Mark Whittington is in a blind panic* over the prospect of Roland Emmerich directing The Foundation trilogy.
* See this post.
Mark Whittington is in a blind panic* over the prospect of Roland Emmerich directing The Foundation trilogy.
First time as tragedy, second time as tragedy again — Europe’s continuing estrangement from Israel:
I am standing in a queue waiting to buy a train ticket from London to Canterbury. A well-dressed lady standing behind me informs her friend that she “can’t wait till Israel disappears off the face of the earth.” What struck me was not her intense hostility to Israel but the mild-mannered, matter-of-fact tone with which she announced her wish for the annihilation of a nation. It seems that it is okay to condemn and demonize Israel. All of a sudden Israel has become an all-purpose target for a variety of disparate and confused causes. When I ask a group of Pakistani waiters sitting around a table in their restaurant why they “hate” Israel, they casually tell me that it is because Jews are their “religion’s enemy.” Those who are highly educated have their own pet prejudice. One of my young colleagues who teaches media studies in a London-based university was taken aback during a seminar discussion when some of her students insisted that since all the banks are owned by Jews, Israel was responsible for the current global financial crisis.
It’s looking like the 1930s again in more ways than one. Let’s hope it ends better this time.
Al Fansome has some numbers to show where the Obama administration puts space in terms of federal R&D priority (scroll down to the eleventh comment):
I reviewed the stimulus package for the science & tech agencies. I have listed them by order of amount received in the stimulus bill.
DOE receives $43.9 Billion (for energy related projects.)
NIH receives $4.6 Billion.
National Telecommunications & Information Administration receives $3.8 Billion.
NSF receives $2.5 Billion.
NOAA receives $1 Billion.
NASA receives $600 million.
NIST receives $500 million.
Now you may think “well at least NASA got more than somebody.”
But wait, the President’s budget request for NIST for FY2009 was $678 million.
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/budget_2009.htmThe NIST stimulus package of $500M is 74% of its FY2009 budget request.
FWIW,
– Al
PS — This is completely depressing.
I’m certainly not surprised. I keep telling people that civil space isn’t important. This is just more proof of that.
Which comes first, the car or the road?
“They’ve all looked at it from the perspective of how to build the car. We looked at it from the perspective of how to run an entire country without oil. You’ve got to put the infrastructure ahead of the cars.” The venture is coordinating with some car manufacturers who plan to create electric vehicles to ensure that the infrastructure will be utilized.
We have the same problem in space. No one is building vehicles designed to use gas stations in space because the gas stations don’t exist. No one is building the gas stations because there are no vehicles designed to use them. This is a place where government could lead by making it policy that this is the future of space transportation, and establishing standards (just as in the eighties, it was the flawed policy that everything would be flown on Shuttle, and that payloads had to meet its payload-integration requirements).
I’ve commented in the past (even recently) that risk estimates of continuing to fly the Shuttle are overblown. There are good arguments to retire the system, but the risk of losing the crew isn’t one of them, both because they aren’t as high as people are saying, and because losing another crew wouldn’t be the end of the world. As I’ve said repeatedly, if we’re not willing to risk human lives on spaceflight, then it’s probably not worth doing. Anyway, Dick Covey, former astronaut and head of USA, apparently agrees with me (at least about the risk numbers):
The often-quoted PRA numbers do not factor in the continuous improvement in the vehicle and operations — of which there have been numerous and significant changes — or the quality and performance of the team that makes it work.
PRA estimates alone should never be used to reach a go/no-go determination on flying one, two or 10 more missions. PRA is intended primarily to provide an analytical yardstick for making sound engineering decisions about the development of a system and whether incremental changes in a system would improve or degrade relative safety.
Applying statistical probability techniques to the space shuttle PRA number to determine the risk of flying multiple missions implies a randomness in safe shuttle operations that does not exist, and belies the real approach to risk identification and management that defines the current space shuttle program.
The shuttle currently operates at the highest level of safety in its history. It is not without risk, but that risk is better understood and mitigated now than at any time in shuttle history.
Absolutely. The Shuttle has never been safer than it is today. Mike Griffin has just been using the PRA numbers to scare Congress into retiring the system so he could free up the funds for the Scotty rocket.
And this nonsense about needing “recertification” (whatever that means — it was never “certified” in the first place) in 2010 is just that. The CAIB never really provided any basis for this date. It’s an arbitrary one that just happened to coincide with the planned completion of ISS, so it seemed like a good marker for the decision as to whether or not to continue to program. We don’t really know if the vehicles need an OMDP, or mini or nano OMDP. We would just have to continue to inspect as we fly.
The left has been pretending to support the war in Afghanistan ever since we went into Iraq, as a cudgel against the Bush administration. Obama himself played that game. Well, now that he’s got the keys to the White House, and the actual responsibility for foreign policy, what will he (and they) do?
Some thoughts from Joe Katzman. I agree with the commenter who said that ditching the plane safely wasn’t heroic — that was just doing his job. The heroism lay in risking his life to help get all the passengers off the plane.
Lileks discovers a useful Obama-related on-line survey.
Not for most people, but for James Lileks:
The page you requested could not be found. Many articles published on StarTribune.com remain on the site for a limited period of time.
Sadly, this is the future for many papers, many of them much better than that one…
[Via Instapundit]