NASA: Buzz Aldrin Defends Search for Water on Moon

I believe that Science needs to try and expand it's knowledge and push the boundaries in many different and innovative ways. I also believe that they should be responsible with public funds but the public needs to understand that some experiments will fail to produce the desired results, the answer you are looking for, such is the nature of science and experimentation.

I also believe that, as a professional Risk Manager that there was insufficient due diligence carried out to cover this disappointing outcome. If such a result had been considered then a mitigated response would have been immediately available to explain the significance of the outcome.

NASA needed to manage public 'expectations' in advance and not react defensively in a seemingly disorganised way. Thus, allowing the critical press and luddite pressure groups the ideal opportunities to score points against their weak underbelly. It does nothing to sustain the credibility of NASA or science, scientists and space exploration for the future. There is a serious risk of falling back into the pit of self satisfaction where no-one dares and no-ne wins.

In my experience, the 'back to the drawing board' mentality is symptomatic of a poor risk assessment, profile and wider strategic landscape. Clearly the risk to everyone's 'reputation' had been downgraded or discarded in advance, most likely because it was considered the least significant risk and had a very low 'cost' factor attached.

This is an all too common mistake produced by people who consider that all risk is about money. People who insist they know the monetary cost of everything and inevitably do not understand the value of what they are dealing with. Now the mountainous path towards securing sponsorship and programme funding just got steeper and more arduous.