now that’s a shit-eating grin if i ever seen one!

i hope those astronauts make it back to earth safely.

As an interesting aside, I have had more than one person tell me that they thought the reason we had the first shuttle disaster is because God didn’t appreciate us sending flying ships up into his home. (No one’s ever said that to me about the more recent disaster – probably because I am now old enough that entertaining such mouth-breathers is no longer necessary to “respect my elders”)

But, considering the fact that such people are part of Bush’s “base”, I don’t think he has to care overmuch what happens with our space program. Anyone remember how we’re going to Mars because of his (completely non-existant) space initiatives? He doesn’t give a shit about good science at all. As such, he is emblematic of why the twenty first century is going to suck it hard for Americans.

You see, they need to send up the shuttles to service and supply the space station, and they need the space station to give the space shuttle a reason to go up.

After all, America has an unquenchable thirst for video of astronauts playing with zero-gravity water blobs…

Y’know, the depressing part of it to me is that space travel, sans all the extenuating circumstances that makes it so godawful boring and useless, is great. When I was born, it was maybe a year or so before the Challenger disaster, so I never really got to experience to elation that man had reached the moon, because really, as I grew up everyone just saw the space race as another gigantic failure. Hell, I have uncles who buy into the Moongate theory. But I just knew that I was gonna be part of the generation that did make it to outer space.

It’s sad when dreams die like this.

So, on one hand, I want to support things like a trip to Mars. I want space travel to become a consistent part of our daily lives. But on the other reality-based hand, I realize everyone in power right now is using NASA as a wag the tail distraction like they do everything else, and that NASA is being mishandled worse than the way the Russians abused their space program as everything started to tank.

It’s just one more thing I don’t want this administration to touch with their dirty grubby little fingers. So of course, they’re outright molesting it.

Speaking of major Bu$hCo fuckups- did anybody else notice this ?

Bounce not performing to spec? Time for a national tragedy.

Shuttle Launch to Go Ahead Despite Risk of ‘Catastrophe’

Replace “Shuttle Launch” with “Iraq War” and you’ll start to see a pattern forming.

Figures you guys would be so objectively pro-external fuel tank shedding some of its solid foam coating.

Replace “Shuttle Launch� with “Iraq War� and you’ll start to see a pattern forming.

same goes for the

a) war on terror
b) war on drugs
c) war on mexicans who cross our borders
d) war in afghanistan
e) war on the constitution
f) war on losing elections

wait. e) and f) is something they are actually winning!

hooray!

I can certainly understand Griffin’s decision. After all, back in the 1980s it was those pointy-headed engineers who got all upset about O-ring deformation due to cold soaking of the external boosters. Those guys whined and cried and made it sound like the damn shuttle would blow up.

Which, of course, it did.

And it was that same bunch of cry-baby engineers who spent 10 years trying to get NASA management to spend the money to improve the external tank insulation. They sent memos, gave presentations, and acted like the shuttle would break up on re-entry if it got hit with spray-on foam insulation.

Which, of course, it did.

So now, here’s this same group of pointy-headed engineers worrying about the same kind of problems. But Griffin and NASA management understand the situation far, far better than those engineers with their slide rules and computer programs. After all, who has the better track record here?

I agree with ya’, Patkin. Space exploration is just interesting as all get out. I used to love it when my dad’s National Geographics would come and I could look at all the space pictures and stuff like that. Unfortunately, We’ve got a lot of stuff to worry about here on this orb right now. But I would like to see us one day be able to go farther out, so I hope that this doesn’t get scrapped.

Well I better put on my flameproof suit before I talk…

Love ya guys here, but I disagree. There has NEVER been a safe shuttle launch, or any launch into space. They strap themselves to a big rocket! There is always a chance for damage!

Now before the last disaster, how many launches took place with the same possibilites of foam hitting the shuttle’s panels? A few. Now we know what to look for. As I have heard, they plan on looking at the shuttle in space (which is the safe trip of going to space… but hey it is still dangerous too) to see what damage is done, and to access the safety of landing (which is still dangerous, just like that takeoff).

I hate Bush too, but to tie NASA to him? If NASA really didn’t want to take off, they just wouldn’t take off. They are astronauts, not soldiers. They volunteer, because it has always had danger.

Nasa doesn’t want to stop space exploration… and if you want to stop the shuttle now, then what kind of vehicle would you approve? Any new vehicle would have TONS MORE DANGER issues than what we have now… because it will be untested.

Flame away… now! lol 😀

[…] Via Sadly, no we find a less friendly version of the story in which we learn that the democratic NASA ballox box has been stuffed by Bush appointee Dr. Michael Griffen: The head of the US space agency, Dr Michael Griffin, overruled warnings that there was a “relatively high” chance the shuttle’s external fuel tank could shed some of its solid foam coating when it launches on 1 July, carrying seven crew including Briton Piers Sellers, an Edinburgh University graduate. […] During a weekend meeting at NASA’s Kennedy Space Centre at Cape Canaveral, Florida, Dr Griffin gave the final nod for next month’s mission, despite what he called an “intensive and spirited exchange” with senior colleagues who recommended a “no-go”. “We have elected to take the risk,” he said. […]

Mark, the issue is not whether space travel is dangerous. Of course it is, and everyone involved knows it. But here we have a situation where there is a known danger — which has proven disastrous in the past — and the smart people at NASA are saying “Wait, you shouldn’t go ahead with this launch because it is very likely to happen again.” And the Bush-appointed administrator in charge is saying the equivalent of “Bring it on!”

Yes, they have a whole bunch of new sensors and cameras, so they will be able to figure out if the problem has occurred, and they can figure out then how to fix it… or they could hold off until they have figured out how to prevent the problem, or at least until the smart people say it’s OK to go anyway.

It’s not the danger, it’s the arrogance.

Pah. NASA (motto: We Found Life on Mars, Dammit, and Anyone Who Disagrees Is Insufficiently Imaginative”) has been a money-churning operation since the Apollo program ended, and the shuttle program, our nation’s premier celebration of 70s technology after EPCOT, is nothing more than Curtis LeMay in a Neil Armstrong mask, since the whole thing predates Photoshop. And we need manned spaceflight about as much as we need the technology to shrink Raquel Welch so she can jet-pack her way to your brain tumor.

I just can’t stand the media histrionics and blows to national identity every NASA disaster seems to occasion. I got fed up in the 80’s with people being sent to therapy for “Shuttle depression” after the Challenger disaster. I mean, there is something weird about personalising the pain of complete strangers to that extent.

On the topic of Griffin (from the 3rd link):

He received a bachelor’s degree in Physics from Johns Hopkins University; a master’s degree in Aerospace Science from Catholic University of America; a Ph.D. in Aerospace Engineering from the University of Maryland; a master’s degree in Electrical Engineering from the University of Southern California; a master’s degree in Applied Physics from Johns Hopkins University; a master’s degree in Business Administration from Loyola College; and a master’s degree in Civil Engineering from George Washington University.

Seven advanced degrees, including five Masters and a Ph.D? That’s bordering on credential porn.

That just ain’t right…

You go to launch with the shuttle you have, not the shuttle you want.

JACQUI GODDARD AT CAPE CANAVERAL
Any relation to Robert?

And I think Bushco would be just fine with the Shuttle crashing and burning. A surge of patriotism, a timely distraction and an end to the space program. What’s not to like?

Bigger picture:

1. Civilian space program (Kennedy legacy) collapses. Whoops, I guess government just doesn’t work.

2. Military space program (Reagan legacy) inherits the resources

3. Profit

I hate Bush too, but to tie NASA to him?

That’s like saying, “Well, it’s not Bush’s fault that Brownie fucked up during the aftermath of Katrina.” Griffin is a Bush appointee, which is exactly the same as saying “Griffin is an asshole Bush crony.” These people do not give a flying fuck about sending people to their deaths. Hey, Griffin, you’re so confident, why don’t YOU get on the fucking spaceship?

I’m having visions of this scenario playing out:

1. Science-y type people warn that space shuttle could blow up.
2. Space shuttle blows up.
3. Bush says “There was no way of anticipating the shuttle could have blown up.”
4. Astronauts wives demand investigation.
5. Coulter and right-wing attack poodles smear astronauts’ wives as unpatriotic.
6. “You’re doing a heckuva job, Griffy.”

Ummm…shrink wrapped Raquel Welch. Can I have one?

I hate to say it because I’d like to think that somehow there might be competent people we can put into government work, but this stupidity is hardly limited to Bush appointees. The “unrealistically optimistic management” problem was amply described by Richard Feynmen re: the Challenger disaster. From Personal observations on the reliability of the Shuttle

It appears that there are enormous differences of opinion as to the probability of a failure with loss of vehicle and of human life. The estimates range from roughly 1 in 100 to 1 in 100,000. The higher figures come from the working engineers, and the very low figures from management. What are the causes and consequences of this lack of agreement? Since 1 part in 100,000 would imply that one could put a Shuttle up each day for 300 years expecting to lose only one, we could properly ask “What is the cause of management’s fantastic faith in the machinery?”

If you’re really quiet, you can actually hear Richard Feynman spining in his grave.

Let me apoligize in advance for the utter non sequiter, and if this is old news, well, I aplolgize for interupting your corn flakes and tang. But I just discovered Fafblog
is back on the air, and I wanted to share this wonderful news with all mankind. We now return you to your NASA debate, already in progress…

mikey

If you’re really quiet, you can actually hear Richard Feynman spining in his grave.

Ah, yes, but is it integer spin or half-integer spin?

Mike Nilsen said,

June 19, 2006 at 20:06 ·
If you’re really quiet, you can actually hear Richard Feynman spining in his grave.

Ah, yes, but is it integer spin or half-integer spin?

BEST COMMENT IN HISTORY1!!!!!!111!!!one!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Is this the same guy who decided that every referance to the big bang must have “theory” after it?

Is this the same guy who decided that every referance to the big bang must have “theory� after it?

That was “Deutsch-bag” or “Heckuva-job Douchie.” (aka George Deutsch), who got fired for lying on his résumé

…sometimes I think if these goobers didn’t exist, we’d have to invent them.

“Sadly, No!: We’ll blame Bush for anything!”

Bounce not performing to spec? Time for a national tragedy

“Sadly, No!: Bush will blow up the space shuttle to improve his job approval numbers!”

…sometimes I think if these goobers didn’t exist, we’d have to invent them.
Maybe we can get the media version of Al Gore to invent them

Is it cynical to wonder whether something symbolic has been planned for July 4? You know, a symbolic gesture… or even a gestural symbol. Possibly involving the world’s largest flag unfurling in space, and astronauts called away from urgent work with zero-gravity water blobs for long enough to talk to Bush on the live link-up.

Some of us think that political deadlines should be arranged to fit the engineering, and not the other way around, but that’s reality-based thinking for you.

“And we need manned spaceflight about as much as we need the technology to shrink Raquel Welch so she can jet-pack her way to your brain tumor.”

Is that worth having a brain tumour for? Possibly a small benign one. It’s not like I’m using my brain at the moment.

Dammit, now I have the idea of a miniaturised Raquel Welch stuck in my head.

Gary Ruppert said,

June 19, 2006 at 22:14 · Edit

“Sadly, No!: We’ll blame Bush for anything!�

Gary, I love you, but how many disasters will it take before you guys start to connect the dots here?

Griffin was appointed because of his work on the ridiculous, laughable money-vortex of the SDI program — a pork project par excellence that nobody thinks can work, but that stirs up billions for contractors. He’s a rubber-stamper.

Griffin seems like a decent guy personally, but so does Brown in retrospect.

What are we, a banana republic? Everything we try to do fails spectacularly for what, mysterious reasons?

wha are repukes so damned ugly? just look at that photo of mike griffin. can you say oliy?

What are we, a banana republic?

Sadly, Yes!

Well, if it does blow up, I wish he could get charged with seven counts of manslaughter or something.

John

Bushbehindbars wondered “wha are repukes so damned ugly? just look at that photo of mike griffin. can you say oliy?”

Let’s be fair — that isn’t his real face. It looks more like a plastic surgeon’s brave attempt to rebuild a face after a tragic accident (possibly involving liquid oxygen and hydrazine and exploding cigars). Using a mixture of pork scratchings and left-over adipose tissue from Christopher Hitchens [but I repeat myself]. I’ve seen this kind of transplant before, and it isn’t a pretty sight — especially when the pork scratchings beging to reject the host.

Dammit, now I have the idea of a miniaturised Raquel Welch stuck in my head.

Actually, you have the idea of a miniaturised Raquel Welch stuck in your head stuck in your head.

I’ll shut up now.

Mike Nilsen said,

June 19, 2006 at 20:06

If you’re really quiet, you can actually hear Richard Feynman spining in his grave.

Ah, yes, but is it integer spin or half-integer spin?
————————————————-
“Angels, God, and good dead people are fermions. Only so many of them can
fit in heaven. The Pauli exclusion principle guarantees this.

“Bad dead people and Satan are bosons. Hell is where you will find a BE
condensate, with room for unlimited numbers of souls.

“According to supersymmetric theology, only on rare occasions is a fermion
transformed into a boson. Satan is the only example to date.”
— Benjamin Carter

The fact is the leftists are anti-O-ring.

If you’re really quiet, you can actually hear Richard Feynman spining in his grave.

If we can hook him and our founding fathers up to dynamos, we’d have a nifty solution to our energy woes.

The fact is the leftists are anti-O-ring.

Ha! I have an o-ring on, right now!!

What a nerd, yosef. You looked at space pictures in the Nat’l Geographic? HAHA I looked at brown titties.

There is an incredible amount of politics wrapped around the space shuttle. If the administrator always did what his safety administrator said the shuttle would likely never fly, and funding would be taken away. As it stands manned space travel is a dangerous business. If risking astronauts is the way to keep the project going then that’s the way it has to be. I’m sure every astronaut would agree.