Comments on: House hearing on lunar science http://www.spacepolitics.com/2004/03/30/house-hearing-on-lunar-science/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=house-hearing-on-lunar-science Because sometimes the most important orbit is the Beltway... Wed, 17 Sep 2014 13:35:41 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.38 By: Doug Lassiter http://www.spacepolitics.com/2004/03/30/house-hearing-on-lunar-science/#comment-285 Sun, 04 Apr 2004 23:03:17 +0000 http://www.districtofbaseball.com/spacepolitics/?p=133#comment-285 Nope. There were three reps present. Roharbacher, Lampson, and Bartlett. Feeney was there briefly before things started. Confusion may have been because senior staff members were seated at the dais along with the reps. This number is not unusual for a hearing in which the main point is to get stuff in the Congressional Record.

]]> By: Dwayne A. Day http://www.spacepolitics.com/2004/03/30/house-hearing-on-lunar-science/#comment-284 Fri, 02 Apr 2004 02:00:17 +0000 http://www.districtofbaseball.com/spacepolitics/?p=133#comment-284 I attended this hearing. At one point there were more congressmen present than audience members. I think I counted six congressmen and five witnesses and five or six audience members.

The witnesses were actually pretty interesting. I suggest reading their testimonies. They threw cold water on several subjects, including lunar astronomy, mining for lunar ice, and mining helium-3.

]]>