There will probably be some reportage of yesterday’s hearing, but Anthony Watts has his written testimony.
[Update a while later]
Bishop Hill has the video of Mark shredding the climate fascists on the committee.
[Update a couple minutes later]
Here is the video: A State Ideology.
[Update a few minutes later]
Here’s the story from Michael Bastasch.
[Late-morning update]
Here’s some whining at The Hill by some idiot from Texas, who thinks that Judith Curry is a “denier.”
An interview with Jeff Greason, at Space.com.
(From a surprising source) let’s stop pretending that it works.
They can’t do that. It cuts the legs from under one of the primary weapons they use against critics of catastrophic anthropogenic climate change.
[Update a few minutes later]
Related: Senator Cruz’s climate hearing with Judith Curry, John Christie, Mark Steyn et all is today at noon PST. Get out the popcorn.
…are narcissistic, and mostly female.
But wait! I thought feminists told us that it’s women who are oppressed!
…but at what cost? My thoughts on the latest battle in Islam’s war with us.
Thoughts on Judith Curry, from Matthias Shapiro.
[Friday-morning update]
The post seems to have disappeared. I’ll ask him what the deal is.
NASA Watch has a draft of the NAC statement on LEO operations and ISS transition. It’s as though it’s posted from an alternate reality:
Even after a shift of focus to cis-lunar space and beyond has occurred, NASA may need to maintain some capability to get astronauts into low Earth orbit. If the Agency concludes that such a capability is necessary, it would be unwise to assume the existence of commercial demand for human access to LEO that may or may not materialize. Taking steps to encourage commercial activity in LEO may not be adequate to guarantee a successful transition.
So WTF is this supposed to mean? By NASA “maintaining some capability,” do they mean on a NASA owned/operated rocket? When Commercial Crew is operational (and there is zero reason to believe that won’t happen, regardless of how much Congress attempts to delay it with budget cuts), that will be how NASA gets its astronauts into LEO. Even in the very unlikely event that no commercial demand emerges, that capability will remain in place for as long as NASA wants to use it, at a much lower cost than NASA has ever gotten anyone into space. So can someone on the NAC explain to me what this word salad means? What are they proposing? Because if they’re proposing SLS/Orion, that’s economically insane.
This looks like an interesting (and likely very entertaining) Senate hearing:
Witnesses:
Dr. John Christy
Distinguished Professor of Atmospheric Science and Director of the Earth System Science Center, University of Alabama in HuntsvilleDr. Judith Curry
Chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Georgia Institute of TechnologyDr. William Happer
Cyrus Fogg Bracket Professor of Physics, Princeton UniversityMr. Mark Steyn
International Bestselling Author*Additional witnesses may be announced
Stock up on popcorn.
Comparing and contrasting NASA and private industry. I prefer the term “space transports” to RLVs, though.
“Oops, I joined a cult.”