If the Russians Won't Play Nice, Who Needs Them?

Bigelow/Boeing Space Hotel

Apparently the Russians don't like it that the US has complained about recent Russian imperialism rearing its ugly heat with the annexation of the Crimea and continuing threats to take more territory from the Ukraine. Now they want to ban us from the International Space Station.  I figure, let's just let 'em have it along with the rest of the world who were supposed to love us now that Barak Obama is president, but don't. We should, of course take our junk with us. I figure, since they all keep telling us they don't need us, let's see how they manage on their own. Call it our gift to international development.

Russian deputy prime minister Dmitry Rogozin and suggested we "use trampolines" to get our astronauts to space. So let's do just that for a while. We don't have to be in space all the time. Let's back up and unleash American private industry on the problem. Meanwhile our astronauts can be training for the next "giant leap for mankind" as Neal Armstrong so aptly described it. For instance:

1. The US pays 67 million dollars per astronaut for transportation to the International Space Station. Elon Musk's Dragon X space capsule could deliver 7 astronauts for that figure. Space X already delivers up to 13,228 pounds (6.5 tons) worth of stuff to the ISS on every trip using it's cargo version of the Dragon X. The spacecraft was designed to also be able to be fitted to carry human passengers. Give him the launch money we'd have used to pay the Russians and we'll wind up saving a lot of money in the long run.
2. Why are we messing with the Russians anyway? Why don't we just build our own space station and, like I said, leave the old ISS behind as our gift to the "rest of the world". Our way of giving them a little boost. Bigelow Industries and Boeing have already developed inflatable space station modules. Take our budget for launching astronauts and put it toward designing a giant blow-up US Space Station with lots more room and more modern tech on board. We could even give the Air Force it's own wing to do Air Forcey type things. 
3. Why aren't we going to the moon? Bigelow also has some nifty designs for blow up moon bases. Space X has a Falcon Heavy rocket under development that could get us there. We could always dust off the lunar lander designs from Apollo and update them. We know they work. 
4. What about mining and salvage operations? NASA already has its eyes on harvesting asteroids for materials.Why not the same on the moon?  There are plenty of minerals there and our astronauts could go around picking up all the metal stuff the Russians and Chinese have left scattered all over the lunar surface and either melt them down for scrap or repair them and charge the Russians and Chi-coms for the repairs. 
5. Why aren't we preparing to go to Mars while we're at it? Apparently there are some things on the moon we could make oxygen and water out of so let's set up labs to experiment with that stuff on the moon. If we can learn to get along on the moon we can figure out how to get along on Mars. At least Mars has an atmosphere to work with.
6. Actions speak louder than words. Instead of talking about how much we want to help the world, why don't we just do it. Let's push out toward the final frontier and bring our friends along with us. Countries that want to go along should be welcomed. Our gain is their gain and all you have to do to be a part of the amazing things we will be doing is to quit calling us names and undermining everything we're trying to do. If you want to be part of something big, do like the sign on the recording studio where "We are the World" was taped - "Please check your egos at the door." If we show the rest of the world how to be altruistic in space, others will follow.
7. Reward innovation and keep the cronyism out of it. You want a successful space race, make it a real race. Rewards go to those who do the best work. Cheating should be massively punished. Crony deals that reward shoddy workmanship, kickbacks and poor return on investment should get the perps banished from space. Let the Earth be their prison.
8. Get the media in on it in a big way. If you want people excited about space investment, get it on television and in the theaters. How about IMAX on the moon or Survivor Tranquility Base. Admittedly down the road, but you get the idea. Chris Hadfield had the right idea with his ISS music video of "Ground Control to Major Tom". Find media celebs to recruit as space boosters. How about a reporter in space on the brand new space station. Wouldn't you love to see Meghan Kelly floating around on camera trying to interview the guys on the crew?
9. Get private investors into the business of financing individual for-profit missions. What might an asteroid pulled into lunar orbit be worth?  How about investors putting up a for-profit space hotel. Bigelow's got the modules for it. Space-X has the boosters and soon will have the crew capsules. About 7 other companies aren't far behind.
10. Make the greenies happy and reduce rich peoples' collective guilt. Start a fund-raising drive to support development of more eco-friendly launch vehicles - balloon launches, space elevators, mag lev "rail gun" launchers and such. Publish efforts to create fuels from things found in space rather than having to lift it off the Earth. Advertise our efforts to reduce the cost and environmental impact of spacecraft launches, to harvest and recycle space junk and improve our knowledge of planetary science as "planet-friendly". Do documentaries showing how what we learn about conservation and recycling of food and water for off-world bases can be used to insure better harvests and cleaner water back on Earth.

NASA Scale Mag/Lev Launch System

We just need some leadership over at NASA that's more concerned with space exploration than with making Muslims feel good about their contribution to science. The politics need to be set aside in favor of getting the job done. Right now, as Ronald Reagan pointed out, we're the last best hope of freedom left on the planet. If we go down to totalitarianism, you'd better hope we've got some way to get off this rock.

Me, I'm betting on Jesus dropping by in a big space ship and evacuating the good guys before the bad guys blow themselves up and all the rest of us with them. Ah, but then I'm a bit pessimistic about how long we've got left. But I do think the longer we keep them busy the less twitchy their nuclear trigger fingers will be.

It'll be nice when we inherit the New Earth, not to have to deal with all the self-interested, corrupt and evil folk that feel like they must rain on every parade anybody gets up besides themselves. I like the rail gun launch system myself. It make take me and some buddies of mine a thousand or so years to figure it out and build it, but then, we won't have to worry about time so much then.

© 2014 by Tom King

Is it a Christian's Duty to Help Expand Government Charity?

Add caption

Jimmy Carter is probably quite honest in his opinion (left), although he seems frighteningly deficient in his understanding of the American system of government and the Scriptures' advice on the subject.  Scripture does say, "Render unto Caesar, the things that are Caesar's and even did a miracle to help Peter pay his taxes. The moneylenders were the crony capitalists of Jesus' day and He did not approve of their activities at all. Jesus said if the government asks you to carry a burden one mile carry it two. Jesus was talking about a government ruled by kings and emperors. He was not talking about a government of the people, by the people and for the people. If He were He would have very likely had some things to say about our responsibility not to let our government drag people out of their beds and make them carry heavy loads for the Army.

Because our American government derives its power and its mission from the people, we are charged with responsibility for what it does. That is why we vote - to guide our leaders and to tell them what we want them to do.  And in that process, yes, we may have to pay our taxes to support things we do not like, but that enough of our citizens voted to do anyway. Thanks, however, to our constitution, we are not required to shut up and give tacit approval to those things the government does that we think are wrong or even misguided by our silence. It is our responsibility in a democratic republic to provide guidance to our government's representatives as to how we want to run things.

If we see that government doesn't do a thing very well, it ought to be our responsibility to require that our government representatives step aside and stop interfering with those who do perform those tasks well. After all, it is our government. Our congress, senate, judiciary and administration were not seen by our founders as infinite law generating machines. At some point, if you keep adding laws and systems to a government, eventually it collapses of its own weight. I do believe that, unless we can get a few congresses that abolish more laws than they make, we are not far from that collapse now.

Jesus never said we could buy freedom from guilt or our responsibility to the poor at a discount by making our neighbors pay "their share". Charity by taxation is a way for wealthy people to not have to pay as much to fulfill our Christian duty to the poor. That's one powerful reason for some wealthy people to favor charity through government taxation. It costs them less and they don't have to feel guilty because they can tell themselves, "It's the government's responsibility, not mine."

Charity to the poor, the widows and orphans has always been a duty Christians are expected to perform regardless of what "everybody else" does. We are not relieved of that duty simply because the government demands we pay a high tax rate so it can give help to the poor. We can't shuffle off our responsibilities that way. It is not allowed. We are commanded to give real help to the poor, to set them on their feet and help them become strong and independent - to set them free. The type of help the government gives is not help at all, but a subtle enslavement of those it purports to help. It serves the interests of the wealthy and powerful because it creates a large dependent class who will reliably vote for those who pay them their pittance. That is all.

Christian charity as God would have it, sets free the poor, the disabled, the sick and the poor of spirit. True charity will always set people free, not just make them reliable political supporters.

© 20114 by Tom King

Be Careful Little Hands What You Sign

I got an e-mail from Change.org this morning asking me to sign an "important" petition to protect our children. "What could it be?" I asked myself. Is the government threatening to force my children to be indoctrinated in schools with socialist, atheist or communist propaganda?

No. It's even worse!

Are they threatening to burden my children with a national debt they will never be able to pay off in a dozen lifetimes?

No, not that. The petitioner didn't want you to think about that.

Here is the burning issue our nation faces - the threat to the well-being of children (and I quote):

• Target is contributing to gender stereotypes and gender segregation by having pink and blue pegboards to identify particular toys (and aisles) as "girl toys" and "boy toys". It has been proven that not only is this bad for our childrens' self-esteem and intellectual prowess, but also contributes to bullying and ostracism.

Okay, let me valve off a little steam slowly so that my head does not explode. The opening paragraph of this petition starts off with a totally unsupportable statement linking genderized colors not only with the destruction of children's self-esteem, but also apparently with brain damage and social violence.

Perhaps the petition should also call for the removal of blue and pink from the crayon box. Maybe we also need to remove such colors from the sky in order to protect the environment from segregating us all by gender every time we look up.

What a flying crock of hoo-doo!  When you look at unbiased studies of the role of toys in gender identification, you find a different story. The entire diatribe that goes along with this bogus petition accuses retailer Target of promoting sexism because it uses color cues to show boys and girls which have the toys that intensive marketing research shows that boys and girls want. These studies are very scientific as the bottom line of a huge corporate retailer is at stake here and Christmas is only 8 months away. Got to be ready for those kids looking for toys they like.

Target will cave, of course. They are, after all, Walmart for liberals, but just for fun let's look at a the result of a real study. Back when I was in grad school studying psychology I ran across a study on toys and gender. I can't find it anymore. It was likely suppressed as politically incorrect.

Anyway, in this study, the researchers decided to provide children with toys not specific to their gender. They wanted to see if it was the kinds of toys kids played with that influenced the gender stereo-types they embraced as they grew up. They gave boys Barbie dolls and Easy Bake ovens. They gave the girls building blocks, Army men, trucks and cars. What they discovered as a result of months of intensive research was that if you bend Barbie at the waist and grab her by the legs, she makes a usable six-gun and that the Easy-Bake Oven will partially melt down smuggled in Army men so you can make your own dead guys. And you can build play houses out of Legos and park your dump trucks in front of it so your Army Men can come to a tea party.

We are biologically imprinted from birth to take on certain roles for which our sex qualifies us - at least those of us who don't have some kind of genetic misfire. Removing sexual identity cues from our children's worlds and even removing normal sexual cues and replacing them with non-gender or opposite gender cues serves only to confuse children.

We need our blue shirts and pink skirts. It's how we learn who we are and what we are in this troubled and confusing world. Trying to force some sort of artificial gender neutrality on human beings doesn't work unless, of course, you adopt the "Nebuchadnezzar method" and that only works with men. And remember why old Neb used to do that particular out-patient surgery. It was to remove any ambition from his male harem guards, slaves and clerks.

Are we really going to add one more artificial, politically correct prohibition to our culture that confuses young children? I'm not signing this petition. I'd rather barbecue a steak in an Easy-Bake Oven.

© 2014 by Tom King