Why was NASA short sighted with no shuttle replacement? Is NASA relevant in the 21st century?

It is obvious to those who are knowledgeable about the potential of a robust space program that, far from diverting resources away from efforts to solve Earth’s problems, the answers to many of our problems are to be found in space.

NASA's spending made up more than five percent of the federal budget during the heady days of the Apollo program. If it received five percent of the federal budget today, its annual funding level would be $139.2 billion dollars.

For every $1 the federal government spends on NASA, it spends $98 on social programs. In other words, if we cut spending on social programs by a mere one percent, we could very nearly double NASA’s budget.

We must begin to reframe and recast the entire debate in Washington on this issue, so that the politicians start thinking in terms of how much can we spend for space exploration, rather than how much can we cut from space exploration.

Professor Stephen Hawking, celebrated expert on the cosmological theories of gravity and black holes, believes that traveling into space is the only way humans will be able to survive in the long-term. He has said, "Life on Earth is at the ever-increasing risk of being wiped out by a disaster such as sudden global warming, nuclear war, a genetically engineered virus or other dangers ... I think the human race has no future if it doesn't go into space." Another of his famous quotes reiterates his position that we need to get off the planet relatively soon. "I don't think the human race will survive the next 1,000 years unless we spread into space."

To answer all four of your questions: no, NASA is not shortsighted, it is extremely relevant, and it is not loosing its edge. The shuttles are already past their projected lifespan. NASA was evaluating future manned vehicles when W ordered them to proceed with the Constellation project. Then he started slashing the budget. The folk at NASA did the best they could, but Constellation was rapidly falling way behind schedule. You probably noticed a huge turnover in NASA leadership about then.

President Obama then ordered a panel to evaluate the Constellation program and all other NASA projects. The result was that Constellation was killed off, the many other space and and atmospheric projects were renewed, and a new directive to *carefully* plan the next manned program was undertaken. The President also gave NASA a roughly 10% funding boost, reversing several years of cuts at the hands of W.

It really sounds like the only part of NASA that you are aware of were the manned missions. NASA does research into anything that flies, or is above the ground, in the entire universe. Have you forgotten about the Hubble telescope? Did you know that there is a bigger one under construction right now? Did you know that all modern aircraft are designed using data from NASA research? The link below is a good starting point for your lack of NASA knowledge, and will explain all of the various fields of study, and the reasons for the recent decisions.

The reason NASA hasn't shared this with anyone is its completely inaccurate. ISON is not coming straight at us - didn't all the crap around 12/21 last year wise people up to the idiocy of spreading trash? What new info do you want - its still a long way away. At its closest approach, it will pass Earth at about 0.429 AU. That is almost half the distance from the Earth to the sun, or about 64 MILLION kilometers. Hardly "coming close to us". Hardly "coming straight at us". Its fine if you want to panic over nothing, but there are very uneducated people that will read your incorrect question and think its real. Then we have another group of scared people that don't even know what they are scared of or that its the result of one uninformed question. NASA isn't planning anything, since ISON will be almost as far from us as Venus - that is a LONG way away. What would you like NASA to plan - a party maybe...?

The shuttle was a terrible mistake.

NASA did much better work before they got sidetracked for political reasons into the shuttle business. It seemed like a good idea at the time, especially to the bean counters in Congress, but it deflected NASA's resources into projects with little or no scientific value. The really important things NASA has done, the Apollo Moon landings, interplanetary probes, and Mars rovers, have had absolutely nothing to do with the shuttle program. The only really useful thing the shuttle has done has been to place the Hubble Space Telescope in orbit and service it from time to time.

(to answerer with snappy answer)

Are you ignorant or just stupid?there's so much possibilities in space... also I assume you know eventually our earth will be unhabitable. We need to at least show some ambition and get into space and secure our place in the univerese. What we can get out of it? Hello, Helium-3. The fuel of the future. No radiation, no pollutants. But where is it? SPACE. It's worth a buttload here on earth. Oh and the survival of our species, but what does that matter?

And my answer, I thought manned flights by NASA are out til 2015. Seems like a mistake but as funds are dwindling it seems to be the only option. What I cant understand is why Obama wants to kill constellation program. That would make NASA irrelevant. Might as well kiss our influence goodbye. The ESA, China, and Russia will capitalize on NASA's downfall and get structures on the moon while we sit here and do nothing.

NASA does what congress and the President tell them to do. It's not NASA that has no replacement manned vehicle, it is the US congress that killed it.

So we should ask, is the US congress relevant in the 21st century? Has congress lost its edge?

Nasa does not have the fund they require to develop their vehicles.

Who cares about going into space, either for a two-week orbit, or a trip to the ISS?

Seriously, please list five important things that we have discovered through the last fifty years of being in space? We've discovered things down here on the *surface* such as new metal, fuels, computers, manufacturing techniques... what do we discover in space? That spiders get confused when they spin webs? That flames extinguish themselves? WOW -- what a shock.

If we need to blow $20 million to send somebody to the ISS, fine. There's no reason to send anyone into space, period. Everything can be done quite efficiently by remote. The Space Shuttle was right for its time, and it did what we needed it to do. But the Moon, Mars, Space Station? Totally unnecessary wastes of money.

It doesn't make NASA irrelevant, it just means that manned spaceflight is irrelevant.

We're supposed to have colonies on the moon by now. The future just ain't what it used to be. :(