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.
TrumpSpace

Waiting For Bridenstine

By Keith Cowing
NASA Watch
November 21, 2017
Filed under
Waiting For Bridenstine

Is Trump’s NASA Nominee Ready to Tackle Climate Change?, Wired
“[Tony] Busalacchi, who has twice testified before Bridenstine’s House Subcommittee on Space, says he’s had two phone calls with Bridenstine since his nomination became public September 1. “He told me he regrets his [2013 House floor] statement in the past, and that he believes CO2 is a greenhouse gas and is contributing to climate change and man is contributing to climate change,” Busalacchi says. Is Bridenstine just saying that to get in office? Busalacchi says he’s taking Bridenstine at his word. “I see him as pragmatic and not an ideologue,” Busalacchi says. “As a congressman he has been standing up for his constituents. It’s one thing to be a congressman from Tulsa, it’s another to be working for the American people as NASA administrator.”
Keith’s note: FWIW I think people will be pleasantly surprised by Bridenstine, should he be confirmed as the next Administrator of NASA.

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

19 responses to “Waiting For Bridenstine”

  1. Daniel Woodard says:
    0
    0

    This battle is pointless. I don’t think Bridenstine has any particular ideology, except perhaps to advance his career. This is a democracy. If we want NASA to continue to contribute to useful climate research, we need to demand it from our representatives in Congress and, if they refuse to modify their positions, attack them in the press or work for the election of other representatives.

    • Chris Owen says:
      0
      0

      Or we can build instruments for space agencies of more “enlightened” countries.

    • kcowing says:
      0
      0

      So you are just guessing.

      • Michael Spencer says:
        0
        0

        I think people will be pleasantly surprised by Bridenstine

        Unaccustomedly sanguine point of view from our host…:-)

        I too will keep an open mind.We need younger ideas after the mess my generation created.

      • Daniel Woodard says:
        0
        0

        Everyone who claims to know the motivations of another is guessing. I don’t claim to know. I am basing my guess on the Wired article indicating that when pressed on climate questions his answers have varied from overtly political and opinionated to nuanced, i.e. conditional, possibly based on the people he wanted to impress at the time. Of course it is also possible that he has strong personal views and is simply being deceptive at times.

    • George Purcell says:
      0
      0

      I think it is pretty clear Bridenstine is largely on the side of commercialism and New Space and having an Administrator who has that perspective is more than worth a little bit of apostasy on climate change.

  2. ThomasLMatula says:
    0
    0

    What I am interested in what his attitudes and actions are towards space commerce. NASA has the potential to accerate it or to be a barrier to it. Since he owned a rocket racing team he probably is probably open to working with New Space.

    As for climate, the researchers would be complaining no matter who was appointed since their argument is with President Trump so I see trying to make them happy a waste of time as nothing will under the current Administration.

    • muomega0 says:
      0
      0

      He support SLS/Orion which are the Beyond LEO expendable architecture so he has no interest in space commerce.

      A waste of time is constantly having the Party of Red spread lies and half truths 80% of the time. What’s scary is the facts: 3.5 to 9 degrees F and 1 to 8 ft of global mean sea level rise, mostly from human emissions, contributing to a rate of rise that is greater than during any century in at least 2,000 yrs- and yet you do not see its not about ‘researchers’ but destroying Planet Earth.

      Having multiple LVs including IPs provides redundancy and long term sustainability. Launching NASA payloads would increase flight rate and reduce launch costs to DOD and ‘commercial’ markets. Since 80% of the mass is dirt cheap propellant, it allows risks to be taken with new or upgraded LVs and not get stuck with basically the same LVs for decades because of certification costs (it was called ‘Delta’ for a reason).

      Launching dirt cheap propellant with common configurations provides demonstrated reliability for crew as well, with the goal of reuse to further reduce ‘commercial’ launch costs.

      • ThomasLMatula says:
        0
        0

        He supports SLS/Orion because he would have zero chance of becoming Administrator if he directly threaten the flow of pork to the Congress Critters that he needs to vote for him.

        But once in I am sure he will find ways to help New Space more forward.

        Yes, all the lies and half-truths that both Democrats and Republicans spread so their loyalist keep funding them is getting tiresome. The Noise to Signal ratio is worst than ever.

      • kcowing says:
        0
        0

        “so he has no interest in space commerce”. You clearly have no idea what he has been talking about since he arrived in Congress.

        • muomega0 says:
          0
          0

          Why would anyone believe what he says based on his past history?

        • muomega0 says:
          0
          0

          The data clearly shows that SLS cannot be part of the architecture [3B/yr provides multiple U.S. LVs flight rate (NASA 100+mT/yr) + R&D to remain SOA with the goal of reuse], with common configurations to provide demonstrated reliability for crew launches using cargo flights.

          You ‘proclaim’ he is now recanting his false beliefs on climate, yet he is not recanting his false beliefs on SLS. (?) Worse, his policies cost future $Ts in remedial work (barriers for sea level rise, etc), which means less for Exploration.

          IOW, its about what he is ‘NOT’ talking about: the huge mess he helped to create and moore SLS.

          • kcowing says:
            0
            0

            WRT “You ‘proclaim’ he is now recanting his false beliefs on climate” Dude, I never proclaimed he was recanting anything. You are on hiatus for posting. I’m tired of you making things up and putting words into people’s mouths.

  3. MarcNBarrett says:
    0
    0

    All Republicans are ideologues these days. You can’t get past the primaries in the Republican Party without being one.

  4. DougSpace says:
    0
    0

    His apparent new position isn’t necessarily incompatible with his previous position on global warming. One can reasonably hold the view that CO2 is a greenhouse gas and that people are affecting climate while also believing that natural causes are the greater cause. He could have “regret” his previous speech on the floor not because he disbelieves what he said but that he now believes that he should emphasize (exclusively) the smaller human component.

    As I view his House floor speech on global warming, what he says is technically correct according to the data. But his qualified statements now are also technically true. But he emphasizes different perspectives depending upon the political context.

  5. Bulldog says:
    0
    0

    I’m definitely keeping an open mind. He certainly doesn’t need to do much to surpass the last two who occupied the position. And, if he is even fractionally as adept negotiating the halls of the Congressional office buildings as Jim Webb was, he will prove to be a very competent Administrator.