Stuf4 wrote:
From Herb Schaltegger:

(Stuf4) wrote:


How ironic that you offer your extrapolation regarding "pretty much
everyone..." while chastising my extrapolation.

This reads as another form of "I'm right/you're wrong", coated with a
heavy tinge of hypocrisy.

And how many posters are publicly supporting your continued games of
semanticism, pedantry, prevarication, equivocation and hand-waving?
None.

But let me guess: the lurkers all support you in email.


Umm, they're not lurking. If you've been following the thread
thoroughly you've seen that Jim Oberg's website has a page that fits
in total agreement with what I've been saying here.

So if, by assumption, Jim agrees with the position I have put forward,
one might ask why he has remained silent. And an obvious follow up is
to ask why others who might agree have remained silent.

My best guess is that there is so much hostility among those who
persist in abusive behavior that a silent majority/minority (?) prefer
to sit out a would be scientific discussion.

(3rd Reich lessons learned have previously been provided as to their
application here at sci.space.)


~ CT

Just to add fuel to this dwindling fire, Oberg, in a recent MSNBC column
on the Chinese launch, says:

" Moreover, Shenzhou’s solar arrays, unlike those on Soyuz, can rotate
to track the sun while the spacecraft itself is aligned for other
purposes, such as Earth observation or long-term microgravity drifting
flight. The Russians did put rotating solar panels on another of their
manned spacecraft, their Salyut-class space stations, and for exactly
this same reason."
See http://www.msnbc.com/news/979759.asp?cp1=1

Did you find the word "microgravity"?
Hmmmm.