As far as disasters, u- unfortunately, there's a lot to choose from these days, but how did you sit down with Seth and Brannon and decide which ones to do?

We not only s- uh, uh, we had a list, but we had ones that were possible that we could produce.

Uh, and we had an idea of what the digital effects budget...

You know, in the 21st century, you're gonna do a disaster show, you're gonna have digital effects.

So how much, you know, if you're gonna flood an entire city, how much, how much trouble can you go to? Then, so then how many shows are we gonna do? 11? That was thrown around for a while.

10, 15? I mean, the, the studio or the f- people with the money decided six was what we could afford, so we picked our top six.

[laughs]

Maybe they did, but it wasn't good enough.

Now, can you tell us a little bit about when you started your partnership with the National Ataxia Foundation?

I'll tell you, my brother especially was, you know, "Bill, you should use your celebrity to do something for ataxia.

You should do something." You know, "Why aren't you out?" And I go, "Well, it's..." We all grew up with it.

We all in, uh, my family, we all live with it, and there ain't much, known much you can do with it until two and a half years ago, two separate groups of researchers discovered the gene repeat that causes spinocerebellar ataxia 27B.

By the way, you probably know much more about it.

It was first called SCA, spinocerebellar ataxia 50, 5-0, but then they, it, you all realized that it was really part of 27.

This is a breakthrough.

[laughs]

Can you just educate our listeners about what Friedrich's ataxia is and how it differs from other ataxias?

So, Katie, Dr. Peters, I got to stop you right there.

They got a whole thing now.

It's no longer possessive.

It's Friedrich Ataxia.

It's not even Friedrich anymore.

Thank you.

What was sort of the time span of sort of you learning about that diagnosis and sort of how did it impact your childhood even into adulthood?

Watch now.

[gentle music] [audience cheering] Good morning.

I would like to discuss with you your place in space.

Now, I'm not gonna talk about black holes.

There are gonna be no multiverses.

There will not even be Planck time.

I'm talking about fundamental astronomy that lets us know where we are in the cosmos.

Hey, ho, let's go

Could you tell us about how you've addressed that uncertainty in terms of seeking answers and also how you've managed any kind of medical anxiety? This might be helpful for our listeners.

So first of all, when you grow up in a family with ataxia, every time you lose your balance, Every time you lose your grip on a wet glass or whatever the heck it is, you figure that's it.

I'm down.

I'm going to have this condition as bad or worse than my ancestors.

All right.

So I went to see a neurologist this long time ago in Seattle.

And he just was eventually, dude, you do not have Friedrich ataxia.

There's still a lot of things that could be gleaned, but what is your perspective on those gaps?

Yeah

... that that weekend after the second one came out, every big city in North America had one or two comedy clubs, and along with that, uh, Warner Brothers Records sponsored the Steve Martin lookalike contest.

The guy who had been my freshman roommate, Dave Lax, was still a friend of mine, and he comes hurrying over to, "You gotta see this guy.

You gotta see this.

He's just like you.

The way he moves, he's just like you.

He talks like..." I went and I saw this, the video of Steve Martin at the Boarding House.

Just kidding.

Tell me, who do you meet with, and do you think your message was received?

Well, so everybody in Congress is, uh, on board with supporting NASA.

Uh, NASA has funding streams in virtually, oh, in every congressional district in the United States, certainly every state of the United States.

And so NASA is, uh, very popular, both sides of the aisle.

The thing that's happening again is something like the Office of Management and Budget is trying to, uh, cut NASA funding by twenty percent, cut science by forty-six percent, and this is very much not in the national interest.

Everyone in the US, everyone around the world, was inspired by the Artemis 2 mission, where, uh, four extraordinary people went beyond the Moon and came back.

Uh, but that's just the beginning.

So tell me, if the US does end up pulling back on all of this investment in science, who or what fills the vacuum, you think? Is it, you know, the private companies like Blue Origin and SpaceX? Is it one of the countries that we compete with, like China?Where does this go?

So do you mind for our listeners just backing us up a little bit? And how did you start down this path?

First of all, I had a fantastic physics teacher in high school.

And that through that combined with some sort of mistake, In the admissions department at Cornell University, I went there in major mechanical engineering because I like bicycles and I really like airplanes.

I think they're amazing gizmos that people build.

So then the guy who had been my freshman roommate, senior year, he went into material science.

I went into mechanical.

And he came hurrying.

Do you mind telling us a little bit about the Planetary Society for our listeners so they know a little bit more about the organization and how they might be interested in engaging?

What's your sense?

Well, it's...

I think it's definitely achievable, and it's like, uh, Antarctica, only more so.

I mean, people have been there.

People...

The rockets are getting cheaper and cheaper.

We're flying them more and more frequently.

But what, what would you say to someone who's, like, looking at all that private investment and, and looking at it differently than they did decades ago?

Please.

So s- there's something that nobody talks about because everyone is, "Oh, my gosh, there's a ball of fire coming through, and it's gotta, you know, and the heat energy has to dissipate, and it's dangerous." Yes, all that's true.

Uh, but we talk about it as though it's a necessary evil, when in fact it's a high- highly desired fact that you don't need fuel to slow down out of orbit.

Exactly.

Yeah, space, space will do that.

Do you know that the International Space Station is the only after the waging of war, is the International Space Station the greatest investment of human capital that the world has ever seen, of international capital?

doesn't happen for free.

No, it doesn't happen for free, but it happens for a tiny fraction of the federal budget.

You ask, you walk down the street and you ask somebody, They'll say NASA budget is 10%.

NASA is 10% of the federal budget.

It's somewhat less than 0.4%.

And the return the United States gets for goodwill, NASA is the best brand the United States has.

Anywhere you go in the world, people respect NASA.

We will always choose each other.

[laughs]

When I was in school, the, nobody had a reasonable explanation what happened to the ancient dinosaurs.

Now, uh, the Alvarezes proved pretty much to everybody's satisfaction that it was an asteroid impact, and you can see what happened here on Earth, uh, in that same era, or maybe epoch, where this, uh, solar system was bombarding the Moon and the Earth.

The Earth craters are largely washed away by erosion.

So there is a life lesson there.

Uh, if we have an asteroid incoming, we're gonna have to give it a nudge.

And you don't believe me, look at the far side of the Moon.

Th- these must be the most intense cameras that have ever been created.

Why is now the moment that you feel like it's time to step out of this role? Is it just a nice, round 15 years, or is there some moment in your life that you've kind of decided is the catalyst for this?

Both.

15 years is a round number.

My anniversary was in September of 2025, for you listeners who may not be listening in 2026 [laughs].

And I turned 70, seven-zero years old.

So, it's a round number, but a good one.

So I'm, I think this is a good ti- And by the way, everybody, they're not letting me leave.

Worked really well, yeah.

Mm

... with these, these voting districts that are a tortured shape on a map, geome- geographically misshapen voting districts, and this has polarized the country.

Both sides gerrymander, to be sure, but the way it's gone right now, it's really favored, uh, people who, who are not open to change.

A key to the US government is, which is akin to the scientific method, is change.

S- in science or s- uh, the practice of science or the body of knowledge of science, there is change.

That's the whole idea.

People didn't know there was Pluto-... then Pluto was found, and it was v- it's very shiny.

Mm-hmm.

Tell us about what the reception has been like from the Trump administration, from Congress, in trying to push back against some of these proposed cuts.

Well, Congress has been great.

So both the Senate and House have pushed back, rejecting virtually all of the proposed cuts.

So 20% overall to NASA and 47%, almost half, to NASA science.

And if you cut NASA science in half, you pretty much end it.

So the expression is extinction level for science.

And so the reason this matters is...

And I'll seriously, I mean, talk a little bit about why that's important for the average person, because I think the average person looks at this and just thinks, OK, we're just shooting stuff up into space just for, you know, you know, just for giggles.

Explain why overturning or potentially overturning this rule is a big deal.

Well, so, uh, the pre- the premise of the bit back in 2009 was carbon dioxide, i- if you think of it as, um, the greenhouse gas that keeps the earth warm enough for all of us to be here, to have liquid water, solid water, and gaseous water all at the same time, that's great.

If you, uh, think of it as the, uh, chemical, the, uh, compound that nourishes plants, that enables them to metabolize and for you and me to have food, that's really good.

But if you have too much carbon dioxide, then the world's getting warmer at an, right now, uncontrollable weight- rate, and that's bad.

So carbon oxide is a gas that is both good and bad, and Mr. Zeldin and his colleagues have embraced the idea that it's only good, and so therefore it's not a pollutant or it doesn't endanger anyone as was discovered, as you said, back sort of 1950s, but especially in the 1980s.

People pointed out (clears throat) that if you have too much of it, that we're gonna have serious pro- problems here on Earth, and so I'll just say categorically, I'm not...

He's wrong.

Mm-hmm.