Rosetta Team Proposes Landing On Comet To Finish Mission
schwit1 writes: Rather than simply turn off the spacecraft when its funding runs out at the end of 2015, Rosetta's science team has proposed that the mission get a nine-month extension, during which they will slowly spiral into the comet and gently land. Their proposal is similar to what American scientists did with their NEAR spacecraft, which hadn't been designed to land on an asteroid but was successfully eased onto the surface of Eros, where it operated for a very short time.
What's more important is that they all wear shirts that don't hurt fragile women's minds
transsexual
Is that woman that was once a man, or a person with mixed genitalia including breasts?
We're going to have a tough time staffing space programs with criteria like this.
We don't just want anyone working on these space programs.
Really? Half of Tumbler are self identified bipolar transgendered bisexual polyamorous turtle-kins with diabetes. I bet it wouldn't be hard to hit the quotas at all, as long as you ignored things like qualifications.
Why are assuming we will only staff with humans? Won't someone think of the AIs?
Awesomest comment every! Thanks for the laugh and spew.
What the hell is everyone talking about?
Is professing progressive politics now a hard requirement for being allowed to contribute to opensource?
Yes. But only until the reeducation camps get up and running.
Next to the guy with the "Naked-girls" shirt, let the second interviewee be one of the female scientist wearing a shirt with "masochistic men in bondage" printed picture on it.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Eventually, as the comet erodes, then both parts of the spacecraft would end up in orbit, but within the (mildly unpredictable) envelope of the comet's other natural ejecta, which doesn't really add to the space-debris problem. Though where the launch cowlings etc go, I've no-idea. One would hope for re-entry, but the mission design may not have included that at build time.
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"