Conscious Choice cover

From the press release: In this ground-breaking new history of early America, historian Robert Zimmerman not only exposes the lie behind The New York Times 1619 Project that falsely claims slavery is central to the history of the United States, he also provides profound lessons about the nature of human societies, lessons important for Americans today as well as for all future settlers on Mars and elsewhere in space.

Conscious Choice: The origins of slavery in America and why it matters today and for our future in outer space, is a riveting page-turning story that documents how slavery slowly became pervasive in the southern British colonies of North America, colonies founded by a people and culture that not only did not allow slavery but in every way were hostile to the practice.  
Conscious Choice does more however. In telling the tragic history of the Virginia colony and the rise of slavery there, Zimmerman lays out the proper path for creating healthy societies in places like the Moon and Mars.


“Zimmerman’s ground-breaking history provides every future generation the basic framework for establishing new societies on other worlds. We would be wise to heed what he says.” —Robert Zubrin, founder of founder of the Mars Society.


Available everywhere for $3.99 (before discount) at Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and all ebook vendors, or direct from the ebook publisher, ebookit. And if you buy it from ebookit you don't support the big tech companies and I get a bigger cut much sooner.

Details on Starliner changes

This article provides some details about the design changes being made to Starliner that have caused its first test flight to be delayed until 2018.


I must unfortunately ask you for your financial support because I do not depend on ads and rely entirely on the generosity of readers to keep Behind the Black running. You can either make a one time donation for whatever amount you wish, or you sign up for a monthly subscription ranging from $2 to $15 through Paypal or $3 to $50 through Patreon.

Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.

Your support is even more essential to me because I not only keep this site free from advertisements, I do not use the corrupt social media companies like Google, Twitter, and Facebook to promote my work. I depend wholly on the direct support of my readers.

You can provide that support to Behind The Black with a contribution via Patreon or PayPal. To use Patreon, go to my website there and pick one of five monthly subscription amounts, or by making a one-time donation. For PayPal click one of the following buttons:


Or with a subscription with regular donations from your Paypal or credit card account:


If Patreon or Paypal don't work for you, you can support Behind The Black directly by sending your donation by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman, to

Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652

Or you can donate by using Zelle through your bank. You will need to give my name and email address (found at the bottom of the "About" page). The best part of this electronic option is that no fees will be deducted! What you donate will be what I receive.


  • John Kross

    Kind of late in the game isn’t it? Didn’t Boeing conduct aerodynamic tests before this? Troubling.

  • Edward

    John Kross,
    Yes. It is late in the process, but the tests were months ago. The solution is only now being announced, now that further testing indicates the solution works.

    Congress’s choice to reduce funding delayed this kind of testing and may have reduced the amount of resources available to find the solution, as other aspects need to also move forward as well, spreading scarce resources among too many areas.

    This is the kind of surprise that rears its ugly head after the engineers think that they have a good design, and why testing is performed to verify that the design is as good as thought. When this kind of surprise comes up, they figure out why and how the design is inadequate and what needs to change to make a working design.

    The disappointing part is that we have had capsules on top of rockets before, so we would think that we know how to do it successfully. Without knowing what the aerodynamic problem was, I am going to guess that the service module is shorter than for earlier capsules (perhaps to save weight), and that the shorter section resulted in unexpected aerodynamics.

  • John Kross

    Yes, I agree with most of your post, but surely aerodynamic tests (or at least detailed CFD models) should have been performed years ago when the first designs of the CST-100/Atlas V stack were envisioned. It still seems very late to discover “unexpected” aerodynamic loads.

  • Edward

    John Kross wrote: “but surely aerodynamic tests (or at least detailed CFD models) should have been performed years ago when the first designs of the CST-100/Atlas V stack were envisioned.

    Vision is not design. The vision is the perfect condition that is seen by the designers and artists making the concept drawings. Eventually reality rears its ugly head (that is where the surprises come in) and changes have to be made. A seemingly harmless, minor design change can turn into a nightmare. Because of the costs of tests and computer modelling, these are not done constantly but are saved until the design has settled down a bit.

    My research shows that they performed early wind tunnel testing — without the Atlas V as part of the model — in December of 2011. I did not find out when they included the Atlas V in their tests and analyses, but the service module was already short.

    The following article talks of two problems. One was weight (it grows during design, because of reality’s ugly head) and the other was the aerodynamic problem, but they had been working on these two problems before May:
    They had one issue, a non-linear aerodynamic loads issue, where they were getting some high acoustic loads right behind the spacecraft.

    Solving the problem may have taken a long time, because they need to understand why and how the problem occurred and what is happening aerodynamically in order to figure out how to solve it. When you run into trouble, return to the fundamentals and work from there.

    After all, what got them into this trouble in the first place was relying on the similarity to Apollo and other proven capsules. Guessing at a solution without understanding the problem can cause even further delays as it is discovered that the guess was wrong. As Gene Kranz said, “work the problem, people. Let’s not make things worse by guessing.” (1 minute)

    From the linked article: “The good news is there are no additional large problems that have arisen in the last six months, so maybe we’re at the point where we’ve investigated everything, and we finally have a design we’re confident in.”

    Robert may have your answer, though:
    Robert commented: “This delay for Boeing is not really a surprise. Unlike SpaceX, the company had done very little actual development work on the capsule before winning its contract from NASA. They therefore have a lot more to do to become flight worthy.

    It looks like, for Boeing, the serious work started after the contract was signed in 2014.

Readers: the rules for commenting!


No registration is required. I welcome all opinions, even those that strongly criticize my commentary.


However, name-calling and obscenities will not be tolerated. First time offenders who are new to the site will be warned. Second time offenders or first time offenders who have been here awhile will be suspended for a week. After that, I will ban you. Period.


Note also that first time commenters as well as any comment with more than one link will be placed in moderation for my approval. Be patient, I will get to it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *