On Oct 24, 10:35*pm, Ian Parker wrote:
On 18 Oct, 23:23, Peter Lucas wrote:





You little fairy faggots are totally pathetic.You are childish,
witless, stupid and repetative. There is not one post on this entire
group that looks like it came from anyone who has more IQ points than
teeth.

Revenge? What a ****ing joke! You wouldnt know how to get revenge on
anyone. You poor deluded little arseholes. rename the group to Potty-
Mouth
kindergarten you morons. What a bunch of ineffective jerk offs.

****, I wish people wouldnt let their kids have access to computers
without supervision.

I'll leave you here to lick each others slimy little arses and suck
each others tiny little cocks.

It was a waste of time coming here. Bye **** eaters, don't forget to
watch sesame street in the morning.

Some of you might get to experience firsthand the difference between
Aikido and a real martial art.

I don't give up, I don't go away, I just get angrier and angrier until
I get to feel bones breaking in the arseholes that are ****ing me
off.

You laugh and feel smug now but I PROMISE you, all pricks that
crossposted are going to feel MAJOR pain.

I already know where one of you is, you have already had an ISP track
you down for something else. I got that info **** for brains and I'm
going to use it.

Laugh now cos you sure as **** wont laugh later.

You want to know why I got the nickname Psycho? Because I went to jail
for biting a guys finger off after he gave me the finger in traffic.

I followed him for thirty miles before I got the cowardly little
arsehole.

You dip****s have pised me off a ****ing sight more than he did."

--
Peter Lucas
Russell Island
Brisbane
Australia

"Life is not like a box of chocolates... it's more like a jar of
jalapenos. What you do today... might burn your ass tomorrow."

Are you surprised? I stopped regularly contributing to this usergroup
after a stream of abuse by certain individuals. Fundamentally you
cannot be a credible scientific group which pooh poohs related
developments such as robotics and AI.

It was clear to me then, and by Jove it is even clearer now that you
cannot have manned expeditions to the Moon/Mars on the basis of
present day technology. It is simply going to cost far more than any
government, or even group of governments is going to be prepared to
pay in these recessionary times.

If you are going to deem "mad" anyone who advocates any form of future
technology you must accept that the Moon and Mars are going to be
permanently out of reach for humanity.

The most severe abuse by Rand Simberg and his girlfriend (I forget her
name, let us simply refer to her as Bint Al-Kalbah - the daughter of a
bitch) occurred when NASA "went mad" and contributed to the
Singularity University. Clearly NASA (and I think ESA as well)
appreciate this basic rubic. In fact robotics and AI MUST assume even
greater importance as funds are limited.

What should this group be discussing? Fundamentally I think it should
appreciate that NASA/ESA know far far more than they do about what the
technological possibilities are. OK certain things, like LISA where
there will have to be phase coherence over 5million km represents
milestones that can be discussed. Clearly what is required are ideas,
perhaps futuristic, that are not going to cost the Earth. A tall
order, probably the official NASA/ESA ideas people will come up with
the majority of the better ones. Still they need discussing and
perhaps someone could just come up with something that the
professionals have missed.

Rand Simberg and Bint Al-kalbah in particular should realise that they
were not just attacking me but attacking the NASA top brass and
thereby producing a "pathetic" group as you put it.

It is clear too that space colonies based on present day technology
can be little more than a hugely expensive bolt hole for generals and
politicians. People have advocated putting a spike on the steering
wheel to encourage drivers to drive better. Far from providing
generals/politicians with a bolt-hole ways should be found of
providing them with spiked steering wheels.

Everything which I have posted has turned out to be correct, including
my comments on the Iraq war.

http://www.google.co.uk/search?sourc...GLQ_ENUK247&q=...

Another comment I made was that the best way to reduce launch costs
was to purchase launches from the cheapest source. NASA has now
adopted this policy. It is in fact the ONLY sound rational policy.
Ideas about novel launch technologies are all unsound. The expendable
rocket remains by far and away the cheapest method of access to space.

* - Ian Parker

Just out of curiosity, Ian... which newsgroup do you think you're
posting to? Your rant, while interesting (and I did read it all),
doesn't seem to have much to do with alternative genealogy, Australian
transvestites, soccer or recreational food cooking.