Thanks, sounds great. I'm actually going to be at the Palmer House for the American Political Science Assn conference next week, but the Mars Society one sounds like it would have been a heck of a lot more fun. Unfortunately, it also would have been less likely to get me a job.

Actually, once I get a job and get stuff from my dissertation published, I'd like to do some work on space politics. Or maybe not until after tenure; it isn't a subject likely to impress most review committees, unfortunately. In any case, I'd love to look into public opinion on space exploration because it's interesting, but also because I'd love to get invited to space-related conferences. I did my graduate work at a university that is overwhelmingly a science and engineering school, so I was able to hang out with nerds, go to the occaisional astronomy or geology talk, we even had our own mini-Mars conference each year. I'm gonna miss that.

Glad to see NASA talking up cooperation with the Society at such high levels. Whatever faults the Mars Society in particular might have, in general it would be very good for NASA to be open to innovative ideas from outsiders, and to work with enthusiasts to keep up public interest.

Of course, even Zubrin sometimes gets the technology calls wrong. I was skimming Case for Mars last night, and noticed that he was very alarmed that Nasa chose the "Soviet-style, 100% unsuccessful" airbag landing method for what was then the soon-to-be-launched Pathfinder, and was glad that some clear thinking people at JPL decided to back to the tried and true rocket-powered soft landing for the subsequent Polar Lander mission.... doh!