Via Mark Whittington, an article in which he (as usual) takes false hope, with a misleading title: “China Aims to Put Man on Moon by 2020.”
But if you read the article, it’s clear that “China” has no such “aims.” The only person with such “aims” is the “deputy commander of the Chinese manned spaceflight program.” He himself makes clear in the paragraph following that this is not (yet) a national goal:
But the goal is subject to getting enough funds from the government, Hu said, explaining that the space program must fit in the larger scheme of the country’s overall development.
If Mike Griffin’s deputy said, “I think that in about fifteen years, we could have the capability to send humans to Jupiter,” would Mark then agree with the headline “US Aims To Put Man On Jupiter By 2020”? Would he say that there are “indications” that this is a US goal?
Well, given his apparent gullibility, perhaps he would.
[Monday morning update]
Mark amusingly (as usual) misses the point:
Of course landing a man on Jupiter and landing one on the Moon are exactly analogous. At least it seems Rand thinks so.
First of all, I didn’t say “land a man on Jupiter.” But then, reading comprehension has never been Mark’s strong suit, either, at least when it comes to reading me. But ignoring that (non-trivial) distinction, for the purpose of this discussion, they are in fact analogous. The point is that a statement of technological capability (and we could in fact send a man to Jupiter if we so chose in that time period, not that it would be a sensible thing to do) is not a statement of intent, or a declaration of a national goal. Even Mark might realize this, if he actually read the article he cites with such misplaced hope, and thinks about it a little.