6 thoughts on “NASA’s “Day Of Remembrance””

  3. Maybe picking one of the actual disaster dates would have looked like that disaster was more ‘important’ than the others. Picking a date in the middle would have looked like Apollo I was skipped. So, picking a date just before the start of NASA’s week of misery might have been seen as better. Of course, if this is true someone is thinking too hard about appearances.

  4. Commemorating it on the 27th makes sense since it was the first time astronauts were killed in their spacecraft. The 28th makes sense since it was the first time they were killed in flight.

    The 26th just seems kind of odd. Is it the last Thursday in January? 1/27/67 was a Friday. 1/28/86 was a Tuesday. 2/1/03 was a Saturday. So I don’t get it. Could it be another instance of Obama’s cluelessness, or thumbing his nose at the American people?

    1. “Could it be another instance of Obama’s cluelessness, or thumbing his nose at the American people?”

      Really? How does this even make sense? Obama is in sitting in the oval office saying to himself, “Today I’ll really stick it to ’em. I’ll commemorate the NASA tragedies on the wrong day. Ha Ha Ha. Kenya for the win!”

      How about this instead:

      “NASA’s Day of Remembrance was actually started after the Columbia accident,” agency spokesman Allard Beutel told Space.com. “By pure happenstance, the three high-profile accidents at NASA related to astronauts happened at relatively the same time of the year, separated by years, but all within a few days of each other. It was decided that NASA would put aside the last Thursday of January — whatever that date happens to be — to pay tribute.”

      http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46148857/ns/technology_and_science-space/t/nasa-its-day-honor-fallen-astronauts/#.TyMVasFE7ZA.link

      1. Thanks, I didn’t know that. It looks like I inadvertently guessed correctly. If the proclamation had mentioned that, it would have avoided confusion.

Comments are closed.