Farmer Astronaut

"Darren J Longhorn" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 04 Feb 2007 04:57:42 -0600, Pat Flannery
wrote:



Jim wrote:
I absolutely agree with Pat in this case, now that the spacecraft has
been
recovered, there is no reason to fully investigate and fully exonerate
Gus
Grissom, arguibly the finest of the fine.

Why, exactly, when I try to reply to you, does your original message
never appear on the reply message?

It's because his posts start with a sig separator '-- ' and you have a
well-behaved news reader.
OK, I learned something, trash the sig sep. Thank Darren.
Jim in Houston
oSpAm
Nurse's creed: Fill what's empty, empty what's full, and scratch where it
itches!!

"Jim" wrote in message
...


--
!
"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
...


Jim wrote:
I absolutely agree with Pat in this case, now that the spacecraft has
been recovered, there is no reason to fully investigate and fully
exonerate Gus Grissom, arguibly the finest of the fine.

Why, exactly, when I try to reply to you, does your original message
never appear on the reply message?
This is around the third time this has happened, and my only way of
posting a reply has been to copy your original posting, and then pasting
it as a quotation in reply to you.
Gus Grissom was a great astronaut... but let's face it, he wasn't a
superman of any sort; they were, and are, all fine astronauts, and he
probably no finer than the rest.
(Okay..Wally Schirra had the makings of a great Space Pirate, head cold
or no... but I'm not going to hold that against the rest of them.) :-D

Pat
Gee Pat, even when I agree with you, I can't agree with you. I give.
Yes, OM I did gaff and left out not. To restate: There is no reason to NOT
fully investigate and fully exonerate Gus.
Pat, I don't truncate posts. The only thing I do is to move my sig line to
the bottom because OE6 won't put it there. What news reader do you use?
Anyone else having the same problem with my posts?

Jim in Houston
oSpAm
Nurse's creed: Fill what's empty, empty what's full, and scratch where it
itches!
BTW and this is not an attempt for sympathy, but I am on a disability
retirement, and can't afford to buy a good news reader.
Could anyone recommend a good free (or low cost) newsreader? I certanily
don't want to **** Pat off anymore than he already chronically is.
Thanks,
Jim in Houston
oSpAm
Nurse's creed: Fill what's empty, empty what's full, and scratch where it
itches!!

"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
...


Jim wrote:
I absolutely agree with Pat in this case, now that the spacecraft has
been recovered, there is no reason to fully investigate and fully
exonerate Gus Grissom, arguibly the finest of the fine.

Why, exactly, when I try to reply to you, does your original message never
appear on the reply message?
This is around the third time this has happened, and my only way of
posting a reply has been to copy your original posting, and then pasting
it as a quotation in reply to you.
Gus Grissom was a great astronaut... but let's face it, he wasn't a
superman of any sort; they were, and are, all fine astronauts, and he
probably no finer than the rest.
(Okay..Wally Schirra had the makings of a great Space Pirate, head cold or
no... but I'm not going to hold that against the rest of them.) :-D

Pat
Sig seperator or no, I stand behind my original statement that Gus was the
finest of the fine, while just a man, he was a great and brave explorer.
Without him, and his kind we never would've gone to space. One other thing,
Gus was religated to second fiddle between Sheppard and Glenn and he didn't
flinch. Betty may have been boo whooing all over the place, but Gus was
taking care of business. I wonder how you would have handled what Gus had to
deal with? And he couldn't hide behind a "well behaved news reader.
Jim in Houston
oSpAm
Nurse's creed: Fill what's empty, empty what's full, and scratch where it
itches!!

Pat Flannery wrote:

Because out there there's still the perception in the world that
somehow he might have been responsible for the loss of his
capsule; and I want that to to be removed from the history of
his life...completely, provably, fully, and
unequivocally...forever.

Pat, it's really simple.

Either we *know* Grissom was not culpable in the incident or we do
*not know* he was not culpable in the incident.

If we do know then no investigation is necessary. All we have to do
is educate any doubters.

If we do not know then the issue of Grissom's culpability is still
on the table and any investigation launched must reflect this
otherwise it is a dishonest sham which will convince no one.

I opt for the former. I think the investigations done immediately
after the incident came to the correct conclusions in the matter,
that Grissom was not culpable.

Perhaps you feel the issue hasn't been settled to your satisfaction
and that's why you want an investigation?

Jim Davis

On Sun, 4 Feb 2007 11:39:20 -0600, in a place far, far away, "Jim"
made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way
as to indicate that:


Could anyone recommend a good free (or low cost) newsreader? I certanily
don't want to **** Pat off anymore than he already chronically is.

If your running Windows, use Thunderbird (the email/news client that,
like Firefox, is put out by Mozilla). There may also be a free
version of Agent.

If on Linux, use Pan.

Pat Flannery wrote to Jim:

Why, exactly, when I try to reply to you, does your original message
never appear on the reply message?

The
"-- "

at the top of Jim's message is a "secret code" that tells the mail agent
not to quote anything below it. It is commonly used to separate the
main body of a message from the signature.

--
Dave Michelson

Pat Flannery wrote:

This really needs to be thoroughly investigated to completely clear
his name in regard to the incident, because that's a undeserved spot
on his record.

I thought Skip Chauvin had already done this back in 1962 or thereabout.
He showed that there were several ways that the hatch could have blown
without Grissom's involvement. If so, the investigation is complete.
All you need do is seek a press release or proclamation from the NASA
Administrator. The justification would be "persistent misconceptions in
the popular media".

--
Dave Michelson

Neil Gerace wrote:



Speaking as a disinterested foreigner, I would hope that you would only want
his name cleared if the facts (whatever they were) warrant it, and not
otherwise. Setting up an inquiry while already having determined what the
findings will be is in the worst tradition of the civil services everywhere.


Of course that would be the case, but I don't see how he could have
blown the hatch and not ended up with the bruise on top of his hand like
everyone else who activated the system ended up with.

Pat
Just sayin' :-)

Jim wrote:
BTW and this is not an attempt for sympathy, but I am on a disability
retirement, and can't afford to buy a good news reader.


Steer clear of Mozilla Thunderbird; I'm using it, and the spellcheck
section of the program needs major reworking, at least when it comes to
Windows 98.

Pat

On Sun, 4 Feb 2007 11:39:20 -0600, "Jim" wrote:

BTW and this is not an attempt for sympathy, but I am on a disability
retirement, and can't afford to buy a good news reader.
Could anyone recommend a good free (or low cost) newsreader?

I like Forte's Agent. Not sure how much it costs these days, but they
used to do a free version.