NASA (properly) slams DIRECT 2.0

[Andrew]

Keith Cowing over at NASAWatch has a copy of NASA's 70 page presentation that pokes holes in each and every one of the DIRECT myths. Kudos for him getting it online. Here's the link to download the .pdf:

http://images.spaceref.com/news/2008/Direct.analysis.pdf

The white paper on the issue is here:

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=28514

I'd ask what a DIRECT proponent thinks about this, but what's the point?

-Andrew

[JimMcDade]

I read those presentations this morning.

You are correct. You can't argue against willful ignorance. The classic delusional disputationist works from the premise that he doesn't have to respond to facts and figures. Emotional investment in a bad idea leads to the mind-lock of passion and prejudice. This faulty thought process has little to do with the intelligence or educational level of the victim.

[Rick]

I think its over.

[Andrew]

Nope, not over yet, of course.

Now the DIRECT mob is starting to pull together numbers that suggest NASA has used incorrect thrust vector and lift capacity data to (perhaps deliberately) put DIRECT in a bad light.

Numbers within numbers: the DIRECT 2.0 legacy.

At some point they need to realize that if Ares didn't work that the businesses involved would be leaping to DIRECT. Indeed, let's assume for a moment that Ares is going to price itself out of existance in the middle of the next decade. Why would companies be in favor of an ultimate dollar loss? Unlike other so-called "economic analysis" from the DIRECT team...simply put, they wouldn't.

-Andrew