Space Life and Microgravity Science Community Fights Back

Restoration and Sustainability of our National Space Life Science Research Capability, 31 March 2006

9:10am Keynote Speaker Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, invited

Researchers say NASA cuts endanger U.S. science, AP

"Simon Ostrach, a retired director of the National Center for Space Exploration Research, said he and others are "up in arms." New scientists cannot be trained if their mentors have no funding, he and others say. "If he (Griffin) thinks 15 years from now he is going to turn the spigot on again, he's crazy," said Ostrach, whose former center has to shut its doors and will release about 40 workers by September because of the NASA cuts."

House Science Committee Hearing "The Future of NASA" (Complete transcript)

"GRIFFIN: Most of the kind of fundamental research that we talk about is done in universities or in programs where universities are part. And it will -- if we are not able to fund all of the work in fundamental life science, the researchers who were doing it will go elsewhere to other occupations, other research endeavors that are being funded, and we will have to put the program back together later.That is just a fact. But I cannot responsibly prioritize microbiology and fundamental life science research higher than the need for the United States to have its own strategic access to space."

What Mike Griffin *Really* Thinks About NRC's Space Station Report

"About the report itself, Griffin says: "I've read the report, and there is not much good in it for us. Not surprising, however, coming from Len Fisk. I'm copying a bunch of folks on this note because it concerns the nucleus of a strategic problem for us in going forward with the VSE. Bottom line, we're going to have to answer the specific issues in this report."

NRC Report: Review of NASA Plans for the International Space Station

"The panel saw no evidence of an integrated resource utilization plan for use of the ISS in support of the Exploration Missions. Presentations that covered some elements of criteria and processes for determining priorities for utilization of ISS for different exploration missions demonstrated poor definition of those criteria and processes. In particular, the materials presented to the panel did not seem to take into account the effects that high priorities assigned to one mission would have on factors such as the ability to complete another, perhaps later mission, through depletion of necessary resources or limitation of necessary lead times."

- NASA's Hypocritical Christmas Present for Life Science Researchers

- Space Life Science: Where You Stand Depends on Where You Sit

- Senate Authorization Act Defends ISS Science

- A (Smaller) Space Station With No Purpose?

- NASA Internal Presentation: FY06 ISS Program Budget Challenge POIF

- Battle Lines Drawn on ISS Science

- Griffin Begins to Shut Down ISS and Exploration Science Research

- The Senate Speaks Clearly on The Value of a Fully Functional ISS

- NAS Review of NASA Strategic Roadmaps: Space Station Panel meeting

- ISS Science Cuts Update (letter from Simon Ostrach)

  • submit to reddit


In Fury Born by David Weber - Baen Books
Kepler Communications - Aether

Join our mailing list

Commercialization: Monthly Archives

Monthly Archives

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Keith Cowing published on March 12, 2006 2:16 PM.

IFPTE Submits NASA Workforce Response was the previous entry in this blog.

Google Mars is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.