Blogs / Bad Astronomy

As promised, today President Obama released his planned NASA budget for the year. Not too surprisingly, it’s pretty much as the rumors indicated. There’s a lot to say here, and I have a lot on my mind, so please hear me out.

The Good News

The good news for sure is an increase of $6 billion over the next five years. It stresses new technology and innovation (to the tune of over $1.5 billion), which is also good. A lot of NASA’s successes have been from pushing the limits on what can be done. It also stresses Earth science, which isn’t surprising at all; Obama appears to understand the importance of our environmental impact, including global warming. So that’s still good news.

The very very good news is that half that money — half, folks, 3.2 billion dollars — is going to science. Yeehaw! The release specifically notes telescopes and missions to the Moon and planets. That, my friends, sounds fantastic.

Bye bye Constellation

Now to the other aspects of this budget. As I have written before, this new budget axes Constellation:

NASA’s Constellation program – based largely on existing technologies – was based on a vision of returning astronauts back to the Moon by 2020. However, the program was over budget, behind schedule, and lacking in innovation due to a failure to invest in critical new technologies. Using a broad range of criteria an independent review panel determined that even if fully funded, NASA’s program to repeat many of the achievements of the Apollo era, 50 years later, was the least attractive approach to space exploration as compared to potential alternatives. Furthermore, NASA’s attempts to pursue its moon goals, while inadequate to that task, had drawn funding away from other NASA programs, including robotic space exploration, science, and Earth observations. The President’s Budget cancels Constellation and replaces it with a bold new approach that invests in the building blocks of a more capable approach to space exploration…

[Emphasis mine.]

I can’t say I disagree with much that’s written there. A lot of it is based on the conclusions of the Augustine commission, a blue-ribbon panel of experts appointed by Obama to look into NASA’s future plans and make recommendations.

The Space Station

The budget calls for extending the International Space Station beyond the 2016 timeline, perhaps for four more years. I would say this is a bad idea, BUT the budget also asks for extending the ISS’s scientific capabilities. I would be happy to see that; ISS is very limited as a science platform. However, the dang thing is already built and in orbit, so it makes sense to spend a little bit more (I was surprised to see only about $180 million for this) to make it useful scientifically. If that becomes the case, then a lot of the issues I have with ISS go away.

Incidentally, the budget calls for a guaranteed $600 million for the next five Shuttle missions to ISS, even if a launch slips into FY11.

Back to the Moon?

So, where does this leave us as far as going back to the Moon? It leaves us delayed, again. That sucks. However, as I have pointed out before, Constellation was already a mess. Behind schedule, over budget, and starved of funding. It was a mandate from the Bush White House, but never got the money it needed from them or Congress to ensure it could be done (this didn’t work when it was attempted from the Bush Sr. White House/Congress either).

I don’t want a repeat of the Apollo program: a flag-and-footprints mission where we go there, look around, and then come home for another 40 years. I want to go there and stay there. Apollo was done as a race, and the goal of a race is to win. It wasn’t sustainable. We need to be able to figure out how to get there and be there, and that takes more than just big rockets. We need a good plan, and I’m not really sure what we had up until this point is that plan.

Building a heavy-lift rocket that can take us to the Moon, Mars, and near-Earth asteroids is not really easy. It’s not like we can dust off the old Saturn V plans and start up the factories again. All that tech is gone, superseded, and we might as well start from scratch with an eye toward newer tech. This budget is calling for that, as well as relying heavily on private companies.

Commercial space

And about that. I’ll say this again: private companies have not yet put a man in orbit, but Space X, as an example, is close to doing so. Once the Shuttle retires later this year, private companies will be putting humans in space before NASA will have the capability to do so again [UPDATE: please see my comment below; the above statement about companies beating NASA is correct]. I am no fan of paying the Russians or other countries to do this for us, and going the route of civilian space makes sense.

Now, Space X doesn’t have the heavy lift capacity that an Ares 5 or other planned NASA rocket might have had… but with routine launches to space covered by private companies, NASA can concentrate on what it should: innovation, pushing the limits, paving the road. Once the road is laid, let others use it.

So I don’t see this as doom and gloom. I see this as 1) putting science and innovation first, and 2) freeing NASA up to do what it does best: explore the boundaries.

Here’s what I think. Warning: political complaining ahead.

Remember: the way we’ve been doing things for 40 years has gotten us literally in circles. It’s perhaps long past time to shake things up and try something different. In my previous posts on this (see Related Posts at the bottom), people are complaining that Obama is killing our Moon plans and gutting NASA. That’s simply not true. I think this may very well save NASA and our future manned exploration capabilities, if this is all done correctly.

As for that, and having said my piece that I think this is a good idea, it may not matter: the other thing to remember is that this must pass Congress first. I honestly don’t think that will happen. For one thing, two many Congresscritters have too big a stake in NASA to let go; if you don’t believe me, read this article where Alabama Congressmen complain about the new budget. When Republicans whine about privatizing something, you know you’re in for a fight, and it’s not like Congressional Democrats haven’t been all that useful in backing up Obama’s plans.

We’ll see how this goes. If it’s business as usual with Congress, then I suspect it may be a lot like the health care plan all over again: lots of spin and noise, lots of knee-jerk reactions because it’s Obama’s plan, lots of "compromise" that’s really just watering down something to make it worse, and then a budget will be passed that won’t be able to get anything done.

I’m pretty damn tired of that, and I’m going to do something about it. I’ll write my Congressmen, and I’ll tell them that the time for bending over backwards is long gone. It’s time to grow a spine, time for boldness, time for innovation. Whether people like it or not, this is the new budget being proposed, and if Congress wheedles over it, then yeah, NASA really will be screwed, and we’ll spend the next four decades circling our planet and gazing at the Moon, wondering when we’ll ever go back.

Perhaps it’s fitting that this news is released on the anniversary of the loss of Columbia — it’s been seven years since that day when the orbiter broke up upon re-entry. A very good case can be made that complacence played a big role in that event. When it comes to space exploration, we must never rest on our laurels, we must never have the arrogance to think we have it all under control, and we must never forget that to explore means to push ahead into unknown territory. That is the lesson of Columbia.

The Moon, Mars, and all of space await us. This new budget may not be perfect, but I strongly suspect it’s the best we can do, and far, far better than the course we currently have laid out. If we don’t push for this now, we may never go back.

A ship may be safe in the harbor, but that’s not what ships are for.

I am very, very pleased to write about two wins for the military and skepticism today:

Story the first:

Remember the company that made millions by selling totally worthless bomb-sniffing magic wands to the military, detectors that were used at checkpoints in Iraq to search cars, and which failed to detect the terrorist bombs used to kill 155 people in October and 120 more in December last year?

Yeah, well, Jim McCormick, the head of the company that sold those useless dowsing rods, just got arrested for — oh, let me savor typing these words — "suspicion of fraud".

Wait, wait. That felt so good to write, let me do it again: Jim McCormick, who sold provably worthless dowsing rods to the military, has been arrested for suspicion of fraud.

Ahhhhh. That was just as good to type the second time.

This has been reported in The Register as well as The Times Online, which mentions Randi for an added bonus! The BBC has an in-depth analysis of this as well.

In the courts, you are presumed innocent until proven guilty. But in this case, we have scientific evidence that the kits sold by the company are 100% garbage, and I hope this guy gets everything he deserves.

And is McCormick penitent? Of course not! With apparently no sense of Teh Stoopid, he said:

We have been dealing with doubters for ten years. One of the problems we have is that the machine does look a little primitive. We are working on a new model that has flashing lights.

Holy wow. Serously, dude? I mean, really? Here’s a clue, Mr. McCormick: it’s not that your dowsing rods lack doodads and flair and blinking lights. It’s that they don’t frakking work, and because the Iraqi military swallowed your story people have died.

I hope that’s clear now.

Story the second:

Our second news item is also quite satisfying, and also has a bit of the cluelessness from a company that sells things to the military. Trijicon, the company that inscribed references to Bible quotations on rifle scopes sold to the military, has announced that they will no longer inscribe them, and will provide kits to the military to remove the references in existing scopes.

Very cool. The military has rules forbidding proselytizing in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the rifle scopes were in clear violation of this. Of course, the company did this because of their concern over our troops and for the appearance of the military overseas, right? About that, the President of Trijicon, Stephen Bindon, said this:

Trijicon has proudly served the U.S. military for more than two decades, and our decision to offer to voluntarily remove these references is both prudent and appropriate.

As I read that, it translated in my head as, "We did this because we were suddenly getting tons of bad press, and had to do something about this PR disaster, so we can can make it look like we’re being all altruistic and everything." Here’s another free hint to the head of a company selling stuff to the military: don’t thump your own chest and say how cool you are when we all know better. Simply admit your mistake, and let people know you’re honestly sorry. Telling everyone what a great move this was on your part is maybe just a wee bit oily.

So I’m really thrilled that rational and critical thinking has had two victories today. The fight continues, because the forces of irrationality are always, always on the march. So, for those of us fighting for reality:

[Update: In this post I originally said that Biblical passages are inscribed in the sights, however, what is actually inscribed are references to these passages, such as "JN8:12" referring to John 8:12. I corrected the text below. I don't think changes anything but I want to be accurate.]

[Update 2: I urge folks to please read this soldier's account of his experience with these inscriptions.]

There has been a minor uproar over an ABC news report that some rifle sights made by a Michigan company and bought by the US military have Biblical inscriptions in them.

According to the article, the military Powers That Be apparently didn’t know about the inscriptions (though apparently some soldiers knew; see below). The military does have rules forbidding proselytizing any religion in Iraq or Afghanistan (where the rifles are used), and this could be seen as such. Certainly it’s fodder for the people there to claim the US is waging a holy war, so the inscriptions are a pretty bad idea.

What to do about this?

First, on the military side, they need to sever the contract with the company, called Trijicon. I would hope that there is some other company that can make scopes for the rifles — if not, then the military needs to tell Trijicon to stop inscribing the ones they buy. The existing scopes are a problem to be sure, but that’s already done. Maybe they can be swapped out, or the inscriptions scraped off, though of course the expense in time and money would be huge. As far as the military goes, I think it’s almost certainly not worth it; they may simply have to (haha) bite the bullet, continue to use the rifle scopes, and hope for the best.

Trijicon, on the other hand, really screwed this up. They put the U. S. government in a bind here, both financially and perceptually. Whether they did this knowing it would violate U.S. laws or not, they need to be fined at the very least, and publicly humiliated as well.

Why humiliated? One of the Bible passages referenced on the scopes reads, "Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life."

Remember, that’s referenced in the scope of a rifle designed to kill people. Unless I have grossly misinterpreted the Sermon on the Mount, I don’t think that’s exactly what Jesus had in mind.

So Trijicon is icky and weird and allegedly did something illegal. However, Michael Weinstein of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation goes farther. He said: "It’s wrong, it violates the Constitution, it violates a number of federal laws…" I agree it’s wrong and that it violates laws. I suspect a First Amendment case can be made here, but I’m not sure it’s a good one, or that it’s worth making. I’m not a lawyer, but it seems to me that an indirect violation of the Establishment Clause has probably occurred, and since it was done unknowingly by the military, the violation of the federal law is a better avenue of pursuit if action is taken to stop the inscriptions. I’m glad the issue has come to light, but I certainly don’t think we need to rake the Marines and Air Force as a whole over the coals because of it.

Now, having said that, there’s the matter of some soldiers knowing about the inscriptions. Weinstein says that "…commanders have referred to weapons with the sights as ’spiritually transformed firearm[s] of Jesus Christ.’" If that is true, then we have a far clearer problem. Those soldiers have indeed violated the First Amendment, and again, if this is true those military personnel need to be chastised — at the very least. I am of the opinion they shouldn’t be in charge of troops in religious tinderbox areas like Iraq and Afghanistan as well. The idea of religious zealots fighting on our behalf in an area that has been torn apart by religious zealotry for millennia strikes me as a really, really bad idea.

But then, again in my opinion, Weinstein goes too far in his rhetoric:

"This is probably the best example of violation of the separation of church and state in this country," said Weinstein. "It’s literally pushing fundamentalist Christianity at the point of a gun against the people that we’re fighting. We’re emboldening an enemy."

This statement makes me uncomfortable. I suspect Al Qaeda will use this as propaganda against us, but then they do that for everything; they hardly need more fodder for that. But this being the best example of Establishment violation… I think Weinstein needs to take a look at Kansas, Pennsylvania, Oklahoma, and most recently Mississippi. Creationists make bigger violations than this over breakfast every day.

Perhaps he means Iraq when he says "this country", though the context in the article is unclear. Either way, though, I think caution is called for in our rhetoric over things like this. There’s a clear path here, and no need to exaggerate the situation.

The image of Jesus with a rifle is everywhere on the web, but I couldn’t find the original. If anyone knows who did this, please leave a comment!

[Update: some commenters are saying this bill is dead in the water. That's music to my ears! Let's hope that info is correct. We'll see soon enough.]

Mississippi state representative Gary Chism has decided that science is stupid. After all, he submitted House Bill 586 to the legislature, which is in part,

AN ACT TO REQUIRE LOCAL SCHOOL BOARDS TO INCLUDE AN INSTRUCTIONAL LESSON ON THE EVOLUTION OF HUMANITY IN ITS HIGH SCHOOL BIOLOGY CURRICULUM, WHICH SHALL BE TAUGHT AT THE BEGINNING OF THE BIOLOGY COURSE; TO REQUIRE THAT THE CURRICULUM BE BASED ON CERTAIN EVIDENTIARY FACTS AND SCIENTIFIC DATA; TO REQUIRE THAT THE LESSON NOT BE BIASED THROUGH SELECTIVE INSTRUCTION; TO REQUIRE THAT THE LESSON HAVE EQUAL INSTRUCTION FROM EDUCATIONAL MATERIALS THAT PRESENT ARGUMENTS FROM BOTH PROTAGONISTS AND ANTAGONISTS OF THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION

[ALL THAT SHOUTING is in the original bill.]

This is obviously another attempt by antireality anti-Constitution creationists to ram their religion down the throats of students. Chism, by the way, tried to get a disclaimer put into biology textbooks last year because he has mistaken the Bible for a science textbook. Anyway, if this bill passes, Mississippi will join the lofty ranks of such places as Texas, Kansas, and Dover, Pennsylvania as the laughing stocks of the nation and the world at large.

But there’s a funny thing in the bill. About teaching evolution, it says:

The lesson provided to students shall not evidence bias through selective instruction on the theory of evolution, but rather, shall have proportionately equal instruction from educational materials that present scientifically sound arguments by protagonists and antagonists of the theory of evolution.

Well, hey, I agree with that! Let them pass this bill! Because, of course, there is no scientifically sound argument by antagonists of evolution.

Creationists. Is there no dumbosity they can’t surpass?

The NCSE has more info. And if you live in Mississippi, especially District 37 where Chism supposedly represents the people, you may want to make your voice heard.

But if this bill does pass, then, of course:

Related posts:
Oklahoma: Doomed
Louisiana: Well, that’s it then
Texas: Careening toward doom
Sorry Texas, you’re still doomed

Tip o’ the Old Man River to Chad Gardner.

Leo Igwe is a skeptic in Africa who has tirelessly and heroically fought the forces of unreason. He is director of the Centre for Inquiry in Nigeria and executive director of the Nigerian Humanist Movement, and has battled against female genital mutilation, the oppression of women in Africa, witch hunters, and all manners of religious-based (generally Sharia law) woe in that continent.

But he’s in trouble. Igwe accused a man of raping a ten-year-old girl in Nigeria. This man has turned around and accused Igwe and his father of murdering another person — an apparently false charge, since the man was examined and found to have died due to an HIV/AIDS related illness. Igwe was arrested, temporarily imprisoned, and then let out on bail. But the pressure is on, and the Nigerian government is not doing a whole lot to help.

Please note all this is alleged, but is coming from multiple sources. You can find more information on on the Think Humanism forum. Also, Kylie Sturgess has been on this since it started, and has more information on this case with updates and what can be done to help.

I have talked here many times about the atrocious libel laws in England, and how they are used by cranks and crackpots (and others) to clamp down on freedom of speech. Most notably, skeptic Simon Singh is being victimized by the British Chiropractic Association, who decided to sue him rather than actually defend their dodgy claims about their practice.

Simon’s case has started a grassroots campaign to reform the libel law there, and this has gained incredible momentum. The Libel Reform Campaign website was put together by the group Sense About Science to provide information on all this. It has news, affidavits, and much more, all set up to keep you informed on the progress made about this.

Freedom of speech is so important on so many levels, but it’s pertinent to you, BA Bloggees, because you know how pernicious and prevalent quackery is. Many of the people behind such antiscience — the antivaxxers, the chiropracters, and others — would love to see us, the voices of reality, shut off. So go take a look at the Libel Reform page. Sign up, sign the petition, and make sure that your voice will not only be heard, but will continue to be heard.

I love a President who gets it. In general, science, and in particular, vaccinations:

Yeah, he got his novel H1N1 vaccination, just like my daughter did a few hours ago, and just like I will as soon as they are available for adults in my area.