FaithFusion offers blogs and columns on
many topics: storytelling, society and culture, philosophy, religion,
politics, science, and especially “deep doctrine magic” about
all seven.
I believe this is the first time this term has been used in any president’s annual address (from the White House):
I propose to double the federal commitment to the most critical basic research programs in the physical sciences over the next 10 years. This funding will support the work of America's most creative minds as they explore promising areas such as nanotechnology, supercomputing, and alternative energy sources. [emphasis added]
And he went on. More technology took precedence in last night’s State of the Union speech than I can remember in Bush’s previous deliverances. Alternative energy research, math and science foci in education, development initiatives, and nanotechnology.
Color-changing wallpaper, unbreakable glass, smarter fabrics and dirt-resistant carpet — that’s what just nanotech research could give us. Unseen changes made to the components of molecules themselves, enabling them to function differently and together, copy themselves and do things that not even microscopic computer chips can do. ...
Bush didn’t mention further upgrades to NASA, though, which would have related closely to math and science — give the next generation something specific to aim for.
One wonders how much improved the struggling space administration could be were the USA not attacked on Sept. 11. But, first things first.
Creation adherents and even ID theorists, please, don't yell at the New York Times. Why would they present any different perspective or present the evolutionary version of history as just that: a version of history only and not proven, or even provable, fact?
After 3 Billion Miles, Craft Returns Sunday Bearing Cosmic Dust Older Than the Sun
In a blaze across the night sky, it should be a spectacular homecoming at the end of a very, very long journey.
After covering 2.88 billion miles over seven years, the Stardust spacecraft is nearing home with its minute but precious cargo: samples of what are believed to be the oldest materials in the solar system.
Tucked away in what looks like a giant fly swatter of a collector is dust swooped up from a close encounter with the comet Wild 2 and an accumulation of particles picked up in three circuits of the Sun.
“This has been a fantastic opportunity to collect the most primitive material in the solar system,” said Donald Brownlee of the University of Washington, the principal investigator for the mission. “We fully expect some of the comet particles to be older than the Sun.”
Comets, icy bodies that normally inhabit a region near Pluto's orbit, are made of material many scientists believe is virtually unchanged since the Sun and the planets formed about 4.6 billion years ago.
Studying comets not only provides clues to how the solar system was created but could also help explain how certain materials and conditions combined to form life, researchers said.
Behold more real, present-day, observational, operational science — except for the historical-belief-only “billion years” parts. (While reading, don't automatically dismiss the word billion, of course — the craft certainly did travel 2.88 billion miles.)
Actually, comets pose a bit of a problem for those who adhere to billions-of-years beliefs: with that solar system antiquity, there shouldn't be any. Astronomer Dr. Danny Faulkner explains more in this 1997 article for the peer-reviewed magazine formerly known as Creation Ex Nihilo Technical Journal . A shorter, less-technical article covers the theoretical “Oort cloud” that some scientists believe resupplies the comets after the first batches keep disintegrating over those billions of years.
The BBC reports somewhat vaguely on new FAA space tourism guidelines to ensure mad terrorists don't get up above the sphere and kill — all the thousands of people who live up there, evidently.
Space tourists must be screened to ensure they are not terrorists, according to proposed regulations from the US Federal Aviation Administration.
The draft report's suggestions aim to prevent a terrorist from destroying a spacecraft or using it as a weapon.
However, the report has no strict proposals on the health of any would-be space tourists.
The suggestions will affect Sir Richard Branson's enterprise [the very silly-monickered company “Virgin Galactic”] which aims to launch people into space this decade.
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is attempting to regulate the commercial space industry in a bid to ensure minimum safety standards.
Many religious terrorists view American technology as some sort of near-magical force, available only to Western civilization by chance. This may only heighten their perceptions; within a few years, ignorant jihadists could imagine Americans launching beyond the sphere just as easily as traveling transcontinental. Another subject for someone's sci-fi. ...
Here's some commentary from ZDNet requesting Bill of Microsoft to open further gates to private space flight.
Nice idea; the more competition, the better. Yet one graph warrants some slight fault-finding:
It was the twentieth century's highest achievement — literally. When Neil Armstrong stepped out from Eagle, the Space Race was officially over: while America and the world celebrated the achievements of Apollo, the Soviets brooded in secrecy over the smoking wreckage of its own N1 lunar rockets.
Unfortunately there's no true up or down in space. Thus it would be geographically difficult to have a literally “highest” achievement even on the moon.
As “literally” word abuses go, though, this isn't that negative at all. Better are when people use the term in quotes, as in “they're literally busting at the seams,” when they're just using a cliche and somehow think adding “literally” will refreshen it. Another moronic cliche modifier tends to be “virtually.”
Incredible — here's the actual NASA administrator stating what many visionaries and observers within nerd-dom have been discussing for years. Perhaps even more amazing is the fact that this is on page 1A of USA Today:
The space shuttle and International Space Station — nearly the whole of the U.S. manned space program for the past three decades — were mistakes, NASA chief Michael Griffin said Tuesday.
In a meeting with USA TODAY's editorial board, Griffin said NASA lost its way in the 1970s, when the agency ended the Apollo moon missions in favor of developing the shuttle and space station, which can only orbit Earth.
[. . .]
The shuttle has cost the lives of 14 astronauts since the first flight in 1982. Roger Pielke Jr., a space policy expert at the University of Colorado, estimates that NASA has spent about $150 billion on the program since its inception in 1971.
Space efforts will always be costly, both in financial terms and even with loss of life — yet if America is to spend either of these, it would be much more worthwhile to head outward with a true vision, to Mars, asteroids, or the Moon, places with actual commercial possibility, instead of quite literally flying around in circles around Earth.
Only now is the nation's space program getting back on track, Griffin said.
Even amateur practioners of space geek-etry can only hope ...
NASA just announced plans to re-send astronauts to the moon, and nobody cares.
Meanwhile, Republican lawmakers are delving for surplus money in the federal budget to help pay for hurricane cleanup — guess what’s among the top suggested stockpiles to raid. Yes indeed, the same Air Force spin-off agency that once put men on the moon.
It’s a sad era, not just for nerd-dom, but the scientific community and America altogether. Yes, clearly the nation has much else to worry about, but everyone else is talking about those other issues; few are giving much attention to one of the most promising ventures in human history.
Just last week, before a TV audience of cheering millions across America, NASA officials outlined their vision to reopen flights to the moon. Following President Bush’s call for a specific space vision in January 2004, engineers and other professional geeks have begun planning enhanced versions of the original Apollo rocket parts for the missions — they’ll launch robot probes first, then actual human explorers, sometime before 2018. Eventually they’ll establish actual colonies on the moon. Eventually, they’ll use that experience to head on out to Mars and begin limited settlements there.
Yes, although this sounds very incredible, it’s all true. All of it — except for the “cheering millions across America” part.
What happened since the 1960s, when space travel was quite thrilling to people?
A few changes in 2005: no Soviet Union to fight against; increasing public inattention to engineering and observational science (as opposed to guesses about origins), and children’s near-nonexistent tendency to regard actual heroes like soldiers and astronauts with awe, preferring to watch the actions of silly celebrities and Japanese cartoon characters with weird eyeballs.
Meanwhile, several myths about all science fields, not just space, have crept into social consciousness. NASA itself is partially to blame for this; steeped in bureaucracy, it can’t help but often act the part of the isolated, uncool government agency, without reason or societal relevance.
Ergo, I’ll briefly assume the role of NASA evangelist and defuse a few myths myself:
Myth 1: Exploration is too expensive.
This one is based in imagery — rocket launches, fire and smoke and some of the most complex computers ever sliced out of silicon certainly appear costly. Yet compare NASA’S $16.5 billion budget in 2006, to that of one of the nation’s largest agencies: the Department of Education, which will use $56 billion just this year.
Myth 2: There’s nothing in it for me.
Only your cell phone, PDA, certain plastics or even those little parts in your car that ensure the air bag will inflate, just for starters. They’re all byproducts of space exploration programs; this doesn’t even count the more-awesome aspects of discovering new technologies or alternative energy sources.
Myth 3: We should be fixing our problems here first.
Here’s a standard of “perfection” no one can ever meet; if people applied it to themselves, there’d be no incentive ever to do anything new or helpful.
A related myth-conception holds that space scientists are merely motivated by beliefs in atheisticevolution in their efforts to observer the stars or travel to Mars. While that may be true for some, even creation-believers can’t dismiss these endeavors solely because of that. Earth still has plenty for people to explore and research, but why not travel beyond the sphere to probe the seemingly infinite mysteries of God’s universe as well?
Join in the vision, America; we have time and money enough to do it.
Meanwhile, America’s media owe it to the public to pay more attention to the new space race as well. Let’s move past the standard political conflicts and national news, and talk about some things that are literally beyond ourselves.
Perhaps some friendly multimillionaire capitalist adventure-geeks someplace can beat their deadline with half the time to spare. It would certainly save the government money, which is certainly a hotter topic recently, thanks to Tom DeLay.