Tuesday, July 13, 2010

For all the non-believers!

I can go into deep detail about NASA vs. NOAA, but I won't waste my time writing about it. I will just show you. Here is the budget for NASA for 2010 (after Obama's NASA budget cuts):
Link to NASA Budget summary document
http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/344612main_Agency_Summary_Final_updates_5_6_09_R2.pdf

Here is the budget for NOAA:



Link to NOAA budget summary:
http://www.osec.doc.gov/bmi/budget/10BIB/Comparison%20of%20ATB%20estimate%20and%20program%20change.pdf


Also, if quantitative information isn't enough. Here is my main man Colbert:

4 comments:

Harrison Kim said...

Robert Ballard offers an interesting opinion on why space is more explored than the oceans. I wonder if he actually believes that or if he said it just because he was on the Colbert Report.

Also, aside from the numbers, I think space is much more prevalent in popular culture, like movies and literature.

Jennifer said...

Other thoughts?? Rudy, thanks for finding some support for your argument...

Audi said...

I think that the difference between funding is mostly based on the materials used throughout the research. And this is also only about money.

I don't read or hear anything about space anymore but a lot about the oceans because of the speculation of the glaciers and sea levels, plus the oil spill.

Jim Tantillo said...

so THAT'S why lobsters are red . . . I had no idea.

great interview.