[carl in alaska]

Please read post #24 above. I don't think it's a valid argument that environmentalists are responsible for NASA's shuttle foam problems. If freon-free foam is hazardous to the astronauts, then NASA should ask for a waiver on freon use from the EPA. As you point out, the amount of freon used in 4-5 launches per year is insignificant. So why shouldn't they be allowed to use it, especially when China is producing tons of "bootleg" freon every year? This has the look of a leadership and management problem at NASA. If the shuttle is not safe to fly, then you don't launch it. No excuses, no rationalizations. You just don't launch it, and if someone orders you to launch, then you resign instead. I haven't heard of any resignations lately by high-level people at NASA.

[Lancey Howard]

Carl,
NASA is at the mercy of the politicians. When the politicians say "jump", NASA asks permission to come down. The "management" at NASA is not about to lock horns with the people who write the checks. If the scumbag politicians want to pander to the environmental extremists who help fill their campaign coffers, NASA doesn't stand a chance. That's the way it is, especially when the Democrats' parasite constituencies are constantly whining about "sending money to the moon instead of to the schools", etc., etc.

If NASA was intimidated into changing the composition of their foam insulation, they didn't stand a chance of getting a "waiver" and they didn't dare complain. All they could do was smile and say "yas suh!" Because next year, and the year after that, they have to go back to these same scumbag politicians and beg not to have any more cuts in their budget.

Regards,
LH