Slashdot Mirror


NASA Public-Affairs Appointee Resigns in Disgrace

belmolis writes "George C. Deutsch, who tried to muzzle top NASA climate scientist James Hansen and ordered NASA web designers to add the word 'theory' to every mention of the Big Bang, has resigned. The New York Times reports that NASA declines to discuss the reasons for his resignation, but that it came the same day that Texas A&M University, from which Deutsch claimed on his resume to have graduated, revealed that he had attended the university but did not complete his degree." The New York Times reports it today, but as of yesterday, it was the Times that had unquestioningly passed along the falsehood of Deutsch's graduation, and it was the blog Scientific Activist whose investigation revealed he'd left before graduating to work on the Bush reelection campaign. For more on the 24-year-old political appointee's interesting viewpoints, see World O' Crap; on Monday, we covered the anger over his attempts to squelch science -- something that, sadly, Jim Hansen has gotten used to.

17 of 698 comments (clear)

  1. Jim Henson spins in his grave by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 5, Funny

    He never would have thought that he would be on the receiving end of a puppeteer's hand.

  2. Could be a win-win... by SnapShot · · Score: 5, Funny

    This could be a win-win situation. NASA has an opening for a job to be filled by a Republican crony. Michael Brown is unemployed. Looks like a natural fit! Give that man a call!

    --
    Waltz, nymph, for quick jigs vex Bud.
  3. What you people don't understand.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    ....is that he could have graduated from college in theory!

    1. Re:What you people don't understand.... by AndroidCat · · Score: 5, Funny

      And that's just one side's opinion. We have to present opinions from both sides for a fair and balanced viewpoint. A bunch of lefty darwinist university administrators have a theory that says that he doesn't have a degree, and a hard-working young man says he does. Who are you going to believe?

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  4. Cronyism doesn't work by digitaldc · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Let this be a perfect example of why cronyism is not a good practice.

    Now that this guy is found out to be a fraud, it begs the question as to how many other people are holding positions that they neither deserve nor are qualified to hold?
    And how many more qualified individuals were passed over because of cronyism?

    The US Government should do a resume audit to find out who actually went to college and worked where they say they did.
    But, of course, this will never happen.

    --
    He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
  5. Re:Good News and Bad News by CaymanIslandCarpedie · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'd just read the article below before seeing this as well.

    86 Evangelical Leaders Join to Fight Global Warming

    Could this actually mean that well intentioned christians are actually beginning to crawl out from under the thumb of the right-wing extremists like Dobson, Robertson, Bush, etc?

    I know this is only a small beginning and may be offering false hope, but at least its better than the complete lack of any hope for American socieity I'd been feeling recently.

    --
    "reality has a well-known liberal bias" - Steven Colbert
  6. "He did a heckuva job!" by sg3000 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Let's recap for those at home keeping score.

    MIchael Brown, the guy Bush picked to head FEMA, had no experience doing disaster recovery, having been fired from his previous job as commissioner of the International Arabian Horse Assocation. However, Bush appointed him because he was the roommate of the college roommate of Joe Allbaugh, President Bush's 2000 campaign manager and Brown's predecessor at FEMA.

    Next, he nominated to the Supreme Court his personal lawyer Harriet Miers who had absolutely no judicial experience. Luckily she didn't get her "up or down" vote due to a Republican backlash (but probably for the wrong reasons).

    And now we find that Bush appointed to NASA a 24-year old journalism major who dropped out of college but had all the qualifications of someone who worked on his campaign. And the guy was censoring real scientists!

    This problem of Bush cronyism goes much further than just giving plum jobs to to one's friends. These types of appointments are dangerous to our democracy because they can do real damage (as we saw in Brown's case). The fundamental problem is Bush and his ilk value loyalty more than experience or expertise; they value faith more than facts.

    --
    Insert simplistic political, ideological, or personal proselytization here.
    1. Re:"He did a heckuva job!" by SnapShot · · Score: 5, Informative

      Don't forget:

      Bolten as U.N. Ambassador.

      Ellen Sauerbrey as (recess appointment to) Assistant Secretary of State for Population, Refugees and Migration ($700M budget).

      Melvin Sembler, youth cult leader, appointed to Amabassador to Italy.

      --
      Waltz, nymph, for quick jigs vex Bud.
    2. Re:"He did a heckuva job!" by damsa · · Score: 5, Funny

      Considering that the Bush campaign won in 2004 with all sorts of problems. I'd say anyone working on that campaign is qualified for any PR positions in any company or government agency.

  7. What's going on? by Fiachra06 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This guy was able to hold a prominent position in the government? Only a day ago we were discussing how this guy was trying to influence NASA's output for a political end and now we find that the people who put him in the job weren't smart enough to do a background check. If you've ever been in poltics this is Lesson #1. Before you put someone in front of a camera to represent you, you make sure of their job credientials.
    It's bad enough that a 24 year old was trying to tell NASA what to do but he never even graduated college. Whoever gave him that job should be fired along with him.

    On a more personal note, Serves you right you dozy eejit.

  8. More cronyism, what the hell? by cerebud · · Score: 5, Informative

    I can't believe this administration hired some young kid to this position (well, I can but...). Besides the Michael Brown/FEMA disaster, there's this shocking bit (from Al Franken's latest): And then there was Scott Erwin, twenty-one, a former intern for Dick Cheney and Tom DeLay, who didn't need a job because he was still in college. Erwin marveled to the University of Richmond newletter that "in one week I went from chatting on the quad, eating in the Heilman Dining Center and attending ODK [Omicron Delta Kappa] meetings to being briefed in the Pentagon, flying in a C-130 military plane from Kuwait City to Baghdad and living in one of Saddam's many palaces." Erwin soon landed a gig as the top Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) official managing the finances of Iraq's civilian security forces -- fire units, customs, border patrols, and police. What a great job! Almost as much fun as his previous favorite job, which he told the Richmond Times-Dispatch was "my time as an ice cream truck driver." Erwin was one of the six youngsters given control of Iraq's $13 billion budget. ... CPA Inspector General Stuart Bowen concluded that no less than $8.8 billion went unaccounted for ...

  9. Resume by TheZax · · Score: 5, Funny

    I guess he should have added the word theory after Texas A&M everywhere on his resume.

    --

    JWall: GUI client for IPTables
  10. OOOHH I know! by BitterAndDrunk · · Score: 5, Insightful
    "Now that this guy is found out to be a fraud, it begs the question as to how many other people are holding positions that they neither deserve nor are qualified to hold? "

    Let's start with the President! *ducks*

    --
    You better watch out, there may be dogs about . . .
  11. Re:The Big Bang by DreamerFi · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's not the word "theory" you're looking for.

    Every time a Christian, Muslim or Jew speaks of anything to do with their religion, they must use the phrase "ancient tribal myth" in the same sentence.

  12. Re:Good News and Bad News by hey! · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Every time I hear someone say, "But it's only a theory, not a fact" I cringe and then immediately ask them if they have a problem with the Theory of Electromagnetism or the Theory of General Relativity since they too are "just theories" and not facts. The usual response is a blank stare as their mind tries to not assplode from having to defend such a ridiculous statement.

    You're in good company. Lord Macaulay in his 1841 speech to parliament on the issue of copyright extension had to deal with exactly this misunderstanding of what a "theory" is:

    My honourable and learned friend talks very contemptuously of those who are led away by the theory that monopoly makes things dear. That monopoly makes things dear is certainly a theory, as all the great truths which have been established by the experience of all ages and nations, and which are taken for granted in all reasonings, may be said to be theories. It is a theory in the same sense in which it is a theory that day and night follow each other, that lead is heavier than water, that bread nourishes, that arsenic poisons, that alcohol intoxicates.


    Always happy to plug one of my favorite writers. Macaulay's riposte probably works better than yours because he uses more homely examples.

    If I had to put the missing point in a nutshell, I'd do it this way: in science, not all theories are true, but all truths are theories. Of course it's a bit of an overstatement, in that one can certainly talk about an individual fact in isolation. But as soon as you try to connect facts, you have a theory.

    Of course religion has its theories as well, which are called "doctrines". For example you have the doctrine of original sin, and the doctrine of substitutionary atonement, which I believe any fundamentalist should be familiar with. These are, within a certain scope "testable", in the sense they can be compared to scriptural sources. The difference between a doctrine and a theory is the ultimate test, the foundation upon which all other tests reside.

    In religion, this is mystical experience. The Christian experiences the Bible as a manifestation of God's grace and love, and therefore accepts it as authoritative. In science the foundation is sensory experience.

    The reason then that many thoughtful religious people reject fundamentalism is that by confusing science and religion, you are in a sense denying grace itself. Fundamentalism is often mixed up with mystical movements like pentacostalism; indeed many individuals are both. But these are inconsistent. Fundamentalism is a form of pseudo-rationalism.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  13. Re:Just one apparatchik -- there are others by hey! · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Deutsch is only a minor (and obvious) part of a larger problem with the NASA public-affairs branch.

    But he represents a more fundamental problem: the way we govern our country is broken. Given that, it's not surprising that the government is dysfunctional in the realm of space science. It's dsyfunctional period.

    Look, the guy's 24 years old and he gets a political appointment? Now prove to me this country isn't being run by an aristocracy. It used to be connected people got their kids internships, or made congressional pages. They didn't get them policy level poliltical appointments.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  14. Re:Can we please... by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Insightful
    ...stop calling a 24 year old a kid? I have a friend who insists on calling anyone 10 years younger than him a kid, so at this point 30 years olds are "kids." Fuck, that's annoying.

    You lose the luxury of being considered "just a kid" at age 18. Period.

    You know -- at an agency like NASA which presumably has a large number of career scientists who have spent decades in their field (some of whom have spent over a decade on a single project like Stardust) -- a 24-year old, politically appointed, non-college graduate who tries to put Bush's political spin on science doesn't deserve anything better than kid. And, in fact, probably deserves worse.

    A grossly underqualified person with no real world experience telling people many years his senior and way more qualified they need to call the Big Bang a theory (and whatever else he did) doesn't deserve anything but contempt and scorn.

    Compared to what can only be called 'elder statesmen' of science, this guy is a kid. In this sense, 'kid' is used in the diminutive to refer to someone who is new to a field and doesn't have a lot of experience.

    Heck, rookie quarterbacks get referred to as 'kid', even if they're in their early 20's.
    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.