Comments on: GAO clears NASA’s use of study teams

By: Rand Simberg

Rand Simberg — Thu, 27 May 2010 05:00:30 +0000

Well of course, comment-blocking is synonymous with ditto heads.

I don’t know about that, but whining about “ditto heads” is synonymous with political idiocy, and a distinct sign of unseriousness about discussing politics.

By: Stephen C. Smith

Stephen C. Smith — Wed, 26 May 2010 22:45:26 +0000

GAO has criticized Constellation for years, warning it was over budget, behind schedule, lacked a business case and badly managed. GAO is well aware of how NASA functions, or lack thereof. Click here to read the August 2009 GAO report on Constellation.

By: Gary Church

Gary Church — Wed, 26 May 2010 22:04:21 +0000

I must have mistaken you for someone else.

By: Ben Joshua

Ben Joshua — Wed, 26 May 2010 21:40:09 +0000

I acknowlege the great things NASA accomplished and continues to accomplish. It is not demonizing to also acknowlege the failings, in order to set a better course and approach, moving forward.

btw, new monthly heliosphere data from NASA is sure to re-write astronomy textbooks and lead to some yeasty new graduate work in astrophysics. That’s right now.

btbtw, some of the FY11 tech dev initiatives (a prediction here) will lead to new industrial processes, applicable outside NASA, which means economic development, jobs and a tech edge for our country, all courtesy of NASA achievement and the taxpayers footing the bill. Excellent investment, that.

And correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t it NASA that produced key research into laminar flow? How many applications did that find its way into?

Celebrate the good, and build on it. Recognize the shortcomings and correct them at their origins, not with layered on expensive “fixes.”

By: Gary Church

Gary Church — Wed, 26 May 2010 20:38:14 +0000

â€œditto heads.â€ Thereâ€™s another useful comment-blocking term.

Well of course, comment-blocking is synonymous with ditto heads. They block reality.

By: Gary Church

Gary Church — Wed, 26 May 2010 20:18:07 +0000

GAO is not NASA. Or is anything you dislike automatically associated with what you hate? – which is what many of the people who post here seem to do by demonizing NASA as an evil empire destroying America. This hatred of NASA and homoerotic love of any company building 1950’s tech rockets in garages is getting pretty transparent.

By: Ben Joshua

Ben Joshua — Wed, 26 May 2010 18:32:54 +0000

From the GAO website:

“We provide Congress with timely information that is objective, fact-based, nonpartisan, nonideological, fair, and balanced.

Our Core Values of accountability, integrity, and reliability are reflected in all of the work we do. We operate under strict professional standards of review and referencing; all facts and analyses in our work are thoroughly checked for accuracy.”

When the data disagrees with your position, re-visit and challenge the underlying premises of your position, like a good engineer or analyst, or re-label and discount the data to fit your position.

The same way NASA re-labeled and discounted data concerning ET foam issues, O ring issues and Apollo block 1 issues.

By: Rand Simberg

Rand Simberg — Wed, 26 May 2010 17:41:42 +0000

“ditto heads.” There’s another useful comment-blocking term.

By: Gary Church

Gary Church — Wed, 26 May 2010 17:31:12 +0000

Your wind is foul. This is not a right wing site. Go hang out with the ditto heads.

By: Major Tom

Major Tom — Wed, 26 May 2010 14:32:34 +0000

“One nest of liberals offering a legal fig leaf to another…”

The GAO is an “independent, nonpartisan agency that works for Congress”. The information GAO provides to congressional decisionmakers is “objective, fact-based, nonpartisan, nonideological, fair, and balanced”.

gao.gov/about/index.html

Don’t make stupid, ignorant statements.

And do you really think that a Republican like Shelby would have asked the GAO to conduct an investigation of anything if the GAO was a “nest of liberals”?

Duh…

Think before you post.