Those are the facts, as far as I know them. Consider the situation in Afghanistan though. More than a half-million casualties, over a decade of war. The country was blown to pieces. Then the Soviets back out, and so does the US, without much, if any, further aid to get Afghanistan back on its feet. Considering that the US was giving weapons, but no people, to the effort, one could feel like one just got used as the personal army of a third party pretty easily.
The wikipedia section (mind, I didn't edit it, promise) you point to goes on to say that after the Soviets (and the US) left in 1989, Afghanistan experienced a leadership vacuum that led to civil war and the eventual rise of the Taliban. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe they're purported to have something to do with the attacks on the WTC.
And New York was a retribution for US's lack of support in Afghanistan. US's lack of support there was a result of a war objective with the USSR being completed. If you look back on political history far enough, it just starts to look like one giant mosh pit where countries occasionally die.
But when's the last time you lounged in a chair in torn jeans and $150 dress shoes, a dress shirt covered nicely with a sweater vest, horn rimmed glasses and just-greasy-enough hair, looking up casually at the passers by before returning to one-handedly surfing for the latest website for wholly organic silica gel packets, at your local Burger King? That kind of policy just doesn't have the right flow, man.
Yeah, I guess I was thinking more along the lines of "there'll be more that meets the eye in the future than meets the eye right now." From a purely government point of view, it might not be that great. Didn't Spain get some nice bling from Central America and Mexico though?
Good point, but space exploration is kinda like particle physics in that sense (or discovering America for that matter). You go in looking for one thing (which we need to find) but the good finds come out the other side with something totally unexpected, and totally awesome. I don't think we need better than a "we could probably make some cash doing this," sort of probability before it's time to jump on it... I just hope the folks with the big bucks agree.
Trolls? I'm continuing discourse about NASA with you as long as you continue. You're done, so I'm done. The rest goes something like this: you attack an organization for something they've been directed to do, and you do so in a coarse way. I share my opinion that this isn't very intelligent. Flames ensue from you. At that point I began talking down to you because, frankly, I was trying to make you mad. Call it aggression if you like.
I'm a pretty nice guy, really, but you didn't leave much window there. If you're going to write a baseless opinion in a caustic manner, you're not going to get a flowery and polite reply from me.
As for NASA, I don't think they're done with rocket scientists, nor are many other organizations. If you're as impassioned and frustrated as your words seem to say, I would think you'd push for the same.
You're treating Moonbase:Alpha as though it's NASA's answer for a compelling mission: to make video games about space. Moonbase:Alpha is a Public Affairs stunt. It's not very good. Of course it doesn't change anything for NASA's mission.
NASA has secured mandates in funding. Those mandates in funding have been reversed or had the mission profile drastically changed by the following president. This has happened repeatedly in manned spaceflight since 1973. From going to Venus, to Mars, and doing various compelling missions. If by compelling you mean "gets congress re-elected," then NASA has been less successful. It's difficult to ascertain what you mean between the flames.
You've summarized the state of NASA's manned space program (one of two that actually put people in space) as "fucking dead," several times. I'm pointing this out to be fair, as it's your most coherent argument. What's your solution then. Despair? Play better video games than what NASA contracts? I haven't seen anything from you on this department. Too hard to suggest perhaps?
...(not to mention fat and stupid line - hey suck my cock fag - did I spell that right virgin? It hurts to think down to your level).
I've always wondered what it was like to have a huge throbbing e-penis. Do you get one by cursing on message boards and posting derogatory statements towards the intelligence of, quite literally, rocket scientists? I'll have to try that sometime.
Good you mentioned Sarah Palin though, because she has nothing to do with spaceflight of any kind. You make me laugh. Did you mean to?
"Methtown" is a little better though, since LOX-Methane is a pretty efficient oxidizer-fuel combo. You'll get there someday. If, you know, you do exactly what you aren't doing.
20 years ago: The President says - Go do! Congress funds paperwork but no hardware.
15 years ago: The President says - Scratch that! Congress funds the shuttle.
10 years ago: The President says - Go do! Congress says hell yeah lets roll.
5 years ago: The President says - Go do! Congress says hell yeah lets roll!
Today: The President says - Go think! Congress says where's our pork now?
The folks at the tip top of NASA aren't NASA at all. It's the President and Congress. You're saying it's NASA's fault they didn't build a shuttle replacement without funding and at times against orders? Interesting world you live in. NASA has built hardware, they've successfully tested hardware. They are nearing a launchable vehicle, and funding stops, because the President believes there is a better way to do it. He might be right.
But I guarantee you that taking no direction, or changing direction every 8 years or less, or committing to a direction without the money needed to do what you set out to do, will all put you in the same place: nowhere.
As for a governmental organization successfully intercoursing itself, well, lets just say it toes the line of the intelligence level of the rest of your statement. Go forth, and get fat and stupid.
There's a difference there... NBC and Comcast deliver services, at least at the core of their business, that people just don't need. Comcast has branched out to phone, which people probably need some form of to function, as well as high speed internet, which of course is very useful, but the point stands.
Most people don't truly need cable internet (there are other ways of internet) or cable/VOIP phone (there are other ways for phone). No one needs TV and movies. It's a nicety, and if this proposed conglomeration decides to be forceful enough, people will learn that they never really needed it in the first place. In that sense, it lies in the hands of these two companies to respect their customers, if they want to keep making money.
If I remember correctly the predictions for Katrina didn't quite shape up right. Let's sue every meteorologist into the ground so that they understand that a statistical educated guess has to be 100% accurate when lives are on the line. Then we can offer a tax credit to anyone who donates to BP to clean up the oil spill.
Man... sometimes innovation comes from the most unlikely places. If any country was going to find an exactly ass backwards way of finding accountability for a natural event, I'd have expected it to be the US.
Re:NASA shutting down manned exploration doesn't h
on
The Real Science Gap
·
· Score: 1
To which manned exploration missions are you comparing the robotic exploration missions? December 14th, 1972 was the last time a person left the orbit of earth. Since then the only scientific discovery that can occur in space, by humans, is microgravity experiments. These have plenty of merit, but they don't do what the robots do on Mars and around Saturn.
When the Apollo program put humans on the moon, little was known about what we should be looking for. Even less of that information was known by the astronauts involved. After Apollo 11 there was a concerted effort to expand the geological science done on the lunar surface, but the history of the moon and the knowledge gained about it couldn't be completely learned in 3 years, whether robots or humans were there.
I'd love an apples to apples citation on where a robot perceives more and brings back more data and insight than a human. More objective data, possibly. But until you can build a curious robot, they're way behind.
Except when one pays for social security for less than a decade, and then spends the rest of one's life living off of it. Close to half, possibly more than half, of the US population that pays into social security would be better off putting the same funds into a bank account for retirement. That's why it's "social" security. It is a team effort. And like any exceedingly large team where no one can get fired, it's the lazy bastards that get it the easiest.
I think what you mean is that they're designed to be social nets. In use, it is so trivial to abuse the system that several people make it their "profession" to do so.
Or with the case of Constellation, which was designed for 6 month global access missions (Apollo was only equatorial) with the purpose of exploration and the construction of long term habitats and research facilities on the moon, absolutely been there, absolutely not done that.
I agree with you 100%, I just find it strange that no one, including Obama, read the mission plan for Constellation, instead of just seeing that Ares wasn't doing well and saying the whole thing is trash. It was designed to do things that we've never done before.
The Constellation moon missions were to the Apollo moon missions as Portland is to the Lewis and Clark expeditions.
If you averaged 22 mph without ever stopping for anything (assuming no tailwind) and you're an average weight and build for a cyclist, your "recovery day" was either done on aerobars or you're a Cat 3 (men's) time trialist. If there were stops in the ride for traffic, or if your FTP is lower than about 270 watts, you're working too hard.
Truth is everybody in Australia is a criminal. You just have to wait until some prosecuting authority thinks it's your turn and they find the rule to nail you with.
Well... Australia was a criminal colony.... Short of the natives you're pretty much spot on.
Slashdot Mirror
Bags of sand?
I'll grasp who I like, thank you very much.
Those are the facts, as far as I know them. Consider the situation in Afghanistan though. More than a half-million casualties, over a decade of war. The country was blown to pieces. Then the Soviets back out, and so does the US, without much, if any, further aid to get Afghanistan back on its feet. Considering that the US was giving weapons, but no people, to the effort, one could feel like one just got used as the personal army of a third party pretty easily.
The wikipedia section (mind, I didn't edit it, promise) you point to goes on to say that after the Soviets (and the US) left in 1989, Afghanistan experienced a leadership vacuum that led to civil war and the eventual rise of the Taliban. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe they're purported to have something to do with the attacks on the WTC.
And New York was a retribution for US's lack of support in Afghanistan. US's lack of support there was a result of a war objective with the USSR being completed. If you look back on political history far enough, it just starts to look like one giant mosh pit where countries occasionally die.
Is throwing the Rubik's Cube against a wall a valid solution? If so I think I have a valid solution to your query.
But when's the last time you lounged in a chair in torn jeans and $150 dress shoes, a dress shirt covered nicely with a sweater vest, horn rimmed glasses and just-greasy-enough hair, looking up casually at the passers by before returning to one-handedly surfing for the latest website for wholly organic silica gel packets, at your local Burger King? That kind of policy just doesn't have the right flow, man.
Yeah, I guess I was thinking more along the lines of "there'll be more that meets the eye in the future than meets the eye right now." From a purely government point of view, it might not be that great. Didn't Spain get some nice bling from Central America and Mexico though?
Good point, but space exploration is kinda like particle physics in that sense (or discovering America for that matter). You go in looking for one thing (which we need to find) but the good finds come out the other side with something totally unexpected, and totally awesome. I don't think we need better than a "we could probably make some cash doing this," sort of probability before it's time to jump on it... I just hope the folks with the big bucks agree.
Amen.
Trolls? I'm continuing discourse about NASA with you as long as you continue. You're done, so I'm done. The rest goes something like this: you attack an organization for something they've been directed to do, and you do so in a coarse way. I share my opinion that this isn't very intelligent. Flames ensue from you. At that point I began talking down to you because, frankly, I was trying to make you mad. Call it aggression if you like.
I'm a pretty nice guy, really, but you didn't leave much window there. If you're going to write a baseless opinion in a caustic manner, you're not going to get a flowery and polite reply from me.
As for NASA, I don't think they're done with rocket scientists, nor are many other organizations. If you're as impassioned and frustrated as your words seem to say, I would think you'd push for the same.
Otherwise, you know the rest.
Simple. Simple simple simple.
You're treating Moonbase:Alpha as though it's NASA's answer for a compelling mission: to make video games about space. Moonbase:Alpha is a Public Affairs stunt. It's not very good. Of course it doesn't change anything for NASA's mission.
NASA has secured mandates in funding. Those mandates in funding have been reversed or had the mission profile drastically changed by the following president. This has happened repeatedly in manned spaceflight since 1973. From going to Venus, to Mars, and doing various compelling missions. If by compelling you mean "gets congress re-elected," then NASA has been less successful. It's difficult to ascertain what you mean between the flames.
You've summarized the state of NASA's manned space program (one of two that actually put people in space) as "fucking dead," several times. I'm pointing this out to be fair, as it's your most coherent argument. What's your solution then. Despair? Play better video games than what NASA contracts? I haven't seen anything from you on this department. Too hard to suggest perhaps?
I've always wondered what it was like to have a huge throbbing e-penis. Do you get one by cursing on message boards and posting derogatory statements towards the intelligence of, quite literally, rocket scientists? I'll have to try that sometime.
Good you mentioned Sarah Palin though, because she has nothing to do with spaceflight of any kind. You make me laugh. Did you mean to?
"Methtown" is a little better though, since LOX-Methane is a pretty efficient oxidizer-fuel combo. You'll get there someday. If, you know, you do exactly what you aren't doing.
Churchill was speaking in abbreviated third person, the quote is capitalized incorrectly.
The quote should read:
"...and destroy one's belief in The Church."
You can't go around destroying people's belief in their Prime Minister... it's just not right.
20 years ago: The President says - Go do! Congress funds paperwork but no hardware.
15 years ago: The President says - Scratch that! Congress funds the shuttle.
10 years ago: The President says - Go do! Congress says hell yeah lets roll.
5 years ago: The President says - Go do! Congress says hell yeah lets roll!
Today: The President says - Go think! Congress says where's our pork now?
The folks at the tip top of NASA aren't NASA at all. It's the President and Congress. You're saying it's NASA's fault they didn't build a shuttle replacement without funding and at times against orders? Interesting world you live in. NASA has built hardware, they've successfully tested hardware. They are nearing a launchable vehicle, and funding stops, because the President believes there is a better way to do it. He might be right.
But I guarantee you that taking no direction, or changing direction every 8 years or less, or committing to a direction without the money needed to do what you set out to do, will all put you in the same place: nowhere.
As for a governmental organization successfully intercoursing itself, well, lets just say it toes the line of the intelligence level of the rest of your statement. Go forth, and get fat and stupid.
This is the same reason Apple's OSX security is claimed to be so infallible. Not that many people are on macs, so why bother?
At the very least it gives you the ability to eat a possessed turkey.
There's a difference there... NBC and Comcast deliver services, at least at the core of their business, that people just don't need. Comcast has branched out to phone, which people probably need some form of to function, as well as high speed internet, which of course is very useful, but the point stands.
Most people don't truly need cable internet (there are other ways of internet) or cable/VOIP phone (there are other ways for phone). No one needs TV and movies. It's a nicety, and if this proposed conglomeration decides to be forceful enough, people will learn that they never really needed it in the first place. In that sense, it lies in the hands of these two companies to respect their customers, if they want to keep making money.
If I remember correctly the predictions for Katrina didn't quite shape up right. Let's sue every meteorologist into the ground so that they understand that a statistical educated guess has to be 100% accurate when lives are on the line. Then we can offer a tax credit to anyone who donates to BP to clean up the oil spill.
Man... sometimes innovation comes from the most unlikely places. If any country was going to find an exactly ass backwards way of finding accountability for a natural event, I'd have expected it to be the US.
To which manned exploration missions are you comparing the robotic exploration missions? December 14th, 1972 was the last time a person left the orbit of earth. Since then the only scientific discovery that can occur in space, by humans, is microgravity experiments. These have plenty of merit, but they don't do what the robots do on Mars and around Saturn.
When the Apollo program put humans on the moon, little was known about what we should be looking for. Even less of that information was known by the astronauts involved. After Apollo 11 there was a concerted effort to expand the geological science done on the lunar surface, but the history of the moon and the knowledge gained about it couldn't be completely learned in 3 years, whether robots or humans were there.
I'd love an apples to apples citation on where a robot perceives more and brings back more data and insight than a human. More objective data, possibly. But until you can build a curious robot, they're way behind.
Great. Now my brain is techno dancing to DJ Stewart.
Except when one pays for social security for less than a decade, and then spends the rest of one's life living off of it. Close to half, possibly more than half, of the US population that pays into social security would be better off putting the same funds into a bank account for retirement. That's why it's "social" security. It is a team effort. And like any exceedingly large team where no one can get fired, it's the lazy bastards that get it the easiest.
I think what you mean is that they're designed to be social nets. In use, it is so trivial to abuse the system that several people make it their "profession" to do so.
Or with the case of Constellation, which was designed for 6 month global access missions (Apollo was only equatorial) with the purpose of exploration and the construction of long term habitats and research facilities on the moon, absolutely been there, absolutely not done that.
I agree with you 100%, I just find it strange that no one, including Obama, read the mission plan for Constellation, instead of just seeing that Ares wasn't doing well and saying the whole thing is trash. It was designed to do things that we've never done before.
The Constellation moon missions were to the Apollo moon missions as Portland is to the Lewis and Clark expeditions.
And your functional threshold power is....
If you averaged 22 mph without ever stopping for anything (assuming no tailwind) and you're an average weight and build for a cyclist, your "recovery day" was either done on aerobars or you're a Cat 3 (men's) time trialist. If there were stops in the ride for traffic, or if your FTP is lower than about 270 watts, you're working too hard.
As for the sunshine, I fight in the shade.
They're estimates were bullshit. They're claim that there were no plumes is bullshit. Their claim that they're fully funding the cleanup is bullshit.
There there... third time's a charm.
Nah, he's posting from the intersection.
Truth is everybody in Australia is a criminal. You just have to wait until some prosecuting authority thinks it's your turn and they find the rule to nail you with.
Well... Australia was a criminal colony.... Short of the natives you're pretty much spot on.