US space policy

A place to engage extended discussions of things that come up on the ttbrown.com website. Anything goes here, as long as it's somehow pertinent to the subject(s) at hand.
Trickfox
The Magician
Posts: 1461
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 7:06 am
Location: Quebec or Montreal
Contact:

National Aeronautics and Space Council

Post by Trickfox »

There is currently no organizational authority in the federal government with a sufficiently broad mandate to oversee a comprehensive and integrated strategy and policy dealing with all aspects of the government’s space-related programs, including those being managed by NASA, the Department of Defense, the National Reconnaissance Office, the Department of Commerce, the Department of Transportation, and other federal agencies. This wasn’t always the case. Between 1958 and 1973, the National Aeronautics and Space Council oversaw the entire space arena for four presidents; the Council was briefly revived from 1989 to 1992. I will re-establish this Council reporting to the president. It will oversee and coordinate civilian, military, commercial, and national security space activities. It will solicit public participation, engage the international community, and work toward a 21st century vision of space that constantly pushes the envelope on new technologies as it pursues a balanced national portfolio that expands our reach into the heavens and improves life here on Earth.
Now there is a man with a PLAN!!!

Amalie.... without tell us whom,....do you know anyone who would probably end up being "in" this council yet?

Trickfox
The psychopropulsier (as pointed out in the book The Good-bye man by Linda Brown and Jan Lofton) is a Quantum entanglement project under development using Quantum Junctions. Join us at http://www.Peeteelab.com
FM No Static At All
Senior Officer
Posts: 558
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2008 4:34 pm
Location: Pacific Northwest
Contact:

Re: US space policy

Post by FM No Static At All »

....do you know anyone who would probably end up being "in" this council yet?
Are you interested in a post there Mr. Trickfox?

Fred a.k.a.
FM - No Static At All
'The only reason some people get lost in thought is because its unfamiliar territory.'

http://fixamerica-fredmars.blogspot.com/
Trickfox
The Magician
Posts: 1461
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 7:06 am
Location: Quebec or Montreal
Contact:

Space Council dreams

Post by Trickfox »

I don't think I could meet the required background experience. I'd be lucky to sweep the broom in someone's office who was in this council, -so long as I had permission to read anything there :mrgreen: .

Trickfox
The psychopropulsier (as pointed out in the book The Good-bye man by Linda Brown and Jan Lofton) is a Quantum entanglement project under development using Quantum Junctions. Join us at http://www.Peeteelab.com
amalie
Junior Birdman
Posts: 208
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 7:36 pm

space council dreams

Post by amalie »

FM No Static At All ,
You are talking in the Exo-politics style, I recognize that style although I did not read any of the books yet. The collective trauma posed by momentum into an advanced human society that does not tolerate disease, warfare, famine and ignorance could probably only be explained away by positing the psychological values of an "alternative " civilization .

Trickfox,
I shouldn't worry overmuch about having background experience, I don't think Obama had anything much behind him,
apart from the Chicago connections and I know something about those already.

I don't know who will be part of Space Council , but I have a few suspicions without mentioning any names. Not me or any of my friends though unless ISST gets quickly included as part of the forthcoming policy package. Mc'Cain might have another route planned for space policy altogether, science debate 2008 team is still waiting for some more answers from that side.

It seems to me as if a lot of placements (or support structures)for a next administration are being incurred already, within a multitude of private and undisclosed special interests groups . These might be national or even International in scope. Which leaves me wondering if there is any place at all for a civil society initiative such as ISST , or if everything nowadays must achieved though personal connections. Not so much a matter of WHAT anyone wishes to say , but more WHO wishes to say it .

There is a lot of power posited by US space policy , so far there has not anything much said about sharing that power. The generation of a US space treaty would expose the current informational structures into the legislative process and also co-ordinate those prospects into foreign policy outreach and the establishment of international equivalencies. It is very unlikely that a new administration, from either side would wish to engage for such an oversight review . The basic reason why they will not, is because the general tendency is still towards creation of an elite formation, national , international or global, and not towards the preparation of open and democratic technological implementation values.

Amalie







Amalie
Trickfox
The Magician
Posts: 1461
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 7:06 am
Location: Quebec or Montreal
Contact:

Re: US space policy

Post by Trickfox »

There is a lot of power posited by US space policy , so far there has not anything much said about sharing that power. The generation of a US space treaty would expose the current informational structures into the legislative process and also co-ordinate those prospects into foreign policy outreach and the establishment of international equivalencies. It is very unlikely that a new administration, from either side would wish to engage for such an oversight review . The basic reason why they will not, is because the general tendency is still towards creation of an elite formation, national , international or global, and not towards the preparation of open and democratic technological implementation values.
Forgive me for saying this but isn't that just YOUR opinion of what is going on?

I don't see to many other nations wanting to do anything in space, and quite frankly those who are trying are doing just fine with the way things are now. I keep thinking there is another agenda in your quest to introduce ligislative bureaucracy in all of this. The SPACE COUNCIL sounds like a fine idea to me. Let the geniocrats decide what our policy should be. I think people who have actually BEEN in outter space are the best judge of what we should be concerned with. Those people had had a full and enriching experience and the wisdom of having floated above the planet has foreever changed these people in a way that none of us can posibly understand.

John Glen should be prime example of this type of leader.

Trickfox


Trickfox
The psychopropulsier (as pointed out in the book The Good-bye man by Linda Brown and Jan Lofton) is a Quantum entanglement project under development using Quantum Junctions. Join us at http://www.Peeteelab.com
FM No Static At All
Senior Officer
Posts: 558
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2008 4:34 pm
Location: Pacific Northwest
Contact:

Re: US space policy

Post by FM No Static At All »

Amalie wrote:You are talking in the Exo-politics style, I recognize that style although I did not read any of the books yet. The collective trauma posed by momentum into an advanced human society that does not tolerate disease, warfare, famine and ignorance could probably only be explained away by positing the psychological values of an "alternative " civilization .
I must honestly say that I didn't read any of the books either. I was strictly speaking from the soul, what I envision as a context for moving forward. Unlike many, I do not see government or politics capable of changing how people see the world or how they see one another.

We are the collection of our learning, whether that is classroom, self taught, or experiences. We are told that people are a certain way and we have experiences that reinforce those beliefs. My view is that is self-fulfilling prophecy. We as a global race of humanity will only exercise our "free will" to the extent that it does not impeach our beliefs, hence we are left trapped with the confines of an illusionary "box" from which we view the world outside of ourselves. We have become dependent on others to provide us with our basis needs. We are dumbed down, codependent, and most of us feel trapped in a world in which we have no control. Truth is, we only have control over ourselves. We never have control over others. We can influence others by our actions or by force, but that is not how real paradigm shift occurs.

Changing the way we look at the world, taking responsibility for doing what will move us forward instead of expecting a new administration to make those changes. And what changes can be expected by a new administration? Will a new energy emerge that will end the dependence on oil? Will cures be found that will end our dependency of pharmaceuticals? Will children be able to attend institutes of higher learning simply because that have an exceptional ability to excel? Will hunger end for those that cannot obtain adequate nutrition? What do you really expect to happen?

Sad state of affairs when a corporate entity has more privileges than a human being. We are more liable than any company with "Inc." following the name. Corporate law is held in higher esteem than common law. The individuals rights have been usurped by the legislative body elected to represent us and protect our rights. No, I am certain that real policy changes, those that will enable individuals to share in the explorations and commercial advantages of space systems, will only occur when there are enough individuals pushing toward that goal, and at some point will reach critical mass and the reaction will occur. Until that time, it is nothing more than board room banter, and more rhetoric.
Trickfox wrote:I don't see to many other nations wanting to do anything in space, and quite frankly those who are trying are doing just fine with the way things are now. I keep thinking there is another agenda in your quest to introduce ligislative bureaucracy in all of this. The SPACE COUNCIL sounds like a fine idea to me. Let the geniocrats decide what our policy should be. I think people who have actually BEEN in outter space are the best judge of what we should be concerned with. Those people had had a full and enriching experience and the wisdom of having floated above the planet has foreever changed these people in a way that none of us can posibly understand.

Glenn became a Senator and hasn't pushed for any global space program. And other nations that have put forth space agendas have done so under the auspices of NASA or ESA. Only USSR/Russia and China were able to do what they did without US/NASA guidance/policy and I am not certain that is entirely accurate. In fact, I don't think the space program that we have known about since Sputnik is the whole truth and nothing but the truth. But that would lead us into a gray area that I don't care to dive into at the present. We have enough with the rabbit hole we are in here with TTB and such.

Which brings up a point regarding TTB and space. Could it be that because the technology that he was working with was so "out there" that he chose not to be vocal about a space program? Ms. Brown, were you privy to any talk from your father regarding a space program, civilian or otherwise? Did your Dad ever offer his thoughts about going to the Moon, Mars, and beyond? Any hints about what he thought we would find once we got there?

Fred a.k.a.
FM - No Static At All
'The only reason some people get lost in thought is because its unfamiliar territory.'

http://fixamerica-fredmars.blogspot.com/
amalie
Junior Birdman
Posts: 208
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 7:36 pm

Re: US space policy

Post by amalie »

Dear Trickfox ,

Perhaps you are right , it is just my opinion , that we are all heading into a mindless totalitarian global technocracy, something that the world has never seen before.

The astronauts don't often have much say about what happens to the planet, they were lucky to even be properly paid for the risks they took . Although when those chosen few got a good look at our situation , they wept for what man has done and continues to do .

I do not like politics much , I feel that the idealism of political theory has caused tremendous devastations . Nations will engage into warfare because of political allegiances , because of cultural differences and because of the need to provide resources for populations . None of the long standing and historic planetary instability is helped any by the tremendous problems now posed by climate change. We may well find the world of the future becomes an even more threatening and difficult one for most.

Now is the right moment ( in my opinion ) to make the best of what we have and to come together as an international community of nations, against what grave dangers the future might hold . A great deal can be achieved presently within a US initiative for a more co-operative and informed approach to international affairs. The easiest and quickest way to achieve such a focused and dynamic global interchange is through the thoughtful inter-governmental utilization of Information technologies, in particular by the exploration and undertaking of genuine and collaborative pathways within the untoward capacity of space based systems. This sort of initiative is what the world wants and what it is looking for , they are seeking as active and benign American leadership, and of course information technology and space exploration and space systems development is what America does best , and even what it invented for the most part.

I believe that without this kind of a US generated "active" space treaty structure, finding accurate and equitable solutions for the multitude of upcoming problems will be far more difficult . Please note that future planetary instabilities may even extend as far as space itself, the postulation of space based warfares and the destruction of space assets is not an unthinkable within the current and insular strategic defensive perspectives.

In fact all other nations wish to do something with space . They wish to ensure that space is only used for peaceful purposes.re; PAROS and COUPOS at the UN . The only nation that does not subscribe for the current peaceful usage mandate is US.

I do genuinely appreciate the established US space policy position which is one of obtaining unilateral space oversights. However( in my opinion ), that oversight capacity would be of far greater significance if it now undertook process for the developmental criteria, providing a "democratic " basis for utilization potentials at the international level . I have put "democratic " in hyphens because that is a difficult and sometimes very misunderstood word . A better description would advocate for the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the assurance that all countries and all peoples do what can be done to allow all individuals of basic human rights and the necessities of life .

Within a few years we may find that food production decreases, epidemics become widespread and vast populations are displaced owing to both flooding and desertification. Or the worst case scenarios may not happen at all. I do not subscribe to the arguments for or against the several and comparative climate change outcomes. All I know is the ice caps are melting, and I feel something very dangerous is going on and I think we should create useful international policy structures such as ISST in case of a worst case outcome .

ISST would be prepared to ensure food supplies for untold millions and to locate and endow alternative habituations and occupations for masses of disenfranchised. ISST is about human survival for which ensurance co-operative and internationalized legislative pathways remain the most effective. Bureaucracy is only of any value if it gives sought after results, we might be inclined to leave space based and information process more open ended and in the hands of informal and mostly unrecognized agencies but if that means that implementations which could save the lives of untold million are not made available, is not such freedom rather too expensive .

ISST does not preclude personal or corporate information enterprise , it works to advice governments of the best possible outcomes, for millions and millions of people. I would be happy to see the geniocracy create the methods and attributes of a future " information Age " dynamic, if I thought they would be prepared to address the varied space usages within an equal and balanced perspective. However to date what I have seen of such undertakings and applications, has not been impressive, focus and spending ( within US )is still mostly for militarized applications while many other nations seem to view enhanced administrative capacity ( within information and media process ) as an opportunity to engage into censorship and state propaganda .

I have though a lot about the arguments both for and against ISST. "against" because it is a legislative and bureaucratic entity, and who needs more of those , "for" because it is a reasonable way of ensuring and expediting a genuine and helpful international development process. For me the argument "for" superseded the argument "against" , mainly because ISST is an institution that would only be used if it offered opportunity for authentic value and problem solving , it would not and could not be used in any other capacity as it functions within discrete opt in/opt out clauses and therefore would only have applications if they were requested and required .

My inquiry would be ; As we do not know what will happen next (climate change) do you think that ISST could be one way of ensuring the better outcomes ?

ISST represents the creation of global safety net , it should not represent an effort to posit power within any organism no matter how international and far reaching the agenda of that particular platform .

Informational technology is all about problem solving, about the distribution of affect and the dissemination of expertise. Unfortunately without an intention or a vision for an globally integrated informational capacity , the dramatic potentials now available may well be lost within a multitude of conflicting identities and a plethora of details . Not to mention totally lost within the identity and duration of power for isolated and totalitarian national outcomes .

Amalie
Mikado14
Mr. Nice Guy
Posts: 2343
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 1:49 pm
Location: Somewhere in Pennsy

Re: US space policy

Post by Mikado14 »

amalie wrote:A better description would advocate for the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the assurance that all countries and all peoples do what can be done to allow all individuals of basic human rights and the necessities of life .

Within a few years we may find that food production decreases, epidemics become widespread and vast populations are displaced owing to both flooding and desertification. Or the worst case scenarios may not happen at all. I do not subscribe to the arguments for or against the several and comparative climate change outcomes. All I know is the ice caps are melting, and I feel something very dangerous is going on and I think we should create useful international policy structures such as ISST in case of a worst case outcome .
Amalie, I am asking if you could please elaborate on the above as to how it interrelates with the uses of space which is what I have labored under in thinking of ISST. From my point of view, I see it different, please do explain, concisely.

Mikado
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy
amalie
Junior Birdman
Posts: 208
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 7:36 pm

Re: US space policy

Post by amalie »

Dear FM No Static At All,

It is me then that has the cynical exo-politics angle . You must excuse , I have had a few bad experiences already, so I am not reading you properly here .

I will go through your all your posts , on the "space policy" thread again and try to respond from a better and more adequate line of sight .

That would be more focused for the genuine and humanistic content of your discourse , which is painful to talk about because one knows something about the horrors of a misguided imagination .

But you have been very brave already , so I should follow suit.

Amalie
amalie
Junior Birdman
Posts: 208
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 7:36 pm

Re: US space policy

Post by amalie »

Dear Mikado,

Information technology is primarily applications based and it is a currently available and very impartial policy vehicle .
Impartial because such technology focuses on verifiable information which in this particular context would mean accurate statistical collations for conditions and attributes, analysis of data via computational capacity and the creation of advisements within an open international forum. These attributes are trans-political and beyond discriminations of language or culture, they are based on scientific acumen.

The linkage into space based systems happens for two reasons. Because information technology is primarily communications technology, it therefore often functions best through satellite connections. Also because the statistical references which comprise the substance of the utilization platform, will be greatly enhanced and enabled by near earth observation systems and endowments.

So for example in the case of entitlements and crisis, an institution such as ISST would function to enable problem solving at this level within a range of equivalent and mutable options.

Firstly by presupposing inimical conditions such as an upcoming food production deficit for a nation. Which is one example from a comprehensive agenda .

Internationally mandated earth observation systems can help establish verifiable outlines for the future productivity cycles , measuring soil moisture content, solar radiation and so on . Results from such space enabled surveys can be contributed into a computational platform for analysis along with many other relevant and protected nutritional details such as population specifics, what people eat , what foods they export . The computational input would also include what is known about alternative types of seeds and plants and various uncertain parameters such as less or more rainfall. Also included in the data for such a computational analysis would be several agricultural methadologies, for example for the enabling of greater agricultural prospects through innovative water supply technologies, or for the provision of alternative sources of fertilizers.

From all this data, computational maps can be drawn which postulate various future outcomes according to various conditions. The choices for a national agricultural policy would be made by a subscribing government according to the typical criteria, such as the need for a government to ensure adequate nutrition for all of it's population, the need for a government to ensure adequate food export capacity and so on. Policy choices that might be made in light of analysis outcomes, include cutting back on meat production in favor of other foods(more protein per hectare), choosing new strains of seed (disease or drought resistant, or genetically engineered ) and establishing either larger co-operative farming ventures or encouraging smaller and self supporting ventures ( depending upon which styles give the optimal results )

Agricultural plans following from such policy choices can also be distributed through the civil society informational advisements, the same routes that have been established at treaty level for the collation of informations. Such pathways would be secured and protected within the treaty mandate for equal representation .

In the case of infringement of Human Rights by for instance denial of food to segments of a population , the treaty mandate would identify such departures from agreed international norms and take responsive action within the international mandates for correct utilization policy .

This is of course only a preventative measure , however at this time not even such legislated prevention against economic and policy abuse is available to the international community , as we have recently witnessed in Zimbabwe.

I should stress that despite the appearance of far greater advisement and applications potential , integrated legislation at this level would not necessarily mean an immediate need for more informational and space based equipment , only that the equipment we already have, would be expedited in a co-operative manner for greater productivity and general usage.
amalie
Junior Birdman
Posts: 208
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 7:36 pm

Re: US space policy

Post by amalie »

Dear Mikado,

Although I risk exhausting your patience ,

I would add to the fairly fundamental agricultural development theory I have put forward, a couple of asides.

That ISST or a similar institution would fulfill several specific functions for all the civil society conditions, developmental, corporate or economic, educational and even crisis and security (which might be considered together as they are both extreme conditions).

Because of the many dimensions to the information age utilities platform, information process for agricultural implementations can also be viewed within the context of informing international economic flows, monetary adjustments and export/import ratios. Therefore a country that finds it can grow a lot of soy beans but does not have many phone technicians can trade in a few food exports for a few good communications professors. A silly analogy I know but the argument is the same, to each his own, from each to all, such a system works both ways and both directions are useful.

The agricultural items also represent the economic or corporate issues as well, for example a company needs a certain type of agricultural advocate for a certain style of agriculture, these sociological and cultural attribute can be found within an government enabled teaching facility, for instance take the example of Rwanda which has recently become a technological infrastructure, with all their school children on the inter-nets. Truly astonishing when you consider that they were chopping each other to pieces with hatchets a few years ago.

The agricultural issues also enable the early production of large scale engineering infrastructures, to supply water, provide alternative energies, manufacture advanced medicines and materials, and learn how to use suitable materials, right methods and proper process so that everyone gets a chance to live e reasonable life. All the aspects of the informational process are subservient to the legislative impulse, which represents the authentic passage of the living and universal humanistic principles. Justice has and does exist, in history from Greece , in China , from everywhere, people have always sought to look for pathways of a future world.

Not to mention the trades unions.

Amalie
amalie
Junior Birdman
Posts: 208
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 7:36 pm

Re: US space policy

Post by amalie »

Dear Mikado ,

Yes well, you have guessed, there is something else as well.

Information based economics and engineering is readily duplicated , or franchised, an international process via treaty speeds all the levels of technological outreach up.

The other thing is when you get down past all the layers, past the agricultural layers and the economic layers you get to the heart of the beast, the crisis layers.

At least if we have ISST, we will be able to use rations properly (and with informed consent) . Would you really keep six cats if you knew that two children in Mexico would get malnutrition because of your choice ... for the worst possible example...ever ...

At least in that case we will all be assured of a proper entitlement card, to collect survival rations, what you will need to survive. ISST would be the only guarantee. Unless you happened to be living in Haiti ( yesterday news item told me that "the refugees refused to eat the beans because they wished to have rice with them and there wasn't any " )

Amalie
amalie
Junior Birdman
Posts: 208
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 7:36 pm

Re: US space policy

Post by amalie »

Friends ,

Climate change clouds, a new species !
Oxidized methane,dry atmosphere, nano ice crystals, meteor seeding, sunspots

http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/strangecl ... dgeofspace

Amalie
amalie
Junior Birdman
Posts: 208
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 7:36 pm

Re: US space policy

Post by amalie »

Mikado14
Mr. Nice Guy
Posts: 2343
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 1:49 pm
Location: Somewhere in Pennsy

Re: US space policy

Post by Mikado14 »

Amalie,

I now see a bit better where you are coming from. One item does strike me as too encompassing and sends a red flag.

"infringement of Human Rights" - that is a very broad meaning group of words. One must be aware of cultural standards as well and what we may interpret as a violation may be of the norm for a group of people. Who defines "Human Rights"?
Amalie wrote: I should stress that despite the appearance of far greater advisement and applications potential , integrated legislation at this level would not necessarily mean an immediate need for more informational and space based equipment , only that the equipment we already have, would be expedited in a co-operative manner for greater productivity and general usage.
My interpretation of that statement almost sounds like Marshall Law upon a private companies wholly owned Satellite System. A parallel to that would be, since you have a house and the country needs to be protected, the government is going to pass legislation that you must give up one bedroom to house a soldier, for the protection and benefit of all. Further, you must provide food as well and there will be no reimbursement since you already have the house in place. This might be silly but I see a means of usurping ones capital looming in your statement. Some of what you say treads perilously close to taking away Constitutional and Property Rights in this country. Too many, way too many rights have been abrogated and the American public doesn't even know unless it directly affects them. I know that if I spend my funds to build, launch and maintain a satellite, I expect to be compensated for any use thereof and before you say that they would be compensated, who is going to pay?

One other item I find disconcerting is when you refer to the joint operation of military satellites with civilian. Am I the only one on this forum that sees a conflict here?
Amalie wrote:Internationally mandated earth observation systems can help establish verifiable outlines for the future productivity cycles , measuring soil moisture content, solar radiation and so on . Results from such space enabled surveys can be contributed into a computational platform for analysis along with many other relevant and protected nutritional details such as population specifics, what people eat , what foods they export . The computational input would also include what is known about alternative types of seeds and plants and various uncertain parameters such as less or more rainfall. Also included in the data for such a computational analysis would be several agricultural methadologies, for example for the enabling of greater agricultural prospects through innovative water supply technologies, or for the provision of alternative sources of fertilizers.
Much of what you state here already exists. You can pass all the treaties, directives etc but the individual countries have to accept the information and utlilize it. How the United States has typically dealt with this is to throw money at them to implement the information. Historically speaking, what happens to the changes once the money is gone? What happens when the food, or whatever, is confiscated into the black market? Who enforces? Do we send in the military or do we use a space based system to hold them at "gun point"?

I'll slow down now.

Mikado
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy
Locked