Slashdot Mirror

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-10-31/news/os-home-invasion-suspect-dies-20121031_1_home-invasion-deputies-shot-several-times

You were referring to? The GP mentioned his grandmother killed someone. That story is obviously not related, unless the 35 year old Hispanic male is someone's grandma.

Here is the story I was referring to: http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-10-25/news/os-suspect-shot-home-invasion-ucf-20121025_1_home-invasion-suspect-shot-deputies

Disney World has been quietly requiring fingerprint scans for certain parts of the park: http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/news_columnist_mikethomas/2007/05/finger_scanners.html

While it seems new for school attendance, non-financial biometric scans are not new...

Disney World has been quietly requiring fingerprint scans for certain parts of the park: http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/news_columnist_mikethomas/2007/05/finger_scanners.html

While it seems new for school attendance, non-financial biometric scans are not new...

By all reconstructions, testimony and other means available to the court, Martin was on top of Zimmerman. No one really contests that at this point. Your take on his SYG being torpedoed is idiotic, because, as I've demonstrated in this thread, you have zero knowledge of SYG case history in the state. There have been multiple PUBLICIZED instances where the instigator shoots the victim to death and walks. Do some god damn research. This is one such case: http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-06-27/news/sns-mct-miami-man-freed-in-stand-your-ground-ruling-20120627_1_miami-man-miami-police-miami-gardens

So, how have the big traditional space contractors like the Rockwell, Boeing, Lockheed, etc., of old, and now United Space Alliance and United Launch Alliance not delivered on their contracts?

It's not that they didn't (eventually) deliver. It's that those were done on a cost + basis of if we keep throwing money at it, eventually we'll get it done.

I believe SpaceX is working under a different model. NASA has said "if you can achieve this, we'll pay you $x for each of this many trips". So the costing is fixed up front. Yeah, here:

The company has a five-year, $1.5 billion contract to make 12 more deliveries.

So SpaceX did their own development up front and are then selling the lift services for a fixed cost. Hell, I think that works out cheaper per flight that the shuttle was. And it sounds like they've created a more overall usable platform.

Someone like Boeing will spend a decade building it with you, spend a large amount of money, probably have cost overruns. They'll give you something, and it will probably be cool, but you don't really know what it's going to cost you.

SpaceX has just become the longest haul trucking company around. ;-)

If only nuclear could be done economically.
  Unfortunately, it seems to have a "negative learning curve". Plants keep getting more expensive, not less.
Latest from Orlando Sentinel http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-05-05/news/os-progress-energy-rates-beth-kassab-050612-20120505_1_nuclear-plants-nuclear-reactors-progress-energy
It seems that the Progress Energy boondoggle continues. In 2007 it said the twin 1100 Megawatt reactors would cost $5 Billion. In 2008 it said they would cost $14 Billion (plus $3 Billion for transmission lines). In 2011 they said they would cost $24 Billion .... and oh, by the way, they wouldn't be finished until 2024... not the 2016 date originally projected.
The real kicker is that they are allowed to charge ratepayers now for the cost of building these plants even though they won't produce power until 2024 (if then).
This makes Solyndra look like a great investment.

But shouldn't we be concerned that NASA's interest in Global warming is going to get in the way of their Primary Mission of Muslim Outreach"...

Except that you're reading a script prepared for you by the 'sympathy media'.

Listen to the 911 call. http://www.orlandosentinel.com/videogallery/68871920/News/George-Zimmerman-911-call-reporting-Trayvon-Martin (not edited by NBC)
There were a number of break-ins in the neighborhood.
Neighborhood watch individual sees him, calls it in.
Trayvon approaches guy calling him in.
Trayvon moves out of sight.
Zimmerman leaves car.
Dispatcher tells him to get back into his car.
Can't tell if he's getting back into his car, but the wind noise substantially decreases so it MAY be that he got back into his car.
End of call.

It doesn't sound like he ignored the operators instructions to me, so where did you hear that?

SYG law is supposed to leave the benefit of the doubt with the person apparently defending himself. In this case, I suspect that the police determined there was no significant likelihood of conviction. They questioned Zimmerman for hours afterward. The physical evidence - his condition when the paramedics arrived, the location, grass stains, etc. - as well as witnesses corroborated his version of events. All the puzzle pieces fit, which is all police look for (they could still be wrong, but if they all fit, it's a tough road to convince a jury otherwise).

I sincerely hope that with a trial, discovery, and conclusion, we'll wrap this up (I expect Zimmerman will be exonerated). But this looks terribly like the police and DA are caving to the threats of mob violence (more likely they are caving to pressure from the White House and Justice, who have both seemed to already taken a side in the issue, unfortunately).

Coincidence: next story (if you just let that audio play out, it rolls to the next queued one) is about 2 black males holding a family at gunpoint in a home invasion.
I wonder if either of them would have looked like Obama's son?

Two important corrections:

* Trayvon was not a "stranger randomly wandering down the street"; he was a guest of someone in the neighborhood and he was walking home. Sure, Zimmerman may not have recognized him, but do you suppose he recognizes everyone who lives in the entire gated community? What do you suppose made him suspicious of this particular person...? I wonder.

* It was not an "early morning hour." It was at about 7PM.

See: http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-04-02/news/os-trayvon-martin-qa3-20120402_1_civil-rights-gated-community-robert-zimmerman

Nevertheless, yes, you're right that there are a number of ways this could have unfolded in which Zimmerman could have been acting reasonably, and I think it's good for everyone to be reminded of that. I'm suspicious myself for a few reasons: the stories coming from Zimmerman's family are not consistent, Zimmerman appears at most slightly injured in the police video, and the voice calling for help on the 911 tape is apparently not Zimmerman (according to some independent analysis: http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-31/news/os-trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman-911-20120331_1_voice-identification-expert-reasonable-scientific-certainty). I think it also looks pretty unlikely that Martin was shot anywhere near Zimmermen's truck. Trayvon was shot in an area that was not directly accessible by vehicles (see the map here: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/04/02/us/the-events-leading-to-the-shooting-of-trayvon-martin.html), so I don't think the "he was confronted at his truck" theory holds up.

But I do think it's helpful to be reminded of what we don't know.

Two important corrections:

* Trayvon was not a "stranger randomly wandering down the street"; he was a guest of someone in the neighborhood and he was walking home. Sure, Zimmerman may not have recognized him, but do you suppose he recognizes everyone who lives in the entire gated community? What do you suppose made him suspicious of this particular person...? I wonder.

* It was not an "early morning hour." It was at about 7PM.

See: http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-04-02/news/os-trayvon-martin-qa3-20120402_1_civil-rights-gated-community-robert-zimmerman

Nevertheless, yes, you're right that there are a number of ways this could have unfolded in which Zimmerman could have been acting reasonably, and I think it's good for everyone to be reminded of that. I'm suspicious myself for a few reasons: the stories coming from Zimmerman's family are not consistent, Zimmerman appears at most slightly injured in the police video, and the voice calling for help on the 911 tape is apparently not Zimmerman (according to some independent analysis: http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-31/news/os-trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman-911-20120331_1_voice-identification-expert-reasonable-scientific-certainty). I think it also looks pretty unlikely that Martin was shot anywhere near Zimmermen's truck. Trayvon was shot in an area that was not directly accessible by vehicles (see the map here: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/04/02/us/the-events-leading-to-the-shooting-of-trayvon-martin.html), so I don't think the "he was confronted at his truck" theory holds up.

But I do think it's helpful to be reminded of what we don't know.

Like this story, that got absolutely no coverage, even though it is in the same district as the Zimmerman case:
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-04-02/news/os-two-arrested-seminole-beating-20120402_1_victim-arrest-affidavits-crimeline

I wonder - would you accept 3 months in jail with breath mints being the only evidence? Is that close enough? (link)

They can also force a catheter up your penis without evidence. (Well, they can taser you if you don't let them.) Dontcha think that stings a bit? (link)

Or they could just charge you with conspiracy. You can be jailed for years with no evidence for conspiracy, because the sentence (at least in my state) is exactly the same as if you really possessed the drugs. So even if you've never possessed drugs, merely talking about it on the phone carries the same sentence as possessing the same amount. The added bonus is the prosecution now needs no evidence of actual drugs to convict! Open and shut case if you have a phone recording.

While the original poster was possibly engaging in hyperbole - I don't find it quite so objectionally out of realstic bounds. A case could pop up where that is what happened. It would probably require other factors to aggravate the situation (i.e. somebody schtupping a cop's wife), but it's not unimaginable to me.

> Everywhere I have been that makes you sort recyclables has been way
> too picky about what can and can't be recycled. "Plastic, but not this type,
> paper not including newspaper, x glass but not y glass". Pain in the ass.

Pain, you say? OK then, just quit eating food that comes in packages. Eat nothing but fresh fruits and vegetables, and remember that meat products do NOT get composted but eggshells do. Then all you have left are milk containers (I don't expect you to raise your own dairy cows) and that's only one thing so therefore doesn't need to be "sorted", technically. Problem solved. :-D

I do appreciate that you're willing to pay more for better service, but that's just the thing--someone needs to do the work, and until everyone agrees to pay more to have someone else do it, you'll be stuck doing it. Me, I just figure it's part of the price of living with all the conveniences a modern supermarket affords, and I'm glad to know that one way or another it's not just all going into a landfill. (Except when it doesn't.) But to say it's a pain in the ass is a little much. The biggest pain for me is when places don't even put a number on the plastic and I just have to trash it.

Besides, it'll get better over time. I live in a place (FL) where plastics #s 1 and 2 have been OK for over 10 years, and a couple years ago they started accepting #s 5 and 6 if they're bottles with a neck (yes, really) but where my mom lives (CA), you just mix all your stuff together. Then again, she pays for her own garbage collection (along with water and something else, IIRC) whereas here it's paid for by the city through taxes.

The average cost to launch a Shuttle mission was $450 million... Isn't this system supposed to be cheaper than that on a per-mission operation and per-pound-lift basis, and less likely to asplode?

Shuttle: $450,000,000 per mission
New system: $15,000,000,000 per mission (Source copied below.)
After spending $30B for development and 2 launches, you would need 130 launches with the new system at HALF the cost of the old shuttle before this became break even. And that's even before we consider the time-value of money.

Someone else do the math for the per-pound calculation. I'm too disheartened.

If NASA stays on budget, which is far from certain given NASA's history of cost overruns, each mission would cost about $15 billion apiece, although planned missions after 2021 would reduce that average price tag.

I'm guessing a lot of them get arrested pretty quickly. For example, a local kid got arrested by the FBI for being involved in the Anonymous "hacks." http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2011-07-20/news/os-fbi-ucf-police-cyber-investigation20110719_1_fbi-agents-ucf-student-fbi-program The hacks tend to make bigger news than the arrests.

This is how they smuggle drugs too. And when the package is intercepted, it is the passenger that goes to jail.

This is one reason why I try to never check-in luggage. Of course, I seldom fly anymore.

http://www.aolnews.com/2011/04/28/baggage-handlers-arrested-in-drug-smuggling-bust-at-detroit-airp/

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/1992-04-24/news/9204240104_1_baggage-handlers-orlando-international-airport-luggage

http://www.gadling.com/2008/04/22/madrid-airport-luggage-handlers-smuggle-17-kilos-of-cocaine-into/

etc. etc. etc...

Say what you want about evolution, but intelligent design has helped shape young minds to be fit for the workplace far better than the exceptional, honest primitive. The fact is that deep in the ID subtext is a dangerous idea -- that if you remove any assumptions about evolved order, and begin applying intelligent design to your own life, your own personality and your own standards, that you can blindside the least desirable bits of the established order with your own ideas.

That leaves us with how to keep the wheels greased. The key notion is that intelligently designed culture is not worth rescuing. Why would a child eat or want to be a STEM or any other kind of vegetable when he or she can feast on sugar? Foreign students are doing the work of getting the proper education just fine on their own -- the only metric is that there are enough of these professionals to wind up as the necessary cogs of industry. Indoctrinated, of course, with necessary subtext -- limit your interests to your own field, and never consider the implications in a broader context. Also, contracts are binding and non-negotiable; of course your mindshare is of the company's benefit solely.

To think of the average American child, therefore, we need only appeal to economics. I will take for given the idea that public schools are inefficient. That granted, the Establishment has considerable infrastructure already in place to continue a large breadth of education. Coursework would be greatly simplified into the substance necessary: respect for authority. The price of a penis entering an anus in a normative corrective context could not possibly be lower, and this would be a critical part of education. Instead of a standardized test, we would get back to the individual teacher having discretion on which students pass; the metric would be solely if the child exhibits the necessary rate of submission.

In conclusion, we must affirm our societal values by applying them economically; these are evolved values at their best. Time-honored and conservative; easy to relate to and understand. The default in every way.

Say what you want about religion, but Catholicism has helped shape young minds to be fit for the workplace far better than the exceptional, honest scientist. The fact is that deep in the scientific subtext is a dangerous idea -- that if you remove any assumptions about social order, and begin applying science to your own life, your own personality and your own standards, that you can blindside the least desirable bits of the established order with your own ideas.

That leaves us with how to keep the wheels greased. The key notion is that American culture is not worth rescuing. Why would a child eat or want to be a STEM or any other kind of vegetable when he or she can feast on sugar? Foreign students are doing the work of getting the proper education just fine on their own -- the only metric is that there are enough of these professionals to wind up as the necessary cogs of industry. Indoctrinated, of course, with necessary subtext -- limit your interests to your own field, and never consider the implications in a broader context. Also, contracts are binding and non-negotiable; of course your mindshare is of the company's benefit solely.

To think of the average American child, therefore, we need only appeal to economics. I will take for given the idea that public schools are inefficient. That granted, the Catholic Church has considerable infrastructure already in place to take over a large breadth of education. Coursework would be greatly simplified into the substance necessary: respect for authority. The price of a penis entering an anus a normative corrective context could not possibly be lower, and this would be a critical part of education. Instead of a standardized test, we would get back to the individual teacher having discretion on which students pass; the metric would be solely if the child exhibits the necessary rate of submission.

In conclusion, we must affirm our societal values by applying them economically; these are corporate values at their best. Time-honored and conservative; easy to relate to and understand. Christian in every way.

Say what you want about religion, but Catholicism has helped shape young minds to be fit for the workplace far better than the exceptional, honest scientist. The fact is that deep in the scientific subtext is a dangerous idea -- that if you remove any assumptions about social order, and begin applying science to your own life, your own personality and your own standards, that you can blindside the least desirable bits of the established order with your own ideas.

That leaves us with how to keep the wheels greased. The key notion is that American culture is not worth rescuing. Why would a child eat or want to be a STEM or any other kind of vegetable when he or she can feast on sugar? Foreign students are doing the work of getting the proper education just fine on their own -- the only metric is that there are enough of these professionals to wind up as the necessary cogs of industry. Indoctrinated, of course, with necessary subtext -- limit your interests to your own field, and never consider the implications in a broader context. Also, contracts are binding and non-negotiable; of course your mindshare is of the company's benefit solely.

To think of the average American child, therefore, we need only appeal to economics. I will take for given the idea that public schools are inefficient. That granted, the Catholic Church has considerable infrastructure already in place to take over a large breadth of education. Coursework would be greatly simplified into the substance necessary: respect for authority. The price of a penis entering an anus in a normative corrective context could not possibly be lower, and this would be a critical part of education. Instead of a standardized test, we would get back to the individual teacher having discretion on which students pass; the metric would be solely if the child exhibits the necessary rate of submission.

In conclusion, we must affirm our societal values by applying them economically; these are corporate values at their best. Time-honored and conservative; easy to relate to and understand. Christian in every way.

3 of the astronauts had lobster for breakfast, maybe they thought it may well be their last meal on Earth?

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/news_space_thewritestuff/2011/05/space-shuttle-endeavour-what-was-for-breakfast.html

You can say they don't 'need' to steal the research, but the evidence of Chinese born espionage in the US is blatant. And if you follow corporate and government level espionage in the news you would know that you would bet China if betting your life on who did it.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/spy/spies/

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/11/19/national/main5708534.shtml

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/3319656

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/foremski/chinese-spies-use-cyber-hacking-and-sexual-blackmail/1104

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2008-02-12/news/shuttlespy12_1_space-technology-military-technology-republic-of-china

http://www.haohaoreport.com/ChinaNews/Chinese-spy-gets-more-than-15-years-in-prison

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/fbi-arrests-chinese-spies-over-theft-of-military-data-781090.html .............

Seriously, just open your eyes or start paying attention. NASA has been infiltrated by Chinese spies on several occasions. This policy is rational and safe and is a better/safer choice than any potential 'crippling of research' as you put it.

But go ahead pretending this isn't real... go ahead.. I only copied the first few things I looked up, but the truth is about every 3-4 months I read about another Chinese spy in the US. Yet it takes years before I read about ANY OTHER NATION spying (or getting caught at least).

I wish desperately I could say I was making this up, but I am not.

An exorcist should be called when "the moral certainty has been reached that the person is possessed", said Father Nanni, a member of the Vatican's Congregation for the Causes of Saints. That could be indicated by radical and disturbing changes in the person's behaviour and voice, or an ability to garble in foreign languages or nonsensical gibberish. Father Gabriele Amorth said people who are possessed by Satan vomit shards of glass and pieces of iron, scream, dribble and slobber, utter blasphemies and have to be physically restrained

Dear Vatican,
 
My child has autism. She puts stuff in his mouth - anything. Most of the time she just speaks gibberish but she also does the echolalia thing to the point some people think she speaks fluent Japanese! One day, after ingesting some shards of glass and pieces of iron, she threw them up and started dribbling and slobbering. I suppose she was in pain or perhaps just upset because she was screaming and uttering blasphemies too. This all happened at school and as she was uncontrollable, she was deemed to need to be physically restrained.

Should I call an excorcist?

Love,
H.

First of all, "dirty" comes from the accounts of people who have been in the capitol building and described it as such. Second, I don't think the Democrat party has that kinda money but you can bet unions do and that together they could and are doing this. Third, the fact that people are coming in from out of state is apparent. I never said people weren't coming from around the state but to say that there aren't people coming from out of state is patently false and has been widely reported.

"Trying to silence this one man isn't going to accomplish anything except to perhaps reinforce to the people how much he resembles other dictators and fascists leaders."
Then I assume you'd condemn this: http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/news_politics/2011/03/waiting-for-joe-and-bill.html
And you have to condemn Biden for it to be fair. Just like every Republican is responsible for what just one Republican does.

The thing that *does* worry me is the fact that our plants are ~40 years old.

I'll give you something to worry about: Power uprates. This is where a utility gets the NRC to approve operation of a plant above its design power level. 105%. 115%. One day a 40 year old uprated reactor is going to fracture a main steam line and blow-down into containment. Zero pressure. The LPCI better kick in as designed because nothing else will save it.

but there was so much bitching and other bullshit

That, ultimately, is the real problem in the US. The little enthusiasm a utility might have to replace an old facility is utterly overwhelmed by the legal tar-pit that must be forded to accomplish anything. The somewhat greater desire to expand existing plants or even create a new plant is also legally infeasible. Tying up billions in capital for years on an uncertain outcome is financially infeasible; much easier and more profitable to take that money to Asia. The US can rot in its legal morass; money doesn't care.

This is a matter of political will; stimulus projects have exemptions from "environmental review." Border fence construction enjoyed that as well. When either the left or the right wants to stop muddling around and accomplish something they can make it so. They know exactly what the problem is and they know exactly how to fix it.

They just don't want to.

First article I could find about Florida doing this. Not sure about other states, but obviously it isn't forbidden in America. http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2010-03-24/news/os-education-reforms-senate-03-25-2010-20100324_1_merit-pay-plan-rank-and-file-teachers-public-school

Not True. If the this news report is to be believed, at least one guy is getting 20 years prison time.

The language that keeps Constellation going was inserted into the 2010 budget last year by U.S. Sen. Richard Shelby, an Alabama Republican who sought to protect the program and Ares jobs at Marshall Space Flight Center in his home state.

Here, you fucking retard. Yes, that is TFA.

To support that: Fox News has much better ratings than MSNBC.

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment_tv_tvblog/2010/04/fox-news-channel-marks-100-months-as-most-watched-cable-news-channel-nbc-nightly-news-wins-weekly-race.html

In prime time, it has 50% of all viewers of news channels, and MSNBC a paltry 20%. The top 9 programs are all Fox News programs; Olberman's and Maddow's one million viewers are a third of O'Reilly's and half of Beck's and Hannity's.

As you observer, Stewart does beat MSNBC with 1.3 million viewers, but it doesn't come near to Fox's top commentators:

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2010/11/04/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-1-in-late-night-with-adults-18-49-for-october-bests-the-tonight-show-late-night-with-david-letterman/70856

The one thing that contradicts your conclusion: none of these numbers are a substantial fraction of all voters. However, those are only nightly numbers; the total number of occasional viewers is probably at least 2 to 3 times that. And even more importantly, each one is probably (mis)informing friends and family who don't otherwise watch TV news.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/fl-endangered-sharks-20101030,0,1055241.story

This happened with sharks after Jaws and continues to this very day. The original author of Jaws, Peter Benchley, said that he regretted writing the novel and the creation of the film because it lead to the mass killing of so many species of sharks.

http://www.monstersandcritics.com/books/news/article_1097132.php/Peter_Benchley_author_of_Jaws_dies_at_65

"most conversation within a car don't cause anywhere near this level of distraction"

[citation needed]

Link

Link

Link

Google for more

Their budget increased, but they have stopped funding for manned space missions and reallocated it to research. At least that is what the Obama administration wants to do. They haven't officially decided the direction of NASA, though, as the committee deciding NASA's future recently "...sidestepped a potential vote on NASA’s future, opting to take “no position” on White House plans to scrap NASA’s moon rocket program and replace the space shuttle with commercial rockets."

What's crazy is the people he hires to write the papers don't seem to have any sense of the ethical issues involved. At least two of them are interviewed using their real names, and they act like the only thing wrong with this whole shady enterprise is that the fool didn't pay them on time. One of them is apparently an established writer for the Star Tribune; another one seems to be an award-winning teacher in Orlando Florida. I'm glad these individuals are no longer working for this douchebag, but it doesn't seem to bother them at all that they are cheapening their own professions.

Here are a couple of reasons:
(this post describes goals, not what we think would probably actually happen)

1. development cost
Current space-rated tools are designed for humans. A humanoid robot can use these tools with no further research expense. Building robotic tools for all likely tasks would be more expensive than building a humanoid robot, not to mention requiring more mass to orbit and failing to take advantage of existing in-orbit resources and introducing substantially more complexity (points of failure).
For a peek at the cost of tools, try this: http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/news_space_thewritestuff/2008/11/so-why-does-a-n.html

2. adaptability
Similar to the above point, a humanoid robot would be useful anywhere humans might end up. For a base on the moon or Mars, for example, send one of these after all the cargo arrives, but before the first humans arrive. Now you have something flexible, suitable for most tasks that a human would perform, and expendable. The robot(s) can be used to set up, unpack, etc. and confirm that the facility is safe for human habitation. There are other feasible concepts, but all of them require some level of parallel development and additional cargo mass beyond that of a compatible robot. A further complication is that if these alternatives should break down, then the human astronauts may not be physically able to complete the robot's tasks.

3. spinoff
In keeping with NASA tech tradition, many technologies developed for use in space are adapted for use on Earth. The same advantages to using a humanoid robot in space apply on Earth. The launch fuel now becomes a transportation concern; can your shiny new robot fit in the passenger seat of your car or does it need to be shipped by freight? Once the basic hardware and software are developed, it becomes a much simpler task to adapt one into a lawn-mowing robot that uses your existing lawn mower. Or one that does your laundry, or weeds your garden, or replaces your siding. Given a robot with at least human range of motion and strength, any repetitive task then becomes a question of programing. Anything you are equipped to do, now your robot can do for you with no added tool costs.

When these three factors converge, the result is a strong marketplace in robotics that benefits us civilians and NASA, taking advantage of the risk behaviors of both groups to achieve something better and faster than either group could manage on their own. The publicity stunt angle was almost certainly in the top two reasons for sending it, and immediate cost was probably the other contender.

Or some of them committed the heinous "crimes" of public urination.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2007-03-21/news/VOFFENDER21_1_matamoros-deltona-incident

Members of the U.S. House panel with direct oversight of NASA vowed Wednesday to oppose White House plans to cancel the Constellation moon rocket program, calling the proposal a “deficient” idea that could jeopardize U.S. leadership in space exploration.

The criticism, from both Republicans and Democrats, underscores the difficulty that President Barack Obama faces in convincing Congress of his plan, which would terminate Constellation and instead rely on commercial rockets to ferry astronauts to the International Space Station.

I predict that the usual political sausage factory will preserve some part of Constellation. Look how long the F-22 lived on life support.

I concede on the engine fire, I had not seen the embedded link in the first article, only the one from the orlando site. So thanks

Still, my point was that if the first firing had failed on a NASA vehicle it would have been (correctly) called out for it, while anything NewSpace is fine and dandy and they can do no wrong. My "flagrance" is a result of this submitter always spinning his submissions and having conveient omissions (the first failure in this case).

The first failed test fire was a result of "growing pains" (inexperience). The test enviornment did not suffice for the real enviornment. They will get better and better over time.

The failure, Musk, admitted, might have been avoided.

"We had tested everything on the vehicle side exhaustively in Texas, but didn't have this ... valve on our test stand there," Musk said. "Definitely a lesson learned to make sure that *everything* is the same between test stand and launch pad on the ground side, not just on the vehicle side."

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/news_space_thewritestuff/2010/03/musk-chalk-up-spacex-falcon-9-aborted-test-to-growing-pains.html

For those of you who've watched the Senate hearing video that QuantumG linked to, there's this rather bizarre part where Sen. Vitter (R-La) made some insinuations that Bolden wasn't actually involved in the planning, but it was all supposedly done by his deputy Lori Garver. The Orlando Sentinel has some follow-up on this, with sources reporting that ATK (one of the primary contractors on the Ares I rocket) had put up the Senator to make those attacks:

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/news_space_thewritestuff/2010/02/senators-attack-on-nasa-deputy-chief-lori-garver-backfires.html

The attacks on NASA deputy administrator Lori Garver spearheaded by Louisiana Republican Sen. David Vitter during a hearing on Wednesday on the 2011 NASA budget have badly backfired, according to a range of sources.

Vitter accused Garver -- who was not present at the hearing -- of orchestrating the cancellation of Constellation. He also seemed to suggest that Garver was running the agency, and not Administrator Charlie Bolden. Bolden later called Vitter's comment "unfair."

Not only were administration outraged by Vitter's remarks but several female civil servants and women executives in aerospace companies who have known Garver for years felt compelled to send their complaints to senate staff Wednesday afternoon.

Several sources on the Hill, in industry and inside the Obama administration blame rocket maker ATK, the developer of the Ares I rocket first stage, for putting Vitter up to the attack. Sources say that complaints have been sent to ATK and so far there has been no response.

In the meantime, members of the Senate and the House said they were going to refrain from any further personal attacks as they move against the White House's proposed 2011 budget for the space agency.

I believe that NASA will develop a heavy lift vehicle that is meant just for LEO, not for the moon. This says so, so it must be true. Obviously this will not be in the near future, but it looks like NASA will try to do it themselves instead of just giving up and saying "Someone else will do it".

2016 for India (at a cost of $2.76 billion) seems like a long way off, but it should be noted that NASA's similarly-capable Ares I isn't expected to be ready to launch people until 2017-2019 at a cost of ~$40 billion. The Ares I has also been under development since 2005, while the Indian launch plans have just been announced.

Then again, fixed-price commercial capsules from the United Launch Alliance or SpaceX (on their already-proven rockets like the Atlas V) would be ready 2013-2015 if they received a few billion in funding, which would beat both India and NASA on schedule and be competitive with India (and be an order of magnitude less than NASA) on price.

I can't believe what's happening, first ax the moon, now cut the sun, not to mention this thing about mars' spirit being stuck. What the hell is going on with our solar system ?

Obama wants to cancel NASA's moon mission: Linky

Stephen Hawking said it best:

"I don't think the human race will survive the next thousand years, unless we spread into space. There are too many accidents that can befall life on a single planet..."

If the government insists on squandering space progress, we as a nation need to look to private industry to move the ball forward.

If you prefer, this and this predate the Fox story by several days.

Why shouldn't they oppose it? The Democrats aren't interested in meeting in the middle. They are interested in pushing their own agenda. The fact that they can't even convince the moderates in their own party to go along with some of the stuff they've tried to pass ought to tell you something. Mind you, this is exactly how the GOP operated when they had control, but the silence coming from the man who promised us a new kind of politics is deafening, isn't it?

Are you serious?

The Democrats have made concession after concession to the Republicans on every major bill they've tried to get through Congress, and the Republicans just move the goalposts. This is why we ended up with a watered-down, crap stimulus bill. This is why we're ending up with a watered-down, crap health reform bill. The Republicans are taking obstructionist tactics to new extremes, like "accidentally" losing their voting cards, and filibustering a defense slash war-funding bill in the hopes that the Senate won't even be able to debate the health insurance reform bill. Meanwhile, the Democrats refuse to use the options at their disposal, like reconciliation, to pass the health care bill without bipartisan support or a supermajority. Senator Baucus worked with Republicans for ages on his version of the health care bill, only for them to oppose it anyway. Republican Senators gleefully announce that they intend to break Obama and make health care his waterloo. Republicans previously for health care reform suddenly oppose it for nebulous reasons.

100% party unity is unrealistic for the Democrats on any issue, and the Democrats have 60 members in their caucus in the Senate, not 60 Democrats. Senator Lieberman lost his Democratic primary and garnered more Republican votes than his Democratic opponent, and also more than his Republican opponent. He opposes pretty much every big-ticket Democratic agenda item. That's hardly a party-line Democrat to begin with. Other Democrats are suggesting they will vote against the bill because of a lack of cost-control options like the public option (removed to appease Republicans, despite it's 60%+ support among the public), or because of compromises made to the Republicans, which have garnered no Republican votes and only weakened the bill.

The Republicans don't want to meet in the middle, and the Democrats are fools for trying to act bipartisan. All they get for it is Republicans shrilly insisting that the Democrats are bullying them around any time they want to pass any of the legislation they were elected to pass. The Republicans don't oppose the health care bill on ideological grounds. Plenty of Republicans have supported health care legislation more liberal than what's in the Senate today, such as, say, Richard Nixon. Mitt Romney imposed a very similar plan to the one in the Senate now while he was governor. And so on and so on and so on. It wasn't until the current cycle that Republicans became opposed to plans such as the one now before the Senate. The ideology behind conservatism didn't suddenly change. No, the Republicans made a political decision that it was in their best interest to do their best to attack and bring down any initiatives Obama came up with.

The Republicans aren't opposed to the health care reform bill for any other reason than they were determined to make the Democrats failures. And they're doing an excellent job of it.

...That there was no ice in Greenland a 800 years ago?...

Yes, ice cores show that at the bottom of the ice sheet, 8000 feet down, there are pollen grains and microscopic plant remains very similar to the plants, specifically trees, that are found on the East Coast of North America.

The ice cores show thousands of layers, but it is erroneously assumed(believed) that each layer represents a season or year. In World War II some planes went down and were buried under ice and snow. Through radar images, the planes were found 40+ years later under about 250 feet of ice. The ice to the depth at which the planes were found showed layering for many hundreds of layers. This shows very clearly that the annual layering assumption in ice cores is false. The layering simply represents successive freezes, thaws and storms, recurring numerous times throughout the year.

I am sure that you know how to use Google just as well as I, but here is an entry you may look at:

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/1992-05-26/news/9205260356_1_war-ii-buried-fighter

I will leave it to you as a simple arithmetic exercise, given 250 feet of ice in about 40 years, how deep an ice pack you might get from about the year 800 until now.

These so-called climate scientists were exposed as having an agenda and they manipulated data to give evidence of a foregone conclusions. The e-mails clearly showed that these people who call themselves scientists were not interested in truth in the least bit.

Now the $445 million price tag may be from development that has been done already for the entire program.

Actually, Ares I development costs has been $3 billion spent so far, and Orion development has been another $3 billion. The $445 million was specifically for the Ares I-X.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2009-09-06/news/0909050169_1_ares-1-rocket-astronauts

It is true that a Delta IV would be about $10 million or so, but these aren't man rated. To get to that level with anything is costly.

According to the Augustine Committee, man-rating and developing crew capsules and LES for commercial rockets like the Delta IV would cost $300 million - $2 billion, depending on the rocket.

$1.6B for the satellite? - wow.

The US Department of Defense is the only organization I've ever seen complain about launch costs being too low. Namely, they're willing to pay much more for a launch in order to insure the payload makes it. From what I understand, the cost above is a bit on the expensive side, but not the most expensive satellite that the DoD has put up.

Only if the costs are proportional, though, right? If one can do 7 Delta IV launches for the cost of 1 Ares V launch, then there *is* a strong argument. Costs ought to be figured out to probably 2040 or so and include Mars mission capability.

My view is that yes, they probably can do 7 Delta IV Heavy launches for the price of a Ares V launch. Plus they can launch unmanned payloads now. We could be launching lunar missions now, not ten or twenty years from now.

So, if the Ares V can put 70 tons on the Moon you'd need to go to a 14:1 ratio?

The Ares V has two efficiencies in its favor. First, it can launch directly to lunar transfer orbit (LTO). Using a Delta IV Heavy or equivalent requires assembly and fueling in low Earth orbit. So in the long run with appropriate infrastructure for the Ares V and the Delta IV Heavy, 14:1 ratio may well be accurate. And there is as I mentioned in a previous post some economy of scale in payload size. Even so, it may well turn out that the Delta IV Heavy (and Atlas V Heavy) would be cheaper in the long run.

As I mentioned above, the Delta IV Heavy could be launching now for lunar mission support. Even with the relatively crude Apollo-era Lunar Module "truck" that delivers 5 tons of payload to the Moon for the cost of say 5 Delta IV Heavy launches, that means that you could have significant activity on the Moon by the time Ares V hypothetically would be developed.

Further, and this is a key point that I don't think most heavy lift advocates understand, by buying a lot of 20-25 ton payload launches from multiple commercial launch providers, the US would be providing considerable incentive for larger commercial vehicles. Recall after all, that commercial launch has only recently gone to this payload range. I don't see a 180 ton payload vehicle in the cards, but easily 40-50 ton vehicles, maybe more, by the time Ares V would hypothetically come about. Incremental investment in commercial space launch is in my view far superior to NASA competing with commercial launch.

So why did the NASA study conclude the Ares I was 2x safer than a Delta IV solution? Just BS for the sake of perpetuating the program?

As far as I can tell, yes, that was bullshit. Whether it was intentional or not, the ESAS has a number of biases in favor of Ares I type vehicles. Overestimates of the safety of the SRBs (and to an extent other solid rocket motors including those used on the Atlas V Heavy) by what appears to me to be a factor of ten are only one of the problems. There's also apparently lowered standards for vehicles that depend on solid rocket motors for the first stage. Inaccurate mass numbers for the EELVs. Thrust oscillation (despite it being a problem for all solid rocket motors including the Space Shuttle) was completely ignored. And they treated crew escape from a complete solid motor rupture as being just as easy to escape from as the equivalent failure from a liquid propellant stage, even though the latter is more survivable due to slower combustion speed and lower heating of the escape vehicle (in particular, no melting parachute).

I'd like to see NASA

As well as being just a test of repackaged existing technology, this launch is costing $445 million. I'm pretty sure that Congress could find a lot of other uses for that half billion dollars.

I doubt Congress would allow NASA to spend it in a productive way, at least not without pressure from the White House. For example, this past year NASA wanted to spend $150 million in stimulus funds on jump-starting development of spacecraft for commercial crew to the ISS. Senator Richard Shelby (R-AL) put up a fuss and threatened all of NASA's stimulus funding, until they diverted $100M of the funds to the Ares program based in his state, leaving only $50 million to get commercial crew started. Article:
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2009-07-03/news/shelby_1_rocket-constellation-space-shuttle

I've pretty much decided the U.S. Senate is an epic FAIL because one senator can often single handedly kill any program they oppose.

For a more recent example of this, this past year NASA wanted to spend $150 million stimulus funds on jump-starting development of spacecraft for commercial crew to the ISS. Senator Richard Shelby (R-AL) put up a fuss and threatened all of NASA's stimulus funding, until they diverted $100M of the funds to the Constellation program based in his state, leaving only $50 million to get commercial crew started. Article:
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2009-07-03/news/shelby_1_rocket-constellation-space-shuttle

The release of the Augustine Report is just the beginning of some very nasty political battles.