....How Obama Could Become the Next Kennedy!

....How Obama Could Become the Next Kennedy!

By getting shot in the head?

On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 19:36:44 -0400, in a place far, far away,
"jonathan" made the phosphor on my monitor
glow in such a way as to indicate that:

"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
...

If you want to repeat Apollo, do it right

Henry Spencer, computer programmer, spacecraft engineer and amateur space
historian
http://www.newscientist.com/blog/spa...llo-do-it.html


Apollo was a success because the goal was so /inspiring/ and /world-changing/
that...everyone...immediately realized it was worth doing, and right now.
The 'extra margins' that made Apollo succeed was in the strength of the...IDEA.

Apollo was a success because we were in a Cold War and it was deemed
to be critical to it.

Apollo is not an energy program.

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/energy-...-for-the-moon/

rest of SPS nuttiness snipped

On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 19:36:44 -0400, "jonathan"
wrote:
"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
...
If you want to repeat Apollo, do it right
Henry Spencer, computer programmer, spacecraft engineer and amateur space
historian
http://www.newscientist.com/blog/spa...llo-do-it.html
Apollo was a success because the goal was so /inspiring/ and /world-changing/
that...everyone...immediately realized it was worth doing, and right now.

That's not why it was a success. The goal was inspiring and
world-changing because beating the Soviets was inspiring and
potentially world-changing.

The 'extra margins' that made Apollo succeed was in the strength of the...IDEA.

And that IDEA was to beat the Soviets and rub their nose in our
buttcrack, in public.

To redo Apollo we must create a Goal as remarkable and important
as Apollo.
The goal that NASA was moving to just before Pres. Bush took over,
Space Solar Power, did have all the qualities of Apollo as an idea.
Laying the Foundation for Space Solar Power
An Assessment of NASA's Space Solar Power Investment Strategy
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10202&page=1
A replacement for fossil fuels, a solution to global warming.
The two greatest global threats.With America becoming
the next energy "Saudi Arabia". Insuring American prosperity
and independence for the rest of the century.
Ending the prospect of more wars over oil.
Now that's a goal that shines. And inspires.

I don't disagree that Space Solar Power is where we will eventually
end up. But its HUGE compared to Apollo.

That's the way you win the war with radical Islam.

Well, no, it just gives them something else to blow up. (You win the
war with radical Islam by killing the radical Islamists.)

I believe we should replace fossil fuels with Space Solar Power
before global warming becomes irreversible.
That's the speech I wish to hear Obama give.

I'd rather hear Obama speak on why he refuses to provide even one
single page of actual medical records or why he refuses to provide his
original birth certificate.

A goal that can inspire the American people to dream again.

We're beyond that. We've matured. Trying to con the American people
into some kind of throwback dream is the wrong approach.

The correct approach is to lay out a rather specific PLAN. Tell the
American people the PLAN is:

1) We're gonna put huge solar collectors in space and beam pure energy
back to Earth. You electric bill will be slashed by 90%.

2) We're gonna refit gasoline stations to charge and store the
power-pacs for your new electric cars. Replacing your low power-pac
will be quicker and cost 90% less than gassing up your car does now.

3) We'll have 6-passenger minivans with actual acceleration that can
run at 60mph on the highway for at least 4 hours.

After some twenty five years of almost constant 'war', it's time
for America to regain it's inspirational leadership and respect
by turning some of our Swords into Plowshares.

THAT is exactly how to get MOST of America to ignore you as a Public
Fool. Most Americans do not believe we've lost inspirational
leadership and they will resent that charge. Most Americans
completely reject the stupid notion that we've lost respect in the
world and will reject YOU for that insult. Most Americans know that
the childish notion of "turning some of our Swords into Plowshares" is
precisely how 9/11 happenned.

Space Solar Power, as an idea, has that potential.
If Obama wants to be the next Kennedy, here's his chance
to step out and above the fray. And change the world like Kennedy did.

Kennedy said trust him and trust your country and we'll rub the
Soviet's nose in our buttcrack. We did, and then we did.

The next Contender needs to say trust him and trust your country and
we'll rub the Arab's nose in our buttcrack. We can.

On Jul 23, 6:58*pm, "Pappy" wrote:
....How Obama Could Become the Next Kennedy!

By getting shot in the head?

Yeah,let the big eared dufus take a ride through the streets of Dallas
since he's so "Kennedyesque".

Patriot Games wrote:
2) We're gonna refit gasoline stations to charge and store the
power-pacs for your new electric cars. Replacing your low power-pac
will be quicker and cost 90% less than gassing up your car does now.


It would be a lot simpler just to plug the car in at night. I can see
the replaceable power pack idea for long trips, but around 90% of the
time you could simply recharge it at home.
What we really should be looking into is large scale fast and
comfortable electric passenger train transport.
It would cost a lot to lay new tracks all over the US, but the
technology to do this is already in existence, so it could be done in a
fairly short period of time if you threw a lot of money and effort at it.

Pat

On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 14:37:24 -0500, Pat Flannery
wrote:
Patriot Games wrote:
2) We're gonna refit gasoline stations to charge and store the
power-pacs for your new electric cars. Replacing your low power-pac
will be quicker and cost 90% less than gassing up your car does now.
It would be a lot simpler just to plug the car in at night. I can see
the replaceable power pack idea for long trips, but around 90% of the
time you could simply recharge it at home.

Your 90% figure is WAY OFF. And that's WHY electric cars have not
been popular in America. Americans REQUIRE a car that will hold two
adults, two or three children, luggage for FIVE, keep up with traffic
on the Interstate FOR HOUR AFTER HOUR as they take their semi-annual
vacation or go visit Grandma.

This is entirely doable technology. If the basic American
requirements are met Americans will buy the **** out of electric
minivans and cars.

We might have to run some more power to each 'gas' station but we'd
eliminate ALL fuel delivery to each gas station.

Americans HATE being told what to do, especially by a Democrat, and
Americans HATE having to sacrifice when they see NOTHING in it for
anyone (especially themselves).

The average American family has TWO vehicles. A crap-mobile that Dad
drives to and from work. It only has to get there and back each day
and be cheap. And they have a much better and more expensive minivan
or SUV that they REQUIRE so Mom can do her part-time job, deal with
all the kids needs, and pack everybody in on the weekends.

Yes, 90% of COMMUTING is probably one or two people and one hour at
most each way and THAT car can be plugged in overnight.

What we really should be looking into is large scale fast and
comfortable electric passenger train transport.
It would cost a lot to lay new tracks all over the US, but the
technology to do this is already in existence, so it could be done in a
fairly short period of time if you threw a lot of money and effort at it.

I don't hate that idea but recognise that its got problems that puts
it a century away. The biggest problem is that taxpayers would have
to pay for it.

The other problem is what do people do after they get wisked from
Dallas to Chicago? They still need local transpo...

If we go nuclear-power-electric-cars its consumers and not taxpayers
who will pay for it.

In "jonathan"
wrote:

Apollo was a success because the goal was so /inspiring/ and
/world-changing/ that...everyone...immediately realized it was worth
doing, and right now.

It was a "success" because it was paid for with free government money.

--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN

Patriot Games wrote:
Your 90% figure is WAY OFF. And that's WHY electric cars have not
been popular in America. Americans REQUIRE a car that will hold two
adults, two or three children, luggage for FIVE, keep up with traffic
on the Interstate FOR HOUR AFTER HOUR as they take their semi-annual
vacation or go visit Grandma.

Do you have any idea how much a powerpack capable of holding that amount
of electrical energy is going to weigh?
It's not going to be something that you can just pull out of the vehicle
and drop a new one into it like a standard car battery
You are talking several hundred pounds here unless you want to be
changing batteries every half hour on your trip.
For a range of 220 miles, the Tesla Roadster uses a lithium ion battery
pack weighing between 900 and 1,000 pounds:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Roadster
Extrapolate that out to your vehicle's size and capacity and you are
talking about somewhere between 1,500 - 2,000 pounds of batteries.
Even double the battery's efficiency and you are still talking about
something along the lines of a 700 pound battery to be replaced at your
battery swap station. That's not going to be something that's faster
than filling the gas tank, and you are going to need something like a
fork lift or overhead crane to remove the used battery and put the
charged one in.
About the only other alternative would be having the battery sticking
out of the back or front of the car so that it drives into some sort of
stall where the used battery is slid out and a new one inserted. This
would work, but God help you if someone struck you from the rear, as the
battery may short and catch fire. Or it may slide right out of your car
and straight into the passenger compartment of the car that struck you,
or in the case of a front-mounted one come right into your passenger
compartment.
There's also the charge time problem... assuming the battery could be
charged in a half hour without overheating (like a new laptop battery)
at the battery exchange station, then you are going to need one charging
for every vehicle you expect to arrive in that time period. Start
extrapolating that to the amount of energy stored in each battery, and
you are going to have one hell of a lot of wattage going into that station.

Pat

On Jul 24, 4:20*pm, Patriot Games wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 14:37:24 -0500, Pat Flannery
wrote:

Patriot Games wrote:
2) We're gonna refit gasoline stations to charge and store the
power-pacs for your new electric cars. *Replacing your low power-pac
will be quicker and cost 90% less than gassing up your car does now.
It would be a lot simpler just to plug the car in at night. I can see
the replaceable power pack idea for long trips, but around 90% of the
time you could simply recharge it at home.

Your 90% figure is WAY OFF. *And that's WHY electric cars have not
been popular in America. *Americans REQUIRE a car that will hold two
adults, two or three children, luggage for FIVE, keep up with traffic
on the Interstate FOR HOUR AFTER HOUR as they take their semi-annual
vacation or go visit Grandma.

This is entirely doable technology. *If the basic American
requirements are met Americans will buy the **** out of electric
minivans and cars. *

We might have to run some more power to each 'gas' station but we'd
eliminate ALL fuel delivery to each gas station. *

Americans HATE being told what to do, especially by a Democrat, and
Americans HATE having to sacrifice when they see NOTHING in it for
anyone (especially themselves).

The average American family has TWO vehicles. *A crap-mobile that Dad
drives to and from work. *It only has to get there and back each day
and be cheap. *And they have a much better and more expensive minivan
or SUV that they REQUIRE so Mom can do her part-time job, deal with
all the kids needs, and pack everybody in on the weekends. *

Yes, 90% of COMMUTING is probably one or two people and one hour at
most each way and THAT car can be plugged in overnight. *

What we really should be looking into is large scale fast and
comfortable electric passenger train transport.
It would cost a lot to lay new tracks all over the US, but the
technology to do this is already in existence, so it could be done in a
fairly short period of time if you threw a lot of money and effort at it..

I don't hate that idea but recognise that its got problems that puts
it a century away. *The biggest problem is that taxpayers would have
to pay for it.

The other problem is what do people do after they get wisked from
Dallas to Chicago? *They still need local transpo...

If we go nuclear-power-electric-cars its consumers and not taxpayers
who will pay for it. *

Can I pull my 6,000 lb. horse trailer with it?? Can I pull my 36 foot
travel trailer with it?? Can I load 6 people in it and drive the 600
miles from Houston to El Paso to visit granny?? If not I don't have
any use for them.

On Jul 24, 5:12*pm, Bert Hyman wrote:
"j onathan"

wrote:
Apollo *was a success because the goal was so /inspiring/ and
/world-changing/ that...everyone...immediately realized it was worth
doing, and right now.

It was a "success" because it was paid for with free government money.

--
Bert Hyman * * *St. Paul, MN *

Where does all the "free" government money come from??