If he wants a future career in science administration he certainly doesn't want a reputation as a flat-earther.

Opposition to AGW is not a scientific position, its an ideological one. It might be a smart political position to adopt, but it wouldn't look good on a scientific or engineering resume.

I'm not saying orthodox scientific positions shouldn't be challenged. Data and methodology should always be open to questioning. But when the challenge is always justified as necessary in order to protect industry profits, or is supported by resorting to a conspiracy theory involving grant-hungry scientists advancing their careers, it loses all credibility.

As for the Space Force, NASA's charter spells out peaceful applications in space. Military applications are carried out by the appropriate service. That's why there's a Vandenburg launch facility.