It’s been 61 years now since that event upended U.S. space policy. It’s worth (re)reading a piece I wrote a few years ago at The New Atlantis, while we’re waiting for my most recent one to come on line. Sadly, it holds up pretty well, and I would make the same policy recommendations today.
Ford’s story is falling apart, and she is bereft of credibility at this point.
She was not well served by the Democrats, but Democrats never treat people well. They threw her into the breach, and I’m sure they consider her expendable.
How bad has the media bias been? So bad that even Morning Joe is calling them out on it.
[Update early afternoon]
Jonah Goldberg: You idiot reporters are making it worse. Or better, depending on your point of view. If this results in a red wave, I’ll thank them.
About a year ago, I started writing an essay comparing and contrasting Bezos’s versus Musk’s visions for humanity in space. As is often the case, it expanded into a history of space visions in general, and how we’re finally returning to the old ones, after the tragic detour of Apollo. It’s out in the current issue, but unfortunately, isn’t yet available on line. I expect it will be in a few weeks or less, though.
[Update a few minutes later]
This is sort of a space issue. There is a piece by Bob Zubrin laying out his concept for Moon Direct, bypassing what he calls the space toll booth (Gateway), and another by Micah Meadowcroft on how Mars will disappoint.
It will affect our innards.
I’d note that the main technology we need to deal with this is affordable transportation to allow adequate shielding.
A fraud is exposed, but it’s a much larger problem:
Data dredging is fairly common in health research, and especially in studies involving food. It is one reason contradictory nutrition headlines seem to be the norm: One week coffee, cheese and red wine are found to be protective against heart disease and cancer, and the next week a new crop of studies pronounce that they cause it. Marion Nestle, a professor of nutrition, food studies and public health at New York University, said that many researchers are under enormous pressure to churn out papers. One recent analysis found that thousands of scientists publish a paper every five days.
I liked this:
“P-hacking is a really serious problem,” said Dr. Ivan Oransky, a co-founder of Retraction Watch, who teaches medical journalism at New York University. “Not to be overly dramatic, but in some ways it throws into question the very statistical basis of what we’re reading as science journalists and as the public.”
You don’t say.
It goes far beyond nutrition. A lot of drug research is based on this sort of thing as well, including the statin scam.
She refused to turn her therapy notes, which are key evidence, to the Judiciary Committee:
Now, I totally understand why someone would not want to turn over therapist records that undoubtedly discuss intimate details of one’s life. But if you are in the process of derailing a Supreme Court nominee based on otherwise unsubstantiated allegations of sexual misconduct thirty-six years ago, and in that process giving the nominee a reputation as a rapist, it seems to me you have the moral obligation to either turn over all relevant evidence, or withdraw your allegation. In the absence of that evidence and any corroboration beyond her say-so, if I were a Senator I would ignore the allegations.
Also, they would be part of a serious FBI investigation.
The story has fallen apart, and now they’re saying he lied about drinking beer.
[Update later morning]
Why sexual-assault survivors should be furious at the Democrats.
[Update a few minutes later]
This reminds me of the 90s when, after making progress against sexual harassment in the workplace, the Democrats and feminists threw it all overboard in order to defend Bill Clinton. In this case, they just destroyed the #MeToo movement.
Thoughts from Jonah Goldberg on the continued descent into madness in DC. As usual, I am in complete agreement.
This circus is the ultimate culmination of it.
We have someone who has been investigated by the FBI six times, and somehow, they never stumbled over any evidence of him drugging and raping women. Either they’re too incompetent to continue to exist as an investigatory body, or this is all bullshit.
In his Fox News interview, he described how these smears are affecting his and his family’s life, seemingly sincerely. So we have two theories that fit the facts: He is sincere and innocent, or he is a sociopath who has been fooling people for decades by merely seeming like a kind, upright man of the highest probity while having a secret life of being a drunken rapist.
Guess which way I’m going with both theories?
Just take the vote. And I hope there’s a huge backlash against Democrats at the polls in a few weeks.
[Update a couple minutes later]
“She’s not credible. Not at all.”
Yes, while in college, she attended high-school parties at which she was aware that the boys were drugging the girls and gang raping them, but she personally avoided drinking anything, and didn’t warn any of the girls. And she’s totally honest. That’s the best the Democrats have.
[Friday-afternoon update, after the hearing on Thursday]
Jim Treacher: I believe she believes this happened.
So do I, or at least I’m willing to believe it. As he notes, the Republicans screwed up by allowing this be about lying, and credibility. The fact that she believes it happened, of course, does not mean that it happened; memory is a funny thing, and she’s had lots of therapy and encouragement from Democrats to nourish the belief that it was Kavanaugh.
"I believe her claims that I did this. I'm sure she believes that I did. She is mistaken." https://t.co/bJ0eTrc8ut
— Rand Simberg (@Rand_Simberg) September 28, 2018
Take a roll call; it’s important to know where senators stand.
[Update a while later]
Yes, the Republicans shouldn’t have delayed the vote.
Ian Fichtenbaum has an op-ed at Space News describing the need to make space activities like other activities. I agree with it. A few years ago, I sat on a panel at Space Access discussing the need to “impedance match” launch with LEO operations, and decouple the two. This is the future.
[Update a while later]
Yes, I understand the confusion about my use of those seemingly contradictory terms, but I’m not using them literally. By “impedance match” I mean providing an interface between the launch system and orbital transportation systems (and space assembly), rather than having the launch system do the whole job of delivering an assembled satellite. This also decouples the launch system, in terms of schedule, from the orbital activities.
[Update a few minutes later]
Meanwhile, with regard to activity on the Hill, Keith Cowing comments about the state of NASA.
Another article on how NASA is changing for the 21st century. I’m a little skeptical about this:
In the next decade, a typical mission could go something like this: NASA astronauts board a SpaceX Big Falcon Rocket (BFR) along with commercial astronauts and a few wealthy tourists. The rocket stops at the new space hotel circling the globe to drop off the visitors and the NASA astronauts spend a few hours there filming an advertisement and lending their endorsement to the privately owned “microgravity resort.”
From there, the commercial astronauts continue on to service the Lockheed-Martin lunar gateway, a space station in orbit around the moon that functions as a sort of truck stop for traffic between Earth and the moon. The NASA astronauts journey on to the lunar surface to continue building the agency’s new outpost there, where both SpaceX and competitor Blue Origin already have permanent landing pads and the latter provides meals prepared by the only off-planet Whole Foods in the galaxy.
I don’t think the Gateway exists in this timeline. And of course, Bill Nye kicks the stuffing out of the usual straw man:
“It is important to keep in mind that all the money spent in space is really spent on Earth,” Bill Nye, celebrity “Science Guy” and CEO of the nonprofit advocacy and outreach group The Planetary Society, said via email.
It’s only important to keep that in mind for idiots who imagine that we are literally shipping currency into space. I’ve never run into such a person. Of course the money is spent on earth. The issue is how effectively it’s spent, and much of NASA’s budget, particularly for human spaceflight, is wasted.
Then there’s this:
So what happens if BFR beats SLS to launch and also winds up being more economical and practical? Will NASA be forced to discard over a decade’s worth of rocket development to go with the commercial alternative?
“The fact that we’ve got hardware in the factory, to me, says a lot,” said Rob Chambers, director of human spaceflight strategy for Lockheed Martin, which isn’t involved with SLS, but is building the new Orion crew capsule for NASA that would fly atop it and has been involved with practically every robotic NASA mission to Mars.
Yes. It says that we’ve wasted a metric buttload of taxpayer money, and will continue to do so until it’s finally canceled.
It’s no surprise, but they finally admitted that they want the BE-4, because they don’t want to continue Atlas. But at least AJR got hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars in cost-plus contracts to develop an engine that no one wants to buy.