This is not a NASA Website. You might learn something. It's YOUR space agency. Get involved. Take it back. Make it work - for YOU.
Space & Planetary Science

President Obama Talks With Mars Curiosity Team

By Keith Cowing
NASA Watch
August 13, 2012
Filed under , , ,


Click on image to enlarge. Source: The Internet.
Transcript of Remarks by President Obama to the Mars Science Lab Team at NASA JPL
“I understand there’s a special Mohawk Guy that’s working on the mission. (Laughter.) He’s been one of the many stars of the show last Sunday night. And I, in the past, thought about getting a Mohawk myself — (laughter) — but my team keeps on discouraging me. And now that he’s received marriage proposals and thousands of new Twitter followers, I think that I’m going to go back to my team and see if it makes sense. (Laughter.)
DR. ELACHI: That’s going to be the new fashion at JPL. (Laughter.)
THE PRESIDENT: It does sound like NASA has come a long way from the white shirt, black dark-rimmed glasses and the pocket protectors. (Laughter.) You guys are a little cooler than you used to be. (Laughter.)”

NASA Watch founder, Explorers Club Fellow, ex-NASA, Away Teams, Journalist, Space & Astrobiology, Lapsed climber.

47 responses to “President Obama Talks With Mars Curiosity Team”

  1. James Lundblad says:
    0
    0

    Time to discuss the Planetary Science budget? I know from experience STEM students are absolutely nuts for Curiosity, so spending a few billion more on planetary exploration is going to have ROI down the road in terms of new Engineers and Scientists.

    • Helen Simpson says:
      0
      0

      STEM students are also nuts about making volcanoes with vinegar and baking soda, so we should spend a few billion dollars on that stuff as well. I mean, we could give STEM students across the nation swimming pools full of volcanoes!

      I have no argument with the fact that space exploration gets many students excited about science and technology. I also can’t deny that you’ll see some ROI on it in new engineers and scientists, but I seriously doubt that the effort has as much real value (as in, scientists and engineers created per dollar) as do less colorful methods … like teacher training, and having kids actually do STEM activities. Space exploration is truly symbolic of our scientific and technological sophistication and capability, but it sure doesn’t make that sophistication and capability.

      Handwaving statements like this are simply pitiful, and don’t really serve either STEM education or space exploration.

      Human space flight, in particular, is desperately in need of rationale, in that our abilities in robotic and telerobotic systems has increased so dramatically since the Apollo lunar landings. Indeed, the lame idea that human spaceflight inspires scientists and engineers may be one of the few valid rationales that actually applies to it anymore. But how many scientists and engineers do you think have been inspired by our ISS efforts? I know from experience that STEM students are not particularly nuts about ISS, and the parades of astronauts going to and from it.

      Pardon my skepticism. I think the world of space exploration, both human and robotic, but I’m not going to build the enterprise on naive presumptions.

      • Daniel Woodard says:
        0
        0

         I remember after Sputnik the US decided it needed more STEM students in a hurry so it set about inspiring them — by increasing funding for STEM education. What a concept. I think it’s great that NASA does attract and educate some really bright students, but they will never be a significant fraction of the total and this is obviously not a rationale for human spaceflight.

        As to the rationale for human spaceflight, the answer is simple. A person in LEO is worth a lot in terms of the work they can do, maybe as much as $2 million. Unfortunately it currently costs $60M to get there. The answer is not looking for a mythical mission of infinite value. It does not exist. The answer is to reduce the cost of the ticket until it is less than the value of the ride.

  2. Mark Firestone says:
    0
    0

    Congratulations on your success.  We’re cutting your budget.

  3. Anonymous says:
    0
    0

    Look well at the faces of those involved with the MSL mission and listen. They are young and way into their work and undoubtedly want to see it continue –
    and they vote.

    • Colin Seftor says:
      0
      0

      So you really think they’ll vote for the other guys?  Under Ryan’s budget plan, the government would:

      “spend 6 percent less on ‘General science, space, and basic technology.’ And, compared with the White House’s proposal, he’d shell out 33 percent less for ‘Education, training, employment, and social services.'”

      The above is taken from the nice analysis by Brad Plumer at the Washington Post:

      http://www.washingtonpost.c

      And, even if Romney backtracks from the Ryan budget (which he is already trying to do) would you really believe anything he says?  I think not.

      • Colin Seftor says:
        0
        0

        And, for another perspective on how science and technology (including space) would fare under Romney/Ryan versus how it does fare under Obama/Biden, look here:

        http://www.theatlantic.com/

        The choice is stark, and I greatly fear what would happen should the Romney/Ryan win.

  4. Ken Hampton says:
    0
    0

    Maybe he’ll explain to Curiosity the logic behind cutting the most successful part of NASA’s budget, in terms of science returned and dollars spent, over the last twenty or so years.  Probably not.  Photo op!

  5. SpaceTeacher says:
    0
    0

    He should have done this sooner. Now it looks like just another candidate publicity stunt. I’d rather the President notmake the call and reward the team with a bigger budget.

    • kcowing says:
      0
      0

      “sooner”? The spacecraft only landed a week ago. The White House issued a statement at 3:00 am EDT on landing day congratulating the team. What else do you want?

      • Johnhouboltsmyspiritanimal says:
        0
        0

        W called the Spirit team within 48 hrs, just saying.

        • kcowing says:
          0
          0

          Idiotic. Did it ever occur to you that the JPL folks are busy and that this was delayed as a result?

          • Johnhouboltsmyspiritanimal says:
            0
            0

            so the JPL folks weren’t busy get Spirit ready to roll off the lander pad? as well as prepping for Opportunity’s upcoming landing. Sorry Keith a week later is just pandering and trying to say hey great job, glad I didn’t cancel this along with all the other planetary stuff I did cancel. and please vote for me.

          • kcowing says:
            0
            0

            Did President George W. Bush visit a shuttle launch? Checking – but I don’t think so. Feel better now?

    • Gonzo_Skeptic says:
      0
      0

       Now it looks like just another candidate publicity stunt.

      The “publicity stunt” would have been to do it right afterward while the media were still swarming around the jubilant JPL crew.

      I doubt if this event will even be mentioned in any major news source other than as a footnote on what the President did today.

    • SpaceTeacher says:
      0
      0

      My point is that Presidents use the space program for publicity, you can mention whatever President you hate to prove that. Nasa is like the relative that you have to, but don’t want to invite to family events
      I just get the sense that to most politicians space exploration is an annoyance that they wish would go  away..

  6. meekGee says:
    0
    0

    ok, that’s funny.

    Cessna – Deeds indeed.  Obama pushed for a Mars-centric plan two years ago.  It got killed by congress, as part of the destruct-o-fest that followed the healthcare bill.   For planetary science, the JWST ate some of the budget, and SLS is preventing that budget from growing.   It’s really a stretch to blame Obama for either of those.

  7. James Lundblad says:
    0
    0

    LOL, I love Obama in the Bobak do. Can we get a higher rez version for the desktop? Someone at Planetfest called Mars “Romney’s home planet.”

  8. Monroe2020 says:
    0
    0

    If you guys want a good laugh, follow:  Saracastic Rover on Twitter. 

  9. James Lundblad says:
    0
    0

    Does anyone know if W phoned JPL for MER? or is this the first WH call for the Rover Team?

  10. Helen Simpson says:
    0
    0

    Let’s see. President Obama was offering congratulations, not support. So he’s supposed to call them a week before the landing and offer his congratulations? Weird. Congratulations and support are two different things and it’s true, now that he’s offered one, it would be nice to see him offer the other.

    But it’s the Mars program that deserves support. Not the Curiosity team, who make up just one part of the Mars program. Any support that the Administration offers won’t come down in a phone call to Elachi. To wit, the support he gave them was a personal commitment to protect critical investments in science and technology. For a phone call, that’s about as good as it’s going to get.

  11. meekGee says:
    0
    0

    [how does one delete a misplaced post?]

  12. meekGee says:
    0
    0

    So the obstructionists now show mock concern over the program they killed…   How hypocritical.
    Obama was using the pulpit – except all he got back, even from within the industry, was the factually incorrect “you’re killing HSF”.  Griffin et. al.  And you personally too.
    If the space enthusiast community can’t put the greater goal in front of narrow interests, we have no right to demand from someone else to do our job for us.
    The money was there, as requested by Obama.  Congress, backed by oldSpace, demanded SLS.  Do you remember how long this fight dragged on?   Congress is the funding authority, and it won.  The Mars technology missions were canceled.  Why don’t you take your complaints there?

  13. meekGee says:
    0
    0

    Nah.

    Most everything you list is completely out of context.

    Kill Orion and heavy lift – sure – but in the context of changing the transportation infrastructure to competitive, privately based.
    Killing the moon as a goal – sure – but in the context of setting a more challenging goal – Mars.
    “Been there before” – sure – in the context of a comparison to a new goal. Nobody said there’s nothing to do on the moon.
    “Dozens of America’s space heroes” – sure – except there were a dozen on the other side of the argument too, and they’ve been changing their mind since. That embarrassing moment was brought to you by Griffin. See my point about putting narrow interests ahead of common good.
    Bush started commercial – sure – but it was a toy program, since he also started constellation. Obama made it front and center, and killed constellation.

    Since everything you brought up was out of context and tainted, why should I take “politics aside” seriously?

    WE are not starving NASA. 14B $/yr is plenty enough to do exploration and robotics if you’re not stuck on building the next rocket system in house.

  14. meekGee says:
    0
    0

    Sorry? Private is proving that it can develop and launch faster, and even that it can have long range goals.
    Meanwhile, Obama’s plan was that NASA would lead the Mars exploration program as a pioneer – only using private launch capabilities, including manned transport.
    The fact that it appears the private market might be interested in long range goals is just an extra bonus.

    A self-fulfilling prophesy of NASA failure? That’s just canned rhetoric that’s not really applicable here.
    NASA as a developer of launch system as already failed. NASA as a pioneer for first-of-a-kind missions is actually doing well. Why not go with it?

  15. Helen Simpson says:
    0
    0

    Take a deep breath and, um, just read the newspaper.

    STEM Teacher Preparation program was allocated $80M in a new budget proposal.

    The Race to the Top grant program ($4B) from the Education Department, after a rocky start, is now widely applauded by the science education community.

    The Educate to Innovate program, which was started with $250M, has now been pledged $1B by the President.

    If you ask STEM teachers around the country, they’re actually pretty impressed with the actual support they’ve seen from him.

    Oh, we’re supposed to judge the President’s commitment to STEM education and space exploration by whether he watched the Curiosity landing at 1am? Yes, he was in DC that day.

    Crazy talk, I know. Got any more for us? I’m not trying to endorse Obama, but just trying to suppress crazy talk. There’s a lot of that going around.

    By the way, rallying NASA interplanetary budgets is nice, but in the grand scheme of things, with regard to real STEM education and investment in the country, there are far more cost efficient ways to do it.

  16. npng says:
    0
    0

    The President looks better in this photoshopped image than he has in years. This new ‘do’ should clinch the re-election effort no matter which way the Administration’s space politics wander.

  17. DTARS says:
    0
    0

    Deleted by author

  18. James Lundblad says:
    0
    0

    He should make it up to them by inviting @MarsCuriosity to tweet at the Convention, assuming she’s a Democrat.

  19. Helen Simpson says:
    0
    0

    Start brush fires in kids minds, eh? What a delightful thought. Can’t wait till I get to tell the school kids about that. That ought to inspire them to run as fast as they can in the other direction!

    Please, PLEASE don’t ever do public outreach for NASA, OK?

  20. Colin Seftor says:
    0
    0

    So you didn’t get everything you wanted in the policies Obama was able to enact. Well, I’m pretty sure Obama didn’t get everything he wanted either, given the toxicity in Congress (not to mention the outright hostility and contempt for science that august body exhibits, particularly the House).

    I, too, am disappointed that everything I envisioned didn’t come to pass.  But you truly think that Romney/Ryan, members of a party that has turned its back on its past and has, over the last decade, shown nothing but contempt for science and scientific principles, would be better?

    Boy, that is truly sad (and terribly frightening).

  21. Colin Seftor says:
    0
    0

    At least under Obama, the budget for NASA will remain flat.  Under Romney/Ryan, it will go down (over 6%) and that’s not just for NASA, that’s for all science and technology. And that’s not even mentioning the hit that STEM will take.  Faced with the alternative, I’ll take the flat budget, thank you very much.

  22. Nassau Goi says:
    0
    0

    If this bothers some of you that much, some of you anti-federal, anti-tax, anti-Obama JSC and MSFC employees could resign your positions and recommend your salary be routed to JPL. That’d really support manned spaceflight.

  23. Nassau Goi says:
    0
    0

     SLS is a disaster waiting to happen and financially unsustainable.

    You’re just speaking nonsense. Even if Obama backed this 2 fold, it will be futile.

    • newpapyrus says:
      0
      0

       How is spending just $3 billion a year of NASA’s annual $18 billion a year budget on a beyond LEO SLS/MPCV spacecraft– which is supposed to be NASA’s priority– unsustainable? NASA spends more than that on the LEO on steroids  ISS/CCd program.

      Marcel F. Williams

  24. F3Victor7 says:
    0
    0

    Agreed. Long before there was STEM education and outreach, there was just education. Then the space race and moon landings happened. No other event caused more children to go into STEM then those programs. Make all the STEM educational specials you want. They definitely help…but doing something is more inspirational….Show our children a worthy endgame…that with STEM they can do incredible, wondrous, practically unbelievable things, and they will follow the paths to get there of there own volition.

  25. James Lundblad says:
    0
    0

    David Brin gave  very good talk at Planetfest the day before the landing.
    http://www.youtube.com/watc

  26. rockofritters says:
    0
    0

    it’s good that he waited a week. wouldn’t want to recreate the personally embarrassing and singularly hysterical moment  when Dan Goldin was at JPL ready to celebrate and take credit for Mars Polar Lander. of all the things that went south that day, the look on Danny’s face almost made it look worth it…. almost….

  27. Colin Seftor says:
    0
    0

    Gingrinch, you may have noticed, is now pretty much an outsider in his own party.  (Besides, apart from science, he’s pretty onerous, and there’s no way I’d want him anywhere near power again; people seem to forget that there’s actually stuff that’s important other than NASA.)  
    Politicians, at least good ones, are about securing the votes they need to do what they want to do.  That’s a long, slow, uncertain slog (especially now), and it means often settling for less than you want in the short term and inching things forward.  That’s what I think Obama is doing.  It’s not pretty, and it can be frustrating, but he’s moving the ball forward. One thing I am sure about; under Romney/Ryan you will get a reboot, and it will be a giant step backward.   His reboot will decimate discretionary spending (including NASA) and the social safety net at the expense of military spending and lining the pockets of those that don’t need more. Again, no thanks. (You say you want a reboot, yet you want more of the same?  No wonder you are supporting Romney, your viewpoint sounds about as weasily as his).