Star Wars

obama is like bush... he doesn't like science unless it says what he wants it to say

Read it again - the guy at NASA is mad because they are "asking too many questions".

Ask yourself why we are scrapping the Shuttle before we have an alternative ready to fly. We're going to have to rely on the Russians for a few years; think that is a good idea or good planning by NASA (or Bush)?

How did NASA forget how to go to the moon? Or is it that they just like reinventing the wheel? I hope Ares pans out soon. Anyway, given Mike Griffin's vast career and educational background versus that of any of the ego-driven stuffed shirt yes men riding Obama's coattails, hmm... Well, who do you think is more qualified to make decisions on NASA matters?

Considering the anti-Griffin slant of this article, I wonder if Ned Potter was the target of Griffin's "Desperate Housewives" quote.

I have worked with NASA as a contractor and I can you that there needs to be stricter oversight of that organization when it comes to budget priorities and decisions.

Oh please, the guy has proven himself to be an egotistical jerk who has more invested in using NASA as a platform for his own legacy than he is interested in studying Science. Let's go over a list of that legacy;

In 2004 Griffin gave an address to congress stating that his mission as the head of NASA would be human settlement of the solar system and that he thinks "no greater purpose is possible".

Unfortunately that means NASA's budget for key scientific studies has been cut in the name of that focus.

In 2007 to the ire of NASA's own climate change scientists:
"I guess I would ask which human beings — where and when — are to be accorded the privilege of deciding that this particular climate that we have right here today, right now is the best climate for all other human beings. I think that's a rather arrogant position for people to take."

James Hansen Nasa's top climate change scientist (featured in "An Inconvenient Truth") was censored by NASA in 2005 for stating that climate change was reaching an irreversible tipping point.

NASA under Griffin has been criticized by congress since 2005 for cutting key climate change studies. Last year a key phrase was quietly cut from Nasa's missions statement "to understand and protect our home planet"

After making a promise in 2006 that he would not shift ANY spending away from other scientific research into manned space-flight, he cut spending on other space research programs by 25%, funneling that money into the manned-space program.

The list goes on. He's an egomaniacal, utopian idealogue who has been single-mindedly focused on his one goal. He is lashing out because he realizes that under a more practical administration he will be taken to task for his current excesses and some of that money will be moved back into needed programs. He clearly values "his vision" over his job. So let him keep his vision and we'll give his job to someone a bit more steady.

The types of questions Obama is asking is above his pay grade. That was his answer when Rick Warren asked Obama when he thought human life began to have rights.

Ed, NASA didn't "forget" how to get to the moon. Some time ago, they destroyed all the plans and drawings for the Saturn V rocket that got them there. How's that for arrogance? Now, certain body parts are caught in a vise, and they're going to be hard-pressed to get to the moon again. Current plans are rapidly proving to be awfully ambitious and expensive. I sure hope someone can get them pointed in thr right direction. As stated before, "Those with the knowledge have no voice, and those with the voice have no knowledge. I don't think this is a particularly good time to have to depend on the Russians.

I don't know, compared to the shuttles, the Ares rocket is pretty lame. With all of the concepts floated around out there I was sure expecting something better than a re-make of Apollo. Personally, I'd rather just keep the shuttles over this thing. The shuttles were the right idea with some problems. Fix the problems and spin a second generation shuttle with the ability to be scaled up for moon travel.

Griffin is defending Ares because it's his baby, he designed a very similar rocket when he was at John Hopkins, when he came to NASA and Ares was on the drawing board he took it under his wing and is defending it against all comers. That's not the right way to run an agency. You need someone who will listen to all ideas, not just his own ideas.
He won't last long...

christine
Just because he realized that Hansen is a crazed fanatic you think he's wrong? Hansen just helped criminals in england get out of jail by his testimony in a UK court.

has anyone ever cosidered what it is like to be told to lay down plans, spend 4 to 8 year doing them then be told to laydown new plans over and over.
Maybe the guy is thinking, crap, here it come again.
Personally I think we should build a new improved fleet of shuttles and the rocket. Both give us everything we need.
Also, I would retire two shuttles in space, bind them together at the wheel wells (they can take off with no wheels) and use them as your ship to the moon. You would have two cargo bays, room for 14 people and would not have to leave anything behind. One bay could hold the cable for lowering you materials to the moons surface. The moon is not like earth with a magnetic field, so you dont have to worry about frying your cable and the cable does not have to be that thick. One ton (2000lbs) weighs 25lbs on the moons surface and zero in orbit. Gosh, a good nylon string could hold 25lbs. Why does NASA insist on overdoing everything instead of being creative. I would rather see the shuttles retired to space than gutted and planted in the ground at NASA. They could have a new life bulding our first home on the moon and it could be done in less than a year. Two of them can hold plenty of fuel for the trip. It would not be as angerous as a 60's style capsule.

First of all the Ares seems to be the solution of choice for a lot of top management at NASA and their contractors. An alternative to Ares has been proposed by quite a few NASA Engineers and contractors working on their own time that was based on prior work done on Shuttle C. This alternative which seems to infuriate NASA is known as DIRECT. I urge anyone interested to review the wikipedia entry on this item. It proposes to bring a new system online three years earlier than Ares with less of an impact on the contractor manufacturing and support workforce and base.

NASA needs to get back into the business of listening to its engineers about what is feasible or safe or affordable. Please review the report on the Columbia disaster to learn about the haughtiness demonstrated by management towards their engineers.

To quote Homer Simpson: "You and I are being led by people that are no smarter than you or I"

David, that goes double for the Challenger disaster, too, back in 1986. They were warned by their engineers about the low temperatures, but for the sake of politics, went ahead with the launch.

Probably mad because the person asking the questions is truly unqualified.

A former "assistant administrator" is hardly a person of scientific renown.

Tra la la
NAILED

Hate to say it, but it sounds like Griffin needs to go. Science which is offended by "too many questions" is not science anymore: it is religion.

Huh? What do you mean lower materials to the surface of the moon. You do realize any spacecraft in orbit around the moon has to be in motion right? You cant just hover in one place. Unless your talking about some kind of geosynchronous orbit. Even then I doubt very seriously that there wouldn't be some kind of drift..

Posted by: Quietman | Dec 11, 2008 8:35:08 PM

Personally I think we should build a new improved fleet of shuttles and the rocket. Both give us everything we need.
Also, I would retire two shuttles in space, bind them together at the wheel wells (they can take off with no wheels) and use them as your ship to the moon. You would have two cargo bays, room for 14 people and would not have to leave anything behind. One bay could hold the cable for lowering you materials to the moons surface. The moon is not like earth with a magnetic field, so you dont have to worry about frying your cable and the cable does not have to be that thick. One ton (2000lbs) weighs 25lbs on the moons surface and zero in orbit. Gosh, a good nylon string could hold 25lbs. Why does NASA insist on overdoing everything instead of being creative. I would rather see the shuttles retired to space than gutted and planted in the ground at NASA. They could have a new life bulding our first home on the moon and it could be done in less than a year. Two of them can hold plenty of fuel for the trip. It would not be as angerous as a 60's style capsule.

The guys got to go. That's how they kill people in NASA.

1. NASA had been going along just fine under President Bush. Sorry it bored the media so much that they did not see fit to report it, but, of course, that was a Bush success wasn't it. They would not report on that... ever.

2. Enter that boot-lipped two term state senator who is paranoid about President Bush and what does he do? He appoints another wannabe to head a blue-chip agency. Her priority is to make sure everyone knows her title over and above all else.

3. Michael Griffin has shown himself to be beyond competent and worth listening to re NASA. So, why is this wannabe coming in and making waves where none need exist? Put differently, completely screw-up NASA, too.

Well, you other half of America, you made your bed, now lie in it for the next four years. The other forty- seven million of us will be watching you bumble your way through on-the-job training.

Time to close NASA down and get down to earth.