debate on Apollo value -- worth entering this site?

Check out
http://www.opendemocracy.net/democra...olicy_4246.jsp


I've read his latest book, it's one smarmy snear from one end to the other,
and will try to get around to a review one of these days...

Jim Oberg wrote:


I've read his latest book, it's one smarmy snear

|snear = a|sneer + b|smear

Jim Oberg wrote:

Check out
http://www.opendemocracy.net/democra...olicy_4246.jsp


I've read his latest book, it's one smarmy snear from one end to the other,
and will try to get around to a review one of these days...

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/760/1

Please do. It's on my reading list now.

--
The Tsiolkovsky Group : http://www.lifeform.org

My Planetary BLOB : http://cosmic.lifeform.org

Get A Free Orbiter Space Flight Simulator :

http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/orbit.html

Gene Cash wrote:
"Jim Oberg" writes:


Check out
http://www.opendemocracy.net/democra...olicy_4246.jsp

I've read his latest book, it's one smarmy snear from one end to the other,
and will try to get around to a review one of these days...


Isn't that enough of a review right there? Your opinion there gives me
enough information that I'd much rather steer clear of it.

Most of a review is enough facts to back up "it sux0z" or "it's l33t!"
and if I respect the reviewer enough, I don't really need most of it.

-gc


Considering that the article mentions:

Neil Armstrong did not agree. According to him, man's first step on the
moon on
16 June 1969 would prove to be a giant leap for mankind.

Since the first steps on the moon was on July 20, 1969, it makes me
wonder how many other factual errors the guy wrote.

"Jim Oberg" wrote in message
...
Check out
http://www.opendemocracy.net/democra...olicy_4246.jsp


I've read his latest book, it's one smarmy snear from one end to the
other,
and will try to get around to a review one of these days...


Ya know, some people complain and criticize
because they care alot about the issue.
They want it better than it is. Or have high
expectations that aren't being met. Maybe
they feel let-down or disillusioned etc.

And some people remain quiet, they go along, accept
...whatever, are complacent and agreeable to anything
and everything about that issue regardless of
what is being done or not. Because they don't care
all that much. OK is good enough for them.

Or maybe the space journalism business is such
that critics are black-listed, and going along
gets the story. I'm starting to wonder if going
along isn't good enough anymore, but a space
journalist needs to double as PR agent to
stay an insider.


Hmm, three choices......

http://www.hamienet.com/12659.mid



s

"PM" wrote in message
...
Gene Cash wrote:
"Jim Oberg" writes:


Check out
http://www.opendemocracy.net/democra...olicy_4246.jsp

I've read his latest book, it's one smarmy snear from one end to the
other,
and will try to get around to a review one of these days...


Isn't that enough of a review right there? Your opinion there gives me
enough information that I'd much rather steer clear of it.

Most of a review is enough facts to back up "it sux0z" or "it's l33t!"
and if I respect the reviewer enough, I don't really need most of it.

-gc


Considering that the article mentions:

Neil Armstrong did not agree. According to him, man's first step on the
moon on
16 June 1969 would prove to be a giant leap for mankind.

Since the first steps on the moon was on July 20, 1969, it makes me
wonder how many other factual errors the guy wrote.

Nah, see if Armstrong HAD stepped on the Moon on the 19th, that would have
been a giant leap indeed. ;-)