G+_George Kozi Posted March 13, 2015 Share Posted March 13, 2015 I tried to come up with a comment, but this kinda left me speechless. Originally shared by Sonny Mikeal WOW! Just...wow. http://www.newrepublic.com/article/121284/cruz-nasa-more-space-less-climate-change Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_William L. Weaver Posted March 13, 2015 Share Posted March 13, 2015 So, if NASA is studying Climate Change and NOAA is studying Climate Change, which government agency is charged with developing air-ships and space-ships? Answer: GoogleX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_William L. Weaver Posted March 13, 2015 Share Posted March 13, 2015 Matthew Mueller I'm optimistic that our level of technology now permits private industry to explore space. Perhaps NASA and all of its central command and control is incompatible with innovation and its a good thing it has been retired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_George Kozi Posted March 13, 2015 Author Share Posted March 13, 2015 so... who should develop and maintain the technology that's needed to study the Earth from orbit? Mind you, the same type of technology used in probes that look at other planets... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_William L. Weaver Posted March 13, 2015 Share Posted March 13, 2015 George Kozi I'm all for NASA having NOAA's mission, but it may be more efficient to combine the agencies to reduce overhead. I think Private Industry is better suited to exploring and colonizing space. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_George Kozi Posted March 13, 2015 Author Share Posted March 13, 2015 I'm just glad ESA is still free to do science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Lee Stoneman Posted March 13, 2015 Share Posted March 13, 2015 As an outside looking in on America it's clear that climate change deniers are one of two things (or both): greedy liars or fools. There are no other explanations. What amazes me most is that the American public don't seem to see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Jeff Stevens Posted March 13, 2015 Share Posted March 13, 2015 Not twit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Randy Hudson Posted March 13, 2015 Share Posted March 13, 2015 NASA's primary focus should be on exploring space, finding us another planet to destroy after we're done with earth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Jeff Stevens Posted March 13, 2015 Share Posted March 13, 2015 I think this thread would benefit from some more actual knowledge about why NASA does meteorological research. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_William L. Weaver Posted March 13, 2015 Share Posted March 13, 2015 Jeff Stevens Why does NASA do meteorological research? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Tony Marenno Posted March 13, 2015 Share Posted March 13, 2015 William L. Weaver my guess its the "Aeronautics" part of National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The name clearly states its not a space only agency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_William L. Weaver Posted March 13, 2015 Share Posted March 13, 2015 Tony Marenno I understand your answer and I'm not being confrontational. Aeronautics = "the science or practice of travel through the air." I was a research scientist under contract with the US Air Force, NASA, Boeing, and Lockheed through the 1990s... I value the study of Climate Change and demand clean air and water for myself and my family. I am questioning if a government agency charged with "the science or practice of travel through the air" and "the physical universe beyond the earth's atmosphere" has the appropriate tool set and expertise to study Climate Change. And I believe Senator Ted Cruz is asking the same question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Tony Marenno Posted March 13, 2015 Share Posted March 13, 2015 William L. Weaver Also NASA's original mission statement (altered in 2006) included the lines "to understand and protect the home planet". Climate research falls into this category. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Mark Cintula Posted March 13, 2015 Share Posted March 13, 2015 William L. Weaver Hello Weiland Yultani - Engineering Better Worlds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_William L. Weaver Posted March 14, 2015 Share Posted March 14, 2015 Tony Marenno Exactly. 2006 was the year that SpaceX was awarded their COTS contract to take over the US manned space program. I think we are saying the same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Dean Albach Posted March 14, 2015 Share Posted March 14, 2015 Climate change determines the deadline NASA has. We need to find a new home before the old one burns down since we will not be able to after. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Dave Trautman Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 William L. Weaver, has it not occurred to you that private companies will put all of the technological advantages currently enjoyed by the good ol' USA at risk if they were in charge of 'exploration' etc. Do you hate your country's government that much to risk losing the lead to China, Europe, Japan, Isreal and/or Russia? NASA has a host of responsibilities which are key to international cooperation in the sky. Take away their mandate to observe and coordinate climate research satellites and you leave your country at the mercy of those who would take over from there. Corporations are not known to share or play nice with each other. There is no natural law mandating a free market solution to everything. This internet thing we are sharing right now might never have gotten off the ground without the help of your much hated government. Where were those companies then? Mostly focused on past profit strategies. Lots of countries rely heavily on the data NASA is coordinating. Take that away (a la Sen. Cruz) and you risk a backlash in both economic terms and in credibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_William L. Weaver Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 Dave Trautman? Have you seen the video transcript of the exchange between Senator Ted Cruz and NASA Administrator General Charles Bolden? I have linked it below if you have not yet had a chance to view the source material used to write The New Republic column which is the subject of this post. Your comment concerns me in two (2) major ways. 1) You have accepted the quote from The New Republic that "His [Cruz] enthusiasm for space exploration is really just a lack of enthusiasm for understanding how humans affect the world." I certainly did not hear any of that language or sentiment in the video transcript. What you did read in The New Republic is Political Dogma that mandates scientific measurements and the analysis thereof to be the subject of opinion, consensus, and popular beliefs. Senator Cruz was asking about the lack of funding in the NASA budget for leadership and advocacy in the areas of aeronautics and space exploration. His point was not that soil moisture measurements are not critically important, but that young humans are inspired by rocket science and spaceships. If you are searching for anecdotal support of his position, perform a Google search on the phrases "It's not Hydrologic Science" vs. "It's not Rocket Science" to obtain a measure the importance of rocket science and space exploration on our culture. 2) I am extremely concerned by your aspersion that I am filled with hate. As a practicing, professional scientist, I have very often been accused of showing too little emotion. I see no evidence of my comments beginning to drift in the direction of hate speech. I assume that you are aware that the United States Space Station Freedom proposed by President Ronald Reagan in 1984 was eventually cancelled by the U.S. Congress in 1993 and replaced by Space Station Alpha (currently known as the International Space Station (ISS)). The ISS project is funded and supported by Brazil, Canada, Japan, Russia, United States, and the member nations of the European Space Agency; Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Romania, Spain, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom. Your suggestion that I suffer from xenophobia is as offensive as it is inaccurate. As President of EncycloMEDIA, Ltd., I am confused by your poor opinion of capitalism. The following image provides a brief list of the commercial companies that were under contract by NASA to develop technology for the Apollo Program. http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/SP-4205/app-f.html Aeronautics and Space Exploration is a dynamic ecosystem of governments, agencies, corporations, non-profits, advocacy groups, watchdog groups, and individuals. To claim that any member constituency is primarily evil undermines the entire endeavor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Randy Hudson Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 Constitutional Conservative Professor. I would not have thought it possible in this day and age. I salute you sir. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Dave Trautman Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 William L. Weaver, I will apologize profusely for suggesting you didn't understand the situation. You clearly do. I mixed some impressions of Sen. Cruz past behaviour and his rhetoric about "big government" with my remarks about whether NASA should remain in charge of coordinating Earth Science research and it was a mistake. I did not mean to suggest you hate people or hate science if that was how you read it. I was suggesting you might hate government, but you have clarified your point on that issue. You correctly pointed out how my remarks were a knee-jerk response to a dogmatic dispute about the value of science and I apologize also for this. I don't enjoy it when others do it and I am ashamed to find I have done it myself. I don't enjoy watching the dog-whistle politics of Mr. Cruz so it is unlikely I will watch the clip you linked to. But I do understand the slant of the article in the New Republic. My point remains the same. Without support of governments the business community is not inclined to push the envelope without a return on that investment. I believe all the companies you mentioned involved in the Apollo program got something in return for their contributions. I just can't see why the resources of NASA should not be directed toward understanding the planet's dynamic environment. I stand corrected and chastened by your response to my comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Uncle Joe (Uncle Joe Hi Posted March 22, 2015 Share Posted March 22, 2015 It's a matter of bastardizing NASA's mission to further political agendas. Remember that Obama redirected NASA to reach out to Muslims. So pushing them to help promote the climate change meme isn't surprising. Climate alarmists need the notion of man-made climate change to be pervasive. It's a leftist tactic that appears to work rather well when coupled with a media willing to use it's power to further such memes. Cultural shifts are what this is about. It's really just the left using every available means to solidify it's power. This is no different. Cruz has a point. On it's face, the article seeks to make him look like an out of touch kook. This is the media's job in this: quell dissent. The idea is if you can make skeptics look like extremists you can eventually use the power of culture to enforce cultural censorship (which I'd argue is all "hate speech" notions are). It's a machine that is running rough-shot over our nation right now. It will either push us to the far left or result in a rift deep enough to exact a division in this country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_William L. Weaver Posted March 22, 2015 Share Posted March 22, 2015 Joseph Polk Well said, my friend. Well said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts