• Senator Ted Cruz appointed to NASA subcommittee
    54 replies, posted
[URL="http://www.theverge.com/2015/1/11/7528337/senator-ted-cruz-nasa-subcommittee"]http://www.theverge.com/2015/1/11/7528337/senator-ted-cruz-nasa-subcommittee[/URL] [QUOTE]As expected, after a major GOP win in the last Congressional election, there's been a shuffling in the ranks of committees, including those that oversee science in government. Next up to chair the Senate subcommittee on Space, Science, and Competitiveness, and thus oversee NASA in the 114th Congress: Texas Senator Ted Cruz. Cruz, a Republican, has said it is "critical that the United States ensure its continued leadership in space," but his stances on established science will no doubt be concerning: he's gone on record, for example, denying that climate change exists. Cruz has also promoted himself as a Tea Party spending hawk, attempting to slash budgets across the government.[/QUOTE] NO. NOOOOO. He's either gonna fuck this up really hard or maybe do better. Who knows. He denies climate change though, and a lot of NASA satellites and experiments deal with that so I imagine something interesting may happen there.
[QUOTE=paindoc;46912528] He's either gonna fuck this up really hard or maybe do better. Who knows. He denies climate change though.[/QUOTE] Yeah no, if you have a climate change denier on any vaguely scientific committee, you may as well seat a chipmunk xylophone player there instead and make him call the shots.
why WHY please fall down a flight of stairs, Cruz
Build a rocket on a bare bones budget that both tears a hole in the ozone because fuck Al Gore and is only accessible to seventh generation Americans, to keep grubby immigrant hands off our space freedom.
It's okay, we have SpaceX.
Why, in any first-world nation, are people who deny objective reality allowed to hold positions of power?
[QUOTE=archangel125;46912608]Why, in any first-world nation, are people who deny objective reality allowed to hold positions of power?[/QUOTE] Unyielding conviction sells. Even if it's fuckin stupid
[QUOTE=ghghop;46912642]Unyielding conviction sells. Even if it's fuckin stupid[/QUOTE] Unyielding conviction should be a flag for idiocy.
[quote]Cruz was the top Republican on the Science and Space subcommittee last year, so his ascension to chair is not unexpected. He did not play a prominent public role in NASA matters in the last Congress, and is known mostly for his advocacy of reduced government spending overall and opposition to almost anything that the Obama Administration supports. Bill Nelson (D-FL) chaired the subcommittee in the previous Congress, when it was controlled by Democrats, and is an ardent NASA supporter, having flown on the space shuttle in 1986 when he was a Member of the House of Representatives. Nelson is now the top Democrat on the full Senate Commerce Committee. Like Cruz, Rubio was the top Republican on the Oceans/Atmosphere subcommittee in the last Congress and now becomes chair. All of NOAA's activities are within the jurisdiction of the subcommittee and historically it has focused more on fisheries and coastal issues than on space. [/quote] [url]http://www.spacepolicyonline.com/news/senate-commerce-names-subcommittee-chairs-ted-cruz-for-nasa-marco-rubio-for-noaa[/url]
Climate change deniers don't deny it because that's what they believe, they deny it because their the puppets of the big oil and coal companies.
Except less funding and approval of climate related research. He's against "big government" and spending so funding in general might be tight. However, he's a Senator for Texas so a large part of his constituent base works in NASA and Aerospace so there might be a conflict of interest there. SpaceX is also good business for Texas so I doubt he'll fudge with the Commercial Crew/Resupply stuff. Not sure what this means for the SLS.
[QUOTE=archangel125;46912608]Why, in any first-world nation, are people who deny objective reality allowed to hold positions of power?[/QUOTE] America is polarized and full of literal, as in clinical, idiots with the power to vote. Not really hard to see where things would go from there.
[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;46912559]Yeah no, if you have a climate change denier on any vaguely scientific committee, you may as well seat a chipmunk xylophone player there instead and make him call the shots.[/QUOTE] Climate change isn't indisputable though. Sure maybe Ted Cruz is much less than fit for this job but it's not like anybody, scientist or otherwise who disagrees with climate change is dumb.
[QUOTE=DropDeadTed;46912859]Climate change isn't indisputable though. Sure maybe Ted Cruz is much less than fit for this job but it's not like anybody, scientist or otherwise who disagrees with climate change is dumb.[/QUOTE] Climate change [I]is[/I] indisputable. Climate changes. This is fact. [editline]12th January 2015[/editline] If you're willing to accept that thousands of years of observed climate change and the fact that weather and seasons are a thing as proof that the climate changes naturally, but then dispute that humans pumping millions of tons of gas into the atmosphere that wasn't there previously, chopping down million of square miles of forest, destroying countless apex species, and physically reshaping the landscape with machines can't possibly change how that climate works, then you are [B]dumb.[/B] [editline]12th January 2015[/editline] If you're unwilling to accept that climate changes naturally, then you're [B]really dumb.[/B]
[QUOTE=OvB;46912884]Climate change [I]is[/I] indisputable. Climate changes. This is fact. [editline]12th January 2015[/editline] If you're willing to accept that thousands of years of observed climate change and the fact that weather and seasons are a thing as proof that the climate changes naturally, but then dispute that humans pumping millions of tons of gas into the atmosphere that wasn't there previously, chopping down million of square miles of forest, destroying countless apex species, and physically reshaping the landscape with machines can't possibly change how that climate works, then you are [B]dumb.[/B][/QUOTE] Well yeah, no shit. I'm talking about "climate change" that's been sensationalized in recent time as being all our fault.
[QUOTE=DropDeadTed;46912859]Climate change isn't indisputable though. Sure maybe Ted Cruz is much less than fit for this job but it's not like anybody, scientist or otherwise who disagrees with climate change is dumb.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=OvB;46912884]Climate change [I]is[/I] indisputable. Climate changes. This is fact. [editline]12th January 2015[/editline] If you're willing to accept that thousands of years of observed climate change and the fact that weather and seasons are a thing as proof that the climate changes naturally, but then dispute that humans pumping millions of tons of gas into the atmosphere that wasn't there previously, chopping down million of square miles of forest, destroying countless apex species, and physically reshaping the landscape with machines can't possibly change how that climate works, then you are [B]dumb.[/B] [editline]12th January 2015[/editline] If you're unwilling to accept that climate changes naturally, then you're [B]really dumb.[/B][/QUOTE] Climate change and global warming. They are two different things, but can obviously be related. You can have climate change without global warming, but you can't have global warming without climate change. [sp]not trying to deny global warming or climate change, just clarifying terms[/sp] [editline]12th January 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=DropDeadTed;46912925]Well yeah, no shit. I'm talking about "climate change" that's been sensationalized in recent time as being all our fault.[/QUOTE] It kind of is the fault of the last ~60 years though, so it sort of is our fault...
There's climate change and anthropogenic climate change.
This could actually lead to a financial boost for NASA, since half their operations are in TX, where Cruz is from.
Oh Good God please shoot this idiot.
RIP US Space Program
[QUOTE=archangel125;46912608]Why, in any first-world nation, are people who deny objective reality allowed to hold positions of power?[/QUOTE] Because we have a democracy where stupid people are allowed the exact same voting power as smart people.
I'm not optimistic either. I would hope that he would increase funding since so much business is done in Texas but what do I know Now, this won't scale linearly of course, but for every $1 of money given to NASA ~$10 makes it way back into the economy due to the way they contract out things and build spacecraft. So maybe he'll see some common sense and things will work out fine? otherwise [video=youtube;WWaLxFIVX1s]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWaLxFIVX1s[/video]
[QUOTE=bitches;46912592]It's okay, we have SpaceX.[/QUOTE] Actually space-x is still subsidized by the gov. Fun fact republican senators tried to shut them out of the commercial crew program to get ula more jobs Probably good for spacex that they're based in Texas though since he would probably not want to screw them now
[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;46912993]Because we have a democracy where stupid people are allowed the exact same voting power as smart people.[/QUOTE] And are much more likely to exercise it.
Any fellow American's down petition this guy out of post?
[QUOTE=Sableye;46913003]Actually space-x is still subsidized by the gov. Fun fact republican senators tried to shut them out of the commercial crew program to get ula more jobs Probably good for spacex that they're based in Texas though since he would probably not want to screw them now[/QUOTE] [B]SpaceX[/B] isn't based in Texas. SpaceX is based in Hawthorne, California. They have a rocket engine test facility in McGregor, Texas, and a private launch site under construction in Boca Chica, Texas. They also have launch sites in California and Florida. [editline]12th January 2015[/editline] Also, Neil Armstrong, and Gene Cernan were also against SpaceX funding, calling it a "pledge to mediocrity" [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wszPA8dURqY[/media] [editline]12th January 2015[/editline] SpaceX's government funding comes from them flying missions for the government. They were paid a contract to develop crew and cargo capabilities to fulfill those missions. They're not "subsidized"
[QUOTE=OvB;46913026][B]SpaceX[/B] isn't based in Texas. SpaceX is based in Hawthorne, California. They have a rocket engine test facility in McGregor, Texas, and a private launch site under construction in Boca Chica, Texas. They also have launch sites in California and Florida. [editline]12th January 2015[/editline] Also, Neil Armstrong, and Gene Cernan were also against SpaceX funding, calling it a "pledge to mediocrity" [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wszPA8dURqY[/media][/QUOTE] It's sad to watch Elon Musk hold back tears on something he's so passionate about.
Isn't SpaceX one of Elon Musk's things? [editline]12th January 2015[/editline] Confirmed by ninja Tbh I don't find tesla all that great either
[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;46912993]Because we have a democracy where stupid people are allowed the exact same voting power as smart people.[/QUOTE] No, we have a republic. The average citizen has no real voting power. The majority of voting power lies with those already in office. You don't even directly vote for the president. Your vote is only used as an indication to your representative as to what your area wants. They don't have to follow your vote. [editline]12th January 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Adlertag1940;46913024]Any fellow American's down petition this guy out of post?[/QUOTE] Petitions do literally nothing.
They can't remove SpaceX's contract because it's the [B]only[/B] American access to space and the ISS. Without SpaceX, science doesn't come back down for [I]any[/I] country.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.