“I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the earth. No single space project in this period will be more impressive to mankind, or more important for the long-range exploration of space; and none will be so difficult or expensive to accomplish…if we are to win the battle that is now going on around the world between freedom and tyranny, the dramatic achievements in space which occurred in recent weeks should have made clear to us all, as did the Sputnik in 1957, the impact of this adventure on the minds of men everywhere, who are attempting to make a determination of which road they should take.” Such was the historic vision of President John F. Kennedy on May 25, 1961 to the Congress.

Who will be the next Space President? Between 2013 and 2016, who will give the speech committing the U.S. to the development and colonization of space?

While it’s possible that neither of the current contestants will be president in 2013, one of them might, so it’s interesting to consider their qualifications. Just a reminder that at 21stCenturyWaves.com, forecasts are based on our perceptions of trends over the last 200 years, not necessarily on personal preferences. Our major interest is how the political season plays into our space forecast models.

Our future Space President must develop the following characteristics: 1) be willing to spend money on big projects, 2) have an interest in technology and space, and 3) be able to sense the zeitgeist of the times and lead the U.S. and its friends at crucial moments in history.

For example, President John F. Kennedy’s brother (Senator Ted) has campaigned energetically for Obama and definitely sees parallels with the former president, as does Ted Sorensen, one of JFK’s closest advisors. Obama’s campaign confirms #1 and his public personality suggests #3 is probably secure. One could argue, by analog with President Kennedy, that when the the next international race to space begins, he will become qualified for #2.

McCain’s campaign suggests he’s less inclined to spend than Obama (#1); interestingly, his tax proposals are more in line with President Kennedy’s than Obama’s are. On the other hand, McCain has already in principle endorsed a human mission to Mars (#2), and in recognition of his long experience in the Senate and the military, McCain (in 2005) was awarded the Eisenhower Leadership Prize. While President Eisenhower saved the world from the Nazis in WW II, near the end of his political career he was slow to appreciate the profound significance of Sputnik for the West (see Kennedy quote above). Is there a parallel for McCain?

So in a sense, it’s “Kennedy” vs. “Eisenhower” in 2008. This is a race that never happened in history and there may be reasons why.

Indeed, based on long-term trends in economics and history over the last 200 years, this blog presents strong evidence that the great explorations (e.g. Lewis and Clark), macro-engineering projects (e.g., Panama canal), and even major wars (W.W. I), were fundamentally driven by long waves (56 yr period) in the economy. Although generally invisible to the public and the media because of their multi-generational length (56 yrs), it appears that long waves provide a framework for the day-to-day economic, social, and geopolitical conditions that affect us all.

So it’s logical to ask if long waves in the economy play an influential role in presidential elections. And the unusual circumstances of Kennedy vs. Eisenhower provide a wonderful laboratory for investigation.

In addition to the interesting economic, geopolitical, and personal parallels between Eisenhower and McCain and Kennedy and Obama, we’ve also sketched the analogs between President George W. Bush and Truman. These continue to suggest to suggest to us that long-term trends play an influential, and possibly even a pivotal, role in presidential elections.

However, one of my favorite columnists — Peggy Noonan — gently dismisses this notion, although her analysis seems to support it (Wall Street Journal, August 9-10, 2008). For example she states that “McCain’s not Truman, not so far.” She’s correct here — George W. is Truman and McCain is Eisenhower — and both analogs are explained by long-term trends. And she recognizes that “Mr. Obama’s problem on foreign affairs is his own youth and experience. In a time of high stakes, do we want Mr. Untried and Untested.” Long term trends show that we are entering a period of growing international conflict — possibly resembling a new Cold War. At this stage in the wave (circa 1952) the nominal forecast model suggests that the lingering conservatism of Americans will opt for McCain’s experience over Obama’s charisma. Author and political scientist Thomas Barnett, initially an enthusiastic Hillary supporter and now a gung ho Obama guy, gently criticised the McCain choice as just “safe.” And his opinion is likely the way American voters will see it. Even the Russians fit the forecast. They sought the cover of the Olympics to launch their aggression against Georgia, but they also reminded American voters shortly before the election that it’s a dangerous world.

David Greenberg in the Los Angeles Times (8/17/08) suggests that “Not only Bush but the conservative movement that he led and embodied seems to have run its course.” But Noonan counters that, “…the ’silent majority’…It’s been called many things the past 50 years…but the fact that it’s big…and somehow always latent, maintains.” Our nominal forecast model suggests that Peggy is right here, because the electorate is feeling similar economic, geopolitical, and social influences to the world of 56 years ago when Eisenhower became president. Greenberg is premature either 4 or 8 years, when the Maslow Window’s ebullience will trigger a 1960s-style zeitgeist and a new “President Kennedy.”

And what of internal wildcards? Consider the V.P. choices: both candidates seem to have weakened their basic themes. Obama’s theme is “change,” but he chose someone who’s been in the Senate longer than McCain. And McCain’s theme is “experience,” but he chose someone who is a young, first-term governor of Alaska. In the end, do VP choices even make a difference?

The real question is: Will Americans vote more like 1952 — exactly one 56 year economic/energy wave ago — when Eisenhower was elected over another Chicago intellectual (Stevenson), or will they vote more like 1960 when John F. Kennedy was elected at the beginning of the first race to space. Our nominal model suggests the former is more likely this November, followed by the latter in 4 or 8 years as the spectacular Maslow Window swings open!

It’s easy to become a collector of negative headlines about the economy these days, and my collection includes: “Economists Expect 2008’s Second Half to be Worse Than First” (Wall Street Journal, 8/11/08), “World Economy Shows New Strain” (WSJ, 8/15/08), and for you Harrison Ford/Tom Clancy fans, “Inflation is a Clear and Present Danger” (WSJ, 8/19/08).

If this financial turmoil were to persist for an indefinite period it might threaten the major economic boom that’s expected to trigger the affluence, ebullience, and spectacular technology and space activities of the 2015 Maslow Window, based on trends over the last 200 years.

But most analysts think it’s going away soon.

For example, best-selling author and financial strategist John Mauldin considers himself a short-term bear, because we have to deal with the twin bursts of the housing and credit bubbles, and can expect slow growth “through at least 2009″.

But as Mauldin explains in his online column (7/18/08), long term he is a “wild-eyed optimist!” Indeed he asserts that, “The next 20 years are going to see the most powerful wave of technologically driven growth the world has ever seen.”

This supports our expectation that the 2015 Maslow Window is going to feature unprecented technology programs and great explorations that will be spectacular.

Mauldin attributes this magnificent wave to the internet and to adding 2 billion people to the global middle class. “We will simply be throwing more people at an ever wider array of problems, and they will be able to share their discoveries at the speed of light.”

As I’ve pointed out, the trend of long economic waves and Maslow Windows over the last 200 years was not deterred by the Civil War, the Great Depression, W.W. I and II, or a variety of lesser disasters, including, for example, the Panic of 1837 — see State of the Wave, 8/15/08 — which is second only to the 1930s Great Depression. Despite the Panic of 1837, the 1847 Maslow Window ebulliently exploded with the greatest macro-engineering projects of the 19th Century and the still-famous equatorial African great explorations of Dr. Livingstone.

Mauldin simply concludes, “Why should the trend stop now?”

Indeed, the lesson of the last 200 years is that the future of the next 20 years is so bright, you’ll probably need shades!

When the most famous theoretical physicist of his generation and key leaders of the Christian world — representing the two most important cultural institutions of the modern world (science and religion) — talk publicly and seriously about a controversial subject, then you know it’s becoming more mainstream. Such was the case recently with the Vatican’s and Hawking’s comments on extraterrestrials (ETs) and their implications for humanity.

As we approach the 2015 Maslow Window (which may open near 2013), the public senses increased global activity in technology and space and thus becomes more aware of and interested in related topics. Both groups (in science and religion) respond by addressing the perceived interests of their constituents — yes scientists have constituents too; they buy their books, take their classes, and support their universities and research centers.

For example, in the Vatican Newspaper (5/13/08) the Director of the Vatican Observatory,
the Rev. Jose Gabriel Funes, asserted that life could exist elsewhere in the Universe.
“It is possible. So far we have no proof. But certainly in a universe so big we can not exclude this hypothesis.”

According to Dr. Funes, an Argentine Jesuit priest with a PhD in astronomy from the University of Padua (Italy), even intelligent extraterrestrials would not be a problem for believing Catholics, “As there is a multiplicity of creatures on earth, so there may be other beings, intelligent, created by God. This does not conflict with our faith, because we cannot put limits on the creative freedom of God.”

As part of a lecture at George Washington University honoring NASA’s 50th anniversay, Stephen Hawking also suggested that we are probably not alone in the Universe. Hawking, the world-renowned cosmologist and Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at Cambridge University, believes ETs could be intelligent, but it is more likely that “Primitive life is very common and intelligent life is fairly rare.”

For ETs to avoid galactic hazards and survive a long time, they must move into space. And in our case, Hawking believes that “If the human race is to continue for another million years, we will have to boldly go where no one has gone before,” and he compares current opponents of space exploration to those who didn’t support Columbus in 1492.

One of the reasons space colonization can become a life insurance policy for human civilization is because of the devastating potential for asteroid impacts on Earth. In addition to the 1908 Tunguska comet impact — an A bomb-like explosion that could have leveled a modern city if it had not occurred in Siberia — scientists have recently found archeological evidence suggesting the ancient destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah (recorded in Genesis 19: 24-26) was caused by asteroid impact.

Indeed, a Princeton professor has calculated odds for how much longer we’ll survive on Earth. Richard Gott, a Princeton astrophysicist, uses the assumption that we are at NO special time or place (known as the Copernican Principle) and the fact that humans have been around for about 200,000 years already, to forecast that — at the 95% probability level — it could be all over for the human species in as little as 5100 years (Nature, Vol. 363, P. 315, 1993), about the length of recorded human history. Incidentally, just to bring it into your personal timescale, if you increase the probability level to 99.9% — a near certainty?? — we have at least 100 years left.

To survive longer you have to do something “special”; i.e., you must violate the Copernican Principle. According to Professor Gott, “Clearly we would increase our chances of surviving if we colonize space.”

India continues to position itself to be among the elites in the space world; See “India Accelerates into the Cosmos.” “This year we hope to send an Indian spacecraft, Chandrayaan, to the Moon,” announced Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on August 15, who called it “an important milestone” for India (Press Trust of India). If successful, India will join an elite club of countries (5 so far; China recently joined) who have orbited a spacecraft around the Moon.

The Indian Space Research Organization, based in Bangalore, plans a two year orbital mission for this robotic spacecraft and has integrated 11 scientific sensors into Chandrayaan-I, includng 5 from outside India (e.g. Europe, U.S.), to study lunar surface chemistry and possibly locate lunar polar ice deposits. Any subsurface lunar lakes will be of inestimable importance to future Moonbases, especially those planned for the Moon’s strategic polar areas that feature continuous sunlight. The follow-on mission will include a surface rover to collect Moon rocks and is under development with Russia.

These types of ebullient plans for deep space (at the Moon!) bespeak the approach of the spectacular 2015 Maslow WIndow, but for India, come at a time when the engine of its impressive economic growth (8+% annually) is slowing down. The Wall Street Journal (8/20/08) reports that after a decade of 40+% annual growth rates, India’s information-technology industry is decelerating rapidly partly due to reduced demand in the U.S. and its own increasng labor expenses.

In the current environment some have questioned the spending on India’s space program — a typical pre-Maslow Window concern; such questions usually recede during Maslow Windows due to societal ebullience as the population ascends Maslow’s heirarchy. Indian visionaries such as former Indian science minister M.G.K. Menon respond that the Moon program “will excite the younger generation” and incease national prestige and confidence. The Prime Minister wants to “…see a modern India, imbued by a scientific temper, where the benefits of modern knowledge flow to all sections of society.”

Indeed, international recognition of India’s high-tech prowess and its close relationship with the United States are evidenced by the pending nuclear deal where the U.S. will supply India with nuclear fuel and technology for civilian power purposes (WSJ, 8/20/08). Like France, which produces almost 90% of its electricity from nuclear plants, India wants a nuclear solution to its surging (9% annual) demand for electricity — resulting in 15+ hours per day of power cuts in some rural areas. The 45 nation Nuclear Suppliers Group is expected to approve the deal which is supported by Germany and Japan, and incidentally, also by both McCain and Obama.

I. Big Shake-Ups at “Readers’ Favorite Posts — 8/22/08″…
On the All-Time Fav List, only 2 of the top 5 survived from 2 weeks ago: #1 remains “10 Reasons Why China is Good for Space”, and surging to #2 (from #5) is “McCain and the Republican Panic.”
On the Last 7 Days Fav List, only one post survived from 2 weeks ago. Remaining at #3 is “NASA’s Challenging Future!”

II. 21stCenturyWaves.com is again happily participating in the Carnival of Space (#68), this week hosted by Crowlspace.
If you’d like to sample a number of excellent space-related weblogs, please click HERE.

The Carnival is run by Fraser Cain, publisher of Universe Today.

This is an updated list of our readers’ favorite posts, based on the number of times each post was visited during the times indicated below.

Although the bi-weekly State of the Wave posts are very popular, the lists below include only Daily Wavelet posts.

The timeframes of the readers’ lists below are: I) All-Time Favorites (the first daily post was published on 5/11/08), and II) Favorites over the Last 7 Days. To see readers’ favorite posts for each previous month, click HERE.

Both lists below give only the top 5 favorites in each category in order of reader preference.

Both lists are updated every other week on Friday afternoons.
All posts below are clickable and their publishing dates are given.

Updated 8/22/08

I. ALL-TIME — Readers’ Favorites

1) 10 Reasons Why China is Good for Space — 6/22/08
2) McCain and the Republican Panic — 6/6/08
3) Taikonaut to Take a Walk — 6/13/08
4) Gallup Polls Support Maslow Window Forecasts — 6/20/08
5) Is the Navy Sinking the U.S. Space Program? — 5/15/08

II. THE LAST 7 DAYS — Readers’ Favorites

1) 10 Lessons Lewis & Clark Teach Us About the Human Future in Space — 8/17/08
2) 10 Reasons Why China is Good for Space — 6/22/08
3) NASA’s Challenging Future — 8/1/08
4) Russian Invasion and the Shuttle 5-Yr Gap — 8/13/08
5) Major Wars Threaten Future Space Initiatives — 7/12/08

Every other Friday the State of the Wave summarizes specific progress toward the opening of the 2015 Maslow Window and movement toward real, near-term space colonization. The focus is on events and trends from around the world of long-range significance, especially in the context of the 10 Wave Guides.

It’s easy this week, although not very pleasant, to summarize the Wave: the Russian invasion of Georgia has thrown the 2010+ future of the American space program into real uncertainty. (See Russian Invasion and the Shuttle 5-Yr Gap)

Using Russian systems as an add-on launch capability was one thing, but becoming dependent on the Russian Soyuz for American access to the Space Station is proving to be a deeply flawed strategy. Will there be a U.S. commercial alternative that can substitute for the Shuttle after 2010?

Because the Russia/Georgia crisis has implications far beyond the space program, and the U.S. feels a need to punish Russia, the prospects for U.S. human spaceflight after 2010 appear dim, even if Georgia does join NATO in the near future.

As we approach a time of ebullient global space activity, many space-related groups are very energetic. For example, a space elevator conference was recently held at Microsoft in Washington. Their hopes center on major technology advances in power beaming and ultra-strong materials, but their technology literally offers the relatively near-term promise of a frontier society in space. Likewise India announced recently that they have decided to launch their own spacecraft to the Moon, in addition to participating in the multinational agreement signed recently with the U.S. as part of the International Lunar Network.

Based on long-term trends over the last 200 years, the major economic boom expected to usher in the next Maslow Window is right on schedule for a 2013-15 take-off. However, short-term, the Wall Street Journal (8/15/08) highlights a 4-year unemployment peak in July of 5.7%, an uptick in U.S. inflation (July’s 17 year high of 5.6 % from the year before), plus sluggish GDP trends in Europe. But China, India, and other developing economies continue to expand strongly, and the dollar’s increasing strength could cool inflation somewhat.

To provide historical perspective, it’s interesting to identify analogs of major recessions that gave way to the major economic booms that drove previous Maslow Windows. One such example is the Panic of 1837. The Panic began 20 years before its 56 year cycle energy peak (in 1857) while our current economic “recession” began in late 2007, about 18 years before our peak (coming in 2025). Thus its wave timing (very similar to now) and its severity (considerably worse than now) make it very relevant to our future.

The Panic featured closure of 40% of all U.S. banks, record high unemployment, and economic turmoil until 1843; it is considered second only to the Great Depression of the 1930s. Nevertheless, the mid-19th Century Maslow Window (1847-57), powered by a major economic boom, opened right on schedule and featured ebullient behavior like Stanley’s African search for Dr. Livingstone engaged in his Great Exploration (”Dr. Livingstone I presume?”) and the California Gold Rush (1848-55). This Maslow Window also featured the “technological jewel” of the 19th Century — the Suez Canal — plus several other secondary MEPs, and tragically, the worst war in U.S. history: the Civil War. More on this Panic soon.

The current picture — sadly including Russian misbehavior and flickering of a renewed Cold War — is very consistent with our expectations 5 to 7 years out from our next Maslow Window.

The seminal Lewis and Clark expedition (1804-06) explored the Lousiana Territory through to the Pacific and has more parallels with the 1960s Apollo Moon program and lessons for future human exploration and settlement of the Moon and Mars than most people realize. The top 10 lessons of Lewis & Clark include:

10. Despite political opposition, Thomas Jefferson was enthralled by the exciting science and monumental strategic implications of exploring an overland route to the Pacific. Analogous to President Kennedy’s 1961 speech to Congress announcing the manned Moon landing, Jefferson pursuaded Congress by explaining his visionary rationales and requesting funding in a letter. Like both of these Great Explorations,
Presidential leadership will be a necessary (but not sufficient) condition for any major space initiative like humans to Mars.

9. While Kennedy had the Soviet’s Cold War aggressions to deal with, Jefferson had to deflect Napoleon’s desires for a North American empire. In 1802 Jefferson wrote, “Every eye in the U.S. is now fixed on this affair of Louisiana. Perhaps nothing…has produced more uneasy sensations through the body of the nation.” Jefferson decided to send Lewis and Clark through Louisiana to the Pacific no matter who controlled it, and Kennedy boldly decided to go to the Moon in 8 years, although no one was sure it could be done. Like Lewis & Clark and Apollo, a compelling national strategic challenge (including international confrontations) will play a role in motivating Moon and/or Mars programs.

8. The 1960s Apollo Maslow Window featured the spectacular Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo space programs which — in 8 years — culminated in the first man on the Moon in 1969. While not as well-planned as Apollo, Jefferson’s 3 pre-Lewis & Clark attempts to explore the northwest go all the way back to 1783 and, although unsuccessful, were highly instructive. They included a plan to explore from the Pacific coast eastward to St. Louis after a water passage from Russia; unfortunately, the would-be explorers were arrested in Russia and deported. The bottomline is: the first manned Mars expeditions may experience difficulties and will require at least a decade (one Maslow Window) of intense operational and technological preparations.

7. On April 11, 1803, when Napoleon decided it was more important to fund his European war machine than keep Louisiana for France — “I renounce Louisiana…not only New Orleans…the whole colony…reserving none of it,” — it may have surprised Jefferson, but he was definitely ready for action. Indeed the Corps of Discovery departed St. Louis only one year later. Likewise, although initially caught offguard by the surprise Soviet launch of Sputnik in 1957, NASA was formed in 1958 and Neil Armstrong took “one small step for a man…” on the Moon less than 12 years later. Although the world is full of wildcards,
the antidote for a Sputnik-like surprise in the next 5-7 years is focused preparation, many international partners, and the ability to anticipate the unexpected.

6. As is typical for Maslow Windows, the decade just prior to Lewis & Clark was a major economic boom; per capita income increased by 25%, international credit was almost unlimited, and by 1800 the U.S. population’s doubling time was 22 years! The 1960s economic boom was unparalleled and, “For the first time in human history, a majority of people (in the U.S.)…could have all of their needs and most of their desires met on demand.”
The last 200 years — including Lewis & Cark and Apollo — show that Great Explorations (and Macro-Engineering Projects) are fundamentally triggered by major, rhythmic, twice-per-century economic booms that result in an unusual level of societal affluence and ebullience. This creates a mindset — as people ascend Maslow’s Heirarchy — where great explorations and large technology projects are not only favored, but seem almost irresistible.

5. Lewis & Clark were “shocked” to learn that the Rockies are not just a single wall of mountains immediately adjacent to the Columbia River headwaters; imagine the shocks awaiting future explorers on a complex, Earthlike world like Mars! On Mars there will be no friendly natives (such as at the Nez Perce Camp) willing to feed starving explorers, suggesting that a “split mission” strategy — where food, consumables, and return propellants are sent FIRST to Mars — makes a lot of sense. Lewis & Clark’s length of mission (2+ years), planned wintering in Oregon before return (like waiting for an orbital launch window to open), and other parallels suggest that aspiring Mars explorers need to be scientifically and psychologically prepared to handle anything, and might even benefit from the journals of Lewis & Clark and other long-term explorers (e.g., Magellan).

4. The Jay Treaty in 1794 opened new markets in Canada and the Great Lakes for the North American fur trade industry and by 1800 made some wealthy, including John Jacob Astor.
Inspired by Lewis & Clark, Astor used his wealth to open up the West by founding Fort Astoria and by sponsoring the Astor Expedition (1810-12), during which South Pass in Wyoming was discovered. For Oregon Trail emigrants and others, South Pass became the key to continental passage by land.
Entrepreneurs and adventurers (e.g., mountain men) played a major role in opening up the West. Today Richard Branson and others may be the new John Jacob Astors as they seek the low energy, safe, economical path — like Astor’s South Pass — to space.

3. The War of 1812 — a tragic example of post-Lewis & Clark ebullience gone wild as Americans unrealistically attempted to militarily conquer Canada — delayed post-Lewis & Cark attempts (like Fort Astoria) to open the West to commerce and people until about 1820. And by 1834 the fur market had declined. The famous Bank Panic of 1837 was a financial collapse second only to the Great Depression; the Panic delayed economic growth for several years until it accelerated again toward the next Maslow Window in 1847. Despite creating great financial hardship for many, the 1837 Panic also provided incentive for some to move west. Alhough economic recessions cause turmoil and hardship for many, the last 200 years show they are usually relatively brief (< 1 year) and inevitably give way to the major economic boom of the next Maslow Window. On the other hand, wars -- like 1812 or Vietnam -- always reduce or terminate Maslow-driven ebullience as well as the great explorations and MEPs (e.g., manned Mars) linked with them.

2. The journals of Lewis & Clark generated great interest in the West and made it possible for many to migrate there during the NEXT Maslow Window (opening in 1847). The migration westward did not follow Lewis & Clark immediately because of the War of 1812, economic stresses (including the Panic of 1837), and the time needed for both Lewis & Clark’s message to diffuse and emigrants to get organized. By 1846 the nation was really on the move with about 20,000 westward-heading emigrants.
The following are consistent with Lewis & Clark and the Great Migration West: 1) the colonization of space did NOT occur immediately after Apollo but is expected to begin during the 2015 Maslow Window, 2) Mid-19th Century westward migrations were limited by financial, operational, and safety factors, which will also influence early 21st Century space colonization, and 3) the first humans may start exploring Mars (during the 2015 Maslow Window) simultaneously with the first steps toward space colonization (orbital and lunar hotels) and space industrialization (solar power sats).

1. Ebullience!!! The California Gold Rush began in 1848 (until 1855) with 300,000 people being drawn to California. In the first 5 years about 370 t of gold was removed ($ 7 B at 2006 prices) with many times that being extracted over he next few decades. The Gold Rush coincided almost exactly with the mid-19th Century Maslow (Dr. Livingstone in Africa) Window, 1847-57, and displayed classic ebullience. One author sees the Gold Rush as a national fork in the road because it, “marked the moment when people stopped believing that hard work leads to a good life…(and) that anyone could strike it rich…a pursuit that continues to this day,” — a very ebullient mindset! The end of the Gold Rush and threat of the Civil War in 1860 moderated this attitude. One gold rush analog for space will be tourism. In the 1950s, New York’s Hayden Planetarium solicited reservations for Moon trips and collected 100,000; how’s that for pre-Apollo ebullience?! And in the late 1960s Apollo era, Pan Am’s commercials used to feature the tease line, “Who’s the only airline with a waiting list for the Moon?” after collecting tens of thousands of eager Moon trippers. So the market’s definitely there. Space tourism will start next year with brief suborbital jaunts but will soon graduate to weekend stays in Earth orbit hotels. Honeymoons at the Moon could materialize in the 2020s. Space resource “gold” could eventually include the Sun’s energy (collected in space for use on Earth), and oxygen (from the Moon) and/or water (from Mars) for habitation and rocket propellants.

With Moonbases becoming the international status symbol for aspiring space powers and entrepreneurs beginning to tap the $ multi-Billion space tourism market, the 2015 Maslow Window may eventually make us think of the California Gold Rush as a rather quaint, restrained period in U.S. history!

Until a few days ago the plan was to hitchhike a ride on a Russian Soyuz after the Shuttle is retired in 2010 and before its replacement is ready in 2015, when American astronauts need access to the International Space Station (ISS) .

Now we’re not so sure.

According to U.S. Senator Bill Nelson from Florida, who spent 6 days in 1986 orbiting the Earth in the Shuttle Columbia (STS- 61C), “There will be consequences not just for Russia but for the U.S. too. That’s a $ 100 billion investment up there that we won’t have access to.”

The problem is a 2000 law that prohibits U.S. purchases of Russian technology — including Soyuz spacecraft — as long as Russia is exporting nuclear technology to Iran. The planned Congressional waiver would have enabled NASA to use the Soyuz to transport astronauts to the space station after 2010.

Now, the word from Washington is the waiver is DOA and there’s no back-up plan for ISS. This turn of events is particularly interesting considering Buzz Aldrin’s and other’s recent comments about the lack of plans for a commercial vehicle to reach ISS and opinion polls that revealed a relative lack of public concern.

Unfortunately, an increase in tensions potentially with Russia and/or other nations is expected based on the last 200 years of international conflicts. Despite our desire to avoid it, some see a return already to a Cold War mentality; for example, Russia’s recent attack of Georgia has similarities to the 1956 Soviet invasion of Hungary. That was rapidly followed by the surprise launch of Sputnik which triggered the first race to space.

Hopefully this time we can avoid most of the violence and engage cooperatively in our global 21st Century thrust into space, as we approach the spectacular 2015 Maslow Window.

Larry King — on his 1994 TV special from Rachel, Nevada (near Area 51) — introduced him as the “Dean of UFO researchers.” And why not? Stanton Friedman has been doing research and scientific investigation of UFOs for 50 years, published more than 80 scientific UFO papers, and has appeared on hundreds of radio and TV programs. He’s the original civilian investigator of the Roswell Incident and co-authored Crash at Corona: The Definitive Study of the Roswell Incident among other books.

A classmate of Carl Sagan at the University of Chicago, Stan received his BSc and MSc degrees there in physics. He was employed for 14 years as a nuclear physicist at GE, GM, Westinghouse, TRW Systems, Aerojet General Nucleonics, and McDonnell Douglas on advanced, classified, eventually cancelled, projects as nuclear aircraft, fission and fusion rockets, and nuclear powerplants for space.

Although Stan doesn’t make this claim himself, I’d be surprised if anyone in history has talked in person to more people about UFOs than he has, given that since 1967 he’s lectured on the topic “Flying Saucers ARE Real!” at more than 600 colleges and over 100 professional groups in 50 states, 9 provinces, 16 other countries. I had the pleasure of meeting Stan about 12 years ago in Arizona at one of his presentations; they are data-rich, exciting, and very thought-provoking.

Needless to say, Stan’s an excellent human barometer regarding public opinion about extraterrestrials and their ability to come here, and he devotes a chapter to this in his new book Flying Saucers and Science (2008).

Public Opinion is Wave Guide #2 because it often drives major technology and exploration activities during a Maslow Window and serves as an early indicator of an impending Maslow Window. For example, public opinion is linked with generational waves (e.g., Millennials), pop culture, and even long-term social cycles (e.g., Sarkar) that point to increased public interest in space, technology, and/or exploration and expanding ebullience.

Indeed, as we approach the 2015 Maslow Window, when Moonbases, international competition in space, and the possibility of alien life, begin to take center stage again, the public may insist that all information about UFOs be revealed by government sources. As the 2015 economic boom elevates the public to higher Maslow heirarchy levels, the need to explore and know the truth increases.

In his book, Stan paints a picture of typical UFO witnesses as feeling alone and being afraid of ridicule, “They would think I was some kind of nut.” When in fact, about 10% of his large audiences have made a sighting. He quotes Gallup polls over decades back to 1966 showing the percent of Americans that believe UFOs are real hovers between 46% and 57% and — contrary to popular belief — that educated individuals (e.g., college vs high school) are more likely to believe UFOs are real. As I’ve mentioned before, many engineers and scientists are increasingly intrigued by UFOs.

Reversing these common misconceptions about UFOs is important according to Stan because they make journalists afraid to cover a UFO sighting or lecture, scientists reluctant to study UFO data or sponsor UFO theses, and people with sightings hesistant to report them. If you’d like to “lift the laughter curtain” that inhibits “full disclosure by individuals and full investigation by scientists and journalists,” contact Stanton Friedman at fsphys@rogers.com or through his website.