iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 09/07/2026

Here are my comments on the proposed OMB rules on Regulations for Federal Financial Assistance. They are a disaster, and should be treated as such. Full text: battalio.com/statements/b...

§200.204: Notices of funding opportunities.
First, the extension of the rule to allow for more non-competed NOFO and grant awards (§200.204—grant competitions can be exempted from public notice), so that agency heads can bypass public postings of funding opportunities, is self-contradictory to the rule's self-described goal of "Transparency, Accountability, and Oversight" (§1 Executive Summary). The public must be made aware of discretionary award opportunities for such opportunities to be transparent. The haphazard and contradictory approach within these rule changes demands withdrawal of the rule changes entirely.

§200.340: Termination and suspension.
Second, changes to §200.340 would allow for grant termination for convenience. By enabling grants to be terminated at will based on non-transparent decisions by political appointees, the already tenuous careers of individuals reliant on grants will be made more precarious. This will stifle the pursuit of novel but not immediately promising investigations, thus harming taxpayers. The increased precariousness of research careers will also impair the ability of the US to attract the most meritorious individuals to perform science that benefits the taxpayer. Instead, the individuals most able to apply for grants will be those in financial circumstances best able to withstand funding precarity, rather than those with the best ideas that most effectively advance the interests of the U.S. taxpayer.

The proposed rules are self-contradictory, as they are opposed to the stated §200.218 goal in reference to Executive Order 14281 on "Restoring Equality of Opportunity and Meritocracy." Allowing termination for convenience reverses rather than "restores" meritocracy by favoring those with independent wealth, regardless of whether a particular grant is directly terminated. Proposed OMB rule §200.340 violates Executive Order 14281.

§200.206: Federal agency review of risk posed by applicants.
Provision §200.206—Federal Agency Review of Risk Posed by Applicants states "that agencies may consider an applicant's history of questionable practices based on publicly available and verifiable information." No guidance is provided on the nature of what constitutes "questionable", other than that the information be publicly available and "verifiable". No statement is made as to what makes information verifiable. By opening such a subjective avenue for determining what a “questionable practice” is, political appointees would have wide discretion to rely on subjective and potentially factually incorrect sources.

As part of the Executive Branch, OMB is legally bound to execute the funding appropriated by Congress. Congress legislates; executive effectuates. No low-level, individual political appointee can determine, unilaterally, what is "in the national interest." Congress, as representatives of the people of the United States, collectively decides what is in the national interest by directing funding to specific agencies. OMB is obligated to fund those agencies; these rules countervail that public interest and run against the three-branch system of U.S. government.

§200.332: Requirements for pass-through entities.
The potential for First Amendment violations is even more apparent in the language of §200.332, which would require that any recipient not "take actions that could significantly damage the reputation of ... the Federal agency ... or Federal Government." What constitutes "damage" to reputation is wholly undefined and ambiguous. Because political appointees would make the determination of what damages the government's reputation, this becomes a point of political pressure and coercion of free speech. This is ripe for corruption and extortion. The clear implication would be to only do or say what the Administration deems politically acceptable, or receive no grant support.

§200.205: Federal agency merit review of proposals.
Decisions made by political appointees on subjective and vague standards will be less transparent than those made by peer reviewers. At present, every scientific proposal is evaluated by a panel of experts gathered from inside and outside the government, selected by civil servants. At the end of the review process, an organized review is provided to proposers, specifically indicating why a particular proposal was denied. By not providing such a transparent process, this altered political review process would obfuscate decision-making and make grant selection arbitrary. That, in turn, would waste taxpayer dollars by forcing proposers to guess how to resubmit proposals that may have been denied for political reasons.

The subjective and factually incorrect political assessments referenced by OMB are present even in the Executive Summary (§1) of the proposed rule. This definitionally reduces oversight of the grant-making process and results in further self-contradictions within the rule changes themselves.

The United States will face irreparable harm if these rules are implemented. I demand that OMB withdraw these rule changes in their entirety. Nearly all of what these changes claim to seek is already in place, with numerous safeguards to ensure transparency and fiscal responsibility. Yet the plain text is repeatedly contradictory to its stated goals, making legal challenges almost certain to succeed. However, the interim between this rule's effective date and any injunction would create an era of lawless political corruption. No amount of tinkering with these changes will alleviate their detrimental impacts on scientific grant-making specifically, or on grant-making in all facets.

051

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 07/05/2026

Tangental to the main point, but a paragraph stood out: Mid-tier oligarch bribes scientist to falsify results, scientist refuses, no funding for scientist. We should not have to rely on only scientific ethics to prevent this. How, you ask? So easy; greatly expand funding of US science agencies.

Conflicts of Interest

The study was partially funded by the David Neeleman, founder of JetBlue , who had a clear financial interest in the outcome. In a piece written days before the study was released titled, “Stanford Professors’ Coronavirus Study Could Be Game Changer”, Neeleman himself described his friendship with the authors and stated that he saw them as the “solution” to the very real financial threat COVID posed for his airlines. In an email to Neeleman, hedge fund manager and coauthor, Andrew Bogan, states, “David, I think you should write Taia a note and tell her you’ll support her lab if she validates this kit.” Neeleman did subsequently reach out to Taia Wang, the Stanford microbiologist who refused to certify the kit. She refused his offer of support.

122

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 05/05/2026

I love that the last half the video is what looks like the arm doing a celebratory dance to tell the rock to suck it, but instead it was just a whole sequence because there was no way to know what movement would actually drop the rock. assets.science.nasa.gov/content/dam/...

1198

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 27/04/2026

For reference, HiRISE, CRISM, SHARAD from MRO would be individually way too big and/or power hungry, but you could squeeze CTX, MARCI, MCS together inside those requirements. Please, please can we at least get another visible camera on this thing? MCS follow on? science.nasa.gov/mission/mars...

Slide from NASA on Mars Telecommunications Network science payload. Title: Science Payload* Interface & Not to Exceed Envelope

Text:
NASA will choose a science payload.
• MTN-REQ-049 was included in the updated draft RFP, as
noted in the cover letter.
• The payload envelope and high-level interface are detailed in
the table.
• There is consideration for deploying free-flying CubeSat
payloads in Mars orbit.
• A mass simulator will be provided to mitigate schedule risks.
• Schedule: proposals should specify required delivery dates for:
• science payload interface specification
• mass simulator
• payload hardware and related ground support equipment
• ground system interface specifications and testing.

Some values in a table
Mass: 20 kg
Size: 55x55x45 cm
Peak power 60 W
Daily data volume 200–1000 Mb

231

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 09/04/2026

I grabbed a screenshot at 0:34 (very cool simulation, BTW; thanks for sharing). I numbered 4 regions of the some sequential vortices in the plume near the surface. Again, rocket fluid dynamics is very different than GFD so grain of salt, but it's the propagation of those that I'm thinking of.

130

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 07/04/2026

I mean, are you kidding? images.nasa.gov/details/art0...

Earth setting behind the moon. Artemis II mission April 6, 2026

Earthset
NASA ID: art002e009288

062

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 07/04/2026

I'm sorry, my allergies are acting up. images.nasa.gov/details/art0...

Crescent Earth in eclipse behind the moon from Artemis II

Artemis Era Earthrise
NASA ID: art002e009280b

0102

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 05/04/2026

Because now Doug made this bad boy only able to do SPENDIs:

Classic /Slaps Roof of Car/ meme with the text: "TUL: **slaps roof of RTG** This bad boy can fit so many fucking SPENDIs in it"

000

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 24/03/2026

Issacman's email hinted at some of the news from NASA today. Science is exciting, but would have been nice to have asked the scientists on needs. (What kind of crypto and who do I send it to in the Trump admin to get a teeny, tiny atmospheric pressure sensor on the Skyfall copters and Lidar on MTN?)

Science and discovery remain at the heart of NASA’s mission.

You will hear updates on flagship missions such as Roman, Dragonfly, and HWO, along with new initiatives designed to expand the pace of discovery, including Rosalind Franklin, DAVINCI, and payloads on the Mars Telecommunications Orbiter. Public-private partnerships will turn NASA into a force-multiplier for science, allowing us to pursue more missions than traditional models alone would permit.

We will introduce concepts that enable science-as-a-service for Earth observation and space weather, along with possible rideshare opportunities to utilize flight hardware sitting at our centers awaiting missions.

We are also excited to hear about the role philanthropic efforts play to increase our understanding of the universe, like the Eric and Wendy Schmidt Observatory System. We are aware of many such efforts and look forward to collaborating and supporting them.

The Moon base alone will also provide immense opportunities for scientific payloads like VIPER, CADRE, and Moonfall hopper drones. With dozens of lunar missions ahead, there will be significant capacity for scientific instruments. And we will continue to explore options that preserve legacy missions still producing valuable data while balancing the investments necessary to pursue future flagship endeavors.

There is also one more thing.

Nuclear power and propulsion represent essential technologies for enabling the development of a lunar economy and facilitating exploration of the outer solar system. Yet after decades of work, $20 billion spent, and dozens of nuclear reactor programs that never reached space, America has little to show for it.

NASA is ready to get underway on nuclear power in space and has begun work on SR-1 Freedom. This approximately 25-kilowatt nuclear electric propulsion demonstration will bring together expertise across the agency and our partners to develop capabilities that support future missions to the Moon, Mars, and beyond. When the interplanetary mission launches in 2028, it will not only demonstrate nuclear power in space but also deliver the Skyfall payload to Mars, deploying multiple Ingenuity-class copters to explore the Red Planet.

270

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 12/02/2026

Science distraction: I'm reanalyzing the evolution of the 2007 Mars global dust s̶t̶o̶ɍm̶ event (nomenclature is a *thing*). A group of us is linking the visible dust storm morphology to optical depth and vertical temperature structure. It's reassuring to see such good agreement between instruments.

Rectilinear map of Mars with blue outlines of dust storms covering a bit under half the surface and with optical depth observation from a polar-orbiting satellite showing good agreement between retrieved opacity and visible morphology.

030

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 02/02/2026

Deleted a post because I'm a dope who has again forgotten FY versus CY. This isn't forward looking. This is the authorization for the already passed NASA appropriation. Thanks to @spacepolicyonline.bsky.social for taking the time to correct me. I will always try to own up to my factual errors.

Screenshot of deleted post where I quoted @spacepolicyonline.bsky.social's post about NASa Authorization. My quote text is factually incorrect, but the quoted post is correct.

100

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 02/02/2026

And MSR may not be quite dead yet depending on what "significant" means in the context of "...without requiring significant increases to the NASA budget."

(1) existing NASA lunar and Martian orbital missions are operating well beyond their planned mission lifespans;

(2) NASA relies on this aging infrastructure for observations, communications relay, and other operations to support critical NASA missions; and

(3) the United States plans to increase its activities on and around both the Moon and Mars in coming years.

(b) Plan.—The Administrator shall develop a plan to ensure continuity of operations and sufficient observational and operational capabilities on and around the Moon and Mars necessary to continue to enable a robust science program and human exploration program for the Moon and Mars well into the future. Such plan shall consider opportunities to engage both private and international partners in future operations.

SEC. 613. MARS SAMPLE RETURN.
(a) In General.—The Administrator shall, subject to the availability of appropriations, lead a Mars Sample Return program to enable the return to Earth of scientifically-selected samples from the surface of Mars for study in terrestrial laboratories, consistent with the recommendations of the National Academies decadal surveys for planetary science.

(b) Approach.—The Administrator shall pursue the program in subsection (a) on a timeline and in a manner necessary to—

(1) Sustain United States leadership in the scientific exploration of Mars;

(2) maintain NASA capabilities to land and operate robotic spacecraft on the surface of Mars;

(3) preserve the relevant unique and long-term institutional expertise; and

(4) maintain a balanced and robust planetary science division portfolio without requiring significant increases to the NASA budget.

(c) Implementation Plan.—The Administrator shall, as soon as practicable and no later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, transmit to the appropriate committees of Congress a plan and timeline for the implementation of a Mars Sample Return program pursuant to this section with the goal of enabling the highest…

000

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 25/12/2025

Twenty-fourth Annual Christmas Mass Email on your Personal Continuum

Twenty-fourth Annual Christmas Mass Email

The cliche of a “day taking forever but a year being quick” has gained new meaning as I enter my 40s, but even the days seem fast now, too. One of my recurring ACME themes is appreciating the present. Dwelling on the written past and fretting on the unwritten future only distracts from the good in the present. But, I’d like to reframe this a bit. I’ve begun to turn my not infrequent inability to focus on the present to motivate myself to do the little things that might make future life better. The anticipation of the future is a strong motivator for the present; it focuses my attention on achieving specific goals, which I can only do in the present. A year from now, whether we’ve learned a new language or finished that book on the nightstand or painted the shutters or whatever else or not, we’ll still be a year older. Perhaps we better just get on with it this year. Leverage your worry in the present to make your future better. Don’t just think about it. Try to plan it; commit to do it. But forgive yourself if it doesn’t work out.

The getting from here to there is not a step-wise process. You don’t suddenly know Mandarin or get through War & Peace or give up and just buy new windows. The development of each of us as individuals is a process each day. You don’t suddenly become yourself, but you were never not yourself. You are a continuous process that is present in every moment but uniquely different at every moment, day, year, decade. You progress from A to B along a trajectory as you the whole way, whether you perceive it and whether you perform it with intent and effort or not. Sometimes the path maintains a steep gradient, and you change quickly by necessity or willful determination. Sometimes development moves gradually or in loops to double back, again not always by choice. Broadly, there is no positive or negative direction. Up is just as good as down, left as right, forward as back. The only pitfall is stagnation through ambivalence. I’m sure situations arise where stagnation is a necessity, but otherwise, stagnation is a choice: the wrong choice. Since our development continues regardless of intention, we must choose to direct it.

You are continuous, not continual. The subtle distinction is vital. Even the careful introspection I often advocate is a deliberate, continuous progression. The development of you cannot be continual with starting and stopping, because you as an individual occur without interruption in an unceasing, continuous way. Because your life is a continuum and you are a process, relating to your past you or envisioning your future you can feel more difficult than interacting with other people now. Similarly, the people you knew a year ago can be different now, and the people you dismissed before might surprise you. Your personal trajectory might parallel someone else for years or decades, then abruptly or slowly drift away; you might only obliquely cross with someone else. You might meet yourself from time to time, but recognize that the person you are now is tied to each of the people you were.

Importantly, your trajectory along your personal continuum contains no wormholes. I choose “wormhole” deliberately and not “shortcut”. I mean there is no jump from A to B; there is no waking up tomorrow a different person or stepping through a portal to improvement. The trajectory demands work and intent, but this doesn't mean we must always take the hardest path. I genuinely think worthwhile, valid, and precious shortcuts—that is, available bypasses that are easier to traverse to reach the next you—are available if the effort to search for them is made. I can’t say what anyone’s shortcut might be. But what I mean might be culling abusive relationships, quitting an exploitative job, forgiving an old enemy, or going back to school. Each person’s unique trajectory and continuum affords something different, with an unfair array of opportunities compared to those luckier. I merely advocate openness to the possibility and intention to point your trajectory.

Embrace the continuity of your experience. Forgive the errors of your previous selves. Anticipate and ameliorate the potential problems of your future selves. Choose to advance along your personal continuum. Take the long way or the short way, but move deliberately, carefully, and patiently. You’ll be a year older for ACME 25 either way.

Congratulations to all of us for making it through another year. Merry Christmas; Happy Holidays; Happy New Year. Be well, and Be continuous.
Battalio

_____________________________________
Two wind turbines are in a field together.

One wind turbines says to the other, “What kind of music do you like?”

The other turbines replies, “Well, I’m a big metal fan.”

020

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 15/12/2025

Proud to see the first paper (out in @agu.org JGRPlanets) from Dr. Campbell, the postdoc @sguzewich.bsky.social and I mentor. She did a spectacular job explaining the source of the odd dust activity (called the B-storm) during Mars's SH summer. #planetaryscience #Mars 🪐🧪🔭 doi.org/10.1029/2025...

Geographic locations of dust storm instances for the B‐storm season in MY30 from the MDAD. Each instance is outlined separately for each MARCI swath and shaded by solar longitude. The background image is a composite MARCI swath generated from the median of all swaths between Ls=255° and Ls=280° in MY30.

1206

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 12/12/2025

Wrote to @delauro.house.gov of @ctdems.bsky.social about this. She's the minority leader on appropriations and been in congress since 1991. We need new Dem leaders top to bottom. They're clueless.

Dear Congresswoman DeLauro,
Reinstating Rep. Cuellar today to his leadership position is pathetic—absolutely pathetic. “We followed the rules of the caucus,” you said. Then change the damned rules. It is morally wrong and politically stupid. Dems can be the anti-corruption party. The country is clearly hungry for something other than the grift that has taken over, but you **YOU PERSONALLY** demonstrated that you don't care as long as *our* team does it. When it comes to messaging, differences in the magnitude of corruption are not going to break through the non-political consciousness. All that the average voter will see is that both parties are corrupt, and you helped prove it. You could be better; we could be better. Your leadership, along with Jeffries, is lacking and failing to meet the moment. Do we really have no one better than Cuellar, Jeffries, and you? If Dem House leadership isn't careful, 2026 will find yourselves in the situation of the 2010 GOP with the Tea Party takeover, and you should be afraid of how many of your voters would welcome it.
Michael Battalio
East Haven

021

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 29/10/2025

Wow, this looks exactly like the five cyclones around Jupiter's South Pole. agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10....

Figure 1 from Gavriel&Kaspi, 2022 Five cyclones surround one cyclone at South Pole of Jupiter. Figure caption reads: Infrared radiation photograph of Jupiter's south pole taken by the JIRAM instrument on Juno. The black point represents the pole. The dashed lines represent intervals of 60° longitude (longitude 0° in System III is the line going “upward” from the pole). The green 'X's are the estimated location at the centers of the south polar cyclones during PJ4. Image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/SwRI/ASI/INAF/JIRAM.

1122

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 08/10/2025

The full comments I wrote to the CNN writer. I'm delighted the part they pulled is about the broader usefulness of studying Mars.

The 3-step process of creating a dataset with humans, training an AI , but then validating is robust against false detections versus trusting AI. The combination of 2 cameras that can detect the motion of small-scale features at different times of day make this new catalog of dust devils particularly useful for probing Mars's weather and climate. This catalog might be used to estimate the background wind and would be valuable as we have no way to measure winds on a global scale.

At present, we only derive winds from temperature, but this is computationally expensive. Winds across all scales from meter to 1000s of km control the opacity of the atmosphere and dictate where dust travels. These wind observations validate and improve models to ensure crewed and robotic mission safety, durability, & longevity. These results highlight the value in having a range of long-term datasets, the future of which is in jeopardy due to proposed NASA budget cuts. Separately, studying Mars's climate is important for understanding Earth. Mars's unique conditions provide an independent laboratory for comparing to how Earth's weather works to make sure we have the most complete, general formulation of atmospheric dynamics possible. Studying the solar system broadly isn't just about exploration, it helps us understand our home.

A second use of this dataset to extract information about the atmosphere is to use the dust devil observations to estimate generalized dust lifting from non-dust devils. The maximum wind stress values derived from this study are appreciably larger than what models provide, and this was only found because the dataset can probe a range of times of day. This study supports the hypothesis that an under-appreciated amount of dust is lifted in joint events by both vortices and straight-line winds in combination instead of the two types operating somewhat separately. This is not captured well in models, but appears to be an important part of the Mars dust cycle.

022

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 16/09/2025

Avi Loeb and I talk the importance of rigorous peer review before claiming aliens.

NYT opinion headline: "Ben Shapiro and I Talk Political De-escalation" By Ezra Klein

051

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 13/08/2025

Elsevier's newest employee. h/t Adam Deitsch

Multipanel comic from Cyanide and Happiness modified with the following text:
Panel 1: Character behind desk: "I tried to access your CV but I was unable to?"
Panel 2: Job interviewee: "Download the PDF for $39.99 or 24h access for $10"
Panel 3: New boss behind desk: "WELCOME ABOARD!"
Panel 4: Pullback from office showing interviewee is newest employee of Elsevier

051

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 25/07/2025

Screenshot to not feed the troll. I see this occasionally, and it's worth it to respond. My pinned skeet says that "cool stuff that happens on one [climate] has parallels to help interpret the others." Let give an example that I'm writing up right now.

Skeet from troll saying, "NASA sending Beatles CDs to Mars isn't helping a burning and dying planet. Work on getting green fuel cell technology to the auto industry ASAP. Looking to the stars is useless if your tennis shoes are on fire! Environment first, space second."

171

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 12/07/2025

Analysis by the fantastic Mike Wong at Berkeley proves how bad ROSES 2025 is. 82% cut for solar system research. Our only hope is that Congress ignores Trump/Vought, and the program officers can fill this back up. More depressing graphs on his blog. research.ssl.berkeley.edu/~mikewong/bl...

Two bars on a graph. Left bar is 2024 research and development and right is 2025. 2024 bar shows $73M; 2025 bar shows $12.9M This is a cut of 82%.

051

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 23/06/2025

Things are going great. 95°F/83°F=121°F heat index. AC struggling.

Current Conditions at my house in CT at 2:45 on June 23, 2025.
Outside Temperature 95.0°F
Heat Index 120.6°F
Wind Chill 95.0°F
Dew Point 82.7°F
Outside Humidity 68%
Barometer 30.056 inHg (-0.015)
Wind 1 mph NW (315°)
Rain Today 0.00 in
Rain Rate 0.00 in/h
Inside Temperature 83.9°F
Inside Humidity 48%

011

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 23/06/2025

93°F/82°F at 10:20 in the morning. Heat index is 116°F. What are we doing here? This would be bad for MS much less CT.

Current conditions at my house in CT:
Outside Temperature 92.9°F
Heat Index 116.1°F
Wind Chill 92.9°F
Dew Point 82.1°F
Outside Humidity 71%
Barometer 30.077 inHg (0.003)
Wind 0 mph N/A ( N/A)
Rain Today 0.00 in
Rain Rate 0.00 in/h
Inside Temperature 77.0°F
Inside Humidity 47%

121

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 31/05/2025

The President's Budget request as released yesterday will gut scientific research. Why should you care? 1) Science is fundamentally a jobs program. Many 100,000s are employed to do science and work for you, the US taxpayer.

NSF, NASA and NIH budgets per year, inflation adjusted from 2000-2025 along with the proposed cuts. NSF includes research component only. Massive cuts across all sectors, well below support spanning 25 years.

5223124

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 31/05/2025

Made a list of NASA cut highlights(?) by request with references to the NASA budget request. www.nasa.gov/fy-2026-budg...

NASA Science top-line cut 47% (NASA SCMD-3)
41 space science projects canceled

Earth Sci: top-line cut of 52% (NASA ES-2)
Research and Analysis competed grants cut by 43% (NASA ES-2)
Eliminates Orbiting Carbon Oobservatory-2 and -3, CloudSat, CALIPSO (ES-49), Atmosphere Observing System (ES-7), LandSat Next (
Heliophysics: top-line cut of 46% (NASA HELIO-2)
Astrophysics: top-line cut of 72% (NASA ASTRO-2)
Planetary Sci: top-line cut of 32% (NASA ASTRO-2)
Research and Analysis competed grants cut by 28% (NASA PS-2)
NASA education budget zeroed out (NASA BUD-1)
Budget proposal decimates current missions in favor of re soliciting for future missions. Current Venus missions in the “Discovery” mission class eliminated only for new Discovery calls in 2028 (NASA PS-30)
New Frontiers class (the class between “Flagship” and “Discovery”) has current missions eliminated including JUNO, OSIRIX-REx, New Horizons (NASA PS-35).
Mars Sample Return is canceled (NASA PS-50) Mars Odyssey and MAVEN also canceled, NASA contribution to European Mars Rover canceled. (NASA PS-45)

Note: Moon to Mars exploration (crewed missions) get $2B increase, effectively earmarked to SpaceX (NASA EXP-3)

043

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 25/05/2025

I'm going to do something a bit dangerous and contradict a narrative—example screenshot and more in alt for context, but I've seen this in a couple of threads now. I'm only research faculty, but I have seen lists of students the actual faculty consider for admission at Yale.

Post from an intentionally anonymized Harvard professor as part of a larger thread reading, "Harvard sponsoring those students [undergrads for grad admission] is not zero sum
At the frontiers of research -- where those students sit -- you can maybe find a dozen people around the world with the right skills and interests to take human knowledge into the unknown"

I'm not quote tweeting because I do not want to risk getting bombed if it gets the attention of the 20K followers from the OP.

121

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 20/05/2025

Got spam to my work email from The Weather Company advertising themselves as "world's most accurate forecaster.*" [Asterisk theirs; ha.] I've never engaged them before. Scientists in industry may defend NWS against dismantling by DOGE/P25, but that's not how their business offices see the situation.

Screenshot of spam from The Weather Company [from business@weather.com] advertising their services while NWS is being attacked and defunded by DOGE/Trump/Musk/Project 2025.

131

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 03/05/2025

While most science is halved (see great post quoted), NASA is only cut by 25%. That difference isn't because *science* in NASA isn't also destroyed. It's because NASA's budget for crewed missions by unnamed private space companies balloons, hiding in the topline that NASA science is decimated too.

Chart showing budget changes in discretionary spending by Trump. Science and aid programs are hit hardest. NASA is the science hit least at drop of ~25%, but that topline hides science cuts.

083

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 11/04/2025

This not about efficiency. This is about eliminating scientists as an objective source of information outside the control of Trump/Musk/Project2025 authors. Since Inauguration, the US government has spent MORE money this year than last year.

Graph of time on x-axis versus cumulative federal spending by day on y-axis. As of April, 2025 is clearly larger than 2024. Credit: NYT / https://www.hamiltonproject.org/data/tracking-federal-expenditures-in-real-time/

14210

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 11/04/2025

Cuts to #science of >50% at NASA and >75% at NOAA would end US climate and space science research. NASA cuts are '...an "extinction level" event': arstechnica.com/space/2025/0... "At this funding level, Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research is eliminated...": www.science.org/content/arti...

Graph of science funding of NASA from 1980 until present with estimated 50% cut included. This drops NASA Science to under $4B. Image source: Casey Dreier/The Planetary Society

4276182

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 08/04/2025

Famously in my hometown of Vicksburg, there are marks on the flood gates separately indicating the 1927 flood as it happened and as if the levees had held. Standing near the river bank and lookup back up is fairly unsettling. Credit: Library of Congress www.loc.gov/resource/hig...

Series of flood markers on a concrete wall. Markers read from top down up, "FLOOD MARKS", "1927 GAGE 62.2 IF LEVEES HAD HELD", "2011 GAGE 57.1", "1927 GAGE 56.2", "1937 GAGE 53.2", "1929 GAGE 52.9", "2008 GAGE 51.0"

Credit: https://www.loc.gov/resource/highsm.42588/?r=-0.738,-0.053,2.476,1.667,0

261

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 02/04/2025

This low-high-low pattern happens for an independent measure of the dust too, called the column optical depth. This is measured differently than the reanalysis dataset we used to calculate the mode from winds, so the effect of the Annular Mode is in two different datasets on 3 different variables.

From Battalio+2025. Polar plots of the surface of Mars in contours, with the relationship between column dust optical depth from Montabone+2024 and the Annular mode at different time lags in shading red for +, blue for -. Plot for -73 sol lag, 0 sol, and +73. At a lag of 0, the dust is anomalously positive (red). At a lag of ±73, the dust is anomalously negative (blue).

100

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 02/04/2025

This is important because winds lift dust. The 150 day period of the mode/winds imparts similar repeatability of the surface stress. The stress basically estimates friction that picks up dust. In these plots, at Lag±75 sols there is low (blue) stress near the pole, but at Lag=0, stress is big (red).

From Battalio+2025: Polar plots of the surface of Mars in contours, with the relationship between surface wind stress and the Annular mode at different time lags in shading red for +, blue for -. Plot for -73 sol lag, 0 sol, and +73.

100

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 02/04/2025

This shift back and forth isn't random. Mars (& Earth)'s modes migrate towards the pole every 150 sols (or Mars days). The blue blob in the fig goes from 30°N at -70 sols at bottom left to 75°N at +70 sol at top right. And the next cycle starts at the same 70 sol time at 30°N again.

Plot from Battalio+2025 of one‐point lag‐correlation map of zonal-wind in red for positive, blue for negative. X-axis is time and goes from -120 (left) to 120 (right) Mars days (sols), Y-axis is latitude and goes from 25°N at bottom to 85°N at top. An area of negative correlation goes from -60 sols, 30°N to +60 sols, 75°N.

100

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 02/04/2025

Wikipedia faster than Schumer.

Updated Storm Thurmond wikipedia article noting he has the second longest filibuster.

040

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 01/04/2025

5.) Kevin McCarthy: you kissed Trump’s ring and were disgracefully kicked out of the House anyway last May.

Kevin McCarthy swinging the Speaker's gavel no more.

100

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 01/04/2025

4.) Elon Musk: Nazi’s were/are the bad guys, man. Also, how many times have cybertrucks had to be recalled this year? 7 How many starships did you blow up this year? 2. After all your flailing, government spending has gone up compared to 2024 since DOGE started, you fool.

111

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 01/04/2025

2.) Trump himself: So many reasons, but tarrifs are taxes on US citizens. COVID didn’t just “go away.” Putin is not your friend. Funding research is good for the economy. WHO and the Paris accord actually help US interests. Water in northern CA can't just flow to LA. On and on...

Donald Trump assaults an American Flag. Trump has his lips puckered even more than usual to mimic what he does to women, including being jury convicted of rape.

111

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 01/04/2025

1.) How can we not start with Mike Waltz?: The fool who shared classified attack plans with the EIC of the Atlantic. Shout out Sec. Def. Hegseth, DNI Gabbard and CIA Dir. Ratcliffe for lying through their teeth about it when they knew Goldberg could just publish the chat.

U.S. National Security Advisor Michael Waltz speaking at the 2025 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) at the Gaylord National Resort & Convention Center in National Harbor, Maryland.

101

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 15/03/2025

We're doing this today, @hakeem-jeffries.bsky.social ? Are you fucking serious? Publicly call for Minority Leader @schumer.senate.gov to resign leadership in the Senate, then I might consider donating to you.

Email donation request from Hakeem Jeffries at 12:37 PM. I reply, "Are you fucking serious? Publicly call for Minority Leader Schumer to resign leadership in the Senate, then I’ll donate to you."

151

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 07/03/2025

Let me be clear. This would end space science in the US. A 50% cut will scramble everything, and the chaos will result in a greater than 50% cut in science. If this happens, China will lap us in a couple of years. www.planetary.org/press-releas... #planetsci #planetaryscience #astronomy

raph of science funding of NASA from 1980 until present with the proposed 50% cut included. This cut would drop NASA Science to <$4B, which is approximately that in the early 1980s.

921471

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 07/03/2025

Let's me be clear. This would end space science in the US. A 50% cut will scramble everything, and the chaos will result in a greater than 50% cut in science. If this happens, China will lap us in a couple of years. #planetsci #planetaryscience #astronomy www.planetary.org/press-releas...

Graph of science funding of NASA from 1980 until present with the proposed 50% cut included. This cut would drop NASA Science to <$4B, which is approximately that in the early 1980s.

29597170

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 27/02/2025

By definition the National Weather Service is *national* in reach and employment and a beloved government service. The employees fired are in every single state. Like with the FAA, arbitrarily firing hard-working civil servants will end up killing Americans. If this doesn't grant standing, what can?

US map showing the coverage and office locations of the National Weather Service.

162

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 07/02/2025

Hey, NASA Admin Petro how about we take ZERO inspiration from the racists and nazis at DOGE instead?

Quote from email from Acting NASA Administrator Janet Petro from Feb. 7 "Finally, we are a community of innovators. Each and every one of us has felt frustration with bureaucracy or inefficiency with our internal processes at some point in our NASA career. But taking some inspiration from the spirit of the "Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)," let's lean into this opportunity to maximize efficiencies. Let's keep refining our processes and find new ways to work smarter. More to come on how you can let your voice be heard — we do value your input in ensuring we remain effective stewards of taxpayer dollars while growing and evolving together."

3278

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 31/01/2025

The Mars Exploration Program Analysis Group has been instructed to pause activities due to the EOs. I do not have a formal MEPAG role, but as a MEPAG member, I condemn the pause. A clear explanation of the legal authority of NASA HQ to force community-led groups to follow these orders is needed.

Letter to the Mars Exploration Program Analysis Group to pause all activities.

1247

Michael Battalio @battalio.com · 25/01/2025

Annoying reading today's Surge at Slate to see @jim-newell.bsky.social buy into the nonsense that the Elon Nazi salute was not that. FYI, here's Elon actually doing the "my heart goes out to you" gesture. Elon knows the difference. Can political reporters please stop being so gullible?

052