I think that NASA functioned just fine all those years without that phrase in the mission statement, developing Landsat for example. It is the direction and focus of the agency and the projects that matter, and in that regard NASA seems to be turning it's back on the development of new earth science technologies. Something that quietly changing the mission statement exemplifies. What would NOAA's capabilities be today without the rocket scientists of NASA?
Sean Grimland --- Andrew Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Tyler Mitchell wrote: > > > > Indeed... and what about our vast oceans? Is our > own inner-space _ever_ > > going to be more fully explored by national > administrations of this > > magnitude? > > That would come under NOAA, not NASA anyways. I > would also think that > understanding the "home planet" would fall under > this type of agency > as well. Earth sensing has a lot of differences from > space > exploration. And NASA is already pulled in enough > directions that it > has had difficulty making progress in any of them. > By focusing on > fewer goals, hopefully it can achieve more in them. > It can still serve > to develop/launch platforms for agencies like NOAA. > > > Andrew > > -- > Andrew Turner > [EMAIL PROTECTED] 42.4266N x > 83.4931W > http://highearthorbit.com Northville, > Michigan, USA > _______________________________________________ > Geowanking mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Geowanking mailing list [email protected] http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking
