You wrote “NASA delenda est” as the temporary Administrator of NASA, I contend that you are then considered an authority on space issues. As such, writing as an authority on space asking you a background question is more then approptiate, rather then if you are writing a simple opinion.

You ask:
“How many hotels have you built on earth? How many space structures have you built? What are your qualifications for building lunar hotels?”

In 1896, how many airplanes had Wilbur and Orville Wright built? If you want to see a formal business plan for building lunar hotels, I’ll get back to you when I’m looking to capitalise such a business.

Here I was not asking about the 100 year old history of flight but I was asking you, as an authority, what experience you had. As you didn’t answer what I actually asked you I am left guessing.

The subject was your essay, and in the essay it was manned flight that was said to be cheap to achieve. I am aware of the launches made by India and Japan, but it was my understanding it was manned flight not rocket launches in general. None of the countries I had listed had achieved independant human space flight.. So to say they have made satellite launches is apples and oranges when it was manned flight as the central topic.

The reason I asked for citiations was because your essay was filled with accusations but no citiations. It is not up to the reader to “have no trouble finding dozens to hundreds” of them, the onus is the person making the accusations to present them as their evidence, not for the reader to try and find them for you to prove your claims.

“You seem to have difficulty believing in aerospace contractor corruption”

I do believe there is corruption at all levels of government, I believe I can safely say there has been corruption since humanity learned how to write it down and record it. But again, this isn’t about me, it is about your essay and uncited claims.

I do know about troubles with Rotary Rocket, from Interview with Gary Hudson in 2003 to a long list of others. But again, it isn’t about me and what I know or don’t know. It is about the author of an essay, acting as an authority, to provide clear citations to claims. You have to assume your reader does not follow the issues close enough and so citations are a must with every claim laid out.

As a regular ranter about the follies of NASA, congress and the exec. branch it surprises me the take you making of this. NASA is an agency that cannot do anything without a purse of coins. That purse comes from congress along with all of it’s mandates.

you said:
“I have always wanted to go live on the Moon. I have wanted to build hotels on the Moon.”

So I asked you why you are not trying to build your own launch system and you answered:

“Why should I? ”

Because you want to goto the moon?

In another answer you said I do not read carefully enough and you say:

“No, I don’t say that. You don’t seem to bother to read carefully. What I am saying is that, e.g., Richard Branson was denied an entry visa to look at the designs of his Spaceship Two because he’s a foreign national. Talk to Gary Hudson about the impediments placed in the way of Rotary Rocket. You could try talking to Gerald Bull or George Koopman, but, alas, they are among those who didn’t live through the process of government opposition to their dreams of spaceflight.”

Well I DID read “NASA delenda est” very carefully and NONE of what you just said was contained in that essay. So maybe you should read my questions closer and provide those citations IN the essay, rather then claim I am not reading the essay close enough and missed those.

You may also be surprised that I do agree with a lot of what is wrong with individuals inside NASA and congress and exec branch when it comes to spaceflight. But just as guns don’t kill people the person pulling the trigger does, NASA, as an agency doesn’t kill people, decisions made by individuals inside NASA do. There are a lot of good people working for NASA and to say every single one is a murderous villian concscieously trying to slaughter everyone that gets on a shuttle everytime is .. over the top.

The British Interplanetary Society designed a lunar landing mission in the 1930s. The technologies used by Apollo followed some similar patterns. And Werner von Braun lifted a huge amount of technology from Robert Goddard patents from before WW2. This rocketry stuff is very old and very well understood technology. Really backward countries like Soviet Russia were able to put satellites into orbit 52 years ago. It isn’t technologically difficult. It isn’t all that dangerous, especially if one uses the same design as the Soviets did, with incremental development.

The impediments to human spaceflight and the settlement of the Solar system are not technical. I suspect that they aren’t economic, either. The main impediments seem to be legal, political, and bureaucratic.

Which is why, moreover, it is my view that NASA must be destroyed. NASA delenda est. QED.

“north koreans, Iran, Japan, Europe, Brazil, India, not already been launching 30 years ago”

Europe. Arianespace was founded in 1980, so not quite 30 years ago. (Then again, their precursor organisation put the first Ariane rocket up in December 1979.) But Britain is a country in Europe. The British were launching in 1969 to 1971, so 40 years ago. Check out the Prospero satellite, for example. Russia is a country in Europe. You might have heard about them launching the very first satellite, Sputnik, in 1957. That was 52 years ago. They also put Yuri Gagarin into space, though guys like Jim Oberg think not in orbit, back in 1961.

You may have heard of the European Launcher Development Organisation which built a Europa rocket for launch in 1967. A distinguished record of launch failures seems to have followed.

India did launch its first Satellite Launch Vehicle in 1979. ISRO. You can look it up.

Japan launched its first satellite, the Osumi, in 1970. Institute of Space and Astronautical Science. You could… look it up.

Brazil began work on rocket launches in 1964. They have developed their own satellites, one of which was launched in 1998 by an Orbital Sciences Pegasus, and others by China Long March rockets.

You might want to take a close look at the various impediments, international sanctions, and treaties which make it difficult for Iran and North Korea to get rocket technology. But you probably support such sanctions and regimes, regardless of who gets hurt.

You may also wish to examine the very long history of Japanese, Canadian, European, and Russian attempts to cooperate with NASA on various projects, including the space station. The list of treaty obligations the USA has violated with Native American Indians is only slightly longer than the number of space projects they have failed to complete their end of. It is a rather tawdry record.

For example, whatever happened to the Solar Polar Orbiter?

You wrote, “In the 50 years of space flight MILLIONS have died on the roadways, half by drunk drivers, if your issue is safety for humanity, the automakers and dept of transportation is a better place to use words like “slaughter”.”

My issue was confined to access to space on a low cost and reliable basis. I do agree that the cartel operating in restraint of trade in the auto industry is reprehensible, and apparently not profitable at present. I would eliminate the very large number of tariffs and subsidies, such as the 100% tariff on imported pickup trucks, and see what the auto industry could produce. But, of course, an unfettered free market in autos would result in many more companies producing different kinds of vehicles. I don’t know if you’d be comfortable with that sort of diversity.

In an essay I wrote in 1996, I discussed the likelihood that an unregulated transportation industry without the numerous subsidies for roads and autos, would likely result in more people flying. Moller still hasn’t been able to get the FAA to certify or license his air car design after, what, thirty years? People confined to two dimensions are going to have more accidents than vehicles free to move in three dimensions. The sky is very big.

You ask:
“How many hotels have you built on earth? How many space structures have you built? What are your qualifications for building lunar hotels?”

In 1896, how many airplanes had Wilbur and Orville Wright built? If you want to see a formal business plan for building lunar hotels, I’ll get back to you when I’m looking to capitalise such a business.

“Please cite examples of corrupt allocation of contracts.
Please cite examples of attacks on competitors.
Please cite examples of criminal corruption.”

You should have no trouble finding dozens to hundreds of each. A case in point, however, of corrupt allocation of contracts: the no-bid assignment of the visitor center at Johnson Space Center to be run by the Manned Spaceflight Education Foundation which, at the time the contract was let was run by the director of public relations at JSC. You can look it up.

You can ask CRD for particulars on corruption within NASA and the contractor community.

Nearly every private business enterprise that has ever had its business plan reviewed by so-called experts at NASA has lost its investors. NASA scum always despise private enterprise.

In the early days of Space Services Incorporated of America, all the efforts SSIA made to launch satellites were undercut by NASA which, at the time, was willing to give away launches on the shuttle in order to prevent Hannah and Slayton from getting any business. The one exception, roughly 1984 timeframe, was Celestis. So, of course, SSIA agreed to launch ashes into space, and NASA flacks began mocking the company that wanted to launch “ashtronauts.”

As I recall, SSIA cooperated on a competitive bid for the Landsat commercialisation deal, with outfits like Ball Aerospace. But the deal went to one of the standard defense contractors.

You seem to have difficulty believing in aerospace contractor corruption. Yet, just a few years ago, the Department of Defense admitted that it could not account for a trillion dollars it had spent. You are just kidding about this cite examples thing, right?

“If there are dozens of space tourism companies testing spaceflight why are you not also launching and testing?”

Why should I? There are plenty of opportunities to watch from the sidelines as company after company throws itself at the impediments. Someday one or two might break through, after which there will be many opportunities.

“In one line you say everyone is being prevented from doing exactly what you then say everyone IS already doing.”

No, I don’t say that. You don’t seem to bother to read carefully. What I am saying is that, e.g., Richard Branson was denied an entry visa to look at the designs of his Spaceship Two because he’s a foreign national. Talk to Gary Hudson about the impediments placed in the way of Rotary Rocket. You could try talking to Gerald Bull or George Koopman, but, alas, they are among those who didn’t live through the process of government opposition to their dreams of spaceflight.

What I’m saying is that in the absence of political and legal impediments, it is clear that many companies are capable of providing spaceflight capabilities. It isn’t clear that any of them, other than corrupt evil baby-killing defense contractors are going to be allowed to provide such capabilities.

“If access to space is so cheap and easy, what have the north koreans, Iran, Japan, Europe, Brazil, India, not already been launching 30 years ago?”

You might want to look into a thing called the non-proliferation of missile technology treaty. There are significant impediments to the export of technologies that are classified as “trafficking in arms.” Look up ITAR. Of course, my friends in the cypherpunk community have been making fun of ITAR rules governing crypto for decades now.

“Has NASA prevented the rest of the world also?”

Not universally. But there have been a number of very bizarre incidents. For example, when I resigned in 1990 from the National Space Society, its McDonnell Douglas guy had just arranged for a law firm to draft a 1974 Trade Act dumping complaint against China for selling a Long March rocket to launch an Arabsat. You know how much the NSS hated the idea of cheap access to space.

“I do not believe NASA should be building launch vehicles but should be buying seats on commercial providers.”

Fabulous. I think you don’t go far enough. It is widely known and understood that I go too far.

“But I do not agree with you that NASA is the devil incarnate and inflammatory words never helps a reasoned arguement.”

It depends on your objective. My objective is to move the debate a long way toward NASA being much less involved in impeding and preventing the human settlement of space. I don’t think our work in getting the space act amended in 1988 to have NASA actually work for the human settlement of space made any difference. They pretend to report every once in a while on what they are condescending to do in that area, but we are no closer to an economically viable human civilisation beyond Earth than we were in 1988.

Meanwhile, Space Industries was never allowed to build and launch the Industrial Space Facility. External Tanks Corp was never allowed to modify any external tanks or launch them. Geostar was run out of business by the Navy’s global positioning satellite system. I could go on and on for pages.

It took Cato the Elder a very long time, ending every speech in the Roman Senate with the words “Carthago delenda est” to incite a sufficiency of Punic wars to eliminate Carthage. Should he have been more temperate and moderate? Not from a Roman point of view. If one overlooks the burnt sacrifice of small children, the Carthaginians seem to have had a healthy penchant for ocean exploration and a vigorous trading empire. The world would be a different place if Carthage had not been destroyed. Then again, if the Romans had never invaded Syracusa, Archimedes might have gotten the word out about calculus around 2,000 years before Newton and Leibniz. Ya never know.

I don’t sell anything door to door. However, I do find it amusing that GWSA thinks there is something wrong, and evil, about people having private property and selling things. No doubt we would all be better off as bureau-rats working for one giant bureau. Shades of 1984.

So you have no brains, nor courage.

Tell us all more about that wonderful Ares I rocket Mr. Earl.

If you only had a brain … and some courage.