There is so much wrong with this piece from @hiltzikm that I struggle with perpetuating it, but the author clearly knows absolutely nothing about our national scientific endeavors, the state of the space industry, or our national space policy. 1/x latimes.com/business/story…
The central thesis is that these programs only exist to exalt the billionaire patrons. Should we discount the work of Galileo Galilei because the Medici Family supported him? Science and exploration have always been supported by the wealthy... this is not new, nor novel. 2/x
The author asserts, with zero evidence, that these flights will do nothing to support science. On its face, this is incorrect, both Virgin and Blue have been public about the science experiments on their flights. And the flights themselves will teach us a great deal. 3/x
The author calls these flights "manned" spaceflight, betraying to his reader his intellectual laziness and his woeful inability to research even the most basic of terminology for the subject he is critiquing. For future reference @hiltzikm, the appropriate term is "crewed." 4/x
The author suggests, without evidence, that all we need to know about our solar system and the most valuable information we have learned so far has been from robots. Putting aside the logical fallacy (since we have no human exploration of mars to compare to the rovers)... 5a/x
It was famed planetary scientist Dr. Steve Squyres who famously said and continues to say, that "I believe that the most successful exploration is going to be carried out by humans, not by robots." 5b/x
The author asserts that if the Shuttle had not launched the Hubble, there would be more Hubbles, because the Shuttle is so expensive. This is a very worn and tired argument and has been conclusively dismissed for decades in the policy community. 6/x
The author says that there is no tangible proof that anything done in the human spaceflight program actually supports our economy... I present to you, NASA spinoffs spinoff.nasa.gov/node/9179 and nasa.gov/press-release/… 7/x
The author, in the same piece, says that Human Spaceflight doesn't offer scientific value, while simultaneously criticizing the very patrons who are performing science on these missions as not being worthy of it since they aren't scientists. At this point, I am very 🙄 8/x
The author concludes with this blindingly stupid line, "The dream of interplanetary travel and colonization is the dream of schoolchildren." As if humanity has not dreamed of moving to the stars since nearly the advent of written word. 9/x
This author has no interest or understanding of his subject. It is common for pundits to do this and like so many others, the author is gesticulating wildly and using populist buzzwords and themes hoping we won't notice he knows nothing about his subject. Its so cliche. 10/x

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Jared Zambrano-Stout

Jared Zambrano-Stout Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Space_Jared

2 Feb
I have spent some time contemplating the ramifications of this. Before you read this thread know this: I am posting this with the information we have and my opinion is subject to change. @wapodavenport @SciGuySpace @Free_Space @jacqklimas @kchangnyt
Regulation of the launch industry is built on the belief that the industry understands the ramifications of their actions and will protect itself by following those regulations and that Congress believes DOT will do what is necessary to protect the uninvolved public.
(It is important to note at this point that Congress granted this authority to the Secretary of Transportation and during the Clinton Administration the Secretary devolved this authority to the FAA, which is why we have the Office of Commercial Space Transportation at the FAA.)
Read 9 tweets
1 Feb
The Senate Commerce Committee has released its Questions for the Record for @PeteButtigieg nomination hearing. There are a few questions about #space and @FAANews. QFRs are submitted post-hearing to witnesses. Thread below for questions asked and answered. 1/9
It doesn't appear that the Democrats asked any space-related questions but there are a few from Republicans. The full packet from Republicans is here 2/9 commerce.senate.gov/services/files…
The full packet from Democrats is here. 3/9 commerce.senate.gov/services/files…
Read 9 tweets
30 Jan
This is an excellent overview from @SciGuySpace about the situation with the SpaceX licensing issues. I would like to add some additional commentary to this as a former Deputy Chief and Acting Chief of Staff in the office.
To start with, it is highly unusual for a launch license or an experimental permit to be issued on the “day of” for a launch. I can think of only a handful of times it has occurred.
I would note that most of the time, launch companies prefer to have their licenses or experimental permits in hand and ready to go before setting a hard launch date. There are many reasons for that, but certainly Thursday is a good example of why.
Read 10 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(