NASA: A Scientific Organization or a Political One?

nasa_logoLately I’ve been highlighting the fact that the “science” some people worship isn’t the pure intellectual exercise many would have us believe.

In an ideal world, scientific facts, information and data would be recognized for what they are–along with all the limitations of that data.  Data would be recognized as data, and assumptions about that data would be recognized as assumptions, not the actual data itself. In an ideal world, facts wouldn’t be twisted, manipulated and embellished to promote the bias or ideology of a particular person or group if those facts did not naturally lead in that direction.  That’s how it would be in an ideal world.

In the real world, unfortunately,  many professionals often hijack the facts and take them places they would never go on their own. Seldom is this seen so often as in the discussion about creation/evolution and global warming. Both the theory of evolution and the theory of anthropogenic global warming are so thin that, without being wrapped in the cocoon of the theological and ideological padding of the biases of their proponents, they would never get off the ground.

But because scientists and other professions are thought to be intellectual, unbiased, purely objective, people tend to lend them a great deal of credibility and often take them at their word.  But as a recent study published in the science journal PLoS ONE found, scientists and other professionals are just like the rest of us.  They are susceptible to the same temptations to fudge and fabricate as are we mere mortals.

It is much easier to understand how such zany theories as anthropogenic global warming get traction when you understand both the faith that many people put into members of the scientific community, and how misplaced that faith often is.

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is one such community of science. NASA studies planet earth and outer space, and both the credibility and objectivity of this organization is widely regarded as impeccable.

But is it?

Not if you apply the smell-test, it isn’t.  For instance, NASA data on climate and solar activity clearly shows a correlation between the sun and temperature changes on earth (you might even ask why we need NASA to tell us something that should be so obvious).  Yet NASA, revealing that is much a political organization as a scientific one, tries very hard to ignore its own evidence.

As if we needed more proof that NASA is as much (or more) concerned about political games as it is about science, we learn today from LifeSiteNews that  NASA is celebrating a “homosexual pride” month:

NASA headquarters issued a press release Monday declaring that the space-faring organization would participate in, and encourage celebration of, the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) Pride Month declared by President Obama.

“LGBT Pride Month is a reflection of NASA’s commitment to inclusiveness across the broad spectrum of our workforce,” said NASA’s Acting Administrator Christopher J. Scolese. “NASA strives to be a model employer by ensuring it adheres to the principles of inclusion. These principles include fairness and respect for the many different backgrounds, perspectives and life experiences of our employees.”

NASA apparently goes to some lengths to “celebrate” homosexual behavior.  I noticed that they have an official Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Advisory Committee (GLBTAC) with its own website. They scheduled an event in the taxpayer-funded Building 3 Auditorium earlier this month where taxpayer-compensated employees went to celebrate homosexual behavior.  And the release from NASA says this scientific, taxpayer-funded organization will

…focus on our efforts to embrace acceptance and welcome diversity in communities regardless of sexual orientation….Goddard will be hosting events in conjunction with Pride Month.

So NASA (the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, remember?) is wasting time, energy and taxpayer dollars promoting an immoral, unnatural and unhealthy sexual behavior–something that, if they really wanted to do a public service–they would discourage along with other self-destructive unhealthy behaviors. How very scientific. How very objective and unbiased. How very above politics.

11 Responses to “NASA: A Scientific Organization or a Political One?”

  1. NASA has been a worthless money pit ever since it wrapped up the Apollo Moon Project. NASA should have been dismantled then, and the private sector should have been encouraged to take the ball from there. Instead, we have one of the most unwieldy and directionless bureaucracies in the federal government and America is falling behind in space study and exploration. It has less and less to do with genuine science and more and more to do with landing project funding from congressmen and women that want to fund certain projects at universities and companies in their districts. If you have a hundred million dollars available to fund global warming research, they’ll study it and find that further study is needed…..along with the funds to do it. It becomes nothing more than make work.
    I’m reminded of an experience I had back in the 70’s just after the oil embargo. My father, an engineer, started a solar energy design company. I worked with him. The Carter Energy Department made MILLIONS available to fund the research and development of alternative energy sources. (Locals got their share and you have the remnant of one such project in Rapid City on Hwy 79 South.) We got to know a couple of professors from the University of Minnesota who had rented a corner building on Lake Street in Minneapolis and started a research company. They spent all their time applying for DOE research grants. After getting a grant they would publish a paper and submit it to DOE. That’s it. They collected hundreds of thousands of dollars for writing a few papers that didn’t produce a thing, but suggested more study was in order. It’s going on today more than ever. It’s going on at the School of Mines and all the other state universities. We need to put an end to it.

  2. People believe the myth that anything “scientific” is coming from a highly knowledgeable and OBJECTIVE source. That's what sets science's authority up for abuse, as touched on in this article. If you don't think it's being abused, you need to open your eyes.

    At the same time, people strongly desire for their beliefs to be confirmed by science. So they'll fight to believe that objective science backs them up when it really doesn't — thus the false science of creator-less origins (evolutionism) and of inborn homosexuality.

    Bible-believers, contrary to frequent accusations, do not bend science so it seems to confirm their beliefs. Rather, acceptance of the biblical God leads to good science, as it did in the centuries when modern science developed. Those who think creation science is “bad science” have not learned about it, or have only done so with the goal of trying to discredit it.

  3. I think space exploration is a worthy endeavor, but as you pointed out, Leland, the government is doing a lousy job of it. I was a kid back in the 1970s, and everyone expected we would have been on Mars by sometime in the 1980s…and we probably would have if these bureaucrats hadn't been running things. The current establishment, as you pointed out, is more interested in career security and shuffling the bucks around than getting something done.

  4. Bob, Bob, Bob…I really enjoy your articles but you jumped the shark with your comment that being gay is an “immoral, unnatural and unhealthy sexual behavior.” You're spot on that NASA should not be using tax dollars to support ANY lifestyle, as that is not its mission, but adding that hateful comment cancels out what would have been a very good column. While you probably don't know any gay people, it's archaic thinking like that that spoon feeds the whackos an excuse to harm and kill those who are different. In the future you should refrain from personal opinions as they have no place in an otherwise fine piece.

  5. It's “hateful” to state the obvious, Jacob? It's “jumping the shark” to repeat what the Bible (and every other major religion) clearly says, what science clearly illustrates, and what an overwhelming amount of health data points out?

    You have a very odd definition for “hateful” and “shark jumping.

    You might want to do a little more research next time before you embarrass yourself with such uninformed statements.

  6. Well, exactly right. NASA has the cash to spend affirming homosexuals but scrimps so much on the budget for probes to Mars and other planets that they fail on arrival. It is unacceptable.

  7. The fraud and deception doesn't stop with evolution and global warming “science.” Look at the endless press releases from “scientists” about all the dangers that threaten our health if we do not avoid this food, or take that supplement, or abstain from this behavior or that. Every few months there is another report contradicting a previous report that was released as proof of a claim.

    No area of scientific fraud outdoes what occurs in pharmaceuticals or costs us more. Do you know that there has not been a single large study that proves the supposed relationship between diet and heart disease? That's right, and furthermore there has not been a research study to show that taking cholesterol-lowering drugs changes morbidity or mortality. (Statin drugs have a cardioprotective effect independent of lipid levels, presumably related to an anti-inflammatory action.)

    The same can be said of some of the top selling drugs now promoted by the industry–lipid-lowering drugs, drugs for ADD and ADHD, anti-depressants, drugs for dementia, drugs for “bi-polar disorder” and “fibromyalgia” to name a few.

    In 1976 I was working on a graduate degree in microbiology and I considered a career in biological research. I soon realized that the era of government control was upon us and would likely get worse. Most research monies came from government agencies and the availability depended upon factors having little to do with science. I chose another route not suspecting that government control was fast on my heels. Now, 30 years later, it seems inevitable that the take-over will soon be complete and doctors will be forced to join their research brethren as tools of the collective controlled by The One.

  8. Thanks, Dr. Theo. Sadly, it seems that the important credibility which is being sacrificed in these politically correct pursuits matters little to them. And that's bad for everybody. Certainly we all remember the story about the boy who cried wolf.

  9. I've been saying for years that it's time to scrap NASA. This incident is another nail in their coffin.

  10. I've been saying for years that it's time to scrap NASA. This incident is another nail in their coffin.