There wasn’t much worth taking pictures of at the conference in Vegas this past weekend, but Misuzu Onuki is always worth taking a picture of, and when she’s with her space fashions, it’s worth posting. The one on the left is a wedding dress, with wires in it to make the fringes “float” up as they would in weightlessness.
The Space Foundation has put their new white paper on line. Released at the conference this weekend (and summarized by Leonard David), it calls for cancelling Block I of the CEV (the one that’s designed to go to ISS), and using the funds to increase COTS funding, and restore aeronautics and space science that has been cut over the past couple years.
I should note that I haven’t been blogging much this week because I’m busy reviewing and rewriting requirements and verification statements for CEV Block I…
[Wednesday update]
There are a lot of reader comments over at NASA Watch.
Here’s an upbeat article in the local paper about this past weekend’s space conference in Las Vegas.
If the devil was smart, of course, he
Michael Huang says that humans are scientifically useless. Taylor Dinerman says that (despite the uselessness of humans) solar physics is important (for those concerned with such things, ignore the demonic nature of the link URL). And Jeff writes about Bob Bigelow’s excellent rodeo adventure. (Other good stuff there as well, wander around the site.)
Michael Huang says that humans are scientifically useless. Taylor Dinerman says that (despite the uselessness of humans) solar physics is important (for those concerned with such things, ignore the demonic nature of the link URL). And Jeff writes about Bob Bigelow’s excellent rodeo adventure. (Other good stuff there as well, wander around the site.)
Michael Huang says that humans are scientifically useless. Taylor Dinerman says that (despite the uselessness of humans) solar physics is important (for those concerned with such things, ignore the demonic nature of the link URL). And Jeff writes about Bob Bigelow’s excellent rodeo adventure. (Other good stuff there as well, wander around the site.)
It’s a sad commentary on public debate that this has to be done over and over again, but Jeff Jacoby dismantles (once again) the imbecilic “Chicken Hawk” “argument:”
“Chicken hawk” isn’t an argument. It is a slur — a dishonest and incoherent slur. It is dishonest because those who invoke it don’t really mean what they imply — that only those with combat experience have the moral authority or the necessary understanding to advocate military force. After all, US foreign policy would be more hawkish, not less, if decisions about war and peace were left up to members of the armed forces. Soldiers tend to be politically conservative, hard-nosed about national security, and confident that American arms make the world safer and freer. On the question of Iraq — stay-the-course or bring-the-troops-home? — I would be willing to trust their judgment. Would Cindy Sheehan and Howard Dean?
While I was driving back from Vegas, Alan Boyle was writing a more coherent article about my post on Extraterrestrial Copulatory Activities. But then, he’s a pro.
But I have to say, I thought that blog sweeps week was over.
Oh, and in case you haven’t inferred it (I suspect that most of my readers are smart enough to have done so) I’m back in LA.
Tumlinson thanking people who put the conference together, and expressing his honor at being part of a conference of “doers.” Seeking feedback on future conferences. There is a dream in this room that we all hold–an incredible future for humanity, that we can all participate in, and paint that future in the stars. There’s a dream outside, and they want it too, but they don’t know that they don’t know. They would rather have that future than one in which Israel and Hezbollah are bombing each other. Sees a future of space colonies, in which we can have a Hezbollah space colony. Horizon narrows if we stay on earth, and widens if we move into space.
Back to regular blogging now. Well, after I drive back to LA…
[Update, back in LA]
If I don’t put quote marks around words, one shouldn’t assume that they are literal quotes. When I type these things, I’m typing as fast as I can, and doing as much gist gathering as possible. Sometimes I’m mistaken (I often don’t even know what I’ve typed until I go back and read it later–there seems to be a direct short between my ears and the keyboard, with little time for processing in the brain (not that my feeble brain would be able to do much with it anyway)).
In addition, it’s quite churlish to jump on extemporaneous speeches. But then, one has to consider the source.