Opportunity, the second Mars Explorer Rover is on the surface andtransmitting!

In article vsuRb.127871$sv6.685779@attbi_s52,
"Robert J. Kolker" wrote:


The Ghost In The Machine wrote:


I would hope that we don't lose 17 more, but it's clear that
from a death standpoint 17 is a lot less than 1.7 million,
which IINM is within an order of magnitude of the number of
Americans who perished during World War II.

Our survival as a nation depended on America entering into the
festivities of WW2.

And, if FDR hadn't started preparations for WW2 before the
US citizens approved it, we would not have the equipment to
fight successfully in WWII.

..Can you convince the skeptical that our survival as
a nation is conditioned on sending manned expeditions to Mars or the
Moon? Pray do tell us why we must. And no fair invoking Cheng He either.

The only condition that I can see is if there is a credible military
threat from another nation's occupying the Moon, say. If that be the
case, then we would have to respond in some fashion.

By then it would be too little, too late. It takes years to ramp
up for war on Earth; perhaps you should think about how long
it would take to ramp up for war on the moon.


/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

In article vsuRb.127871$sv6.685779@attbi_s52,
"Robert J. Kolker" wrote:


The Ghost In The Machine wrote:


I would hope that we don't lose 17 more, but it's clear that
from a death standpoint 17 is a lot less than 1.7 million,
which IINM is within an order of magnitude of the number of
Americans who perished during World War II.

Our survival as a nation depended on America entering into the
festivities of WW2.

And, if FDR hadn't started preparations for WW2 before the
US citizens approved it, we would not have the equipment to
fight successfully in WWII.

..Can you convince the skeptical that our survival as
a nation is conditioned on sending manned expeditions to Mars or the
Moon? Pray do tell us why we must. And no fair invoking Cheng He either.

The only condition that I can see is if there is a credible military
threat from another nation's occupying the Moon, say. If that be the
case, then we would have to respond in some fashion.

By then it would be too little, too late. It takes years to ramp
up for war on Earth; perhaps you should think about how long
it would take to ramp up for war on the moon.


/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

wrote:


And, if FDR hadn't started preparations for WW2 before the
US citizens approved it, we would not have the equipment to
fight successfully in WWII.

In other words we should start now to prepare for Chinese on the Moon.


By then it would be too little, too late. It takes years to ramp
up for war on Earth; perhaps you should think about how long
it would take to ramp up for war on the moon.

I other words we should spend more than we make preparing for -possible-
threats, rather than discernable threats. Good idea. Too bad we don't
have the money for it.

Bob Kolker

wrote:


And, if FDR hadn't started preparations for WW2 before the
US citizens approved it, we would not have the equipment to
fight successfully in WWII.

In other words we should start now to prepare for Chinese on the Moon.


By then it would be too little, too late. It takes years to ramp
up for war on Earth; perhaps you should think about how long
it would take to ramp up for war on the moon.

I other words we should spend more than we make preparing for -possible-
threats, rather than discernable threats. Good idea. Too bad we don't
have the money for it.

Bob Kolker

wrote:


And, if FDR hadn't started preparations for WW2 before the
US citizens approved it, we would not have the equipment to
fight successfully in WWII.

In other words we should start now to prepare for Chinese on the Moon.


By then it would be too little, too late. It takes years to ramp
up for war on Earth; perhaps you should think about how long
it would take to ramp up for war on the moon.

I other words we should spend more than we make preparing for -possible-
threats, rather than discernable threats. Good idea. Too bad we don't
have the money for it.

Bob Kolker

In article SKTQb.119177$nt4.502510@attbi_s51,
"Robert J. Kolker" wrote:

In short, even the astronauts themselve no longer believe what the
agency tells them about the risks.

Bob Kolker

Yet they line up in droves to become astronauts and fly into space.


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

In article SKTQb.119177$nt4.502510@attbi_s51,
"Robert J. Kolker" wrote:

In short, even the astronauts themselve no longer believe what the
agency tells them about the risks.

Bob Kolker

Yet they line up in droves to become astronauts and fly into space.


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

In article SKTQb.119177$nt4.502510@attbi_s51,
"Robert J. Kolker" wrote:

In short, even the astronauts themselve no longer believe what the
agency tells them about the risks.

Bob Kolker

Yet they line up in droves to become astronauts and fly into space.


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Jeepers wrote:


Yet they line up in droves to become astronauts and fly into space.

There will always be test pilots, ready to skirt death for adventure and
glory. To which I have no moral objections as long as they know what the
risks are.

It is not having test pilots that I object to, it is lying to to the
test pilots about the risks. That is primordially wrong. It is gut
wrong. It is wrong down to the toenails.

By admiting the risks, NASA is finally owning up to its "Ace Trucking
Company" canard to be the lie that it is and was. Our manned space
program is nowhere near commericial normality. And it looks like it
won't be for decades, if ever.

When Columbus, Vasco di Gamma and Magellan sailed, voyaging the vasty
deeps was a peril and all hands aboard knew it. Eventually these became
steam ships plying the oceans of the world in both sun and storm with
reasonable safety (althoug not perfect safety, vide Titanic and Andrea
Doria). Space travel has not entered the Steamship Age.

Bob Kolker


Bob Kolker



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Jeepers wrote:


Yet they line up in droves to become astronauts and fly into space.

There will always be test pilots, ready to skirt death for adventure and
glory. To which I have no moral objections as long as they know what the
risks are.

It is not having test pilots that I object to, it is lying to to the
test pilots about the risks. That is primordially wrong. It is gut
wrong. It is wrong down to the toenails.

By admiting the risks, NASA is finally owning up to its "Ace Trucking
Company" canard to be the lie that it is and was. Our manned space
program is nowhere near commericial normality. And it looks like it
won't be for decades, if ever.

When Columbus, Vasco di Gamma and Magellan sailed, voyaging the vasty
deeps was a peril and all hands aboard knew it. Eventually these became
steam ships plying the oceans of the world in both sun and storm with
reasonable safety (althoug not perfect safety, vide Titanic and Andrea
Doria). Space travel has not entered the Steamship Age.

Bob Kolker


Bob Kolker



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----