Slashdot Mirror
Ted Cruz To Oversee NASA and US Science Programs
romanval sends word that U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) will become the new chairman of the subcommittee that oversees NASA and government scientific research. Cruz has both spoken in favor of NASA and attempted to cut its budget, but he's most notable for his opposition to the science supporting climate change. From the article:
His vociferous opposition to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and his support of extreme budget cuts could spell trouble for NASA's less prominent programs, such as its own climate research and sophisticated supercomputers. His role on the front lines of the 2013 government shutdown, which critics say had lasting negative effects on public safety, NASA research and EPA scientists' ability to visit contaminated sites, also suggests at best a narrow focus on NASA's largest projects and at worst a disregard for agencies that require science funding.
This is what democracy is all about.
If this wasn't so sad, it'd be funny. NASA's new prime directive: find evidence that God created the Earth 6,000 years ago. :(
Why do we keep putting people who have a history of being enemies of the scientific community to the scientific subcommittees in Congress? This does nothing productive except give people like Jon Stewart more material.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
> Also, explain to this Canadian why NASA is researching climate.
Studying climate generally requires lobbing things into the sky.
That's covered by the ASA part of NASA.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
As most people don't realize that Muslims have contributed extensively to the sciences during the medieval age.
Space flight happens because we want to study things from space. NASA is the "host" for principal investigators who often work outside of NASA. In fact, a major NOAA installation was constructed right across the street from NASA - Goddard (in Greenbelt, MD) to allow closer interaction between the two because their missions are so closely aligned.
The aeronautical and aerospace research NASA does isn't in a vacuum; it's meant to ultimately serve a useful cause, and that includes studying the planet. It does do wind tunnel research; it does explore other planets; it does advance optics, and thermal management, and fluid flow, and all the myriad pieces which go into spaceflight and airborne hardware requirements. And much of it happens to flow down to terrestrial uses.
And this is more about Ted Cruz, who doesn't believe that they do anything useful, in charge of their mission. Imagine if they put Aunt Jemima in charge of the Canadian strategic maple syrup reserve. Yeah, it's that crazy.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
As most people don't realize that Muslims have contributed extensively to the sciences during the medieval age.
And so did the Catholic church. Between the two of them Muslim scholars and Catholic monks are pretty much single handedly responsible for salvaging much of the collective knowledge of the classical world.
That's the funny, yet totally brain-dead part of this anti-government argument. Rather than having citizens have input into the process, they would prefer that the 1% should simply own the process. Instead of trying to make America better, they are keen to make either smaller or private. How is a smaller and more privately run America better for the average American?
"Saving?" They didn't just save, they actively advanced. Who do you think was at the forefront of medical, technological, scientific, and mathematical research in the middle ages? Who was it that was actively trying to understand how nature worked, because they believed it to be the way to get closer to god?
weinersmith
The only reason I voted for President Obama twice is because as a moderate conservative I couldn't vote for either John McCain in 2008 and Mitt Romney in 2012 because they both pandered to the right wing extremists and made bad VP picks. Surprisingly, President Obama was the best moderate conservative that the Democrats ever nominated.
they make it work for the people that fund their campaigns
it's a false narrative: people believe government is an impediment
of course government and bureaucracy can screw things up, but lack of government is far worse, and a corrupt government that serves plutocracy is far, far worse
the idea should be to treat the sick patient that is government by removing the corruption. but too many morons think killing the patient is a viable option. weaken government and that simply means the power vacuum is filled by the very forces that are corrupting government. works for them: less effort to get what they want at your detriment
government is not the problem. corruption is. of course corruption will always be a problem. the idea is to minimize it. but currently in the usa, we have legalized corruption: revolving door employment between regulator and industry. corporations openly buying candidates in election campaign funding. these are our real problems: corruption. not government itself
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it