Dennis Wingo says we need a courageous one. It’s a long read, that I haven’t read yet, but it looks interesting.
Category Archives: Business
The New Pentagon Procurement Structure
Aaron Mehta breaks it down. Not sure whether or not burying DARPA in the organization is a good idea.
NASA needs a reorganization, too, but space isn’t important enough to justify the political capital it would take to force it through Congress.
Universal Basic Income
Finland’s experiment doesn’t bode well for it.
Buzz And Mars
He calls for cyclers, which isn’t surprising, but he also calls out the waste of SLS and Orion, which is, a little.
Russian Sanctions
Rogozin is making new space threats (no trampolines this time).
All we need to do to end our dependence on the Russians is to stop thinking "Safety Is The Highest Priority." https://t.co/iGtd54u962
— SafeNotAnOption (@SafeNotAnOption) July 31, 2017
Lunar Cryonics
I accidentally started a Twitter conversation with Sandy Mazza as a result of this nice piece on markets being enabled by lower-cost launch, including space burial. I noted to her that it made no sense for the California Department of Public Health to be regulating it, and then mentioned that they shouldn’t have anything to do with cryonics, either. In the course of the discussion, I dug up an old piece I wrote for Cryonics Magazine back in 1990 (ctrl-F “Simberg” to find it). Given that things are finally looking promising for reducing cost of access to space in general, and likely the moon as well, I decided I’d resurrect it here. Note that I’ve been talking about the need for markets to drive down launch costs for three decades. Note also that it’s somewhat dated, in terms of its discussion of the NASP and American Rocket.
Acquisition At The Pentagon
It’s about to get an overhaul. NASA needs one, too, but Congress will never stand for it; insufficient opportunities for graft.
Space Policy Online
Marcia Smith’s excellent web site has gotten a nice makeover.
Robots
No, you cannot rape one.
Vegan Diets
Removing refined carbohydrates, such as sugar, flours, fruit juice, and cereals, makes ANY diet healthier. This is the most likely reason why plant-based diets appear healthier than meat-based diets in some clinical studies. All of the studies I’m aware of claiming that plant-based diets are superior to omnivorous diets suffer from the same tragic flaw. Researchers conducting these studies NEVER simply ask people to remove animal foods from their diet. They always change more than just that single variable—such as lowering fat content or adding exercise—and they always instruct people in the plant-based group to eliminate refined carbohydrates and processed foods. In almost every case, these special “plant-based” diets are then compared to a junky omnivorous diet loaded with sweets, baked goods and manufactured foodstuffs.
This is not a fair fight. How do we know whether it was the removal of the meat, refined carbs, industrially-produced oils, or artificial additives that was responsible for the benefits? I’ve engaged in countless social media conversations with plant-based diet experts in which I politely ask for scientific evidence that simply removing animal foods from the diet—without making any other changes—results in health benefits. None of them have ever been able to cite a single article for me.
The amount of junk science in nutrition studies is just appalling.