Keith’s note: It looks like a lot of Americans still believe in a bunch of conspiracies (surprise surprise) including the whole Apollo Moon landing thing. NASA will launch Artemis II to circle the Moon in 2026. The Artemis III landing on the Moon will be in 2028 or whenever. News and rumor – and fears and hopes – all collide (badly) in today’s news bubble. It is going to be a challenge for NASA to put forth – not just the play-by-play of these missions – but also the rationale and (gulp) even the proof that they are real. I recall experiencing the 1969 landing. The world stopped and watched in awe. Will that happen again more than half a century later as we return?

• Recently I posted a revision of an earlier post “Doing Something Again For The First Time” (Update)“: “75% – 3/4 of the people on this planet have never seen humans walk on another world. We’re suddenly in a race to go back to the Moon and we are not clearly in the lead. The next time humans walk on the Moon will be the first time this happens as far as most of humanity is concerned.” Well, I forgot to factor in the people (across age groups) who think we never went in the first place. So I guess for them Artemis III (or a Chinese mission) will be their first lunar landing too.
• The Conservative Manhattan Institute’s recent Report on Republicans’ opinions survey says: “Moon landing: A similarly sized chunk of the Current GOP (36%) believes that the Apollo 11 moon landing was faked by NASA. Again, younger men are more likely to hold this view (51% of men under 50 vs. 38% of women under 50). There are stark racial divides: while only 31% of white GOP voters believe the conspiracy, this rises to 59% among Hispanic Republicans and 63% among black Republicans.” Based on personal experience I suspect that the Moon landing deniers exist in similarly large numbers among Democrats and Independents and across all age groups.

Keith’s note: A few weeks ago the existence of a “Project Athena” document prepared by NASA Administrator nominee Jared Isaacman and a few close advisors emerged. It had been written during his first nomination period as a shopping list, statement of purpose, first stab at a plan that he was working on for NASA. Then his nomination was pulled. Then it was reinstated. Now it will most likely stick. In the months between this report’s writing and today, much has happened that will nullify, modify, and/or accentuate most aspects of what was written. After its existence became known Isaacman wrote a summary of this summary to clarify a few things. But the actual document remained elusive until it started popping up on various social media accounts on Friday. I have excerpted two main features – the “Workforce Speech – Day 1 Speech”, and “Executive Summary”. You can download the PDF version of the full 62 page document that is circulating here on Google Drive or look at various Twitter and social media accounts for screen grabs and other links. BTW the cover says “Confidential/ Proprietary Information” – well that is moot now – but it was leaked from within a very very very small group of people at NASA who had copies. People leak things for their own purposes. This is a work in progress, subject to wholesale revision and even deletion, so caveat emptor, your mileage may vary, and ad astra y’all. Excerpts below.

Keith’s note: According to @NASAEarthWatch ‪@nasaearthwatch.bsky.social‬ “Goddard Space Center library is due to disappear. It is not about when, but how and where the books will go. Another casualty in this relentless attack to #science and culture. It has a Facebook page. Let’s see how long it lasts.”

Keith’s note: There will be a Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee Hearing: “Strategic Trajectories: Assessing China’s Space Rise and the Risks to U.S. Leadership” Thursday, 4 Dec at 9:00 AM EST. Watch live here, Here is the charter. One tweet from the committee said “China’s rapid progress in space is a serious concern for the U.S.—threatening our leadership, national security, and economic future. Tomorrow, we will examine this challenge and what America must do to stay ahead.” OK, so enough arm waving. If you want NASA to effectively compete with China in space then don’t endorse NASA budget cuts and deep personnel cuts in FY 2026 as put forth by the Administration. All this rhetoric is just hot air. Do something. Or just sit down. Just sayin’.

Keith’s note: Testimony from Jared Isaacman at his confirmation hearing on 3 December 2025: “Thank you Chairman Cruz, Ranking Member Cantwell, and distinguished members of the committee. I am honored and grateful to be here before you again as President Donald Trump’s nominee to lead the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.” More below.

Keith’s note: NASA Public Affairs has issued a bunch of pre-re-nomination reviews regarding Jared Isaacman to be come NASA administrator. Read the glowing words of support below.

Keith’s note: on Wednesday 3 Dec the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation will hold a nomination hearing for Jared Isaacman (NASA) and Steven Haines (Commerce) at 10:00 am EST. It will be live streamed on the committee website and on YouTube. Meanwhile, NASA TV does not seem to have it listed. According to Marcia Smith “Sen. Cruz has already announced the Commerce committee will vote on Isaacman’s nomination next Monday, Dec. 8, at 5:30 pm ET, along with seven others. … Senate vote can be anytime thereafter.” There is talk of trying to fast track this vote so we could see Isaacman on the 9th floor in a week or so.

Keith’s note: House Science Committee Democrats just issued this press release that includes a letter and detailed spreadsheet listing GSFC changes to personnel, programs, and facilities in excruciating detail – and requests NASA feedback. My quick take: It would seem that no one is doing any real work at GSFC until next spring since everything is moving, being sold off, rebuilt, closed down. Other centers have similar albeit more localized changes like this but all of the actions have not hit them yet. So NASA will have lost staff, lose budget (programs, missions etc.) one way or another, and everyone is moving their offices or waiting for people to get to their new locations before resuming work. ‘Time for a new NASA phone book’ as we’d say at NASA. Full text and links below.

Keith’s note: the other day Russia broke the only launch pad it has that can launch Soyuz or Progress missions to the ISS. Space social media is all over the place with what needs to be fixed and how long it will take, cost, etc. NASA has not said much of anything other than admitting “yea, we noticed”. SpaceX is doing just fine. Boeing Starliner – well, not so much and they are not going to be in a position to do much heavy lifting for a while until they prove – for the fourth time – that their system works. As was the case after the loss of Columbia we’re back to a single string of crew launch capability i.e. no back-up. And you will recall all of the arm waving and fuss that the incoming Administration had about two “stranded” astronauts on ISS. Cargo supply to ISS is better off (Dragon, Cygnus, JAXA). Yet, when you add in the ticking clock for splashing ISS and what a reimagined Artemis will look like and NASA is going to have its hands full in 2026. With fewer staff and a significantly smaller budget projection, this is going to be a challenge. ‘Per Aspera’ is going to be more pronounced as we do the whole ‘Ad Astra’ thing.

Keith’s note: A press release from Representatives Chu, Bacon et al urges “Strong Final FY26 Appropriations for Space Science and Exploration.” Full text and letter below.