As Glenn notes, I’m old enough to have known her decades ago when she was Martin. I saw her for the first time since the sex change a year ago at the New Space conference in San Jose. Anyway, a fascinating profile of her.
There’s a good report on the Bezos/Bruno announcement over at The Space Review.
I haven’t read the article yet, but this looks like a big breakthrough, space elevators or not.
Is it time to stop worrying about contaminating it?
As I’ve often said, wannabe Mars colonists’ biggest fear should be the discovery of indigenous life there.
Eyewitnesses are a good thing. And if you believe Neil deGrasse Tyson is your lord and savior, his eyewitness testimony is of course sufficient for verifying, for instance, that George W. Bush quote.
But what about those of us who are not in the Tyson faith-based community? Are we “anti-intellectuals” to not trust in his unverified claims? I suppose that will be the continued approach by many in the media, some folks in the Wikipedia community (whose trust in Tyson puts the most devout religious piety to absolute shame), and the other fanboys.
I’ve never been as impressed with him as those who consider themselves my intellectual superiors have been demanding, but wow, he really is a piece of work.
[Update a while later]
Tyson claims to be a man of science who follows the evidence where it leads. The evidence here clearly shows Tyson screwed up. Whether knowingly or not, he regularly repeated a false account in order to cast aspersions on another public figure. The only proper thing to do is recant and apologize. That is what a person of integrity does.
I won’t be holding my breath.
I didn’t link it at the time, but he had an interesting Q&A on Reddit the other day.
I haven’t read it yet, but this looks like an interesting paper, from Cato.
How it made England the most violent country in Europe.
He’s posted a brief but complimentary review of the book (it’s buried deep in the post, after his lengthy discussion of his computer tech upgrades):
Safe Is Not An Option, by Rand Simberg is a reliability expert’s look at the space program. The book is discussed at length on its own web site. Those interested in the space program should read it: the book is quite critical of current space policies. It has endorsements from both astronauts and space policy analysts.
His general thesis is that NASA’s obsession, born of the days when “ours always blow up” and brought back with a vengeance by the Challenger disaster, is eliminating all human risk from spaceflight. That doesn’t work and the obsession is a huge obstacle to progress. There will always be risks, and we will always have heroes.
Simberg is an aerospace engineer with considerable experience and his analyses of various space incidents such as the Challenger Disaster are spot on, which is to say, I agree with them. Recommended.
Not being a gamer (and/or part of that community) I haven’t really been paying attention to this, but it appears to be pretty ugly. Unsurprisingly, it’s driven by leftist “journalists.”
A new technique to cure it.
I had a bout with it last summer on my left heel. I bought some orthotics at the drug store, and it went away after a few weeks, but if it recurs, I’ll try this.
The sad thing about this article at The Onion is that it could almost be true.
Some thoughts on the demonization of innovation. Sadly, from both sides of the aisle. It brings to mind the stupid attacks on Newt, by Romney and others, when he proposed a bold space policy.
How much payload could they throw into orbit? Maybe up to half a million
tonnespounds at a time.
Not with my money, I hope.
The Salk Institute may have found the on/off switch. This could have implications for both life extension and cancer treatment.
Just how badly Fox screwed it up.
(Paid Lockmart flack) Loren Thompson weighs in.
It’s actually the least hacktastic piece I’ve ever seen from him, except he doesn’t seem to realize that Atlas V alrady requiers “cryogenic handling” because LOX.
A new report from NASA that looks like it could be interesting. Haven’t read yet, though.
Is it being overhyped?
I fearlessly predict that, as with any other experience, some will be underwhelmed, and others will have their expectations exceeded.
In related news, tired of waiting, and fearing that they won’t get to the (arbitrary) von Karman line, some Virgin Galactic customers are demanding refunds.
[Update a few minutes later]
Richard Branson’s credibility is collapsing in the media.
Jeff Foust has the story on last week’s commercial space announcements.
Eric Berger has Part 4 of his series up now. It’s about New Space, and NASA’s wary relationship with it. It seems like he’ll have plenty for a book by the time he finishes.
Over at National Review. I obviously take issue with this:
Boeing has walked away with the biggest share ($4.2 billion) of the money, as its design was further along than that of the SpaceX proposal and, in the opinion of NASA’s leadership, has the best chance of meeting the schedule.
I’ve sent them a response. If they don’t run it, I’ll do it myself at Ricochet.
[Update a while later]
OK, my response is up at The Corner.
I’m reading it now. It starts out with a nice brief history of space stations in general and of the ISS itself. Apparently it says that commercial crew will cost more than Soyuz. I want to see the basis of that statement.
[Update a while later]
“Although the risks involved in space exploration are apparent and subject to mitigation,
NASA cannot fully eliminate them.”
Someone should write a book about that. Oh, wait.
Boeing sounds a little defensive.