Latest posts by James H. Rust (see all)
- How the Word Resistance Has Sunk in Meaning - February 11, 2017
- Anti-President Trump ‘Whiner’s Resistance’ Are 21-Century Benedict Arnolds - January 31, 2017
- A Young Person’s Guide to Energy Conservation - August 9, 2016
The June 1 issue of the North Atlanta weekly paper, Northside Neighbor (printing 18,000 copies), carried an Opinion Column by Mark Maguire “True cost of NASA cuts is astronomical”. The writer complained the Obama administration had removed space exploration from NASA’s budget — which would leave it an organization without a mission that would stir up national interest.
Below is a letter I wrote to the paper, which it printed on June 8:
As a retired Georgia Tech engineering professor I had to agree with Mark Wallace Maquire’s Opinion letter “True cost of NASA cuts is astronomical” published in the June 1 issue of Northside Neighbor. The NASA cuts will show a harvest of a loss of future creativity.
One of the problems I have noticed with NASA is it has become too political. Some of its activities, in particular The Goddard Institute for Space Studies, have been hijacked to support the hypothesis carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels is causing catastrophic global warming. This type of work satisfies the
present administration in Washington, and these activities will thrive to the detriment of future space exploration. Climate science should be an activity handled by the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration; not NASA.
James H. Rust