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.


Northrop Grumman successfully tests SLS solid rocket booster

Northrop Grumman yesterday successfully test fired a solid rocket booster to confirm its design for use on NASA’s long-delayed and overbudget SLS rocket.

The test, completed at the T97 test area at Northrop Grumman‘s facility in Promontory, Utah, took place on Wednesday, September 2, 2020, at 1:05 PM Mountain Daylight Time (19:05 UTC). A single five-segment SLS solid rocket motor with a thrust of up to 3.6 million pounds was ignited, and burned for approximately two minutes.

The booster is an expanded version of the solid rocket boosters used on the space shuttle, with five segments instead of four, and in fact will use previously flown segments from past shuttle launches. Since this booster will not be recovered, these launches will be the last time those segments fly.

Readers!
 

Please consider donating to Behind the Black, by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar below. 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 keep this site free from advertisements and do not participate in corrupt social media companies like Google, Twitter, and Facebook. 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

3 comments

  • Gealon

    Ah yes, more waste of shuttle hardware. So not only are they destroying four shuttle engines per launch of this albatross, they are also destroying the SRB’s? That’s actually news to me, but then again I should be surprised by such waste. Now I know we’re not building shuttle engines anymore, so when we use up those engines, that’s it right? We just move on to the next bloated, government run pork project? Or will they replace the SSME’s with something else to give the chosen manufacturer it’s cut of the pork, all while keeping ATK in business making giant solid rocket motors? Apologies for the harsh tone but I think it’s warranted, especially after finding out that NASA isn’t even attempting to recover the SRB’s, something they were originally designed to do. Guess I should be happy this thing will only fly once every four years or what ever their ridiculous schedule was.

  • Edward

    Gealon,
    You asked: “Now I know we’re not building shuttle engines anymore, so when we use up those engines, that’s it right? We just move on to the next bloated, government run pork project? Or will they replace the SSME’s with something else to give the chosen manufacturer

    Fortunately, NASA anticipated this problem, so they have ordered more SSMEs. In addition, because they are now expendable, NASA has paid for a redesign to remove the ability for reuse so that they can save money on each engine. The unit price of each engine is now higher than the price of the reusable engines. Good to know that our money is going for a good purpose.

    it’s cut of the pork, all while keeping ATK in business making giant solid rocket motors?

    As with many government programs, the work is distributed around the country, which helps to get support from Congressmen and Senators. *Sigh*

    The decision to not recover the SRBs was easy for NASA, because reusing the Shuttle SRBs did not save much money. Instead of figuring out how to make this more cost effective, NASA decided to make the SRBs expendable. Because the Space Shuttle was so expensive, NASA and Congress decided that SLS would be designed as a completely expendable rocket with a one-use capsule. Rather than figuring out how to do things better in space, the government chose to regress to 1960s methods. What a shame, and what a waste of NASA’s lessons learned and talented scientists, engineers, and technicians.

    Apologies for the harsh tone but I think it’s warranted, especially after finding out that NASA isn’t even attempting to recover the SRB’s, something they were originally designed to do.

    You are not the only one with harsh tones for SLS. As with all of NASA’s expensive projects, it is costing too much and will return too little. This is a major reason for shifting to commercial space companies. Commercial companies concentrate on projects that make a profit (sustainability), accomplish their goals with minimal cost, and don’t use taxpayer dollars to do it — so no one can complain that the money would be better used to pay people to be unproductive members of society (even NASA’s expensive projects are less costly and more productive than our various welfare programs). Commercial entities in space or on Earth are the zenith of efficiency, and government is the nadir.

    There is far more capital available outside of NASA than there is inside NASA.’ — paraphrased from an interview with NASA Administrator Bridenstine on the Ben Shapiro radio show on Monday 3 August 2020. Going commercial also removes another problem, the debates over what we should do with our limited space funding. When commercial companies choose how to spend their own money, they get to choose to go to the Moon, go to Mars, or go to asteroids. We don’t need a national debate over which destination we should spend our money on. But even better, with multiple companies making their own choices, each company can choose a unique destination, allowing us to go to the Moon, to Mars, and asteroids “at the same time.

    Allowing commercial companies to do their own things in space gives us the opportunity to explore space faster, forces us to develop space-based products that help us on Earth, and allows government projects to explore the more basic scientific areas rather than the areas that show the most promise for profit.

    NASA has reverted to 1960s methods(!) because of government’s aversion to risk. New commercial companies tend to risk it all to develop new methods and products that advance the state of the art (wasn’t NASA going to do that?), and that is their strength. These new companies hope to get a jump on the competition and make a lot of money while everyone else is trying to catch up. SpaceX and Rocket Lab are doing this right now. This is another advantage to going commercial rather than depending upon NASA to take us to the future.

    If Starship becomes operational, SLS will instantaneously become obsolete. So, yes, Gealon, you are justified in your harsh tone.

  • Gealon

    Thank you Edward, very informative. ^__^

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 *