No I think the title of egomaniac belongs to bitching fans.
George Lucas created Star Wars. It was his vision in the first place. So sorry he fucked up what you "thought" his vision should have been. Episode I and II are political in nature. It's more a movie like "Elizabeth".
The original Star Wars movies were "space westerns". That's not my description, that's Lucas'. Forgive Lucas if he wanted to broaden the scope of things with Return of the Jedi and subsequent episodes.
Same thing with the Wachowski brothers. They penned the original. How could they fuck it up. Honestly, the whole "human battery" concept was lame to begin with. The very concept of nuclear power never seemed to cross their mind. If thought that plotline was "cool" I guess it's your own fault for being scientfically ignorant.
Actually my understanding was that Gandalf was the last to be sent. He was also considered the least worthy. Perhaps this is a reflection of the humility that he displays.
Saruman, by contrast, is considered the greatest and most likely to succeed. It is reflected in his arrogance and contempt for mortals. The greatest point of contrast is that Gandalf was entrusted with the third of the Elf's rings, the ring of fire.
Saruman was jealous of Gandalf for the respect that he garnered from the peoples of Middle Earth. Most profound was Galadriel's outward rejection of Saruman.
Contrary to your analysis, Gandalf was far more interested in the inhabitants of middle earth than Saruman. Saruman was mostly content to sit in his tower and play chessmaster. It was Gandalf who went out and did all the grunt work.
Saruman's downfall was his arrogance. He assumed that he could read Sauron's mind using the palintir.
The Two Towers (movie) does not end on a positive note. Yes the characters are still alive but they are all still in great peril.
The first movie ended in a similar way. The fellowship was broken, Borimir died, Gandalf was presumably dead, Frodo and Sam left on their own.
BTW, starting the Two Towers with the battle between Gandalf and the Borloc was brilliant. It does make one think that they could have brought Frodo and Sam to Shelob's lair and allowed everyone to think he was dead.
After seeing the extended edition of Fellowship I was flabbergasted at what they left out. The scenes were absoluetly brilliant and provided so much ambiance to the film.
However, there is a difference to what I personally am interested in and what an average movie goer is. I like what Jackson is doing with extended additions. Some people simply aren't interested in all that deatail.
At that point they were engaged in the battle for Minis Tirith. BTW, at that point the nine were reduced to 8. The lord of the Ringwraiths had been slayed by a hobbit!!!!
And, on a conspiracy note, I suspect Saruman's scenes were cut because Lee's morning greeting to Jackson was: Well, how are you going to rape the books today, Pete?
Everything I've soon so far indicates that these men have the utmost respect for each other.
Beyond that, the wraiths really can't see the Ring persee. They are aware of it's general location. They are certainly aware of the ring when someone uses it. They absoluetly can see who is using it.
Remember the scene where the hobbits hide underneath the road. If the wraiths could absoluetly "see" the ring, then the jig would have been up. This was not an invention of Peter Jackson, it's in the book as well.
Beyond that, the Ring-Wraiths seen to go into "general" mode after they are vanquished in Rivendell. Sauron knows that everybody is out for the ring. When it is used, he is absoluetly aware of it's location. Sauron would also be aware that no one but him (and perhaps Saruman and Gandalf) could wield it.
After they lose track of the ring at Rivendell, the wraiths stop looking. They are set to other tasks dealing with the war. The only reason he sent the wraiths out in the first place is that Golumn told him where the ring was. The ring seeks out Sauron by it's nature.
In the books Gandalf talks about Sauron's great weakness. He assumes that the ring-bearer will use the ring. By using the ring, they will either reveal themselves or become slaves to the rings power (like the wraiths). The ring itself is a disembodied version of Sauron.
Had any mortal man used the ring (especially Aragorn), they would have come under Sauron's power. Sauron's great fault was he did not consider that they would try to DESTROY the ring. Nor did Sauron believe that anyone could resist it's call (as the halflings can for a time).
Remember how the Ring betrayed Isiodor. That was while Sauron was at his very weakest. Imagine how the ring would affect a human when Sauron was at the height of his power???? The ring would not serve a man, it would only betray him to Sauron.
So you see, Frodo making a token gesture to a ring wraith makes no difference. From visual appearance, they can't tell the difference between the one ring and a wedding band. Had Frodo really wanted to turn over the ring, he would have put it on. Then they would have been on him like a flies on shit.
My guess is that they will zoom forward to Aragorns wedding to Arwen. This would conclude the "love story" and allow them to tie things up a bit.
Somehow, they must depict the departure to the Grey Havens of "the elders". That is Elrond, Bilbo, and Gandalf. In the cartoon, they depicted them leaving directly from Minas Tirith. Somehow, I don't think that Peter Jackson would do something as heretic.
I'm hoping the battle for the Shire will show up in "The Hobbit". Both tales can be narrated by Merry and Pippin (Frodo and Sam having been long gone).
They could even include an argument between Merry and Pippin regarding whether to tell the "sanitized" version (which concealed the ring) or the "unsanitized" version.
This is a fundamental problem with the movies. Book 6 is pretty anti-climactic. It's hard to imagine how one could put it in Return of the King. My guess is a lot of it will have to be in a special edition.
My other suggestion would be to include it in "The Hobbit". Basically, you would have Pippin and Perry narrate the tale of "The Hobbit" to children. As an intro, they would tell their adventure with "The Boss" and the battle for the Shire. After that, they would tell Bilbo's story.
You will notice that there aren't illegal immigrants hauling trash. Why????
Arguably, this is a pretty shitty job. But they're also very UNIONIZED. Trash haulers on the job for several years make VERY GOOD PAY. I dare say they're making a lot more than I as an unemployed programmer/substitute teacher.
Because the job is VERY WELL paid, there are waiting lists to get them. I saw one account of a New York trash hauler stating he was on a waiting list for THREE YEARS to get the job.
Now if you want to raise demand for ANY occupation you only need raise the wages. Illegal immigration short-circuits the process. Illegal immigrants take the jobs, depress the wages and thus Americans "don't want" those jobs.
If bussing tables paid as well as trash hauling, I gauruntee there would be waiting lists as well.
I have nothing against LEGAL immigration. Obviously, this country was built by immigrants (on land stolen from Native Americans). Loads of fresh new immigrants has ALWAYS been the approach of the industrial kings to depress wages and supress Union activity. Of course, it largely backfires because once legitamized, they vote Democratic.
Ahh, but behold a marvelous new form of NON-CITIZEN union busters. They're called "guest workers". The beauty is you get all the depressed wages without introducing votes for the populist party. And illegal immigrants, damn, thats even better since they depress wages even more.
Why isn't this "anti-terrorist" president so unwilling to secure the southern border as part of his campaign to keep nasty stuff like dirty bombs out of the country.
Giving border patrol agents more money would allow them to stem the flow of illegals flowing across the Rio-Grande. If your rich, thats bad. Illegal immigrants are the type of laborers you love. They'll work for shit without complaint. You can pay them sub-minimum wage for mowing your lawn, they'll never tell.
If your a western plantation owner, they're even better. The Unions are trying to organize migrant workers (yes, there are legal ones). A steady flow of new subordinate, illegal labor is an excellent way to disuade workers from organizing. They'll simply be replaced with people even more deserate.
Create new jobs my ass. Because these workers are paid much less, they obviously spend much less. Large portions of their wages are sent back home to subsidize the virtual slave labor working conditions in their native countries and further fund more human traffickers to bring the rest of their family to depress even more wages.
The solution is to get tough with Mexico and insist that their industrialists treat people in a humane fashion. NAFTA and WTO is a joke. We're only transferring money from a poor people in rich countries to rich people in poor countries.
Yeah, that's what they did in "Mission To Mars" right.
Though, somehow I think that getting it to work might be more difficult. Would the lichen survive the extra radiation they would get on mars??? We may have to bio-engineer organisms to make it work.
Beyond that, Mars is a low-pressure environment. I found a nice link that explains some of the atmospheric issues. It also echos my concept of thickening the atmosphere using extra-planentary sources (in this case comet collisions). http://homepage.ntlworld.com/yashakelbert/mars/air.htm
Seriously though, even if the atmosphere of Mars is thickened to the point that you don't spontaneiously hemorrage, it won't last. Mass does not have enough mass to keep it's atmosphere from dissolving into space. That's why it's so thin in the first place. Methinks any long term terra-forming effort MUST involve massifying via asteroid collisions.
BTW, all that can be done by robots. Humans could stay safely on earth. I hope that our planet is someday unified enough to take that step together as a great shared endeavor of mankind.
I have no opposition to employing Chinese nationals. I would simply like the Chinese to do it instead of American citizens. We are squandering are wealth for the sake of enriching slave masters.
The Chinese are a great people with a shitty government. I sincerely hope that they ultimately rise up and defeat their masters. It couldn't possibly the "People's Republic" unless the people get to choose their own leaders.
Velcro was NOT invented as part of the moon effort.
http://www.si.edu/lemelson/centerpieces/iap/inve nt ors_dem.html
It was invented from an observation as novel and simple as a dogs coat being filled with burrs.
Guess what Mylar didn't come from the space program either.
http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/blp ol yester.htm
The bottom line is that if you what product X that does Y, you invest in specific research in that field. You don't send men into space to invent materials for industry. You let industry drive the process.
The fringe benefits of manned space exploration is midly interesting TV and the warm fuzzy feeling that the US is (#1). The fact that we were wasting trillions to do it is beyond the point I guess.
I would much rather build schools than build space stations. For that matter, I would rather build schools than stadiums. I would much rather pay 10 teachers than a single astronaut.
The space shuttle produces LITTLE real science. It is a mission looking for a justification.
We should have kept skylab and let the shuttle fall off the budgets. But Skylab wasn't as cool as the shuttle. It didn't look like a space-ship like the shuttle does. And those capsules, well they looked like washing machines. How would NASA possibly inspire a sufficient manned-space budget if they didn't provide the illusion that manned spaceflight was practical and beneficial to Americans?????
The technology produced from the space program is a big fat ZERO. The technologies used were all derivatives of terrestrial technologies. If an industry needs a material to withstand tremendous heat and pressure, they will develop it directly.
They don't need men in space to fuel their R&D budgets. We don't need a seventy-plus year old John Glenn is space to tell us that old people have brittle bones. You could send thousands of geriatric astronauts into space and it wouldn't get anyone ANY closer to a cure for osteoperosis. In fact, researchers using simple weight-lifting equipment have shown how a little weight resistance can stave off or reverse some of the effects. No perilous launch into orbit was required.
I once worked in a crystallography lab. I visiting research was explaining how he couldn't get funding for simple experiments involving suspension of crystals in gels to simulate low gravity environments. However, other researchers could get funding for elaborate projects that would be launched on the shuttle. You could fund thousands of SIMPLE projects doing basic science. OR you could fund a single project that while sexy, is lacking in fundamental science. WHY??? Because, NASA has to fill the cargo bay with "experiments" to justify the existence of manned space flight.
Don't get me wrong. I love NASA's robots that go to distant places and collect data on the cheap. They are effective and no loss of life is involved. For all the vaunted success of the Hubble retrofit... it would have been less expensive just to launch a new satellite. Futhermore, if funds weren't diverted to the shuttle, it would have been cheaper to do more exhaustive testing on the damn thing before they sent it into orbit.
We have to stop using faith based reasoning in EVERY sphere of government. That includes both tax cuts AND manned space flight!!!!
By no means do I believe that this effort is confined to Republicans. Democrats have been pro-immigrant for years. The big difference is taht both parties seem to be bowing to economic pressures to allow the free flow of both goods and people across sovereign American borders.
The irony here is that I'm a Dennis Kucinich fan. He supports amnesty. You can't get everything you want from a single candidate. But he promises to put an end to NAFTA and WTO.
Oh BTW, NAFTA never did solve the illegal immigration issue as it promised. It turns out that immigrants are seeking the freedom and opportunity of American democracy over the repression of Mexican psuedo-democratic politics. Giving money to rich people in poor countries doesn't help poor people in poor countries.
I would think that launching vehicles off a tall mountain would be effective. They don't have to be all electric. You could effectively build a closed tunnel that would turn a launch vehicle into a bullet shooting out of a gun. It would run on tracks until it came out of the tunnel.
The rocket fuel expended would be thousands of time more effective since it would be expressed over the entire intial oomph of the rocket.
The resulting vehicle would be far smaller and use far less rocket fuel. It would also be a mile closer to orbit in the first place.
Slashdot Mirror
No I think the title of egomaniac belongs to bitching fans.
George Lucas created Star Wars. It was his vision in the first place. So sorry he fucked up what you "thought" his vision should have been. Episode I and II are political in nature. It's more a movie like "Elizabeth".
The original Star Wars movies were "space westerns". That's not my description, that's Lucas'. Forgive Lucas if he wanted to broaden the scope of things with Return of the Jedi and subsequent episodes.
Same thing with the Wachowski brothers. They penned the original. How could they fuck it up. Honestly, the whole "human battery" concept was lame to begin with. The very concept of nuclear power never seemed to cross their mind. If thought that plotline was "cool" I guess it's your own fault for being scientfically ignorant.
Dwarves are, how shall we say, grumpy and arrogant. But, the movie also potrayed the dwarves as great craftsman and VERY industrious.j
Though, I did think they hammed it up in Two Towers. They turned Gimili into half Jar-Jar.
If Tom Bombadil was in the movie he would likely be portrayed by Andie Dick!!!!!
Seriously, he's the gayest character portrayel I've ever read.
Actually my understanding was that Gandalf was the last to be sent. He was also considered the least worthy. Perhaps this is a reflection of the humility that he displays.
Saruman, by contrast, is considered the greatest and most likely to succeed. It is reflected in his arrogance and contempt for mortals. The greatest point of contrast is that Gandalf was entrusted with the third of the Elf's rings, the ring of fire.
Saruman was jealous of Gandalf for the respect that he garnered from the peoples of Middle Earth. Most profound was Galadriel's outward rejection of Saruman.
Contrary to your analysis, Gandalf was far more interested in the inhabitants of middle earth than Saruman. Saruman was mostly content to sit in his tower and play chessmaster. It was Gandalf who went out and did all the grunt work.
Saruman's downfall was his arrogance. He assumed that he could read Sauron's mind using the palintir.
The Two Towers (movie) does not end on a positive note. Yes the characters are still alive but they are all still in great peril.
The first movie ended in a similar way. The fellowship was broken, Borimir died, Gandalf was presumably dead, Frodo and Sam left on their own.
BTW, starting the Two Towers with the battle between Gandalf and the Borloc was brilliant. It does make one think that they could have brought Frodo and Sam to Shelob's lair and allowed everyone to think he was dead.
After seeing the extended edition of Fellowship I was flabbergasted at what they left out. The scenes were absoluetly brilliant and provided so much ambiance to the film.
However, there is a difference to what I personally am interested in and what an average movie goer is. I like what Jackson is doing with extended additions. Some people simply aren't interested in all that deatail.
SPOILERS!!!
At that point they were engaged in the battle for Minis Tirith. BTW, at that point the nine were reduced to 8. The lord of the Ringwraiths had been slayed by a hobbit!!!!
And, on a conspiracy note, I suspect Saruman's scenes were cut because Lee's morning greeting to Jackson was: Well, how are you going to rape the books today, Pete?
Everything I've soon so far indicates that these men have the utmost respect for each other.
Beyond that, the wraiths really can't see the Ring persee. They are aware of it's general location. They are certainly aware of the ring when someone uses it. They absoluetly can see who is using it.
Remember the scene where the hobbits hide underneath the road. If the wraiths could absoluetly "see" the ring, then the jig would have been up. This was not an invention of Peter Jackson, it's in the book as well.
Beyond that, the Ring-Wraiths seen to go into "general" mode after they are vanquished in Rivendell. Sauron knows that everybody is out for the ring. When it is used, he is absoluetly aware of it's location. Sauron would also be aware that no one but him (and perhaps Saruman and Gandalf) could wield it.
After they lose track of the ring at Rivendell, the wraiths stop looking. They are set to other tasks dealing with the war. The only reason he sent the wraiths out in the first place is that Golumn told him where the ring was. The ring seeks out Sauron by it's nature.
In the books Gandalf talks about Sauron's great weakness. He assumes that the ring-bearer will use the ring. By using the ring, they will either reveal themselves or become slaves to the rings power (like the wraiths). The ring itself is a disembodied version of Sauron.
Had any mortal man used the ring (especially Aragorn), they would have come under Sauron's power. Sauron's great fault was he did not consider that they would try to DESTROY the ring. Nor did Sauron believe that anyone could resist it's call (as the halflings can for a time).
Remember how the Ring betrayed Isiodor. That was while Sauron was at his very weakest. Imagine how the ring would affect a human when Sauron was at the height of his power???? The ring would not serve a man, it would only betray him to Sauron.
So you see, Frodo making a token gesture to a ring wraith makes no difference. From visual appearance, they can't tell the difference between the one ring and a wedding band. Had Frodo really wanted to turn over the ring, he would have put it on. Then they would have been on him like a flies on shit.
My guess is that they will zoom forward to Aragorns wedding to Arwen. This would conclude the "love story" and allow them to tie things up a bit.
Somehow, they must depict the departure to the Grey Havens of "the elders". That is Elrond, Bilbo, and Gandalf. In the cartoon, they depicted them leaving directly from Minas Tirith. Somehow, I don't think that Peter Jackson would do something as heretic.
Actually, no. Saruman loses all his powers after Gandalf breaks his staff.
Gandalf was sent back as the White Wizard. I think he was given that power in the "great beyond" before he was resurrected.
The romantic stuff is pretty important. It's presented as an afterthought appendix in "Return of the King". Jackson just weaved it in.
I did think a couple of bits ran long. But ultimately, this was all necessary, as was the cutoff at Helms Deep.
I'm hoping the battle for the Shire will show up in "The Hobbit". Both tales can be narrated by Merry and Pippin (Frodo and Sam having been long gone).
They could even include an argument between Merry and Pippin regarding whether to tell the "sanitized" version (which concealed the ring) or the "unsanitized" version.
Part of this was the moral of Wizards as well.
Gandalf refuses to help the hobbits take back the Shire. He trained them for the job and expected them to do it themselves.
This was the Wizards whole point in Middle Earth. They were there to teach the younger races to deal with the evil but not battle it themselves.
If they were allowed to directly confront Sauron, they could have ousted him in the beginning.
One of the appendices ended up in The Two Towers.
This is a fundamental problem with the movies. Book 6 is pretty anti-climactic. It's hard to imagine how one could put it in Return of the King. My guess is a lot of it will have to be in a special edition.
My other suggestion would be to include it in "The Hobbit". Basically, you would have Pippin and Perry narrate the tale of "The Hobbit" to children. As an intro, they would tell their adventure with "The Boss" and the battle for the Shire. After that, they would tell Bilbo's story.
If you think that lunar mining will ever be profitable, perhaps you need to stop carrying on extensive conversations with the 'Man on the Moon'.
BTW, as long as China's people are denied self-determination, they will ALWAYS be poor. Democracy and prosperity go hand in hand.
It's good to see China will waste billions on manned spaceflight just like the US.
ON the downside, the derivative technology will mean better missles that can strike the US more accurately.
You will notice that there aren't illegal immigrants hauling trash. Why????
Arguably, this is a pretty shitty job. But they're also very UNIONIZED. Trash haulers on the job for several years make VERY GOOD PAY. I dare say they're making a lot more than I as an unemployed programmer/substitute teacher.
Because the job is VERY WELL paid, there are waiting lists to get them. I saw one account of a New York trash hauler stating he was on a waiting list for THREE YEARS to get the job.
Now if you want to raise demand for ANY occupation you only need raise the wages. Illegal immigration short-circuits the process. Illegal immigrants take the jobs, depress the wages and thus Americans "don't want" those jobs.
If bussing tables paid as well as trash hauling, I gauruntee there would be waiting lists as well.
I have nothing against LEGAL immigration. Obviously, this country was built by immigrants (on land stolen from Native Americans). Loads of fresh new immigrants has ALWAYS been the approach of the industrial kings to depress wages and supress Union activity. Of course, it largely backfires because once legitamized, they vote Democratic.
Ahh, but behold a marvelous new form of NON-CITIZEN union busters. They're called "guest workers". The beauty is you get all the depressed wages without introducing votes for the populist party. And illegal immigrants, damn, thats even better since they depress wages even more.
Why isn't this "anti-terrorist" president so unwilling to secure the southern border as part of his campaign to keep nasty stuff like dirty bombs out of the country.
Giving border patrol agents more money would allow them to stem the flow of illegals flowing across the Rio-Grande. If your rich, thats bad. Illegal immigrants are the type of laborers you love. They'll work for shit without complaint. You can pay them sub-minimum wage for mowing your lawn, they'll never tell.
If your a western plantation owner, they're even better. The Unions are trying to organize migrant workers (yes, there are legal ones). A steady flow of new subordinate, illegal labor is an excellent way to disuade workers from organizing. They'll simply be replaced with people even more deserate.
Create new jobs my ass. Because these workers are paid much less, they obviously spend much less. Large portions of their wages are sent back home to subsidize the virtual slave labor working conditions in their native countries and further fund more human traffickers to bring the rest of their family to depress even more wages.
The solution is to get tough with Mexico and insist that their industrialists treat people in a humane fashion. NAFTA and WTO is a joke. We're only transferring money from a poor people in rich countries to rich people in poor countries.
Yeah, that's what they did in "Mission To Mars" right.
r .htm
Though, somehow I think that getting it to work might be more difficult. Would the lichen survive the extra radiation they would get on mars??? We may have to bio-engineer organisms to make it work.
Beyond that, Mars is a low-pressure environment. I found a nice link that explains some of the atmospheric issues. It also echos my concept of thickening the atmosphere using extra-planentary sources (in this case comet collisions). http://homepage.ntlworld.com/yashakelbert/mars/ai
Seriously though, even if the atmosphere of Mars is thickened to the point that you don't spontaneiously hemorrage, it won't last. Mass does not have enough mass to keep it's atmosphere from dissolving into space. That's why it's so thin in the first place. Methinks any long term terra-forming effort MUST involve massifying via asteroid collisions.
BTW, all that can be done by robots. Humans could stay safely on earth. I hope that our planet is someday unified enough to take that step together as a great shared endeavor of mankind.
I have no opposition to employing Chinese nationals. I would simply like the Chinese to do it instead of American citizens. We are squandering are wealth for the sake of enriching slave masters.
The Chinese are a great people with a shitty government. I sincerely hope that they ultimately rise up and defeat their masters. It couldn't possibly the "People's Republic" unless the people get to choose their own leaders.
Velcro was NOT invented as part of the moon effort.
e nt ors_dem.html
p ol yester.htm
... it would have been less expensive just to launch a new satellite. Futhermore, if funds weren't diverted to the shuttle, it would have been cheaper to do more exhaustive testing on the damn thing before they sent it into orbit.
http://www.si.edu/lemelson/centerpieces/iap/inv
It was invented from an observation as novel and simple as a dogs coat being filled with burrs.
Guess what Mylar didn't come from the space program either.
http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/bl
The bottom line is that if you what product X that does Y, you invest in specific research in that field. You don't send men into space to invent materials for industry. You let industry drive the process.
The fringe benefits of manned space exploration is midly interesting TV and the warm fuzzy feeling that the US is (#1). The fact that we were wasting trillions to do it is beyond the point I guess.
I would much rather build schools than build space stations. For that matter, I would rather build schools than stadiums. I would much rather pay 10 teachers than a single astronaut.
The space shuttle produces LITTLE real science. It is a mission looking for a justification.
We should have kept skylab and let the shuttle fall off the budgets. But Skylab wasn't as cool as the shuttle. It didn't look like a space-ship like the shuttle does. And those capsules, well they looked like washing machines. How would NASA possibly inspire a sufficient manned-space budget if they didn't provide the illusion that manned spaceflight was practical and beneficial to Americans?????
The technology produced from the space program is a big fat ZERO. The technologies used were all derivatives of terrestrial technologies. If an industry needs a material to withstand tremendous heat and pressure, they will develop it directly.
They don't need men in space to fuel their R&D budgets. We don't need a seventy-plus year old John Glenn is space to tell us that old people have brittle bones. You could send thousands of geriatric astronauts into space and it wouldn't get anyone ANY closer to a cure for osteoperosis. In fact, researchers using simple weight-lifting equipment have shown how a little weight resistance can stave off or reverse some of the effects. No perilous launch into orbit was required.
I once worked in a crystallography lab. I visiting research was explaining how he couldn't get funding for simple experiments involving suspension of crystals in gels to simulate low gravity environments. However, other researchers could get funding for elaborate projects that would be launched on the shuttle. You could fund thousands of SIMPLE projects doing basic science. OR you could fund a single project that while sexy, is lacking in fundamental science. WHY??? Because, NASA has to fill the cargo bay with "experiments" to justify the existence of manned space flight.
Don't get me wrong. I love NASA's robots that go to distant places and collect data on the cheap. They are effective and no loss of life is involved. For all the vaunted success of the Hubble retrofit
We have to stop using faith based reasoning in EVERY sphere of government. That includes both tax cuts AND manned space flight!!!!
Thanks for the help, I'll provide links anyway. Republicans like cheap labor and busting unions. That's what's in it for them.
o J: www.fairus.org/html/stein/jsoped813.htm+illegal+im migrants+amnesty&hl=en&lr=lang_en&ie=UTF-8
8 J: www.probe.org/docs/c-immigrants.html+illegal+immig rants+amnesty&hl=en&lr=lang_en&ie=UTF- 8
http://216.239.53.104/search?q=cache:2XTRgtNxxj
http://216.239.53.104/search?q=cache:ZkvLlwUKRj
http://www.vdare.com/francis/suicide_of_w.htm
By no means do I believe that this effort is confined to Republicans. Democrats have been pro-immigrant for years. The big difference is taht both parties seem to be bowing to economic pressures to allow the free flow of both goods and people across sovereign American borders.
The irony here is that I'm a Dennis Kucinich fan. He supports amnesty. You can't get everything you want from a single candidate. But he promises to put an end to NAFTA and WTO.
Oh BTW, NAFTA never did solve the illegal immigration issue as it promised. It turns out that immigrants are seeking the freedom and opportunity of American democracy over the repression of Mexican psuedo-democratic politics. Giving money to rich people in poor countries doesn't help poor people in poor countries.
there's something really sad about the illusion of owning a piece of lunar surface
A lot of Native Americans would say the same of owing a part of the Earth's surface.
I would invest just enough money to keep China wasting Billions on a stupid futile effort to extract any gain from the moon.
The irony is that US consumers will be funding their space efforts through purchases at Wal-Mart!!!!
I would think that launching vehicles off a tall mountain would be effective. They don't have to be all electric. You could effectively build a closed tunnel that would turn a launch vehicle into a bullet shooting out of a gun. It would run on tracks until it came out of the tunnel.
The rocket fuel expended would be thousands of time more effective since it would be expressed over the entire intial oomph of the rocket.
The resulting vehicle would be far smaller and use far less rocket fuel. It would also be a mile closer to orbit in the first place.