Open Letter: Save the James Webb Space Telescope

Blinded without science
Science • Views: 32,180

If you think the James Webb Space Telescope is exactly the kind of cutting-edge science the US government needs to support, here’s a page where you can add your authenticated signature to an open letter to Save the James Webb Space Telescope from the depredations of the anti-science right wing.

Dear Senators & Representatives,

On July 6, 2011, the Republican majority of the Commerce Justice Science (CJS) subcommittee of the Appropriations committee released its priorities for the FY2012 funding cycle and announced that they would be zeroing out, or cutting entirely, the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) program. The next day, the CJS committee approved the markup in an essentially unchanged form.�

We, the undersigned, call on responsible members of Congress to reverse this poor decision that contradicts recognized experts in the field and support American scientific research.

The cancellation of the JWST would be a major blow to both American scientific prestige the development of human knowledge, as the last two Decadal Surveys of experts in the field have called the JWST the most important project for astronomy of the 2000s and 2010s. �If this cancellation passes, basically Congress will be saying:

1) to the science community: It doesn’t matter how you want your money spent; we know what blue sky research is important better than you do.

2) to the public: We hope you enjoyed seeing all those Hubble images:
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
There won’t be any more pictures.

3) to the world: We no longer want to lead scientific research.

4) to parents/teachers: If you want to inspire the next generation to be interested in science, you will have to show them things we used to do instead of things we are doing.

5) to the taxpayer: In the name of spending less money we will specifically target a program already under way to cause money already spent to become wasted.

This isn’t about deficit reduction or whether or not to cut NASA’s budget or asking if you’re willing to spend a $1 putting the most awesome telescope ever designed into orbit, this is about whether or not Congress should specifically cut the ‘Number 1’ astronomy project of two decades, a project more visible to the American taxpayer than most of NASA’s other research, while funding many others that cutting would not result in the downsides enumerated above.

Granted, the program is significantly overbudget and delayed, as the Republican majority tersely noted when canceling the project. However, with the JWST nearly complete, canceling it now is an incredibly poor decision that does nothing to make up for the problems of the past or to reclaim money already invested in the future.�
You can track the progress through the Appropriations process here: thomas.loc.gov

As you can see by the blank spaces for CJS, we are in the very first step of the long process, but I encourage all JWST supporters to stay engaged throughout the entire process.

Join me in opposing the cancellation of the James Webb Space Telescope.

I close with the words of Kevin Marvel, Executive Officer of the American Astronomical Society:

“Obviously, this proposal from the House Appropriations Subcommittee for CJS is upsetting. The astronomy community knows the value of the JWST, recognizes that nearly all technical hurdles have been overcome and that a review of the program’s management, budget and completion plan is nearly complete. It is important to remember that the release of the House versions of the appropriations bills is just the first step in the lengthy appropriations process. For now, this termination is a proposal and one we should take seriously with the knowledge that making a few communications now to legislators will not be the end of a process, but merely the beginning. The outrage and upset the community is experiencing cannot be merely today or this week, we must ration our energy to effectively participate throughout the whole appropriations process.”

Sincerely yours,

Craig Montuori
Registered voter in Mountain View, California

Related

Jump to bottom

83 comments
1 jamesfirecat  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 6:32:55pm

“Granted, the program is significantly overbudget and delayed, as the Republican majority tersely noted when canceling the project. “

Didn’t stop the Bradly!

2 Douchecanoe and Ryan Too  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 6:33:48pm

Oh, but astronomy is just a useless science, like that stupid volcanology. What can looking at the stars teach us about anything USEFUL?/

3 Targetpractice  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 6:34:01pm

re: #1 jamesfirecat

“Granted, the program is significantly overbudget and delayed, as the Republican majority tersely noted when canceling the project. “

Didn’t stop the Bradly!

Or the F-22.
Or the V-22.
Or the M1 Abrams.
Or…well shit, I’ve got a rather long list ahead of me. We might be here awhile.

4 Kronocide  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 6:35:08pm

I’m sure energy industry subsidies could pay for the Webb.

5 albusteve  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 6:35:37pm

re: #3 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds

Or the F-22.
Or the V-22.
Or the M1 Abrams.
Or…well shit, I’ve got a rather long list ahead of me. We might be here awhile.

those are military projects, the Webb is not…I support the telescope but the two are not alike

6 Douchecanoe and Ryan Too  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 6:36:46pm

re: #5 albusteve

those are military projects, the Webb is not…I support the telescope but the two are not alike

When it comes to government projects, military or civilian doesn’t actually matter. Government projects are always over budget and behind schedule. Using those as criteria for cancellation would result in the cancellation of the entire federal government.

7 jamesfirecat  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 6:36:59pm

re: #3 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds

Or the F-22.
Or the V-22.
Or the M1 Abrams.
Or…well shit, I’ve got a rather long list ahead of me. We might be here awhile.

Fair enough… but the Bradley stands out to me because not only was it over budget but….

Well watch and weep for your tax dollars

If we kept financing the above monstrosity I see no reason to stop funding this thing….

8 Four More Tears  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 6:37:50pm

re: #7 jamesfirecat

Fair enough… but the Bradley stands out to me because not only was it over budget but…

Well watch and weep for your tax dollars

If we kept financing the above monstrosity I see no reason to stop funding this thing…

I loved that movie.

9 jamesfirecat  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 6:37:55pm

re: #5 albusteve

those are military projects, the Webb is not…I support the telescope but the two are not alike

Why should we tolerate mismanagement of funds from military projects but not civilian ones?

10 albusteve  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 6:41:06pm

re: #9 jamesfirecat

Why should we tolerate mismanagement of funds from military projects but not civilian ones?

I didn’t say we should did I?…military spending is not comparable to NASA spending…the interstate system was over budget too…sometimes budgets are irrelevant

11 jamesfirecat  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 6:41:38pm

re: #10 albusteve

I didn’t say we should did I?…military spending is not comparable to NASA spending…the interstate system was over budget too…sometimes budgets are irrelevant

Then explain to me in more detail WHY is military spending not comparable to NASA spending?

12 William Barnett-Lewis  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 6:42:40pm

re: #3 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds

Or the F-22.
Or the V-22.
Or the M1 Abrams.
Or…well shit, I’ve got a rather long list ahead of me. We might be here awhile.

The Abrams was actually a cheaper tank after the MBT-70 program imploded. That one was obscenely over budget and problem filled. The Abrams was a stellar success by comparison.

Just remember there are always exceptions that help prove the general rule.

13 William Barnett-Lewis  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 6:43:53pm

As for signing the open letter, done.

14 dell*nix  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 6:44:29pm

While I support the science, I do not like having to join a social network or permit access to my data if I am already a member of one.

I will just have to write my reps an email and a letter.

15 albusteve  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 6:47:08pm

re: #11 jamesfirecat

Then explain to me in more detail WHY is military spending not comparable to NASA spending?

the scope is dramatically larger with military R/D and involves far more waste and lobbying that lines the pockets of huge numbers of people…NASA is a direct expenditure into a govt agency almost entirely involved with research, with no profits to fight to the death over

16 jamesfirecat  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 6:49:28pm

re: #15 albusteve

the scope is dramatically larger with military R/D and involves far more waste and lobbying that lines the pockets of huge numbers of people…NASA is a direct expenditure into a govt agency almost entirely involved with research, with no profits to fight to the death over

Thank you for explaining your position and now I agree that it would be a mistake to equate military budget with NASA budget… and I also agree with you that this doesn’t mean we should cut the budget for the telescope.

17 Achilles Tang  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 6:53:00pm

I would sign (I posted a page on this a few days ago), except I don’t like all the “permissions” they want for my facebook info if I do.

18 albusteve  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 6:54:59pm

re: #16 jamesfirecat

Thank you for explaining your position and now I agree that it would be a mistake to equate military budget with NASA budget… and I also agree with you that this doesn’t mean we should cut the budget for the telescope.

completing the Webb is pocket change in the bigger picture…that’s what’s so infuriating to people…there is enough waste generated in 6 months of fed paperwork to build this thing…but the feds never look inward when it comes to cutting costs…it’s always some dork over there that pays bigtime…a cop, a teacher, some poor guy that needs a handout…they are elitist fatcats and that’s why I hate them

19 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 6:55:44pm

re: #2 thedopefishlives

Oh, but astronomy is just a useless science, like that stupid volcanology. What can looking at the stars teach us about anything USEFUL?/

Now exorcisms and the second coming, that’s some science we can get behind!

I bet the Webb telescope would still be on track if it were shaped like jesus

20 goddamnedfrank  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 6:57:33pm

It’s a little known fact that Voltron was completed two weeks early and came in under budget. The power of five mechanical lions is pretty awesome like that.

21 laZardo  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:05:42pm

I understand how weather-monitoring satellites are crucial, but the difference is they’re pointing inward, not outward. I remain serious when I ask exactly what the Hubble has given us and what benefits the JWST can give us assuming it’s launched.

22 albusteve  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:08:42pm

re: #21 laZardo

I understand how weather-monitoring satellites are crucial, but the difference is they’re pointing inward, not outward. I remain serious when I ask exactly what the Hubble has given us and what benefits the JWST can give us assuming it’s launched.

knowledge

23 laZardo  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:10:47pm

re: #22 albusteve

knowledge

about…

24 William Barnett-Lewis  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:11:58pm

re: #21 laZardo

I understand how weather-monitoring satellites are crucial, but the difference is they’re pointing inward, not outward. I remain serious when I ask exactly what the Hubble has given us and what benefits the JWST can give us assuming it’s launched.

It gives us this:

Image: 3-a-giant-hubble-mosaic-of-the-crab-nebula.jpg

25 albusteve  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:12:19pm

re: #23 laZardo

about…

the origins of the Sno Cone

26 Varek Raith  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:12:47pm

re: #23 laZardo

about…

[Link: www.nasa.gov…]

27 William Barnett-Lewis  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:12:56pm

re: #23 laZardo

about…

Life.

The Universe.

Everything.

42.

28 Achilles Tang  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:13:35pm

re: #21 laZardo

I understand how weather-monitoring satellites are crucial, but the difference is they’re pointing inward, not outward. I remain serious when I ask exactly what the Hubble has given us and what benefits the JWST can give us assuming it’s launched.

You are certainly consistent. Your problem is that you can only think inward.

29 goddamnedfrank  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:13:48pm

re: #21 laZardo

I understand how weather-monitoring satellites are crucial, but the difference is they’re pointing inward, not outward. I remain serious when I ask exactly what the Hubble has given us and what benefits the JWST can give us assuming it’s launched.

A better understanding of the beginning of the Universe, galaxy, star and planet formation. Hubble has significantly narrowed down the possible models proposed by theoretical physicists. Webb will narrow them down even further.

30 laZardo  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:14:08pm

re: #26 Varek Raith

That’s why I’ve suspected the only reason we’re looking outward is because we need a new planet to settle on when we inevitably screw this planet up before the Sun goes Red Giant on it.

31 ProBosniaLiberal  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:15:30pm

re: #23 laZardo

Various things.

We are humans. We explore things from near and afar. We are a curious species. Thus, this telescope.

There was a quote from Doctor Who in the Impossible Planet that’s pretty apt.

32 Achilles Tang  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:15:51pm

re: #30 laZardo

That’s why I’ve suspected the only reason we’re looking outward is because we need a new planet to settle on when we inevitably screw this planet up before the Sun goes Red Giant on it.

If you become a Mormon you won’t need Nasa for that. God already knows where the good ones are and if you are good you may get one all to yourself. All you have to do is die in good grace.

33 albusteve  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:16:24pm

re: #30 laZardo

That’s why I’ve suspected the only reason we’re looking outward is because we need a new planet to settle on when we inevitably screw this planet up before the Sun goes Red Giant on it.

I read that comic book too

34 Achilles Tang  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:17:12pm

re: #33 albusteve

I read that comic book too

Yeah, but do you quote it?

35 albusteve  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:17:42pm

re: #34 Naso Tang

Yeah, but do you quote it?

no, and Frank will be all over my ass

36 laZardo  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:19:20pm

re: #31 ProLifeLiberal

Various things.

We are humans. We explore things from near and afar. We are a curious species. Thus, this telescope.

There was a quote from Doctor Who in the Impossible Planet that’s pretty apt.

There are entire swaths of our oceans that remain unexplored. Surely a little expedition there wouldn’t exactly cause a mass extinction.

37 b_sharp  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:21:53pm

What is obvious to the Repubs and should be obvious to everyone is all worthwhile science has already been done and now is the time to use the existing science and the much newer and more useful pseudo-science to make money.

38 albusteve  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:23:54pm

re: #36 laZardo

There are entire swaths of our oceans that remain unexplored. Surely a little expedition there wouldn’t exactly cause a mass extinction.

mass extinction?…how does that relate?…
if you are talking about Eagles fans, then a mass extinction is appropriate

39 Mr Pancakes  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:27:05pm

re: #38 albusteve

mass extinction?…how does that relate?…
if you are talking about Eagles fans, then a mass extinction is appropriate

Appropriate, but not likely I’m afraid.

40 b_sharp  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:27:29pm

re: #36 laZardo

There are entire swaths of our oceans that remain unexplored. Surely a little expedition there wouldn’t exactly cause a mass extinction.

We already know what we are likely to find down there, although it is teeming with unique and interesting species they will all be based on the same DNA/RNA as surface species.

In space we may run across things that have no Earthly counterpart.

Besides, I still want my flying car.

41 Killgore Trout  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:28:03pm
They know that it is human nature to take up causes whereby a man may oppress his neighbor, no matter how unjustly. … Hence they have had no trouble in finding men who would preach the damnability and heresy of the new doctrine from the very pulpit…


- Galileo Galilei, 1615

42 albusteve  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:28:54pm

re: #39 Mr Pancakes

Appropriate, but not likely I’m afraid.

right, they are like cockroaches…
heh

43 b_sharp  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:30:07pm

re: #21 laZardo

I understand how weather-monitoring satellites are crucial, but the difference is they’re pointing inward, not outward. I remain serious when I ask exactly what the Hubble has given us and what benefits the JWST can give us assuming it’s launched.

Validation of physics not possible on Earth.

44 albusteve  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:30:55pm

re: #41 Killgore Trout

- Galileo Galilei, 1615

back to the pasture we go

45 Mr Pancakes  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:31:59pm

re: #41 Killgore Trout

- Galileo Galilei, 1615

They know that it is human nature to take up causes whereby a man may oppress his neighbor, no matter how unjustly. …

Are you talking about that fat lady that lives next to you?

46 b_sharp  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:32:00pm

re: #27 wlewisiii

Life.

The Universe.

Everything.

42.

Hmm. 42.

In time I shall return to my meditation on the energy released by 42.

47 ProBosniaLiberal  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:32:06pm

re: #40 b_sharp

Right now, Europa, Enceladus, and Titan are the front-runners in terms of possibility of life.

48 b_sharp  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:34:42pm

re: #47 ProLifeLiberal

Right now, Europa, Enceladus, and Titan are the front-runners in terms of possibility of life.

Liquid water and atmosphere. Good place to start.

49 austin_blue  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:36:13pm

re: #37 b_sharp

What is obvious to the Repubs and should be obvious to everyone is all worthwhile science has already been done and now is the time to use the existing science and the much newer and more useful pseudo-science to make money.

Harsh. Probably accurate, but harsh.

I am reminded that there was a push to close to the patent office in the early 1900’s because nothing more could be invented.

50 b_sharp  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:38:18pm

re: #19 WindUpBird

Now exorcisms and the second coming, that’s some science we can get behind!

I bet the Webb telescope would still be on track if it were shaped like jesus

Or a penis.

51 austin_blue  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:39:28pm

re: #50 b_sharp

Or a penis.

A Mighty Wind!

52 prairiefire  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:40:11pm

re: #50 b_sharp

Or a penis.

It seems a fake penis is still impossible for the medical community to come up with for trans gender men. Cherish yours, fellas.

53 b_sharp  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:41:57pm

re: #52 prairiefire

It seems a fake penis is still impossible for the medical community to come up with for trans gender men. Cherish yours, fellas.

I certainly will, next time I see it. I haven’t seen it for a while though…

54 albusteve  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:42:38pm

re: #52 prairiefire

It seems a fake penis is still impossible for the medical community to come up with for trans gender men. Cherish yours, fellas.

penis posters always have a grip

55 Mr Pancakes  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:43:09pm

re: #53 b_sharp

I certainly will, next time I see it. I haven’t seen it for a while though…

Always looked for a reason to post this one.

56 austin_blue  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:43:14pm

re: #53 b_sharp

I certainly will, next time I see it. I haven’t seen it for a while though…

It’s the hell of obesity. Or blindness.

57 austin_blue  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:44:35pm

re: #54 albusteve

penis posters always have a grip

Now that is just wrong. Penis posters? Eww…

58 b_sharp  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:45:16pm

re: #56 austin_blue

It’s the hell of obesity. Or blindness.

Or major shrinkage.

59 prairiefire  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:45:32pm

re: #57 austin_blue

Now that is just wrong. Penis posters? Eww…

That is. Technically advanced writing in the snow.

60 lostlakehiker  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:45:52pm

re: #11 jamesfirecat

Then explain to me in more detail WHY is military spending not comparable to NASA spending?

Military spending goes to things that are pretty well known how to do, with very rare exceptions, e.g. Manhattan project.

NASA spending goes to things that are often quite difficult. Part of what makes them difficult is that sometimes we don’t even know enough to know exactly how difficult it will be. You just have to put your head down and give it a try.

That’s how research is.

But this telescope has struggled through that phase. The hard part is done. Now, at last, we do know just how hard it will be, which is, harder than expected but doable.

NASA spending also goes to things that are chancy. We cannot say exactly what we’ll learn from the Webb. But then, we cannot say exactly how a war will go. We cannot say exactly how well a weapons system will perform, because the effective performance of the system will depend upon what the other side’s secret research is up to.

In the business world, money is spent from time to time on spec. Startups mostly fail. But startups are the life blood of an economy.

Research is like that too. A lot of life is like that. You never know how a baby will turn out.

Ben Franklin had it right, when asked of what use was it to know that “static” is made of the same stuff as lightning? His answer was, of what use is a newborn?

This telescope is a near term fetus. Let’s not abort it.

61 albusteve  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:47:21pm

re: #59 prairiefire

That is. Technically advanced writing in the snow.

there is a certain type of man that always has to mention a penis…not sure what you call them

62 b_sharp  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:48:19pm

re: #61 albusteve

there is a certain type of man that always has to mention a penis…not sure what you call them

You call them jealous.

63 Achilles Tang  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:53:42pm

re: #61 albusteve

there is a certain type of man that always has to mention a penis…not sure what you call them

correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t you go first?

64 albusteve  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 7:58:37pm

re: #63 Naso Tang

correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t you go first?

no…can you read?

65 Achilles Tang  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 8:01:01pm

re: #64 albusteve

no…can you read?

I guess only so far.

66 Hal_10000  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 8:02:07pm

One thing that we can not lose in this debate — the JWST money will *not* get plowed back into other programs. It’s disappearing. That means, overall, there is about a 25% cut in funding for astronomy. One in four astronomers will simply be out of work.

67 b_sharp  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 8:02:53pm

re: #65 Naso Tang

I guess only so far.

I started it.

68 Gus  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 8:06:28pm

re: #4 BigPapa

I’m sure energy industry subsidies could pay for the Webb.

Heck. We’ve already “given” Pakistan close to 20 billion in total aid. This includes bot economic and military aid.

69 Gus  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 8:14:23pm

This is infuriating to no end. Having watched the Apollo project get canceled before it’s scheduled end. Then the Superconducting Super Collider going unfinished. Seeing the end to the Space Shuttle program with no near earth space exploration in place to support the ISS.

70 b_sharp  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 8:16:39pm

re: #69 Gus 802

This is infuriating to no end. Having watched the Apollo project get canceled before it’s scheduled end. Then the Superconducting Super Collider going unfinished. Seeing the end to the Space Shuttle program with no near earth space exploration in place to support the ISS.

Grass roots movement don’t want no elites flying in the sky.

Earth good - stars bad.

71 Gus  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 8:23:17pm

re: #70 b_sharp

Grass roots movement don’t want no elites flying in the sky.

Earth good - stars bad.

1/4 billion dollar blimps to fight an 18th century enemy. Good. We have our priorities screwed up. This is nothing new. It’s even reflected by American society at large. Nothing new for me though.

72 Achilles Tang  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 8:25:03pm

re: #70 b_sharp

Grass roots movement don’t want no elites flying in the sky.

Earth good - stars bad.

Along time ago when it was fashionable in Europe for the “left” to call each other brothers and sisters, I can still remember a friend who I though was no fool other than naive politics, say that he thought radio astronomy (Jordell Bank stuff) was a waste of money that could be better used to give to poor people.

Le plus ca change le plus…..

73 laZardo  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 8:26:02pm

re: #47 ProLifeLiberal

Right now, Europa, Enceladus, and Titan are the front-runners in terms of possibility of life.

See #30.

74 Dark_Falcon  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 8:28:59pm

re: #1 jamesfirecat

“Granted, the program is significantly overbudget and delayed, as the Republican majority tersely noted when canceling the project. “

Didn’t stop the Bradly!

Thank goodness it didn’t, since after a bad start the Bradley turned out very well.

75 dragonfire1981  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 8:31:35pm

“Space, the final frontier…
These would have been the voyages of the Starship Enterprise,
But in the early 21st century North American space programs were
Severely crippled and have not recovered to this day.
So instead these are the Voyages of the Chinese ship Xiaodong,
Its continuing mission: to seek out new life and to boldly go
Where no American ship may ever go.”

76 Achilles Tang  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 8:38:12pm

re: #73 laZardo

See #30.

That is no answer to anything. Trolling.

77 jvic  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 8:54:20pm

1. Fortunately, human spaceflight may have attained critical mass in the private sector.

2. The JWST, aka the telescope that ate astronomy because it has diverted funds from other worthy projects, is different from commercial spaceflight. If a government doesn’t do JWST, no one will any time soon.

3. Having worked on military & civilian space-based technology, I have not yet formed an opinion about JWST. The good things claimed for it need to be prefaced with ‘if things go according to plan’.

4. The technological challenges are at the boundary of the doable, but no one seems to dispute that there have been major management screw-ups as well.

5. I’d be more receptive to continuing the program if NASA displayed a few heads on pikes: that is, if the blundering managers have their careers ended. No lateral transfers within the space-industrial complex.

6. I have the same opinion about military procurement. Officers who lose battles are relieved of command and their careers are effectively over. There should be similar consequences for those who preside over serious cost overruns. (Right now, contractors submit bids with every intention of overrunning.)

78 Gus  Tue, Jul 12, 2011 11:15:55pm

Incidentally and for some political historical context regarding science funding. With regards to the Superconducting Super Collider it should be noted that the effort to kill funding in congress for the SSC was introduced by Jim Slattery (D-KS). It found 30 (D) sponsors and 27 (R) sponsors.

93-H1009 on Feb 18, 1993

Terminates Federal funding for the superconducting super collider project: Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the United States shall not, after the date of enactment of this Act, obligate any funds for the superconducting super collider project.

79 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Wed, Jul 13, 2011 3:49:15am

re: #74 Dark_Falcon

Thank goodness it didn’t, since after a bad start the Bradley turned out very well.

you totally missed james’ point

80 laZardo  Wed, Jul 13, 2011 4:11:31am

re: #71 Gus 802

1/4 billion dollar blimps to fight an 18th century enemy.

Fuck yeah Steampunk!

/

81 SidewaysQuark  Wed, Jul 13, 2011 10:21:32am

I enjoy the cognitive dissonance of certain right-wingers who blame Obama for the fact our manned space program has halted on one hand, while pushing to defund our exploration of space on the other.

82 ZeroGain  Wed, Jul 13, 2011 11:31:06am

It’s all political maneuvering. Don’t forget that Clinton wanted to cut NASA down a few notches too. Both sides push for what they think will get votes, and neither gives a crap about science.

“The newest budget cuts would be deepest at NASA, which would lose $8 billion and 2,000 jobs during the next five years, representing roughly a 10 percent cut in budget and personnel.” March 28, 1995, Los Angeles Times.

83 Jack Burton  Wed, Jul 13, 2011 12:08:20pm

In the mid 90s, the one thing that the Republican controlled house did that still makes me want to leave burning piles of horseshit on all their porches, was to kill the Superconducting Supercollider. This set back high energy physics research not only for the USA but for the whole world’s physics community for decades. Even the LHC at CERN is less powerful than the SCSC would have been. (40 TeV vs 14 TeV) The project was already under construction. Money was allocated. The hole was dug. Jobs were created. Then… all gone so save a few bucks that could have been saved elsewhere. This also created a short recession in the Dallas area. Way to go again guys and gals.

Cutting the JWST is the 2011 equivalent of this travesty. Don’t do it again you assholes if you ever want me to even think about voting for any of you again for anything.


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh