Space Philosophy 101 From Jared Isaacman
Keith’s note: Soon-to-be-NASA-Administrator Jared Isaacman just posted this on Twitter in response to some comments. “My position on the subject is simply that of a somewhat informed, lifelong space enthusiast cheering on NASA and industry. I remain nothing more than that until the Senate decides if I am fit for a new job or not. That said, the answers I submitted to the Commerce Committee’s questions for the record remain my position. For those curious, I would recommend reading the answers carefully, as many draw conclusions based on what they think they know about me vs. what I have put in writing. [More below]
As I mentioned in my earlier post, I am thankful for the private investment fueling progress in reusable launch vehicles–this is vital to our national security and the scientific and economic competitiveness of the nation. I would much rather see launches like yesterday than not see them attempted at all.
Regarding Artemis II and III, they do represent the fastest path back to the Moon and they are supported by the President’s skinny budget.
Now for Artemis III landing to succeed, one or more commercial providers will need to have perfected their reusable heavy-lift launch capabilities. At that point, we should have several viable options that can compete to launch routine and affordable deep space missions–including to the Moon.
I would hope all space enthusiasts support a future where many people are regularly traveling to space–to LEO, Moon & Mars–underpinned by an orbital and lunar economy, and at a cadence far greater than one mission every few years because it is affordable.”
12 responses to “Space Philosophy 101 From Jared Isaacman”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Do humans really need to be spending so much time in space? It doesn’t seem like the best ROI for science plus space is a deadly place.
Why do you (or anyone) believe science is the reason we’re going?
Science was not the reason during Apollo. We were in a ‘cold war’ and it was important to demonstrate that a free nation could marshall the resources to succeed, first. We got science out of it too but it wasn’t the reason.
In the case of Artemis the goal is to establish a foothold for future habitability, growth and industry on a new world.
Here’s a fact: humans will one day have an Earth where it will be impossible to exist. Fact: space will serve as the only alternative path to our continued existence. We can work on this now or later, but IMHO the sooner the better.
This idea has never made sense to me. If we can make a place like Mars survivable, what’s to stop us from making Earth survivable?
If your argument is increasing the odds of survival, then make that argument.
To expand on Pru’s ccomment, do you know what Earth was like after the Chicxulub impact? Still orders of magnitudes more habitable than Mars. What if we have a nuclear winter? Last of Us style fungus zombies? All still better than Mars. Gamma Ray Burst? It’ll have a bigger impact to the people on Mars. It would probably be less of a pipe dream to aim for colonizing Venus’ higher atmosphere with airships. Maybe Mars can serve as a temporary bug out shelter for the lucky (rich) few while they wait out a 200 km asteroid that boils the oceans, but once the immediate aftermath calms down, guess what? Still better than Mars. Even a theoretical self sustaining colony on Mars would be small and hanging on by a knife’s edge. A catastrophic event could kill a lot of people on earth, but a minor malfunction could kill every human on Mars. It’s no “backup” for civilization on Earth.
You TWO are WAY OFF — I am not talking about any event created by humans. I am talking about the GUARANTEED END of Earth, ya know, when our sun turns into a Red Giant and even Mars gets consumed. The inevitable and guaranteed END of a habitable Earth. Where will we be? Will we have successfully escaped? To where? Well, we sit back and do nothing, the human race simply ends. I would recommend with technology where itis right now, we proceed full on exploration of space mode. The sooner an alternative, the sooner the chance humanity can live on. If it doesn’t, that doesn’t bother me either, we are not exactly great stewards of life and the universe.
By that time “humans” will not resemble anything you are familiar with any more than they resemble a rodent today.
People are often judged by the “company they keep.” Worse than that, they are, quite often, greatly influenced by them (a cruder adage is “If you lay down with dogs, you’ll get fleas”). Every single Trump appointee (well, maybe not every single one, but I’m sure it’s close) lied during their nomination hearings (see Howar Lutnick, Robert Kenndy Jr., Marco Rubio, …), so why should anybody believe Isaacman?
My main fear is that he’ll follow through on the White House budget and gut NASA science (as they’ve already done with NIH, CDC, NOAA, and any other science-related government entity). And particularly Earth Science; truth to tell, the American public gets much more ROI (return on investment) from that portion of NASA’s budget than any other part. As for space science? Well, as you said:
“NASA has touched the sun, visited every planet in our solar system, has spaceships traversing interstellar space, and has telescopes that look back toward the dawn of the universe all things considered.” Fairly decent pay off for the effort, I’d say.
Apparently, Isaacman pays attention to the website. If so, I’d say to him “Go ahead, prove me wrong.” Sadly, I don’t think he will.
Exactly.
I just want to wish Jared luck in his upcoming position. I saw his hearing and felt he would be great for the job. The greatest NASA asset is its workforce, every single person, and I believe he will take care of them. We have a big transition on the horizon and it will be paramount to take the wealth of NASA knowledge to the next generation of engineers and scientists.
Honestly, I couldn’t care less what happened at his hearing. As I said, all of Trump’s appointees lied during their hearings (and duped too many Democrats who actually believed them), I have no reason to think he didn’t. Again, you lie with dogs… (Yes, I know it’s guilt by association. But I haven’t been surprised yet about any of Trump’s appointees. They’ve all been cut from the same cloth.) Anyway, we’ll know soon enough whether he’s just another lackey. I really hope I’m wrong and he isn’t. But put me down as being highly doubtful.
Lied? Sorry, I couldn’t help but to laugh in tears as I read that. Especially after living 4 years of one big lie without even a President.
Noted.
But again best of luck Jared, remember you have the most talented and intelligent people working for you than anyone else in the Government, if not the world. Don’t lose them.