Late Astronauts Fly In Space Without Medical Certificate

On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 11:28:52 -0800, "Peter Duniho"
wrote in
::

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
.. .
What is behind the bizarre practice of launching capsules containing
the burnt human remains of celebrities into space? Isn't this
ghoulish practice just a bit beneath the dignity of science?

Why should science and ceremony be mutually exclusive? Especially when the
ceremony is directed related to the science?

It seems to unenlightened, medieval and superstitious.

And finally, just what about this story invokes "science" anyway?

Although I couldn't find the reference, I heard on the News Hour
(PBS), that there will be ashes also flying on NASA's Pluto probe.

Who thinks of this stuff? Who approves it?

It seems to unenlightened, medieval and superstitious.

....as is any respect for the dead. No?

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 22:15:48 GMT, Jose
wrote in : :

It seems to unenlightened, medieval and superstitious.

...as is any respect for the dead. No?

I would characterize the service held when someone dies as an attempt
to bring closure to the trauma and sorrow felt by the deceased's
family and other survivors.

But launching someone's ashes into space on a government funded
mission seems inappropriate.

I would characterize the service held when someone dies as an attempt
to bring closure to the trauma and sorrow felt by the deceased's
family and other survivors.

But launching someone's ashes into space on a government funded
mission seems inappropriate.

There are different ways to bring closure, and different ways to honor
the dead. That =you= don't think one way is appropriate doesn't make
it, as you said earlier, "unenlightened, medieval and superstitious".

And honoring Gene Shoemaker (whom I happened to know personally and
professionally) in this way is most certainly =not= "unenlightened,
medieval and superstitious". He was a pioneer in the field of asteroid
studies, especially earth crossing asteroids, as well as a fine
planetary scientist and geologist. I would say that sending him to
Jupiter is appropriate, enlightened, and the highest honor".

Would that any of us would merit even close to the same.

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

I would say that sending him
to Jupiter is appropriate, enlightened, and the highest honor".

I would think a true scientist would have considered it a rather useless
payload which may have displaced a useful experiment (unless of course the
experiment was to examine the effects of interplanetary space travel on
ashes)

"JohnH" wrote in message
. ..
I would think a true scientist would have considered it a rather useless
payload which may have displaced a useful experiment

Why should a "true scientist" have absolutely no concept of subjective
pleasure? Should all "true scientists" refrain from ANY act that might be
construed as unproductive?

I would say that sending him
to Jupiter is appropriate, enlightened, and the highest honor".

I would think a true scientist would have considered it a rather useless
payload which may have displaced a useful experiment (unless of course the
experiment was to examine the effects of interplanetary space travel on
ashes)

My bet is someone sitting around said, we have a payload capability of 156
pounds, 3 ounces. The payload came in at 156 pounds and 2 ounces. They
then said (with family's permission) Let's put an ounce of Gene aboard.

There you have it. ;-}
--
Jim in NC

On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 18:35:42 -0500, "JohnH"
wrote in ::


I would say that sending him
to Jupiter is appropriate, enlightened, and the highest honor".

I would think a true scientist would have considered it a rather useless
payload which may have displaced a useful experiment (unless of course the
experiment was to examine the effects of interplanetary space travel on
ashes)


Ah! The voice of reason rises above the clamor of the superstitious
multitudes.

Don't forget, it is our tax dollars which enable this dubious assault
on rational behavior.

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
Ah! The voice of reason rises above the clamor of the superstitious
multitudes.

And yet, you have still failed to describe what is "superstitious" about the
whole thing. Odd. Frankly, calling something a name does not make it so,
any more than claiming Iraq has WMD makes it so. Surprising to see you
engage in the very tactics you railed against in the not-so-distant past.

Don't forget, it is our tax dollars which enable this dubious assault
on rational behavior.

So far, all you've posted information about is a commercial enterprise. Tax
dollars are no more used for that than they are for any number of other
components of our transportation infrastructure, including aviation.

Pete

"Jose" wrote in message
t...
[...]
And honoring Gene Shoemaker (whom I happened to know personally and
professionally)

Really? Cool!