Tag: bankruptcy

The Cracker Barrel kerfuffle proves the now powerful reach of the alternative/conservative press

Cracker Barrel's logos

While much of the entire “controversy” over the decision by Cracker Barrel to change and then restore its old logo seemed to me to be a tempest in a teapot, the fact that the firestorm itself quickly forced Cracker Barrel to back down tells us something far more important: The alternative press (mostly conservative) is no longer confined to the fringes of culture, but now has real reach throughout society.

This cultural change can’t be underlined enough. For most of my long life, conservative news and cultural outlets had little impact on the general culture. They would make their points, often cogently and based on facts, and find themselves generally ignored. Only a decade ago, when conservatives complained about the leftward drift by major corporations or universities into racial quotas, bigotry, blacklists, censorship, and totalitarian Marxism, few noticed and more significantly, the companies or universities shrugged off the criticisms nonchalantly, as if the complaints were nothing more than a tiny gnat flying about in the air.

I speak from experience, because a decade ago I was posting regularly about this drift in both universities and corporations, was getting my posts picked up by many conservative news aggregates, and yet those posts had no impact at all. Nothing changed. If anything, the corporations and universities cited actually accelerated their racial quotas and their emphasis on bigotry, blacklists, censorship, and totalitarian Marxism.

No more. In the past four years the general culture and how it gets its information has fundamentally changed. That culture now listens to the right, and the result is fast and immediate change.

The Cracker Barrel kerfuffle proves this. Cracker Barrel proudly announced its logo change on August 19, 2025. In less than 24 hours numerous conservatives across the entire internet were lambasting the company about it, accusing the company of abandoning its past and going woke. This comment was quite typical:
» Read more

11 comments

The beginnings of the first political coup in American history

Obama, the boss behind the scandal, just before his election in 2012
Obama pontificating just before his election in 2012.
The change he brought was to toss the Constitution
in the trash heap.

Doug Ross has created a very readable six-part series, with illustrations, outlining in great detail and in dramatic form the corruption of the FBI and the entire intelligence community in the latter years of the Obama administration, beginning first with an extensive cover-up of Hillary Clinton’s illegal use of a private server for sending classified emails, followed by the initial stages of the Russian collusion hoax against Trump that was also used to justify spying on his campaign.

The series admits to be being a dramatization, but is also is based entirely on actual facts that are now documented and known. Nothing of substance or importance here has been made up. And by giving the story a slight patina of drama it becomes much more readable and understandable.

Take a short bit of time and read it all. The actions of numerous dishonest and power-hungry individuals in the FBI, the Justice Department, the Obama White House, and other agencies, will leave you appalled. And heading the list is Barack Obama, taking actions that were unquestionable illegal, immoral, and above all treasonous. He conspired with federal workers to not only cover up crimes, but to attempt to overthrow the elected president of the United States.

The key quote that describes quite succinctly the unconstitutional nature of this scandal comes from part 4, by Rick Ledgett, then deputy director of the National Security Agency.

“This is evidence of systematic violation of Americans’ constitutional rights.”

All six parts can be found at the links below. The series presently ends in May 2016, but Ross fully intends to continue it through the 2016 election and beyond, covering the entire Russian collusion hoax created by the intelligence community, under orders of Barack Obama, that worked to undermine and overthrown Donald Trump’s election as president.

Every American should read it all. It gives a good picture of the initial process that allowed utter evil to take over the entire Democratic Party.

7 comments

Yesterday’s Senate hearing on Artemis: It’s all a game!

Ted Cruz, a typical
Ted Cruz, a typical Congressional porkmeister

The Senate hearing that was held yesterday, entitled “There’s a Bad Moon on the Rise: Why Congress and NASA Must Thwart China in the Space Race”, was clearly organized by Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) to promote a continuation of the SLS, Orion, and Lunar Gateway parts of NASA’s Artemis program. And he was able to do so because senators from both parties felt the same way. They all want to continue this pork, and don’t really care whether those expensive assets can really accomplish what they promise.

Furthermore, the hearing was also structured to allow these politicians to loudly proclaim their desire to beat China back to the Moon, using this pork. They want the U.S. first, but they are almost all want to do this through a government-run program.

As such, the choice of witnesses and the questions put to them were carefully orchestrated to push this narrative. To paraphrase: “We have to beat China to the Moon! And we have make sure a NASA program runs the effort! And above all, we mustn’t let Donald Trump cut any of NASA’s funding, anywhere!”

It was therefore not surprising that the most newsworthy quote from the hearing was the comments by former NASA administrator Jim Bridenstine about Starship and how its choice as a manned lunar lander was a bad one, and that it was likely going to the prime reason China will put humans back on the Moon ahead of us.
» Read more

30 comments

SpaceX gets FAA approval to double its annual launches from Cape Canaveral

After several years of paperwork, the FAA yesterday approved SpaceX’s request to double its launch rate at the Space Force’s Cape Canaveral spaceport.

In addition to the annual launch increase from 50 launches to up to 120, the Federal Aviation Administration’s environmental review also approved a new on-site landing zone that could accommodate up to 34 booster landings per year. These boosters are the reusable first-stage portions of Falcon 9 rockets that SpaceX lands and refurbishes for future flights.

The review, finalized on Wednesday, found what’s known as a “Mitigated Finding of No Significant Impact,” meaning the proposed changes “would not significantly impact the quality of the human environment” under federal law, with impacts reduced by specific protective measures. [emphasis mine]

The highlighted words illustrate the absurdity of these environmental reviews. We know without doubt and without any major review that rocket launches do no harm to the environment or wildlife. We have seven decades of data in Florida proving it.

According to the article both the FAA and the Space Force still need to issue further approvals before this request can go forward. Expect the Space Force to agree, without much bother. The FAA needs to amend SpaceX’s launch licenses, and this should also happen relatively quick, especially with Trump as president.

One comment

Juno detects the aurora of the moon Callisto in Jupiter’s atmosphere

Though previous observations had detected auroras on Jupiter produced by three of its four Galilean moons — Io, Europa, and Ganymede — scientists had until now been unable to detect a similar aurora produced by the fourth, Callisto.

The Jupiter orbiter Juno finally accomplished this observation for the first time.

[T]o image Callisto’s footprint, the main auroral oval needs to move aside while the polar region is being imaged. And to bring to bear Juno’s arsenal of instruments studying fields and particles, the spacecraft’s trajectory must carry it across the magnetic field line linking Callisto and Jupiter.

These two events serendipitously occurred during Juno’s 22nd orbit of the giant planet, in September 2019, revealing Callisto’s auroral footprint and providing a sample of the particle population, electromagnetic waves, and magnetic fields associated with the interaction.

The research paper describing this detection has just been published.

These secondary auroras are caused by Jupiter’s powerful magnetic field.

The Juno mission itself is about to end. NASA did not approve a mission extension, and next month the science team will send the spacecraft into Jupiter’s atmosphere, where it will burn up. We will then have to wait five years for Europa Clipper to arrive in Jupiter orbit, followed a year later by Europe’s Juice orbiter.

While the propaganda press is condemning this decision, there is some logic to it. Juno has mostly completed its work. While new knowledge can certainly be gained if it remained operations for three more years, the amount of knowledge will be relatively small. And NASA does face a budget crunch. Better to spend its money on other things that can produce more bang to the buck.

3 comments

Trump once again moves Space Force HQ from Colorado to Alabama

During his first term as president, Donald Trump attempted to move the headquarters of the Space Force Colorado to Alabama. That move, announced in January 2021, never happened, first because it came so late in his term and second because Biden had no interest in making it happen and eventually rescinded it in 2023.

Today Trump reinstated that decision, once again announcing that the Space Force headquarters will move to Huntsville, Alabama.

The politics for this change have been and will continue to be complicated. Alabama’s lower cost of living would save the government money, but the defense industry is also well clustered in Colorado due to the military’s space operations that have been there for many decades.

In general I have never quite understood Trump’s desire to do this. I suspect there are some quid pro quo agreements in the background with Alabama politicians: “If you bring the Space Force to Alabama, Mr. Trump, we will back you on your other plans.” Then again, Trump might simply want to punish the increasingly leftist haven of Colorado.

Either way, it is now likely to finally happen. Trump 47 has been moving fast on all his initiatives, and is aided in this by a staff that is largely supportive (unlike during Trump 45).

15 comments

An interesting look at why the British government decided to eliminate its space agency

Gone, and likely soon to be forgotten
Gone, and likely soon to be forgotten

Link here. The article depends almost entirely on anonymous sources, but unlike most propaganda news stories which typically use such sources to push one pro-government perspective, this article includes sources from a range of viewpoints.

According to those sources who wanted the UK Space Agency (UKSA) gone, the agency was eliminated last month because it simply had not been very effective in building up Great Britain’s space industry. First, it was too focused on doing what the European Space Agency wanted.

The U.K. has had a different approach to space than its European counterparts, such as Germany, France and Italy, the source explained. Historically, the U.K. has dedicated most of its resources to the European Space Agency (ESA) rather than pursuing a multipronged approach involving a strong domestic space program and bilateral partnerships independent of ESA. Therefore, over 80% of UKSA’s budget has been placed into ESA. The perception in the government was that UKSA was acting more in line with ESA’s wishes than with the U.K. government’s needs, the source added.

Second, it not only did nothing to alleviate the red tape hampering the industry, its existence added a layer that made things worse. Numerous studies and hearings before Parliament in the past five years have bewailed the situation. The inability of the rocket companies to get launch licenses — for years — proved their correctness.

Meanwhile, the anonymous sources opposing the agency’s elimination argued that without it Great Britain will be in a weaker position negotiating with its ESA partners as well as projecting itself internationally in the space field.
» Read more

6 comments

South Korea’s space agency requests big 15% budget increase

South Korea’s space agency KASA today submitted its proposed budget for 2026 that included a 15% budget increase which would bring its funding to just under $8 billion.

According to the national space agency, the proposed funds will be concentrated in six major areas, which include the strengthening of space transportation capacity and new technology acquisition, advancing satellite-based communications, navigation and observation, as well as fostering future space industries through exploration.

The largest requested increases would be for developing new satellite constellations and rockets.

When the South Korean government established this agency in in 2024, it said its goal was to foster private enterprise. The agency itself repeated that assertion in January 2025 when it announced its long term plans. In both cases, however, I sensed a lack of sincerity in these assertions. The government wanted wanted to help build a prosperous aerospace industry, but it clearly wanted to do so with it in control.

Today’s budget request again reinforces my suspicions. KASA might want to encourage a commercial space industry, but it remains unclear whether it will let the private sector develop the satellites and rockets independently, or pay for the development while insisting it owns and controls everything.

Based on past history at NASA, my instincts say KASA will use this big budget to build an empire for its managers. Stay tuned to see if my instincts are correct.

Leave a comment

Trump ends unions for federal employees at NASA and other agencies

Trump defiant after being shot
Trump’s war with the swamp continues

Fight! Fight! Fight! Trump this week issued a new executive order ending the union contracts for government employees at NASA and other agencies, continuing a March order aimed at reducing or eliminating union action in the federal government.

The president issued a new directive ending collective bargaining agreements at NASA, the International Trade Administration, the Office of the Commissioner for Patents, the National Weather Service, the US Agency for Global Media, hydropower facilities under the Bureau of Reclamation, and the National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service.

Trump classified the agencies as having national security interests, exempting them from federal union laws.

Though lawsuits are on-going challenging Trump’s action, the public should know the context. » Read more

16 comments

SpaceX gets major tax credit for the jobs its new Starship factory will create.

Because SpaceX’s new Starship factory, dubbed Gigabay, will create more than 500 new jobs in the Boca Chica region, the Starbase city commission this week awarded the company a sales tax refund valued as much as $3.75 million.

Gigabay will create about 630 new jobs, according to information Barrera showed the City Commission. That number included 315 entry-level jobs, which pay nearly $50,000 a year; 277 staff jobs, which pay nearly $90,000 a year; and 26 manager positions, which pay about $164,000 a year. … At least 25% of the jobs must be filled by veterans, residents of the enterprise zone or people who are considered economically disadvantaged.

SpaceX may receive a sales tax refund of $7,500 per job if the company invests $250 million. The program is capped at 500 jobs, allowing SpaceX to receive a maximum of $3,750,000.

Once again, the opposition to SpaceX does not come from the general public, which overwhelming supports what the company is doing in south Texas because of the wealth it is bringing to the region. The only opposition comes from fringe and very tiny leftist activist groups who oppose anything new, and specifically hate Elon Musk because he backed Donald Trump in last year’s election.

Sadly, those fringe groups are also backed by the propaganda press, which gives them a loud bullhorn they don’t deserve. It is imperative that Texas politicians recognize these facts, and not let that bullhorn bully them into actions detrimental to their constituents.

One comment

Junk science now dominates the reporting of the propaganda press

The Sciences, when science journalism focused on reporting real discoveries
The Sciences, when the goal of science journalism
was to report real discoveries

When I started my career as a science journalist in the early 1990s, Peter Brown, the editor of award-winning magazine The Sciences (now sadly discountinued), assigned me the job of writing short news pieces. He pointed at a three-foot-high pile of press releases, and suggested I go through them to find some scientific discovery worth reporting.

As I went through this pile each month, I found that 90% described results that while interesting certainly did not merit any news coverage. Many described theories that “might” or “could” be true, hardly examples of solid new knowledge. I would find a handful of releases worth a news report, while the remaining 90% would get thrown in the dumpster.

Unfortunately, limited space in the magazine often meant that only one of the stories I thought worthwhile would be reported, but it also meant the story we picked was of real significance. The reader was guaranteed to read about important research results, because the technology then forced us to be discriminating.

That was then. Today, things are very different. The web allows modern news outlets to report about practically every press release they get. Nothing gets thrown away. If anything, new outlets today relish reporting on the least significant science results, merely because the scientists speculate about some amazing final events that “might,” “could,” or “may” happen, if their theories are right. The press eats this junk science up, because it produces great clickbait that, while as vapid as cotton candy, sounds really cool or exciting. That these speculations have no basis in reality is irrelevant.

To give you an idea of what I mean, here are a few examples from our modern propaganda press that I have gathered in just the past week:
» Read more

15 comments

Study: Car design has worsened, increasing blindspots which cause accidents

The view out of a modern car
The view out of a modern car

Our present dark age: According to a study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), in the past two decades the design of cars has drastically decreased the visibility for drivers so that blindspots are larger, resulting in an increase in accidents.

Puzzled by traffic accident data showing that fatalities for cyclists and pedestrians had risen over the past 25 years, while car passenger deaths had come down, IIHS researchers wondered whether drivers might be finding it harder to see those more vulnerable road users.

And they discovered that successive versions of long-running popular cars had obstructed, more and more, a driver’s view of the 10 meters (33 ft) of space they were about to drive into. That near-car view, from the eye point of the average male driver, had shrunk on every one of six long-running models tested, IIHS testing showed, when an early (1997-plus) version was compared with the version on sale in 2023.

In the case of traditional cars, the near-car viewable area had contracted only slightly, the 7-8% reductions from the Honda Accord and Toyota Camry possibly even attributable to measurement error.

When it came to SUVs, however, the shrinkage was dramatic. The driver of a 1997 Honda CR-V could see 68% of a forward half-circle whose perimeter was 10 meters (33 ft) from their eye point – slightly more, in fact, than from the sedans that were tested. The driver of a 2023 CR-V could see just 28% of that semi-circle. In relative terms, the driver of the 2023 CR-V could see only 42% of what they would see from a 1997 model.

You can read the IIHS study here.

Why are designers doing this? One theory is that they are increasingly relying on cameras and software to replace the driver’s sight, and thus feel free to add obstructions to the car body that make it look cool. The problem is that these mechanical non-human solutions simply don’t work as well as the human brain, and thus drivers are hitting things more often.

But don’t worry. Soon AI will soon make it possible for cars will drive themselves! We will even be able to eliminate the windows entirely so that car travel will be an utterly private thing!

19 comments

New Horizons placed in hibernation, possibly forever

The science team running the New Horizons probe, now more then 5.7 billion miles from Earth, has placed the spacecraft into what will be its longest hibernation period so far, with the possibility that it could even last forever.

New Horizons, which had been in active data-collection mode since April, will now remain in hibernation. Pending a final Fiscal Year 2026 budget, the spacecraft may be awoken in late June 2026. This will be the longest hibernation period of the mission so far, surpassing the previous mark of 273 days from June 2022 to March 2023.

But the spacecraft won’t be completely at rest; New Horizons will continue to take round-the-clock measurements of the charged-particle environment in the Sun’s outer heliosphere and the dust environment of the Kuiper Belt using three different onboard scientific instruments. These data will be transmitted back to Earth when New Horizons wakes up. [emphasis mine]

Though the NASA press release puts up an optimistic front, it is very likely that this hibernation period will last significantly longer than planned, due to those budget negotiations. Trump’s budget proposes eliminating all funding for New Horizons, which will mean this hibernation period will be permanent. There will be no money to hire anyone to reactivate it.

Even if the budget is cut, it is probable that NASA management in the future will provide some cash. At the moment there is little for it to observe on a daily basis. All that needs to be done is to turn it on for short periods to download the heliosphere data. Management could simply decide to turn it on once every five years or so.

Leave a comment

Court rules in favor of SpaceX’s lawsuit against the NLRB’s legal status

NLRB logo
Now standing on feet of clay.

The Fifth Circuit of the US. Court of Appeals ruled yesterday that the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) unfair labor practice cases against SpaceX and two other companies should remain suspended until the legal challenges by those companies to the NLRB’s legal authority is settled.

The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit said Tuesday that being subjected to an unconstitutional administrative proceeding was an irreparable harm that justified preliminary injunctions halting NLRB cases. “The Employers have made their case and should not have to choose between compliance and constitutionality,” Judge Don Willett, a Trump appointee, wrote for the court. “When an agency’s structure violates the separation of powers, the harm is immediate—and the remedy must be, too.”

You can read the court decision here [pdf].
» Read more

One comment

Starmer government consolidates the UK Space Agency into larger agency

Gone, and likely soon to be forgotten
Soon to be gone, and likely forgotten

The Starmer Labor government in the United Kingdom today announced that it is stripping the UK Space Agency of its independent status and absorbing it into a larger agency, the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology,

Taking place by April 2026, the new unit will keep the UK Space Agency (UKSA) name and brand and will be staffed by experts from both organisations. This will drive up efficiency in line with the government’s Plan for Change, cutting red tape and making Whitehall more agile.

Today also sees the publication of over 60 recommendations from industry leaders on how to improve regulation for space missions, including Rendezvous and Proximity Operations (RPO) – where spacecraft work together in orbit.

The press release is filled with similar language extolling this bureaucratic change as guaranteeing a reduction of the red tape that has squelched the space industry in the United Kingdom, but a close review should make us all highly skeptical. The link for those “60 recommendations” lists nothing of a kind. Instead, it provides a second link to a report describing a government simulation of a licensing process for a commercial rendezvous and proximity satellite mission (RPO) (working with three different commercial companies) which is filled with bureaucratic language that is practically incomprehensible. For example, from the executive summary:
» Read more

Leave a comment

Oh by the way, the FAA has approved the August 24th launch of Starship/Superheavy

Increasingly irrelevant in the right places
Increasingly irrelevant in the right places

My headline reflects the sense of utter irrelevance of the FAA in announcing its approval of the launch licence for the tenth test launch of Starship/Superheavy (now scheduled for August 24, 2025) as well as its “closing” of its “investigation” into the failure during test flight nine.

As per the FAA in its statement, “There are no reports of public injury or damage to public property. The FAA oversaw and accepted the findings of the SpaceX-led investigation. The final mishap report cites the probable root cause for the loss of the Starship vehicle as a failure of a fuel component. SpaceX identified corrective actions to prevent a reoccurrence of the event.”

The FAA did not “oversee” SpaceX’s investigation. No one at the FAA has the slightest qualifications for doing so. All its bureaucrats did is sit in and watch, and when SpaceX’s engineers completed their work and “identified corrective actions,” the FAA paper-pushers pushed some paper to rubber stamp those conclusions.

Moreover, unlike during the Biden administration, the FAA did not waste any time or money retyping the SpaceX investigation. They simply approved it as is, and issued the launch license. And they apparently instantly agreed to the schedule proposed by SpaceX. In fact, it appears almost as if SpaceX announced the date before the FAA announced the license approval.

Elections matter. And they would matter less if we had had the sense in the past century to not cede so much power to an unelected federal bureaucracy that is really unfit to do the work we gave them. The goal now should be to take that power away from them, and to do it as quickly as it is humanely possible.

It appears at least when it comes to FAA launch licenses, Trump has made some significant progress towards this goal.

8 comments

California’s Coastal Commission again rejects an increase in SpaceX’s launch rate at Vandenberg

Wants to be a dictator
Wants to be a dictator

As expected, the California Coastal Commission yesterday again rejected the proposed doubling of launches by SpaceX at the Vandenberg Space Force Base, from 50 to 100 launches per year, claiming this time it would destroy the environment.

“The sonic booms and their impacts on California’s people, wildlife and property are extremely concerning,” Commissioner Linda Escalante said at a hearing Thursday in Calabasas. “The negative impacts on public access, natural resources and environmental health warrant our scrutiny under California as a standard of review.”

The commissioners and its staff also argued that the launches were not related to national security or military purposes, but instead acted “to expand SpaceX’s commercial telecommunications network rather than serve federal agencies.” See the staff report [pdf] issued prior to the meeting.

The simple fact remains that it is a privately owned company engaged in activities primarily for its own commercial business. It is not a public federal agency or conducting its launches on
behalf of the federal government. It should therefore be regulated accordingly. [emphasis mine]

How dare SpaceX try to make a profit as a private company in America? And how dare the Space Force act as a servant of the people to provide this private company service? What have we come to?! Is communism and top-down authoritarian rule no longer America’s fundamental purpose?

Nor are the claims of the commission about the environment valid. » Read more

11 comments

Jared Isaacman proves in an op-ed today why Trump dumped him

Jared Isaacman
Jared Isaacman has now proven he was
the wrong man for NASA administrator

In an op-ed posted today by Jared Isaacman and Newt Gingrich, the two men pushed the idea that NASA should lead a new “mini-Manhattan Project” to develop “nuclear-electric-powered spaceships” in order to conquer the heavens.

The President’s budget calls for an eventual pivot away from NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS)—leaving the heavy-lift rocket business to a capable commercial industry. That pivot should be toward something no other agency, organization, or company is capable of accomplishing: building a fleet of nuclear-electric-powered spaceships and extending America’s reach in the ultimate high ground of space.

The NASA centers, workforce, and contractors that manage, assemble, and test SLS are suited to take on this inspiring and necessary challenge. NASA Center at Michoud, for example, built landing craft during WWII, the Saturn V during the space race, the Space Shuttle, and the SLS. It is now waiting for the next logical evolution to ensure the competitiveness of our national space capabilities.

Oy. What piffle. » Read more

40 comments

New study: Both PR departments and the press love to speculate wildly about science, even when the scientists don’t

The attitude of our modern press about science
The attitude of our modern press about science

A new study looking at 630 articles in popular press about the study of astrobiology (the possibility of life on other worlds) found that the press frequently exaggerated the findings, often taking relatively minor results that only vaguely and with great uncertainty suggested the presence of biology to speculate wildly that life had been found.

The research also found that university public relations departments tended to encourage this behavior with their own speculations in press releases. From the paper’s abstract:

Findings reveal that speculations and promises/expectations are more frequent in news articles and press releases compared to academic papers. Speculations about conditions for life and the existence of life beyond Earth are common, particularly in news articles covering exoplanet research, while promises of life detection are rare. Press releases tend to emphasize the significance of research findings and the progress of the field. Speculations and promises/expectations in news articles often occur without attribution to scientists and in quotes of authors of the studies, and slightly less so in quotes of outside experts. [emphasis mine]

The study looked at articles from the New York Times in the U.S., the Guardian in the United Kingdom, Folha and Estadão in Brazil, Público in Portugal, and El País in Spain. It consistently found these news sources consistently exaggerated the discoveries, often speculating with little evidence that the research had found evidence of life.

This paper merely confirms what I have reported repeatedly in the past few years. When scientists report that they may have detected a molecule in Venus’s atmosphere that on Earth is associated with life, the press immediately screams “Life found on Venus!” Or if scientists detect with great uncertainty similar life-related molecules in an exoplanet’s atmosphere and gently suggest it might mean life, the press screams “Exoplanet has life!”

In both these examples the research was very uncertain, and in both later research failed to confirm these conclusions.

Sadly this pattern now applies to almost every scientific result. Uncertain results based not even on observations but on theories are routinely touted these days by both press departments and news outlets as big discoveries, even if they are only describing uncertain theories that may prove true.

In fact, words like “may”, “might,” or “could” in headlines are always a give-away. They tell you that the story is not about an actual discovery, but a speculation that remains unproven. Such stories rarely get linked to here at Behind the Black, and if I do link to them, I spend a lot of time noting the uncertainties and weakness of the research.

If only all news outlets did the same.

8 comments

Founder of SaxaVord spaceport passes away

Frank Strang, who first proposed the SaxaVord spaceport on the island of Unst in the Shetland Islands in 2017, died yesterday at 67 from cancer, having never seen a single launch from the spaceport almost entirely due to the odious red tape of the United Kingdom.

When Strang announced last month that he had cancer, he also said he hoped to live long enough to see the first launch. The German rocket startup Rocket Factory Augsburg plans its first launch later this year, though this schedule is not firm. Its launch attempt last year was cancelled when the first stage failed during its last static fire test on the launchpad. Whether the UK’s Civil Aviation Authority will issue a launch permit on time remains decidedly unclear.

One comment

Virginia’s politicians whine about a NASA plan to close the visitor center at Wallops

Chicken Little on the march! Virginia’s representatives are now in a panicked tizzy because it appears NASA is considering closing the visitors center at the Wallops Island spaceport on the Eastern Shore of Virginia.

Members of Virginia’s congressional delegation were shocked by news of the potential closure of the NASA Wallops Flight Facility Visitor Center and worry it will negatively impact the Eastern Shore’s economy.

Employees at Goddard Space Flight Center and Wallops received word last week that management planned to close several facilities, including NASA Wallops Flight Facility Visitor Center — and federal workers asked for congressional support to preserve the local landmark.

Congresswoman Jen Kiggans, a Republican who represents Virginia’s 2nd District, said the proposed closure came as a shock. In a statement, she said was committed to supporting NASA Wallops staff. “This is an unacceptable and drastic step that will have a significant impact on local employees, residents, and visitors,” Kiggans said. “My staff and I are in contact with NASA to better understand the reasoning behind this reported decision as it is contradictory to the proposed House budget. Wallops has long been a vital part of our community, and we will do everything we can to support the work that’s done there and the people who work there.”

Nor is Kiggans the only politican whining. The article includes similar quotes from Democrat senators Mark Warner and Tim Kaine, as well as local state representative Rob Bloxom. All make the absurd claims that closing this one visitor center will destroy American civilization in Virginia.

And as usual for our propaganda press, no alternative opinions are offered. The only side that gets pushed is the pro-spending side.

What crap. NASA’s job is to foster a vibrant American space industry, by either developing or encouraging the development of actual technologies that can be used for this purpose. A visitor center has nothing to do with this job.

Moreover, such a visitor center employs a relatively small number of people. The economy of the Eastern Shore is not going to collapse by its closure. In fact, the economy won’t really notice it is gone in any significant way.

If we can’t cut the budget in this small way, we will never cut anything, and the country is doomed.

12 comments

FCC eliminates red tape for both satellite companies and space stations

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) this week announced [pdf] that it has changed a number of regulations to streamline its licensing in connection with satellite constellations, ground stations, and new space stations.

Today’s reforms intend to boost the nascent Ground-Station-as-a-Service (GSaaS) business model that allows multiple satellite systems to share the same ground station. The new rules eliminate needless paperwork and clear regulatory barriers to GSaaS, a business model that gives satellite operators—especially startups and emerging growth companies—the ability to send and receive signals without having to build their own ground infrastructure.

…The Order establishes a new process for ground station operators to receive a baseline license without first identifying a specific satellite point of communication. For each new point of communication, only a simple FCC notification will be needed. This one change would eliminate approximately 49% of earth station modification applications.

Today’s action further streamlines and expedites the application process for space stations and earth
stations by moving away from regulations that require FCC approval for making even the smallest
changes to a satellite system.

The direction of regulation has shifted 180 degrees since Trump’s election. Under Biden, federal agencies were constantly tasked to increase oversight so that it often took years to get approvals. Under Trump, those same agencies are now beginning to eliminate regulation across the board.

Elections matter. Anyone who says all politicians are the same is either ignorant or lying.

One comment

Sending Juno to fly past interstellar comet 3I/Atlas?

3I/Atlas as seen by Hubble on July 21, 2025
Hubble’s most recent image of comet 3I/Atlas.
Click for original image.

It’s all clickbait! In what appears to be an example of silliness, a scientist, Avi Loeb of Harvard, has proposed repurposing the Jupiter orbiter Juno by using its remaining fuel and its main engine (unused since 2016 because it is feared it will explode if ignited) to send the spacecraft on a path allowing it to fly past the interstellar comet 3I/Atlas that is presently zipping through out solar system.

Not surprisingly, a politician, congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna (R-Florida), immediately latched onto this idea to garner her own publicity.

Loeb believes Juno, which is scheduled to plunge into Jupiter’s atmosphere at the end of its mission in Sept. 2025, could be repurposed. He suggests using its remaining fuel to redirect it toward 3I/ATLAS when the object passes within about 34 million miles of Jupiter in March 2026.

Florida Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna has backed the proposal in a letter [pdf] to interim NASA Administrator Sean Duffy, urging the agency to explore extending Juno’s mission. “It is recommended that NASA conduct a study to assess how much fuel is left in Juno’s engine, and I support an extension of the Juno mission at least until mid-March 2026 at a cost of about $15M per 6 months from the current expiration date of mid-September 2025,” Luna wrote.

The problem with this idea is that it isn’t realistic. Juno really doesn’t have sufficient fuel, and as I mentioned, its main engine is suspect, so suspect that the science team decided in 2016 to never use it again, thus leaving Juno in a higher than planned orbit that required twice as much time at Jupiter to get the same work done.

There is also one more reason to doubt Loeb’s proposal. He has also proposed that 3I/Atlas is an alien probe, ignoring or dismissing the images and data that make if very clear that it is nothing more than a comet, albeit interstellar in origin. It appears therefore that he might very well represent the quality of scientists that Harvard is hiring these days.

22 comments

Sources suggest major job layoffs and salary cuts about to sweep Russia

According to various sources, major job layoffs and salary cuts are about to sweep Russia, affecting 800,000 people working for nine different large companies.

The cuts include layoffs, salary cuts, shortened work hours, and unpaid leave, with many involved in the aviation industry.

According to the tweet at the link, the blame goes to the Ukraine war and the collapse of the Russian economy because of it. That might or might not be true, but the speculation is certainly reasonable.

This collapse has been predicted now for several years. If it happens Putin’s future as head of Russia might finally be reaching its use-by date.

Hat tip BtB’s stringer Jay.

6 comments

Confusion reigns as to what shuttle will be moved to Houston, if any

Despite amendments in the reconciliation bill that said the space shuttle Discovery held by the Smithsonian in DC would be transferred to Houston for display, it appears there is uncertainty and confusion as to what shuttle will be moved, above and beyond the Smithsonian’s opposition to this transfer.

The legislation that required Duffy to choose a “space vehicle” that had “flown in space” and “carried people” did not specify an orbiter by name, but the language in the “One Big Beautiful Bill” that President Donald Trump signed into law last month was inspired by Cornyn and fellow Texas Senator Ted Cruz’s bill to relocate Discovery. “The acting Administrator has made an identification. We have no further public statement at this time,” said a spokesperson for Duffy in response to an inquiry by collectSPACE.

It appears Duffy’s options are limited. NASA no longer has any title or ownership rights to the shuttles held by the Smithsonian and the California Science Center in Los Angeles. It owns the only remaining shuttle, Atlantis, which it has on display in Florida, but moving that to Houston would entail big political warfare.

6 comments

The word that best describes our present NASA lunar program is “delusional.”

Artemis, a program based on fantasy
Artemis, a program based on fantasy

Increasingly it appears everyone in Congress, the White House, and NASA, as well as our bankrupt mainstream press, has become utterly divorced from reality in talking about NASA’s Artemis lunar program. The claims are always absurd and never deal with the hard facts on the ground. Instead, it is always “Americans are piorneers! We are great at building things! We are going to beat China to the Moon!”

An interview of interim NASA administration (and Transportation secretary) Sean Duffy yesterday on the Sean Hannity Show made all these delusions very clear. First Hannity introduced Duffy by stating with bald-faced ignorance that “NASA has a brand-new program. It is called Artemis that aims to get astronauts back on the Moon in the next couple of years.”

I emphasize “brand-new” because anyone who has done even two seconds of research on the web will know that Artemis has existed now for more than a decade. Hannity illustrates his incompetence right off the bat.

Duffy then proceeds to insist that the next Artemis mission, dubbed Artemis-2, will fly in April 2026 and send four astronauts around the Moon, followed by the Artemis-3 manned landing one year later.

Being an incompetent member of the propaganda press, Hannity of course accepts these claims without question. He fails to question Duffy about the serious issues with the Orion heat shield, which experienced extensive unexpected damage that is still not understood during its return on the first Artemis mission in 2022.

Nor does either Duffy or Hannity mention the fact that for Artemis to land humans on the Moon SpaceX’s Starship not only has to become operational for human passengers, it needs an in-orbit refueling capability that does not yet exist. I have full confidence that SpaceX will eventually succeed in achieving these benchmarks, but I also doubt it will be able to do it by mid-2027, as claimed by Duffy.

Duffy and Hannity however are not alone in living in this dream world. » Read more

36 comments

California Coastal Commission to reconsider SpaceX’s Vandenberg launch proposal

The California Coastal Commission has now scheduled a meeting on August 14, 2025 to reconsider SpaceX’s request to double its launch rate at Vandenberg Space Force Base from 50 to 100 launches per year.

Though it has no real authority over the base, and though the Space Force has indicated it has no objections to SpaceX’s proposal, the commission rejected that increase in a 6-4 vote in October 2024, but did so not because the commissioners thought it would harm California’s beaches, but because they did not like Elon Musk’s endorsement and campaigning for Donald Trump during the election campaign.

SpaceX has subsequently sued, with a judge ruling two weeks ago that the suit can go forward. Based on the statements made by commissioners in October, SpaceX has an excellent case, and will likely win in court.

It appears the commission is now acting to possibly stave off that suit. The article at the link also notes that the make-up of the commission has changed since that October meeting, with at least one of the commissioners who expressed the most hate against Elon Musk, Gretchen Newsom, is no longer a member.

At the same time, the hostility to Musk and SpaceX for environmental reasons appears to still exist within the commission. Either way, in the end SpaceX’s launch rate at Vandenberg is going to increase, since the military is agreeable to the change.

5 comments

Smithsonian opposes order to transfer space shuttle Discovery to Houston

The recent passed reconciliation bill included a provision ordering the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum to transfer the space shuttle Discovery back to NASA so that it could be shipped to Houston for display, budgeting $85 million for the task.

The Smithsonian however is now opposing that provision, claiming Congress and the President had no authority to do so as it owns Discovery and had not agreed to the transfer.

In a formal response, the Smithsonian Institution says it owns Discovery, which, like the rest of its collection, is held in trust for the American public. The Smithsonian asserts that NASA transferred “all rights, title, interest and ownership” of the shuttle to the Institution in 2012, and that it is “part of the National Air and Space Museum’s mission and core function as a research facility and the repository of the national air and space collection.”

It does appear the Smithsonian might have a case, based on past precedent and the laws that established the institution as an independent entity. At the same time, Congress provides two-thirds of its funding, which surely gives Congress a say in its actions. Moreover, recent court rulings have generally ruled against such independent institutions, ruling that the Constitution does not allow Congress to cede either its authority or the President’s in such cases.

So, even if the Smithsonian should win in court, its funding could be threatened if it defies Congress. It will be entertaining to watch this kerfuffle play out.

13 comments

Ontario cancels Starlink contract in retaliation to Trump’s tariffs

Cutting off your nose to spite your face: The Ontario government yesterday canceled a $100 million Starlink contract it had with SpaceX to provide internet service to remote areas, doing so in retaliation to Trump’s tariffs.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford threatened to cancel the contract in February if U.S. tariffs on Canadian goods were imposed. He killed the deal in March when U.S. President Donald Trump moved ahead with tariffs. “It’s done, it’s gone,” Ford said at the time. “We won’t award contracts to people who enable and encourage economic attacks on our province … and our country.”

…Ford’s cancellation of the deal came as part of a suite of measures in retaliation to Trump’s tariffs. He pulled American booze off the shelves of LCBO stores in March and has said the U.S. booze ban will be kept in place until Trump removes his tariffs on Canada. Ford also banned American companies from bidding on $30 billion worth of procurement contracts the province awards each year. He also banned U.S. companies from bidding on contracts related to his $200-billion infrastructure plan to build highways, tunnels, transit, hospitals, and jails.

It appears the province had to pay SpaceX a penalty for canceling the contract, but the amount has not been revealed. The cancellation also leaves those rural areas stranded, as the government presently has no alternative service to offer.

8 comments

Texas Space Commission hands $5 million to proposed spaceport in the middle of Texas

US and Mexico
Click for source.

In what can only be seen by anyone with any objectivity as a political payoff that has no chance of ever producing anything worthwhile, the Texas Space Commission (TSC) has given the Midland International Air and Space Port a $5 million grant to develop its proposed spaceport for vertical rockets in the middle of west Texas.

The spaceport is one of three facilities — along with ILC Aerospace in Houston and SylLab Systems in Plano — that received grant funding as part of the Space Exploration and Aeronautics Research Fund (SEARF). The SEARF provides funding to eligible companies, including government entities that the TSC is partnered with, to fund such purposes as technology development, research, workforce training, curation of materials and development of infrastructure. In its history, the SEARF fund has provided $126 million worth of grant money to 22 different projects.

…Although requested and managed by the city of Midland, the vertical launch site will be in Balmorhea in Reeves County, around the same site as the International Rocket Engineering Competition earlier this summer. The area can currently support suborbital rocket launches, but the vertical launch site is expected to support orbital flight, which will complement their horizontal launch system and high speed corridor for hypersonic flight.

The map to the right shows the location of Midland and Balmorhea. As you can see, this site makes no sense for vertical rocket launches, unless every rocket launched from the site is completely reusable. Even then, it faces major political hurdles to get permission to fly rockets over all the neighboring communities and states. The FAA would certainly have doubts.

In other words, this $5 million grant is a nice pay-off from one government agency to another, with its only purpose to spread some graft around.

That the Hearst-owned Midland Reporter-Telegram news article at the link recognizes none of this, and simply and naively spouts the propaganda put forth by government officials, once again illustrates the bankruptcy of our so-called “mainstream” press.

8 comments
1 2 3 … 91