ProjectDv2 t1_j2ubr4p wrote on January 4, 2023 at 12:18 AM

Reply to comment by [deleted] in NASA planetary science budget remains under stress by Lolbitable

How is your comment more relevant, or relevant at all, to the post or his comment? He didn't say anything about the DoD or its entire budget. He said the U.S. Navy (only one part of the Department of Defense) spends more money maintaining decommissioned ships from WWII, than NASA's entire budget. Of course the entire DoD budget will be higher than NASA's, that's a no-brainer. But more is spent maintaining obsolete warships that do not, and very likely never will again, see active service, than on NASA.

[deleted] t1_j2ugall wrote on January 4, 2023 at 12:50 AM

[deleted]

ProjectDv2 t1_j2ugk52 wrote on January 4, 2023 at 12:51 AM

That didn't even address the substance of my comment, let alone his. You're changing the scope of his comment to make your argument. That's not how it works.

pimpy543 t1_j2vymcx wrote on January 4, 2023 at 9:03 AM

Your right, their just talking to talk.

ProjectDv2 t1_j2w2djq wrote on January 4, 2023 at 9:54 AM

And making bad arguments while doing it.

[deleted] t1_j2uh120 wrote on January 4, 2023 at 12:55 AM

[deleted]

ProjectDv2 t1_j2ui4ef wrote on January 4, 2023 at 1:02 AM

No, it's just not relevant. You're bringing up the entire Department of Defense budget, he's talking about a single project from a single arm of the DoD. You're changing the scope of his comment well beyond what it actually said.

[deleted] t1_j2vnmdg wrote on January 4, 2023 at 6:45 AM

[deleted]

ProjectDv2 t1_j2w2bgq wrote on January 4, 2023 at 9:53 AM

>Reminder, DoD still owns GPS, is half of SpaceX’s launch demand (which helps pays for the other half); SpaceX would go under without DoD demand), and NASA utilizes DoD’s TDRSS (communication). Among other things.

Ok, you're right. You brought up the DoD at all, and several unrelated projects, none of which had anything to do with his comment on a single project of a single branch of the armed forces that falls under the DoD. I'm still right, you changed the scope of his comment which isn't how this works.

>Furthermore as much or as little as Europe allocates to defense, the same is true for ESA, when compared to NASA.

You brought up the entire EUROPEAN defense budget, which is even more off-base. Forgive my confusion. In completely missing his point, you created a whole marsh of "wtf is he going on about" that let details overlap in my head. Sucks to suck, I guess.

Real cute trying to imply I'm a sock puppet account, though. Bonus points for pulling an easily disproved deflection out of your ass.