Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

NASA Has pet project ---


Lord Umbarger
 Share

Recommended Posts

CAPE CANAVERAL ­ NASA administrator Mike Griffin is not cooperating with President-elect Barack Obama's transition team, is obstructing its efforts to get information and has told its leader that she is "not qualified" to judge his rocket program, the Orlando Sentinelhas learned.

In a heated 40-minute conversation last week with Lori Garver, a former NASA associate administrator who heads the space transition team, a red-faced Griffin demanded to speak directly to Obama, according to witnesses.

In addition, Griffin is scripting NASA employees and civilian contractors on what they can tell the transition team and has warned aerospace executives not to criticize the agency's moon program, sources said. (Not fair says Lord Umbarger!)

Griffin's resistance is part of a no-holds-barred effort to preserve the Constellation program, the delayed and over-budget moon rocket that is his signature project. (Let's dare not touch any pet projects, alright!?!)

Chris Shank, NASA's Chief of Strategic Communications, denied that Griffin is trying to keep information from the team, or that he is seeking a meeting with Obama. He also insisted that Griffin never argued with Garver.

"We are working extremely well with the transition team," he said.

However, Shank acknowledged Griffin was concerned that the six-member team all with space policy backgrounds ­ lack the engineering expertise to properly assess some of the information they have been given. (Seriously now, If Obama was serious abotu figuring out where the mone is going and trying to reduce cost while increase NASAs abilities, why not put someone like Burt Rotan on the team? He is the guy that built a reusable space craft WITHOUT government money! And it worked too!)

Garver refused comment about her conversation with Griffin -- and his remark that she is "not qualified" -- during a book-publication party at NASA headquarters last week. Obama's Chicago office ­ which has sent similar transition teams to every federal agency ­ also had no comment.

3, 2, 1, BLASTOFF! to the link here!

Edited by Lord Umbarger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
  • Replies 22
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Guardsman Bass

    2

  • Lord Umbarger

    6

  • Raptor Witness

    6

  • MasterPo

    3

Michael Griffin just may be getting the boot from Nasa because he is skeptic and outspoken on Nasa's role of tackling Climate change.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.p...toryId=10571499 Michael Griffin on Nasa and Global Warming

May 31, 2007 · NASA administrator Michael Griffin defends the space agency's programs, including plans for a permanent moon base and manned missions to Mars. He also says that while NASA studies climate change, the agency has no authorization to "take actions to affect climate change in either one way or another."

The following are excerpts from Griffin's conversation with Steve Inskeep:

It has been mentioned that NASA is not spending as much money as it could to study climate change — global warming — from space. Are you concerned about global warming?

I'm aware that global warming exists. I understand that the bulk of scientific evidence accumulated supports the claim that we've had about a one degree centigrade rise in temperature over the last century to within an accuracy of 20 percent. I'm also aware of recent findings that appear to have nailed down — pretty well nailed down the conclusion that much of that is manmade. Whether that is a longterm concern or not, I can't say.

Do you have any doubt that this is a problem that mankind has to wrestle with?

I have no doubt that … a trend of global warming exists. I am not sure that it is fair to say that it is a problem we must wrestle with. To assume that it is a problem is to assume that the state of Earth's climate today is the optimal climate, the best climate that we could have or ever have had and that we need to take steps to make sure that it doesn't change. First of all, I don't think it's within the power of human beings to assure that the climate does not change, as millions of years of history have shown. And second of all, I guess I would ask which human beings — where and when — are to be accorded the privilege of deciding that this particular climate that we have right here today, right now is the best climate for all other human beings. I think that's a rather arrogant position for people to take.

Is that thinking that informs you as you put together the budget? That something is happening, that it's worth studying, but you're not sure that you want to be battling it as an army might battle an enemy?

Nowhere in NASA's authorization, which of course governs what we do, is there anything at all telling us that we should take actions to affect climate change in either one way or another. We study global climate change, that is in our authorization, we think we do it rather well. I'm proud of that, but NASA is not an agency chartered to, quote, battle climate change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't those fools with the Masters in Math and PhD's in science realize who they are dealing with?!

He's the Messiah!

Of course he knows all about all!

And with Hilary by his side, the smartest woman to eve walk the face of the Earth, we'll have colonies on the moon in no time!!

:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And with Hilary by his side, the smartest woman to eve walk the face of the Earth, we'll have colonies on the moon in no time!!
You're only saying that because they both have their heads in the clouds! LOL!

"Climate change"? I thought that we already put that one to bed a while back? Not even Gore is championing it anymore. Isn't that like the death nail for it? Seriousy, I remember reading somewhere, (probably here), that Gore is no longer the spokes person for Global Warming and has admitted that it was a mistake. I really ought to keep better notes on things like this.

Personally, I have for along time thought that the Space Shuttle was a bit of a waste of money. It always seemed to me that it wasn't able to do too much more than what we were doing with rockets back in the 1960's. Just putting people in a can and tossing it around the planet. I can't wait for us to get back to a more flexible system that will alow us to take up missins to the moon and the other inner planets again. It seems like it was a mistake to ever get off of that path. I think that we would have been wiser to work on getting off of our rock as opposed to just running circles around it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Climate change"? I thought that we already put that one to bed a while back? Not even Gore is championing it anymore. Isn't that like the death nail for it? Seriousy, I remember reading somewhere, (probably here), that Gore is no longer the spokes person for Global Warming and has admitted that it was a mistake.

No he hasn't. He recently met with the Messiah about it too.

I think both Gore and Obama have just let it drop from the headlines for now but are going to go full speed ahead with it. Obama has said so already.

Look at what he's pushing on Detroit - electric cars will save the U.S. auto industry!(?) Bull!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...electric cars will save the U.S. auto industry!
Yeah! Now that is one farce that I HAVE heard about! A couple of my problems with electric cars are...

1). Where does the electricity come from for them? Our power grid is already over taxed.

2). What do we do with the highly toxic batteries when they degrade past their usable life? (Approximately 100,000 miles). As far as ecological damage, they are more destructive than driving a Hummer!

Sure, I know that we should be using something better than Hummers all across teh U.S. but, just a little common sense indicates that hundreds of millions of gas tank sized nickel-cadmium batteries going into landfills just isn't the answer.

No he hasn't. He recently met with the Messiah about it too.
I must be thinking about someone else then. I'll have to look and see if I can find the article that I read about it again and see who they were on about for certain then. I'll post it here if I can find it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No he hasn't. He recently met with the Messiah about it too.

I think both Gore and Obama have just let it drop from the headlines for now but are going to go full speed ahead with it. Obama has said so already.

Look at what he's pushing on Detroit - electric cars will save the U.S. auto industry!(?) Bull!!

Your all about the extreme's and the "if's" arn't you...

So you think the big three can save themselves from themselves? they need to desolve and actually make a product people buy because of quality not quantity.

Now shut up and follow YOUR Messiah befor he smites you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It sounds like Griffin is being a bit of a prick from that article, but maybe something that person on the transition team said rubbed him the wrong way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It sounds like Griffin is being a bit of a prick from that article, but maybe something that person on the transition team said rubbed him the wrong way.
From what I understand, the new rocket system that NASA is developing is sort of his "pet project". Maybe he was just ticked that someone with no real expertise in the project was asking about it. Maybe they were asking to hard for answers that NASA hasn't fully fleashed out the questions about yet.

No one has all the finishing answers when they are still in the firt few stages of it. It would sort of be like asking what color paiint you are going to have in a house when you haven't even started the blueprints for yet. The new rocket system is pretty much a ret-con of the Saturn rockets, only bigger, much bigger.

Personally, I also want a lot of hard questions asked about it. If we are going to be sinking untold billions into a new space craft design, we don't need to make all the same mistakes we did with the Shuttle. I'd still like to know the answers to: "How is it better than just building a newer version of the shuttle?" "How much are we going to spend on it?" and of course, "Why are we not pulling the best and brightest from the private sector in to at least advise on the project?".

Ini short, where the hell is Burt Rotan?

Someone like Burt Rotan would have been an invaluable mind to have on tap for this considering he was the winner of the "X - Prize" several years ago. We certainly don't need to sink cash into the Aries Program and then try to justify it afer the fact like we did with the shuttle.

Now, as for me, I have always thought that the shuttle was a waste of money in more ways than one. I've long since thought that we should have carried on with the rocket configuration instead of a system that carries two big wings that weigh far more than a couple of parachutes but, that is just me. It was a NASA dream that Nixon gave the rubber stamp to and I don't totally agree with it to start with but, before we embark on something new, we should have a deffinate reason for building it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you think the big three can save themselves from themselves? they need to desolve and actually make a product people buy because of quality not quantity.

I agree with the latter. But if they haven't gotten off their butts in the last 25 years to do that why in Heaven's name does anyone think Washington pols are soooooo wise and insightful as to be able to advise them what to make and how to market it?!

Now shut up and follow YOUR Messiah befor he smites you.

Yes mam! :ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NASA's two main arms on earth were hit by historic hurricanes this year. Both of which, were predicted [by maps] of exactly where they would hit, AHEAD OF TIME.

Obama is very likely President, in large part because of one of these, which slammed into Houston's Mission Control, and was immediately followed by [a massive storm] in the world's [credit] markets. Hopefully, hurricane Obama will destroy St. NASA's quest for dominion of other worlds, while preserving scientific pursuits which do not seek to conquer other planets, and destroy them. You only get one world to ruin.

There is a celestial glass ceiling, and you are looking at it.

linked-image

[Posted: June 2, 2008 2:12 AM]

linked-image

[Posted: August 27, 2008 3:09 AM]

linked-image

[Posted: August 28, 2008 12:11 PM]

Edited by Raptor Witness
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry Raptor but, you totally lost me there and that is no easy feat!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
Sorry Raptor but, you totally lost me there and that is no easy feat!

Let's just say that I don't expect a President Obama to be persuaded by every whim that NASA spits out of its mouth. Our dominion ends, where the sky begins. It's a political argument, with authority.

linked-image

[Posted Mar 31st, 2007, 2:15 PM]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's just say that I don't expect a President Obama to be persuaded by every whim that NASA spits out of its mouth. Our dominion ends, where the sky begins. It's a political argument, with authority.
I don't know that I would call a replacemtn for the shuttle a "whim". It is a long out dated technology that never really panned out like it was promised to.

Many people are unaware that the Soviet Union built a "shuttle clone" but, soon returned to using rockets because they are cheaper and can be purpose built. It is the equivilent of an evolutionary dead end.

Not only that but, the entire shuttle has less computing power than the one that you are looking at on your desk right now. It is a factor of what I think they call Moores law which states that computing capacity doubles ever 18 months. the shuttle was designed in the 1970s and the first was launched back in 1981. (I remember staying home from school to watch it go up. I ended up going in after though! LOL!) Doing the simple math here, we are looking at a tech that is already twenty seven years old. Teh computing capacity has already doubled 18 times since the first shuttle launch!

Whim or not, a newer system is deffinately in order if the U.S. plans to maintain it's leadership in space. There are already Chinese rockets carrying people into low orbit. If we extrapolate that out using the same numbers that we had, the Chinese will be able to go to the moon in less than ten years now. That is assuming that we don't adjust the numbers for Moores Law. This also doesn't take intoaccount that there are now a lot of competing agencies around the world, like the E.U. that weren't players in the "U.S. v Soviet space race" and now have a real potential to take the lead.

It's also interesting to note that the U.S. is the only nation that has not only continued to use a "Re-usable" space craft, let alone build a fleet of them. Every one else is using rocket designs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what else have you got?

I'm not sure what you mean by "got?" If you mean other examples of foresight of damage to a specific area or thing, perhaps you should look to the historic tornado that hit downtown Atlanta this past March. The inverted triangle is the symbol in meteorology for high speed, rotating winds.

While this has nothing to do with NASA per se, it has "got something else" written all over it.

On [November 20, 2007,] I posted a curious photo of downtown Atlanta, which highlighted a certain building that has a certain symbol on it. That building is called [Centennial Tower.]

Four months later, [the first tornado to ever strike downtown Atlanta,] passed directly in front of this EXACT building causing significant damage to it, interrupting

in the adjacent Georgia Dome where men were playing with red balls.

So when you ask, "what else have you got?" Are you really sure you want to know?

linked-image

linked-image

Edited by Raptor Witness
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Let them find the money to rule space, after their cities are lying flat on the ground, because the mighty wind has entered the crust of the earth, ["by four ways and in two parts."]

[A Spurt of Quake Activity Raises Fears in Yellowstone] - Jan. 01, 2009

... Last week, geologists at the Yellowstone Volcano Observatory (YVO) announced they had recorded a "notable swarm of earthquakes under way since Dec. 26 beneath Yellowstone Lake." The strongest tremor among the hundreds in the past week measured 3.9 on Dec. 27; most of the readings above 2.8 were felt by park employees and visitors around the lake area. The activity relaxed in magnitude early this week but then flexed upward again to top 3.0 by early New Year's Eve. "This December 2008 earthquake sequence is the most intense in this area for some years," YVO reported, "and is centered on the east side of the Yellowstone Caldera," the ancient collapsed volcano beneath Yellowstone Lake. The scientists said they cannot immediately "identify any causative fault or other feature without further analysis." (See a gallery of recent volcanic eruptions.)

"This activity could have a whole range of consequences."

linked-image

If you won't put on sackcloth and cover your heads with ashes as they did at [Nineveh,] it will be done for you.

Edited by Raptor Witness
Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all Lord, the article regarding Dr. Griffin's alleged lack of cooperation comes from Rense, which tends to be rather shaded toward the CT-minded. I suspect some heresay and fabrications in the corpus of that article, mixed with some truth.

Dr. Griffin, I am certain, is rather concerned about the turn of events, as most of us with any connection to NASA are...most definitely.

Obama is in fact a major concern...mostly based upon his relative silence about so many pertinent issues. Those of us with an attachment to NASA, and all it does, and certainly with the Space Exploration Initiative and Constellation, have concerns about the future of what we are not doing and what we've waited for decades to get underway with again.

I am frankly worried about the future of Constellation and especially the ARES program (which is absolutely the way to go in manned space exploration for the forseeable future), and I am also concerned with the idea that Obama might replace Dr. Griffin.

In my opinion, Dr. Griffin is the best NASA administrator since James Webb. He needs to stay and needs to continue exactly what he's doing.

From what I understand, the new rocket system that NASA is developing is sort of his "pet project". Maybe he was just ticked that someone with no real expertise in the project was asking about it. Maybe they were asking to hard for answers that NASA hasn't fully fleashed out the questions about yet.

No one has all the finishing answers when they are still in the firt few stages of it. It would sort of be like asking what color paiint you are going to have in a house when you haven't even started the blueprints for yet. The new rocket system is pretty much a ret-con of the Saturn rockets, only bigger, much bigger.

It should be noted that Dr. Griffin was selected to administer all of NASA, and to manage the Constellation effort. He I should suppose, considers the latter his baby, and I don't think that such a thing is untoward.

The project is in advanced developmental phases. The process is time and labor intensive, and interference in the process would be unwelcome. NASA is qualified to make the design decisions, and they are. The fact is, we have the most qualified, dedicated, and capable management team at NASA that we've had in decades. They've taken a flawed Shuttle program (which was essentially a flawed management paradigm that cost us plenty) and fixed it, and have illustrated clearly the NASA abilities that we all came to know and admire decades past, returning the Shuttle to flight in spectacularly successful fashion and moving the ISS to completion in similarly impecabble fashion.

The ARES project is very complex, and requires people like those they have now in charge of it. It is of course bigger than Saturn was, and certainly no less challenging.

Personally, I also want a lot of hard questions asked about it. If we are going to be sinking untold billions into a new space craft design, we don't need to make all the same mistakes we did with the Shuttle. I'd still like to know the answers to: "How is it better than just building a newer version of the shuttle?" "How much are we going to spend on it?" and of course, "Why are we not pulling the best and brightest from the private sector in to at least advise on the project?".

Personally, hard questions have been asked, and answered. There is no relation between this program and the Shuttle program, which began with a fabulous idea, and was forced into compromise, infiltrated with a management philosophy that was completely contrary to manned space flight success, and which cost us 14 people, and in fact which cost us our purpose in space. There is a purpose to Constellation which is clear, and there's nothing, so far, which will compromise that purpose as there was with Nixon's Shuttle program.

Further, we have the best and brightest working this project already.

Ini short, where the hell is Burt Rotan?

Someone like Burt Rotan would have been an invaluable mind to have on tap for this considering he was the winner of the "X - Prize" several years ago. We certainly don't need to sink cash into the Aries Program and then try to justify it afer the fact like we did with the shuttle.

Burt Rutan is of course, one of the most talented aeronautical engineers on the planet...but his emphasis is on his own programs and projects.

He's got a hell of a lot on his plate right now in the commercial spacecraft area...

Burt Rutan is not a rocket designer...he's an aircraft and spacecraft designer with a particular emphasis--commercial space flight. ARES is a rocket program designed to support Orion flights to the ISS and to the Moon. Rutan is not involved in such things.

Now, as for me, I have always thought that the shuttle was a waste of money in more ways than one. I've long since thought that we should have carried on with the rocket configuration instead of a system that carries two big wings that weigh far more than a couple of parachutes but, that is just me. It was a NASA dream that Nixon gave the rubber stamp to and I don't totally agree with it to start with but, before we embark on something new, we should have a deffinate reason for building it

You're not the only one that was somewhat perturbed by the final Shuttle config, by the delays caused by the compromises, and by the fact that the vehicle finally flew without a particular mission. The following 20 years were somewhat painful to follow.

However, we did have a definite reason for building it when the program was started. Unfortunately, due to a complex set of factors brought on by government (which is the root cause of most problems we have in this country), that reason became muddied to the point of disappearing...for quite some number of years.

Constellation has a definitive purpose, and we have embarked on it full force.

We don't need another administration coming in and modifying the agenda the prupose, or the design constraints...in fact, they shouldn't be getting involved with, nor forcing the latter at all, which is what they did with the Shuttle.

There are no questions about Constellation, nor ARES. We need to execute what we've started, and allow NASA, with the expertise it has on-hand now, to fulfill the program goals as only they can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry Raptor but, you totally lost me there and that is no easy feat!

It seems that Raptor has found some obscure conection between what this thread was actualy about and his agenda of doom, and decided to utilize this thread to spew all of it ad-nauseam...

I think he's losing all of us...quickly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

maybe the bottom line is dollar signs. NASA in a faltering economy looks like a waste compared to more important immediate things .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems that Raptor has found some obscure conection between what this thread was actualy about and his agenda of doom, and decided to utilize this thread to spew all of it ad-nauseam...

I think he's losing all of us...quickly.

What I'm saying is, NASA won't have the budget do DO ANYTHING if we stay on our current path.

I'm probably one of the few members here who manages to create his own, but very REAL, unexplained mysteries. So if I lose you, then you shouldn't try explaining it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

maybe the bottom line is dollar signs. NASA in a faltering economy looks like a waste compared to more important immediate things .

That's like saying that in a drought, it's a "waste" to save seed corn for planting in a better year, since you are hungry now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.