I’m passionate about saving the planet, and Bill Gates’ efforts towards building a better future have always inspired me

Nixon replaced his high priest of science with a virtual unknown, Edward E. David, Jr., described as being “well outside the main channel of the American scientific establishment.” Perhaps the idea was to move that dividing line between presidential policy cheerleader and scientific advocate toward the former and away from the latter — if the scientific community didn’t know the new advisor, they couldn’t expect much of him.

The report supposedly showed the super-fast plane to be “economically wasteful and environmentally harmful,” which theoretically might have helped opponents scuttle further funding to the project. DuBridge, in a letter, wrote that the report was not finalized and “was used as part of a direct input to the President.” That president had asked Congress for $290 million that year for continued development of the SST.

Will Leitch writes multiple pieces a week for Medium. Make sure to follow him right here. He lives in Athens, Georgia, with his family, and is the author of five books, including the upcoming novel “How Lucky,” released by Harper next May. He also writes a free weekly newsletter that you might enjoy.

Bill Gates, founder of Microsoft, shares what he has learnt in over a decade of studying climate change and investing in innovations to address climate problems. He explains how the world can work to build the tools it needs to get to net-zero greenhouse gas emissions — investing in research, inventing new technologies and deploying them quickly at a large scale. Gates is optimistic that the world can prevent the worst impacts of the climate crisis. This is a visionary and inspiring book by one of the world’s most celebrated public figures.

The president, of course, didn’t take kindly to a scientific community so diametrically opposed to his actions. For DuBridge, that community’s primary representative in Nixon’s orbit, that meant diminishing access. A few years later, he would say that White House staff “gradually built an impenetrable wall around the President.” In an essay written for a book compiled much later by William Golden, one contributor put it another way:

In the midst of that environment, DuBridge still tried to play the good soldier for his boss. Along with ABM and Vietnam, Nixon’s other major scientific fight was over the SST, or supersonic transport — an extremely expensive, extremely fast airplane, really. In April of 1970, a member of the House of Representatives accused the White House of suppressing a report on the SST; DuBridge acted as the deflector shield.

Sure, the details of those plans might have been different, but this was no fluke. Generally speaking, the scientific community has shot down as unfeasible, too expensive, or otherwise unwise virtually every large-scale missile defense idea of the last seventy years. But time and again, the scientist at the president’s right hand has found himself defending — or, at times, aggressively supporting — these plans in spite of their dubious technical feasibility. It is perhaps the best example of the disconnect that the advisors have all been forced to confront — science for science’s sake, or science for the president’s sake.

On December 17, 1968, before Nixon took office, DuBridge answered a question about anti-ballistic missile systems by claiming he didn’t have enough information to formulate an opinion — admirable fence-sitting, to be sure. Only a few months later, a single, two-paragraph item in the Times cut DuBridge in half and placed a piece on either side of that fence:

I checked other photos posted around the same time mine were, also geotagged in Atlanta, and found the same spam brands had left the same types of comments on several of those photos. There were a few exceptions that let me build a picture of how the brands targeted accounts.

http://stream88.colomboserboli.com/eca/Video-sampdoriia-v-inter-v-yt2-1yaa-25.php

http://m.dentisalut.com/omy/Video-lorian-v-monako-v-yt2-1mdd-29.php

http://skrs.vidrio.org/sbe/videos-torino-v-hellas-verona-v-it-it-1ucc2-10.php

http://stream88.colomboserboli.com/eca/v-ideos-sampdoriia-v-inter-v-yt2-1wre-14.php

http://skrs.vidrio.org/sbe/Video-torino-v-hellas-verona-v-it-it-1ing2-1.php

http://old.cocir.org/media/los/video-bolonia-v-udineze-v-yt2-1wbq-25.php

http://m.dentisalut.com/omy/v-ideos-lorian-v-monako-v-yt2-1qpa-12.php

http://skrs.vidrio.org/sbe/videos-East-Bengal-FC-Goa-v-en-gb-1sfv30122020-.php

http://old.cocir.org/media/los/v-ideos-bolonia-v-udineze-v-yt2-1uky-23.php

http://stream88.colomboserboli.com/eca/v-ideos-sampdoriia-v-inter-v-yt2-1kks-27.php

http://m.dentisalut.com/omy/video-reims-v-dizhon-v-yt2-1wdh-11.php

http://skrs.vidrio.org/sbe/Video-East-Bengal-FC-Goa-v-en-gb-1zlh-4.php

http://skrs.vidrio.org/sbe/video-East-Bengal-FC-Goa-v-en-gb-1iwn-14.php

http://old.cocir.org/media/los/v-ideos-krotone-v-roma-v-yt2-1txn-22.php

http://m.dentisalut.com/omy/v-ideos-reims-v-dizhon-v-yt2-1fso-24.php

http://stream88.colomboserboli.com/eca/videos-bolonia-v-udineze-v-yt2-1yop-16.php

http://skrs.vidrio.org/sbe/Video-Sassuolo-Genoa-v-en-gb-1cof30122020-.php

http://old.cocir.org/media/los/videos-krotone-v-roma-v-yt2-1pkj-21.php

http://m.dentisalut.com/omy/video-reims-v-dizhon-v-yt2-1mdi-17.php

http://skrs.vidrio.org/sbe/Video-Sassuolo-Genoa-v-en-gb-1xaf-5.php

f the most common signs of nervousness is blushing. Physiologically, it occurs when an emotional trigger causes your glands to release adrenaline in your body. Adrenaline’s effect on your nervous system causes the capillaries that carry blood to your skin to widen. Since blood is then brought closer to the surface of the skin, it causes you to blush. So, it’s something you can’t control.

Once more, DuBridge showed what it meant to be a science advisor to the White House: sometimes, one must defend the indefensible. Apparently though, the SST incident represented one of the final straws he could tolerate: on August 19 of the same year, 1970, he submitted his resignation.

DuBridge apparently attempted to walk that fine line between cheerleading and scientific rigor, just like his predecessors did and most successors would — in one case, on an issue that has in some ways held the science advisor hostage as long as it has existed.

In one sense, it worked, as David lasted longer in the role than his predecessor did. He spent his 28 months at the White House again pushing for increases to federal funding for science, helping negotiate international collaborations, and continuing some of DuBridge’s policy fights that smoldered on past his exit. (That suppressed SST report was finally released more than a year after the Congressional complaints, and it did indeed recommend against further government support for the plane.)

“Misuse of scientific and technical knowledge presents a major threat to the existence of mankind. Through its actions in Vietnam our government has shaken our confidence in its ability to make wise and humane decisions.”

In spite of DuBridge’s willingness to jump on board the ABM train in Nixon’s White House, it didn’t take long for his usefulness as science advisor to come into question. In July 1970, a “prominent science historian” told the Washington Post that science had been all but disappeared from “the high councils of the Nixon administration.” The previous year, the Times reported on a growing “groundswell of dissent” among scientists around the globe; work stoppages normally associated with workers pressing for better wages had spread all the way to — believe it or not — entire countries’ collections of astronomers. A group of scientists at M.I.T. arranged another stoppage and released a statement that read in part: