Novel Idea, but how long would it take to clean a contaminated site using this method. I see from the article that retreval of the precious metals from the plants still needs refining for what is the best way to seperate out the very tiny particles, little more than a few atoms clumped together.
I see from the side bar from the space.com rite that the commision basically rehashed the education needs and the sustaining of the vision again. The real stuff is in todays line up for propulsion, planetary science, robotics and from spacedev maker of spaceshipone.

Yea I gotta say that these commsions are getting a little redundant. I thought they were supposed to be laying out options and plans for how to best get the Moon-Mars initiative going. The discussion focused on how negative the public is about NASA. Well here's a news flash....do something! There are still 3 perfectly fine shuttles that we could be flying right now and yet they sit in storage waiting for the day that astronauts won't stub their toes anymore in a mission. Now they are saying that a March 2005 launch date is unrealistic. I remember when Columbia fell apart the families of the lost astrounauts were united in their belief that we must not stop, that the shuttle missions must go on. We are not doing them or their families any honor by sitting on our butts. There are millions of people around the world like myself that would train to fly on a shuttle mission even with a 10% chance of tragedy. In 113 missions, this foam fluke has happened once. Challenger shoudln't have been launched in sub-freezing temperatures and we haven't don it since. You make mistakes, take a BRIEF look at what went wrong, try not to do it again, and YOU MOVE ON.

With each passing day I'm more positive that we will never go back to the Moon or Mars with NASA. Frankly, they don't have the balls. I mean, a chunk of foam for godsake, has grounded our fleet! Mars is a harsh world with tons of possible accidents waiting to happen, and its millions of miles away. There is no way that this organization can put people on Mars if they can't fly perfectly good shuttles...

What is worst, is that it would seem to take an act of congress to get the tank design changed to one that did not require an outer foam casing.
I do not ever recall the Apollo ever having any foam issues with the Saturn V rocket of old.
I think another proplem has also resulted from the president's time line for shuttle retirement and from the Ciab saying that the shuttles need a recertification if they are to be used for more than that 2012 date. Space.com put as when they are retired we will be putting away a perfectly good orbitor. I would say that there is not p[oint of doing that since the investment is so high just to get them going again.

Zach: There is an article on the spacedaily site witht he caption of Shuttle-Derived Vehicle:
Shuttle-Derived Disaster that gets into the politics of a shuttle derivative and what are the benifits versus what are the draw backs.

Zach: spacedev James Benson is speaking at this time on the commission broadcast.

Shoot, I missed most of it, came in at the last 5 mins. Thanks! Im listening to it right now. Whats the link to spacedaily, I dont have that one.

Ok Harold I got it, lol, it was easier than i thought, I just typed it in =)

The planetary guy's are of the opinion that they would need a minimum number (10 or more )of sample returns before we should send man. Only if the surface were of no signs then they might do it in less.

Well I will miss the rest of the live show for the remainder of the days broadcast, Lots of family stuff to do today and for the entire weekend. It will probably be 2 weeks before the transcript and or the video files to be made available for viewing on the MoontoMars site. Then I will definetely watch the nuclear reactor segment and the final portion of this day that I will have missed.

Well, if I don't hear from you soon, thanks again Harold. take care of yourself man.

Have a good weekend yourself. I might get online during the evengings probably real late so have a good one until then.

Why is it that I needed to go to another site inorder to find out any on the comments that are submitted to this commission. I would have thought that the info would have been posted on their site..

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=14045

groups or catogorizes the responses into for the vision, against and undicided....

One can always write to the Governmental Leaders, at the State and National levels. This way, all individuals can express their thoughts and ideas for further support of the President on the exploration of the Moon and Mars. The future development of space technology consist of public support by letting the Leadership know of the interest and support. Write your congress and state government officials. Go to www.congress.org and write them about the need to develope space base technology, Lunar Scientific and Research facilities and colonies, and Martian Exploration and terraforming potential. The representatives will write you back.
There are university courses that teach nanotechnology related information. There are university courses that teach microbiology. The future society, one that is space-orientated, is achieve through educational systems and learning. Yet, the congress needs to know that the individuals want to explore and develop technology in space and terraforming projects on the Moon and Mars. Let your voice be heard, so funding allocations can occur for the development of these projects. Everyone can participate in this role by writing the Congress and asking them to support the President with these issues.
Harold, that is why the support pages mentioning the percentages is so important. Individuals are supporting the ideas of the President.
Those in favor of Moon colonies or Martian Terraforming for human habitat, need to write their congressinal leaders! I support scientific discovery, as an everyday person, in this way.

Ya the data is good and the fact that a higher level of education is a must to achieving the goal. But the data was not on the site that gets the comments and data is only as good as how as it is reported or catogorized.
The data I personnally would like to here more on belongs in the Idea of how to help them achieve the goal. Not about if you are for or against the SEI. I feel that most feel the way that they do due to the past preformance of NASA over the last 2 decades. That is the past let the past be the past. Unless there is a new agency to take the place of Nasa then just maybe we need to simply support Nasa's new efforts rather than trying to defeat them.