STEM-Talk

Today we have Dr. Francisco Gonzalez-Lima, a behavioral neuroscientist who was our guest in episodes 106 and 107 back in 2020.

Since those 2020 interviews, Francisco and his colleagues at the Gonzalez-Lima Lab have produced dozens of more studies and papers that have advanced their work on methylene blue, transcranial lasers, memory enhancement, neuroprotection and neurocognitive disorders.

Francisco and his lab at the University of Texas Austin are recognized as world leaders for their research on the relationships between brain energy metabolism, memory and neurobehavioral disorders.

In today’s interview, we talk to Francisco about his lab’s most recent research on the beneficial neurocognitive and emotional effects of noninvasive human brain stimulation in healthy, aging and mentally ill populations. This research primarily uses transcranial infrared laser stimulation and multimodal imaging, which we will discuss in today’s interview.

Be sure to check out our earlier interviews with Francisco where he talked aobut his work on brain metabolic mapping and Alzheimer’s, episode 106, and his research into methylene blue and near-infrared light as therapies for cognitive disorders, episode 107.

Show notes:

[00:04:32] Dawn and Ken open our interview with Francisco by mentioning that his lab has been very productive pursuing new research avenues since he was last on STEM-Talk. Ken mentions that Francisco has recently begun collaborating with his sister who has a PhD in computational and applied mathematics and asks Francisco to talk about the work they’re doing together.

[00:06:21] Dawn shifts to talk about the roadblocks that Francisco and his team have been dealing with, particularly that the review process for academic papers is unusually slow, not just for Francisco’s team but at large. Dawn asks Francisco to discuss this issue.

[00:10:37] Dawn recaps that in our previous interview with Francisco in 2020, the discussion focused on his research into methylene blue, which has been primarily used to treat methemoglobinemia, however, the potential for methylene blue to treat declining cognitive function is an active area of research. Despite Francisco’s successful work with methylene blue, he often gets asked about its safety, largely due to various misconceptions. Dawn asks Francisco to talk about the misconceptions about methylene blue.

[00:14:57] Ken asks if Francisco what some other misconceptions about methylene blue are.

[00:20:43] Given the discussion of dosing, Ken asks Francisco what the safe dose range is for methylene blue in humans.

[00:28:15] Ken mentions an article published a few months ago titled “Beyond plaques: How methylene blue and ketones address vascular hypometabolism in Alzheimer’s disease” Ken goes on to mention that the article did a good job of summarizing Francisco’s work as well as the work of Steve Cunnane, who was our guest on episode 59. Ken asks Francisco to discuss his thoughts on the article.

[00:34:25] Dawn shifts focus to discuss Francisco’s work on photobiomodulation, specifically transcranial infrared laser stimulation, which is a non-invasive method for neuroprotection and cognitive enhancement. Dawn explains that Francisco has written two chapters on this topic that summarizes his work in the area, one of which appeared in the Oxford handbook on transcranial stimulation, and the other is in a book on augmentation of brain function, based on a series of presentations he gave in Switzerland. Dawn asks Francisco to give a broad overview of his work on photobiomodulation and transcranial infrared laser stimulation.

[00:43:52] Ken asks Francisco to talk about a paper titled “Light buckets and laser beams” that he and other researchers composed after attending a photobiomodulation workshop convened in 2023 by the director of the National Institute on Aging and several NIH lab directors.

[00:51:25] Ken asks Francisco if there are any commercially available photobiomodulation devices that he thinks have substantial utility.

[00:56:27] Ken asks Francisco to discuss mitochondrial disfunction in the context of neurodegeneration and his work on targeted stimulation of the mitochondria with photo biomodulation.

[01:06:58] Ken asks Francisco to talk about the potential benefits of photobiomodulation on the aging process outside of neurodegenerative conditions.

[01:17:16] Dawn mentions that transcranial infrared stimulation stimulates prefrontal energy metabolism and oxygenation, which produces cognitive enhancing effects. Dawn goes on to ask Francisco about his recent paper exploring this phenomenon in the context of depression titled “Augmenting internet based cognitive behavioral therapy for major depressive disorder with transcranial infrared laser stimulation.”

[01:23:08] In light of the promising results of this study, Ken asks Francisco what he sees as the next research step to further this progress.

[01:30:15] Ken comments on how Francisco has not only had great accomplishments in his recent research but also has a lot of fruitful opportunities ahead.

[01:31:07] Ken asks Francisco if he has looked at photobiomodulation in combination with transcutaneous vagal nerve stimulation.

[01:34:28] Ken mentions that for listeners interested in learning more about vagal nerve stimulation they can listen to episodes 179 with JP Erico, and 172 with Kevin Tracey. Francisco discusses the difficulty in knowing whether to attribute effects of vagus nerve stimulation to stimulation of the vagus nerve itself or incidental stimulation of the carotid artery … or some combination.

[01:38:33] Ken mentions that Francisco is now trying to move away from animal studies and focus more on human studies. Ken asks what human trials he is hoping to conduct.

[01:42:27] Dawn closes our interview thanking Francisco for once again joining us on STEM-Talk.

Links:

Gonzalez-Lima Lab

Learn more about IHMC

STEM-Talk homepage

Ken Ford bio

Ken Ford Wikipedia page

Dawn Kernagis bio

 

 

Dr. Judith Curry, a climatologist known for her criticism of alarmist, doomsday rhetoric about climate change, returns to STEM-Talk for her second appearance.

Judy most recently was one of five researchers commissioned by the U.S. Department of Energy to draft a Climate Assessment Report summarizing the current state of climate science with a focus on how it relates to the United States. In this interview, Judy summarizes the climate report’s key points, including the finding that that carbon-dioxide induced warming of the planet appears to be less damaging economically than has been commonly believed. The report, which was released this past summer, also argues that aggressive mitigation strategies for carbon dioxide emissions could be more harmful than helpful.

Our interview comes on the heels of the prestigious journal Nature retracting a study that predicted climate change and carbon emissions would cause catastrophic economic damage by the end of the century.  Our conversation with Judy also followed an about-face from Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates, who wrote last fall that it’s time to tamp down the alarmist rhetoric that climate change will lead to humanity’s demise.

Curry is president of the Climate Forecast Application Network and host of the blog, Climate Etc, which you can find at JudyCurry.com.  Her blog provides  a forum for climate researchers, academics and technical experts from other fields as well as citizen scientists to discuss topics related to climate science and science policy.

Her research interests include hurricanes, remote sensing, atmospheric modeling, polar climates, air-sea interactions, climate models, and the use of unmanned aerial vehicles for atmospheric research. She has published more than 100 scientific papers and is the author of “Climate Change and Uncertainty: Rethinking Our Response,” a book that provides a framework for understanding and rethinking the climate-change debate.

 Show notes:

[00:03:59] Ken opens the interview explaining that Judy was one of the five authors of a climate assessment report commissioned by the U.S. Department of Energy. Before diving into the key findings of the report and the response it has received, Ken asks Judy to explain how she became one of the five authors.

[00:06:21] Ken mentions that critics of the climate working group have accused the authors of being hand-picked skeptics of the effects of climate change. Judy argues that she and her co-authors are scientists determined to get the science right. Ken asks Judy to talk about her co-authors and the working relationship of the group.

[00:09:18] Ken asks Judy to talk about how she and her co-authors came to their key finding that the economic impacts of climate change are less severe than typically thought.

[00:13:08] Ken asks Judy to provide examples that demonstrate how climate mitigation strategies can be more harmful than helpful.

[00:16:08] Ken follows up by asking about the report’s proposal to shift climate science from alarmism to focus more on a better understanding of natural climate variability.

[00:18:14] Ken asks Judy what her thoughts are on the next steps that should be taken for a better understanding climate variability.

[00:20:06] Ken asks Judy to elaborate on the findings of chapter six of the report regarding global warming and extreme weather events. In particular, Ken asks about the problems with associating specific extreme weather events like hurricanes to climate change, and the issues created by the short historical records we have at our disposal.

[00:24:20] Ken asks Judy to talk about chapter nine of the report, which is about the need to focus on reducing vulnerabilities in our infrastructure instead of mitigating carbon emissions.

[00:28:43] Ken asks Judy to comment on the accusations that she is a “climate change denier.”

[00:31:18] Ken asks Judy to talk about a paper she co-authored with her colleague Dr. Harry DeAngelo titled “A critique of apocalyptic climate narrative.”

[00:36:27] Ken brings up Bill Gates’ recent about-face on climate change and the need to pivot away from doomsday views of cataclysmic climate disasters. Ken asks Judy to elaborate on what she has dubbed “climate alarmism fatigue.”

[00:39:32] Ken asks Judy to give her thoughts on the issue of sea level rise, particularly in light of the pushback that the DOE report faced on this topic. He also asks her to discuss the recent paper that was released after the DOE report titled “A global perspective on local sea level changes” which proports that there is no statistically significant acceleration of the rate of sea level rise for 98% of the suitable global locations.

[00:50:47] Ken points listeners to Judy’s blog, Judycurry.com, where she discusses many of these same issues. Ken goes on to explain that his perspective as well as Judy’s perspective is that climate change has become a scapegoat for many issues. He asks Judy to talk about this phenomenon.

[00:55:24] Ken asks Judy what she would like to see in terms of follow-up research to the DOE climate report.

[01:00:23] Ken asks Judy about her book “Climate Uncertainty and Risk.”

Links:

Judith Curry bio

Learn more about IHMC

STEM-Talk homepage

Ken Ford bio

Ken Ford Wikipedia page

 

 

Today’s episode of STEM-Talk features a timely and wide-ranging discussion with Drs. Michael Griffin and Lisa Porter about NASA’s plans to return humans to the Moon, the history of lunar missions, and how China’s advances in space technology pose a serious threat to U.S. national security.

IHMC founder and CEO Emeritus Ken Ford’s interview with Griffin and Porter came 10 days before Griffin appeared before the U.S. House Committee on Science, Space and Technology to give testimony on China’s advancements in space and the risks it poses for the United States.

“We have squandered a 60-year head start on pioneering the space frontier to a nation that, without reason or provocation on our part, has chosen to become our nation’s adversary,” said Griffin in his opening comments to Congress.

In this episode, Griffin and Porter explain why it is critical for the U.S. to return to the Moon before China. They also argue that NASA’s Artemis III mission to return to the lunar surface and establish a permanent base on the Moon is seriously flawed and should be scrapped.

Griffin and Porter are co-founders and co-presidents of LogiQ Inc., a company providing high-end management, scientific and technical consulting services.

Griffin’s background includes roles as the former Undersecretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, the Administrator of NASA, the Space Department Head at the John Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory as well as Chairman and CEO of Schafer Corporation.

Porter’s background includes roles as the former Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, the founding Director of the Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (IARPA) in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and the Associate Administrator for Aeronautics at NASA.

Show notes:

[00:04:44] Ken opens the interview by welcoming Mike back to STEM-Talk, who was a guest on Episodes 23 and 134. He also welcomes Lisa to her first appearance on STEM-Talk and asks her to talk about her decision to major in nuclear engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

[00:08:50] Ken asks Lisa why she went to Stanford for a Ph.D. in physics.

[00:10:43] Ken explains that Lisa was the founding director of the Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (IARPA), a department within the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. Ken asks about some of the challenges the American intelligence community faced that she addressed as director of IARPA.

[00:16:15] Ken asks about Lisa’s time working for Mike as Associate Administrator for Aeronautics at NASA, and how she came to accept that role.

[00:18:07] Ken explains that when Mike became Undersecretary for Defense for Research and Engineering in 2018, he invited Lisa to become the Deputy Undersecretary for Defense for Research and Engineering. Ken asks Mike why Lisa was ideal for that role.

[00:21:07] Ken explains that Mike and Lisa are working together again as co-founders and co-presidents of LogiQ Inc., a company that provides scientific consulting services. Ken asks Mike to give a brief overview of LogiQ’s work.

[00:24:44] Ken shifts the discussion to space exploration, noting that he wants to talk about Mike’s 2024 congressional testimony on returning to the Moon, and a paper that he and Lisa published titled “A system architecture for human lunar return.” To begin the discussion, Ken asks why it is so important for us to return to the Moon.

[00:29:11] Ken asks Mike and Lisa to explain why it is important for the US to be the first to return to the Moon in the context of China’s ambition to send humans to the Moon and establish a permanent lunar presence.

[00:33:24] Ken asks Mike and Lisa if they see the cancellation of the Apollo program as a mistake.

[00:35:36] Ken asks Mike and Lisa to give an overview of the Artemis program.

[00:41:45] Ken mentions the centrality of the Gateway in the Artemis plan, and the problem with making something that is already hard even harder for no good reason.

[00:43:28] Ken mentions his concern that the focus on a Mars-forward approach might impede our success with the current Moon missions.

[00:46:40] In Mike and Lisa’s aforementioned paper, they propose a dual-launch lunar landing architecture, which is simpler than the current NASA architecture and presents lower risks to the crew. Ken asks Mike and Lisa to elaborate on this idea.

[00:48:41] Ken asks Mike and Lisa what they think are some of the other technical and programmatic problems with the current Artemis plan.

[00:52:31] Ken asks Mike and Lisa what NASA’s response has been, as well as the response of others in the human space flight community, to their paper and recommendations for the Artemis mission architecture.

[00:54:25] Ken explains that Sean Duffy, the Secretary of Transportation and acting NASA administrator, has opened the door to some additional lander ideas in light of concerns that the two current contractors, Space X and Blue Origin, may not be ready in time for the current Artemis schedule. Ken asks if Lisa and Mike think this is a good idea or if they think it would further complicate matters.

[00:59:25] NASA’s current budget is around $24.9 billion dollars, approximately 0.4 percent of total federal spending. Ken notes at a time when China is increasing their investment in their space programs and launching several missions, NASA is facing a proposal to cut its funding by 24 percent to $18.8 billion. Ken asks Mike and Lisa for their thoughts on this.

[01:03:13] Ken and Lisa continue Mike’s discussion on the core purpose of NASA beyond science.

[01:08:55] Ken and Mike reflect on Ken’s observation that the U.S. is not as serious about space and the Moon as it was during the Apollo years, years that attracted the nation’s best and brightest.

[01:09:39] Ken asks Mike and Lisa their thoughts on the way that NASA is contracting more services in the development of Artemis, rather than funding a development program.

[01:15:55] Ken wraps up the interview by commenting that he believes listeners will very much enjoy today’s conversation.

Links:

Michael Griffin bio

Griffin’s Dec. 4 2025 Congressional testimony

Griffin’s 2024 Congressional testimony

Lida Porter bio

Ken Ford bio

Ken Ford Wikipedia page

Learn more about IHMC

STEM-Talk homepage

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Today we have Dr. Marina Walther-Antonio, a Mayo Clinic researcher who investigates the role of the microbiome in cancer and reproductive health, particularly endometrial and ovarian cancers. According to the World Cancer Research Fund International, endometrial and ovarian cancers are among the top 10 most prevalent cancers in women worldwide, and there are still no standard screenings for early detection.

Marina is an assistant professor in the Department of Surgery and the Mayo Clinic Center for Individualized Medicine Microbiome Program. She has a joint appointment in the department of Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Today we talk to Marina about how she and her colleagues are utilizing the methodologies of environmental microbiology and technologies used in astrobiology to improve our understanding of endometrial and ovarian cancers. Through her investigations into the microbiome, she and her team are developing early detection tests that will enable clinical interventions before certain cancers develop.

Show notes:

[00:03:13] Dawn opens our interview asking Marina about the history of her interest in extraterrestrial life.

[00:05:49] Dawn mentions that Marina did her undergraduate studies in Portugal at the University of Aveiro, where she majored in biology. Dawn asks why Marina chose biology as her major.

[00:06:39] Ken explains that the undergraduate programs at Aveiro University require students to do a year of research outside the university and asks Marina about her experience with this requirement.

[00:08:34] Ken explains that while Marina was conducting her internship at NASA Ames Research Center, there were several projects under way at the astrobiology institute, with the one that Marina was assigned to looking at a Mars analogue site in Oregon’s Warner Valley. Ken asks what kind of work Marina did on this project.

[00:10:06] Ken asks Marina why after earning a master’s degree in microbiology from Indiana University, she went to Washington State University to earn a Ph.D. in environmental sciences.

[00:13:29] Dawn asks about Marina’s Ph.D. research on microbialites, which are microbial structures that can thrive at the bottom of certain freshwater lakes and other extreme environments.

[00:16:02] Dawn explains that just as Marina began researching microbial populations, the Mayo Clinic Center for Individualized Medicine created a microbiome program. Dawn asks Marina about the circumstances that led to her joining Mayo.

[00:19:05] Dawn mentions that Dr. Claire Fraser, the director of Maryland’s Institute for Genome Sciences pointed out in Episode 32 of STEM-Talk that there are more microbes on a single person’s hands than there are people on Earth, as well as the fact that our gut is home to more than 100 trillion bacteria. Dawn asks Marina to talk about this microbial side of humanity.

[00:21:51] Ken mentions that if listeners are interested in learning more about the microbiome and how it affects human health, they should listen to Episodes 20 and 168 with Dr. Alessio Fasano. Ken asks Marina to give a short overview of the microbiome.

[00:25:37] Dawn asks Marina how the focus of her research shifted to the role of the microbiome in cancer and reproductive health.

[00:29:00] Dawn explains that endometrial and ovarian cancers are among the top 10 most prevalent cancers in women worldwide; with ovarian cancer being the most common gynecological malignancy and the fifth leading cause of death due to cancer in women in the nation. Dawn goes on to explain that in a 2023 paper Marina investigated the area of microbiome that is associated with ovarian cancer to better understand the microbiome’s potential in early detection. Dawn asks Marina to talk about this study and its findings.

[00:35:55] Given the small scale and sample size of her initial study, Ken asks Marina what her ideal follow-up study would look like.

[00:38:37] Ken mentions that in 2019 Marina published the results of a study that found that post-menopause is a key factor in the composition of endometrial cancer microbiome. This study also investigated the impact of patient factors on the microbiome, including menopausal status, BMI, and vaginal pH balance. Ken asks Marina to elaborate on the findings.

[00:44:13] Dawn notes that there is no standard screening for early detection of ovarian and endometrial cancers despite their prevalence worldwide. Dawn asks Marina about the work she and her colleagues are engaged in in this space.

[00:47:17] Dawn explains that prior to Marina’s aforementioned study, vaginal pH had not been associated as a risk factor in endometrial cancer. Dawn goes on to explain that variations in microbial compositions are implicated in a number of gynecologic and obstetric diseases. Marina’s core question was that since the vaginal microbiome is so crucial to women’s health, why then do vaginal microbial profiles vary strikingly from person to person. This question, as Dawn explains, led to a study and 2020 paper titled “Daily Vaginal Microbiota Fluctuations Associated with Natural Hormonal Cycle, Contraceptives, Diet, and Exercise.” Dawn asks Marina to talk about this study.

[00:54:23] Ken asks Marina about her finding that exogenous hormones in contraceptives may affect vaginal microbiota.

[00:56:42] Dawn asks Marina about future research that will stem from her study.

[01:00:29] Dawn asks Marina about her job as director of Mayo’s mentorship and Ph.D. program, and her passion for mentorship.

[01:05:24] Given her accomplished and varied career, Ken asks Marina what advice she has for young people beginning their careers in science.

[01:10:06] Circling back to Marina’s original interest in the search for extraterrestrial life, Ken explains that among the NASA scientists we’ve had on STEM-Talk there is disagreement on our chances of discovering intelligent life. While our guest Ed Wiler is confident that we will be able to prove the existence of life off earth within the next 20-30 years, Pascal Lee says he doesn’t think it is likely that we will discover intelligent or complex life anytime soon. Ken asks Marina to weigh in on the matter.

Links:

Marina Walther-Antonio

Learn more about IHMC

STEM-Talk homepage

Ken Ford bio

Ken Ford Wikipedia page

Dawn Kernagis bio

 

 

Today Ken interviews his co-host Dr. Dawn Kernagis about her new position as the Director of Scientific Research for DEEP, a UK startup that is pioneering a new era of ocean exploration.

For listeners unfamiliar with Dawn’s background, she is a NASA-trained NEEMO Aquanaut, a Fellow of the Explorer’s Club Fellow and has been inducted into the Women Divers Hall of Fame. In addition to co-hosting STEM-Talk for the past nine years, Dawn is also a Visiting Research Scientist at IHMC.

Dawn’s research over the years has been focused on protecting the brain and nervous system of people working in extreme environments. Prior to joining IHMC, Dawn completed her Ph.D. and Postdoctoral training at Duke University, where she studied the genetics of decompression sickness and mechanisms of oxygen toxicity in divers.

In today’s interview, Dawn talks about DEEP’s mission to create subsea stations that will allow humans to live and work permanently underwater.

Show notes:

[00:03:20] Ken reminds listeners of Dawn’s first STEM-Talk appearance as a guest on Episode 19 where she conducted the interview from the bottom of the ocean floor while she was a member of NASA’s NEEMO Mission 21.

[00:04:13] Ken asks Dawn what she was like as a child.

[00:05:48] When Ken asks Dawn what she was like as a child, she talks about how she was an annoying kid because she was always asking people questions like, “Why is the sky blue?”

[00:06:49] Dawn talks about the different places she lived during her childhood.

[00:07:34] Ken mentions that Dawn was inducted into the Women’s Divers Hall of Fame. He asks her how old she was when she first became interested in diving.

[00:10:35] Dawn talks about how she wanted to attend the University of North Carolina after high school but ended up at North Carolina State University and then Duke University.

[00:12:18] Ken asks Dawn to elaborate on her decision to change her field of study multiple times throughout her collegiate career. What follows is an interesting conversation about the importance of a person following their passion.

[00:14:53] Dawn talks about cave diving and how she and her friends used to do deep dives of six and seven hours at a time. Dawn explains how this led to her obsession with ways to protect people who dive into extreme underwater environments.

[00:18:28] Ken asks Dawn how she learned that some people have a genetic predisposition to decompression sickness.

[00:21:32] The conversation shifts to Dawn’s Ph.D. journey and how Richard Moon, who was a STEM-Talk guest on episode 26, played a significant role in her development.

[00:26:14] Ken and Dawn reminisce on the practice of performing academic research in libraries.

[00:28:20] Ken points out that despite Dawn’s extensive experience in human physiology with respect to diving, her doctoral work focused on cancer-related research. He asks her to talk about that seemingly odd combination.

[00:34:10] Dawn talks about two papers that emerged from this research. One paper addressed how genes with bimodal expression patterns not only define clinically relevant molecular subtypes of ovarian carcinoma, but also provide ideal targets for translation into the clinical laboratory. The other paper looked at precise microarray-based predictions of tumor behavior in breast cancer patients.

[00:39:00] Ken asks Dawn to recount the story of how the two of them met.

[00:41:52] Ken asks Dawn to discuss the paper she co-wrote with Dom D’Agostino on mitochondrial health and its relationship to potentially preventing oxygen toxicity during exposure to hyperbaric environments. Dawn goes on to talk about some of her other IHMC-related research.

[00:43:22] Ken asks Dawn to discuss her acceptance into the Aquanaut Program and her participation during one of NASA’s NEEMO missions.

[00:46:04] Ken asks Dawn to reflect on her time on NEEMO Mission 21, and if there are any key takeaways she can discuss.

[00:49:04] Ken asks Dawn to describe saturation diving, the research involved, and the health implications on saturation divers that are not present in other forms of underwater exploration.

[00:52:04] The conversation shifts to how Dawn became the Director of Scientific Research for DEEP, a UK startup that aims to “Make Humans Aquatic.”

[00:55:02] Ken explains that DEEP is a company that is pioneering a new era of ocean exploration and asks Dawn to give a primer on the importance of better understanding the Earth’s oceans.

[00:56:12] Ken mentions DEEP’s mission to expand human subsea habitation through research and innovation. Dawn explains some of the challenges associated with constructing underwater habitats.

[00:57:36] Ken asks about DEEP’s goal to create a relatively permanent deep-sea human habitat, analogous to the International Space Station. Called the Sentinel System, the underwater habitat will serve as a place for researchers to live and work.

[01:01:23] Ken explains that the Sentinel System will operate at a depth of up to 200 meters, which represents the epipelagic zone, or sunlight zone, which is the deepest point where light penetrates the ocean. To put this in perspective, the average depth of the ocean is 3,688 meters. Ken asks Dawn to talk about how little we actually know about what exists below the 200-meter depth of the epipelagic zone.

[01:02:58] Ken mentions that NASA has a long history of using the sea as a loose analogue for space. With renewed interest in human space exploration of the Moon and Mars, Ken asks if the Sentinel System will help in the preparation for deep space missions.

[01:05:10] Ken asks Dawn to discuss what other areas of research she is excited to explore once the Sentinel System is fully operational and in the water, including a project that involves IHMC.

[01:06:50] Dawn gives an overview of  DEEP’s current testing and training facility, which  is located in the UK.

[01:07:55] Ken asks Dawn to talk about DEEP’s increased presence in the United States and Florida, including a project with the Florida Institute of Oceanography.

[01:08:47] Ken asks Dawn about an anonymous billionaire who is funding DEEP.

[01:10:06] Ken asks Dawn about her responsibility of establishing DEEP’s first U.S. office in Raleigh, N.C.

[01.11.03] Dawn ends the interview talking about how much she loves the work that she does.

Links:

Learn more about IHMC

STEM-Talk homepage

Ken Ford bio

Ken Ford Wikipedia page

Dawn Kernagis bio