the past 13 years and counting, that's currently situated right next door and so very obtainable as far as xenon/laser communications is concerned. The fact that we do not have that VL2 platform is today not such a loss because, we do have those nifty laser cannons (lots of them, even some lethal UV spectrum variations) capable of transmitting binary packets towards Venus for at least 16 months out of their 18 month orbit of the Venus Year and, we should also be capable of receiving for at least 12 of those months worth. And, that's certainly a good thing, as there's absolutely nothing to lose and only good things to gain, with little mission investment, absolutely no astronaut risk, nothing worthy of involving NSA/DoD, nearly zilch worth of new technology required and as for the October/November event, our existing EL1 SOHO can easily monitor Venus for any signs of a reply or, God forbid, warn us of a visit by somewhat testy nocturnal Islamic lizard folk that are perhaps thirstier then hell and don't much care for having bright lights radiated into their large nocturnal eyes. Hubble too can deliver upon good imaging (in spite of what NASA/NSA/DoD may have to say), especially as throughout this October/November window of opportunity, plus amateurs can pitch in with relatively little effort as to obtaining sufficient daylight viewing that could potentially also detect signals from Venus, possibly even transmit some of their own smut towards Venus, just to see what happens.
Cutting those "Mars microbe mission(s)"; That issue alone is worth 2 decades of talents which could be better utilized as well as the 250+billions (and that's only if nothing goes wrong) better invested. Instead of, how about taking but 1% of that budget for a truly "can do" "mission possible" VL2 platform plus a Magellan-II capable of 1 meter 16 bit resolution, which should do quite nicely, thank you. Having that VL2 platform (manned or not) would permit nearly continual relay of Magellan-II as well as whatever Venus transmissions. As for gathering upon and relaying those nifty 1 meter 16 bit Magellan-II images, thus fewer Earth based receivers would be needed and, fewer yet staff, as essentially minimal cost and zero risk can be provided from all those existing SETI worshiper's, which could basically take over this homeland portion of the GUTH Venus or GASA/SETI xenon/laser binary packets and even of those Magellan-II functions. Again, there's absolutely nothing to lose.
Lunar/LL2 SAR: For a space research and exploration focused upon obtainable goals worthy of our future (@10%);
I foresee a sufficient NASA budget of 10% by comparison to last year's requirement, that which could certainly do this trick, especially if that amount were restricted to the sort of obtainable mission focus as represented by "GUTH Venus", as that's not only where the action is but, it's humanly obtainable within our present technology as well as our lifetime (that's not saying we need to actually set foot on Venus, as those thinking we do could be crazy). Without all the dreaded NSA/DoD baggage and subsequent drain upon the resources intended for NASA, that alone is either a 75% savings or a 75% boost depending on how that transformation is accommodated. By eliminating missions which represent greater scientific risk and far lesser potential for the immediate future of Earth's humanity, this will more then pair off the remaining overhead and, by an amount that's far greater then whatever requirements of our focusing upon the more obtainable goals.
One of those goals may eventually have to include scientifically manned lunar habitats and/or at least KECK-III class robotic observatories or how about something better yet, like a backside truly deep space VLA sort of SAR imaging via LL1 as for receiving upon those SAR detections, which could and should offer a capable (distortion free) focus of 1^-7 degrees [that's 0.0000001 degrees as subsequently targeting upon a 100mm X 100mm @1.024^6 X 1.024^6 pixel sensor, thus containing 1.048^12 worth of total pixel/frame coverage as based upon LL1 residing at 58,000 km], that's a magnification or effective per pixel recording of 1^-7 X 1,024^-6 for a grad slam of 1.024^-13. Somewhat better yet, I'm thinking of that system being comprised of a 100 GW pulsed transmitter array from a sufficiently nuclear powered site, lunar surface installed and obviously fully articulated array(s), then by utilizing our LL2 SAR receiving satellite, perhaps along with LL4 and LL5 and/or a few orbiting relay satellites [+/- tracking/alignment being what it is], should offer detail views upon worlds which our next hundred generations couldn't possibly reach at present speeds, not to mention unacceptable risk factors as from a fair number of space radiation exposures). The only significant draw back that I can see (especially of those images are those of 16 bit from that 1.048^12 detector) is rather massive file size considerations getting a little out of hand, then needing a CRAY computer in order to even view such detailed images.
For an example; This lunar SAR/LL2 imaging, if such were ever focused upon Venus as residing at 0.271AU from Earth; @1^-8 aperture, this delivers a target or frame area of roughly 25.9 km, of which this information is to be divided or segmented by that distant SAR detector, as offering a raw .0253 meters/pixel and 16 bit depth as well (that's not even including any PhotoShop X10, let alone X20 potential). Now I'll be the first to admit that I could certainly be introducing some inaccuracies (more likely suggesting upon things currently beyond our technology), but, I'm not intentionally skewing those principals upon what such a capable and stable lunar/LL2 SAR imaging has to offer (could be lesser or even a whole lot better).
A four step program that's in the right direction as to first clearing the slate:
1 - Disassociate NASA from anything NSA/DoD or Homeland Security, as there's no such cloaking requirement unless we somehow manage to piss off those nocturnal Islamic lizard folk from Venus.
2 - Disclose and thereby publish the facts, clarifying that in the past we (that's mostly NASA/NSA/DoD) have made more then our fair share of mistakes or indiscretion's if you will (cold-war associated as well as economical, political and even of religious affiliation considerations).
3 - Admit that we have deeply hurt ourselves, as well as much of other global communities and, as such have significantly retarded if not inhibited worthy humanitarian achievements and thereby seriously affected/skewed scientific as well as historical "truths".
4 - Pledge that our new slate (new guard if you will) is not going to have to repeat those mistakes in the future and, as such will become open as to being challenged and/or scrutinized, thereby insuring greater international public confidence and faith (goodwill to boot).
Actually, in addition to a great deal of restitution, there will eventually become a 12 step program of our disinfecting NASA and/or towards managing the subsequent "grand mall seizure" that which will surely happen if the situation should require GASA being formulated into replacing NASA.
Regards, Brad Guth / IEIS http://guthvenus.tripod.com/positive.htm