Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
NASA It's funny.  Laugh. Space

ISS's Node 3 Might Be Named "Colbert" 276

Posted by kdawson
from the sure-he's-a-star-but dept.
Panzor writes "NASA is running a contest to name the new addition to the space station, Node 3. The polls are open until March 20. The selection that is getting the most votes is 'Suggest your own,' and the leading name besides the official four (Earthrise, Legacy, Serenity, and Venture) is 'Colbert.' Comedian Stephen Colbert suggested on the air that fans write in his name. On March 5th, his vote count passed that of Xenu and Colbert pronounced himself Scientology's 'Galactic Overlord.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

ISS's Node 3 Might Be Named "Colbert"

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Seriously? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Trent Hawkins (1093109) on Friday March 06, 2009 @12:44PM (#27092677)

    I don't suppose anyone takes these kinds of things seriously anymore... a LITTLE pride maybe? Funny, yeah. A good idea? Sorry, I don't think so.

    Why? Colbert gets to have a module named after him and NASA gets more free publicity then they could ever muster up on their own.
    It's win win.

  • Re:Seriously? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jhfry (829244) on Friday March 06, 2009 @12:55PM (#27092817)

    How is this a bad idea, and how does it show a lack of pride.

    Essentially, the entire process was created to generate media attention, otherwise the module would be given a sterile name, or just a number. In an age where NASA seems positively boring they must actively compete with reality TV and myspace/facebook for the attention of the public.

    I would be all for naming the module "FUCK" if it would make the public more interested in our space program; and I think Colbert encouraging the public to participate in an entertaining way can do nothing but good things for NASA. It helps make space fun again.

    Most societies have used entertainment to help keep important issues in the public interest. Even Rome had it's gladiators to help remind it's citizens that the country was still at war, without them the citizens would have lost interest and stopped backing the expansion.

    Seriously? Yes, and why should we be so serious all the time... let history reflect that our generation was both highly productive and capable of good spirited fun.

  • by wiredog (43288) on Friday March 06, 2009 @01:05PM (#27092951) Journal

    We know where the next "launch failure" is going. Michigan.

    It should be noted that Buddy [herald.com] is number 3. And a much cooler name than "Colbert". Or "Xenu" And much better than "Serenity".

  • no (Score:5, Insightful)

    by BitterAndDrunk (799378) on Friday March 06, 2009 @01:39PM (#27093425) Homepage Journal
    The sad part is his and the Daily Show's satire is more insightful than most legitimate news - that's a sad statement on society.

    Your "sad statment" is indicative that you're a humorless twat.

  • Re:weak (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Daravon (848487) on Friday March 06, 2009 @01:53PM (#27093623)

    In Scientology, Xenu is the bad buy.

  • Re:Serenity? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Nick Ives (317) on Friday March 06, 2009 @02:00PM (#27093719)

    Don't feed the AC trolls. We all know space western is one of the most interesting and under-used genres - Cowboy Bebop anyone?

  • Re:weak (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 06, 2009 @02:16PM (#27094011)

    They do. But remember that Xenu is the arch-nemesis of the story. It's like rooting for Emperor Palpatine in the Jedi religion or Satan in the Judeo-Christian religions. The easist way to troll a group is to root for the Big Bad.

  • by mprindle (198799) on Friday March 06, 2009 @02:19PM (#27094067)

    When I first glanced at the name, I saw Dilbert. Not sure if it's fitting, but the living spaces up there must be the side of cubicles or smaller. :)

  • Re:weak (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 06, 2009 @02:56PM (#27094763)

    Why does it suck?

    Do you believe that if someone else works on something very hard and puts a lot of time and money into it (something which you have put no time or effort into at all) and then takes the time to ask for your opinion on some small aspect, that your opinion should be somehow binding? That they are being rude, or even cheating you by not committing themselves to your whims?

    Good luck with that.

  • Re:no (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Nick Ives (317) on Friday March 06, 2009 @03:23PM (#27095267)

    Sorry, there is absolutely zero proof that it is more insightful. It sounds good, but that's it.

    Religious people once had this idea that "everything is for the best in this best of all possible worlds" as a way to justify all the horrible suffering that God allows, then Voltaire wrote Candide.

    Actually, the opposite is often true. Satire may work like a safety valve. People who discharge their pent-up emotions through satire rarely take their anger to the streets.

    Now who's making claims without evidence? In my (obviously personal) experience, all the best lefties I've met stage demos, organise campaigns and attend political comedy nights.

  • by LihTox (754597) on Friday March 06, 2009 @04:49PM (#27096981)

    Nixon was too liberal for the current GOP, although they appreciate his theories on executive power.

"In matters of principle, stand like a rock; in matters of taste, swim with the current." -- Thomas Jefferson

Working...