|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Musk remains on Advisory Council
On Thu, 23 Feb 2017 15:49:15 -0700, Fred J. McCall
wrote: Michael Gallagher wrote: If your definition of "the truth" is "anything Donald Trump says," then you have a funny definition of the truth. Which has veered off topic. Since I never said any such thing, your political delusions have veered WAY off topic. And off reality. I didn't quote you; I said if that was your defintion is that. If it's not, then what is it? What is the delusional part? |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Musk remains on Advisory Council
Michael Gallagher wrote:
On Thu, 23 Feb 2017 15:49:15 -0700, Fred J. McCall wrote: Michael Gallagher wrote: If your definition of "the truth" is "anything Donald Trump says," then you have a funny definition of the truth. Which has veered off topic. Since I never said any such thing, your political delusions have veered WAY off topic. And off reality. I didn't quote you; I said if that was your defintion is that. If you're still raping young children it's a terrible thing. Oh, I didn't say you were. I just said IF you were. Get my point? If it's not, then what is it? What is the delusional part? My definition of 'the truth' is quite simple - THE TRUTH. The delusional part should be clear to you now. Why did you ask the question? -- "You take the lies out of him, and he'll shrink to the size of your hat; you take the malice out of him, and he'll disappear." -- Mark Twain |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Musk remains on Advisory Council
On Fri, 24 Feb 2017 10:01:48 -0700, Fred J. McCall
wrote: ...My definition of 'the truth' is quite simple - THE TRUTH. And according to you, does Trump speak THE TRUTH? |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Musk remains on Advisory Council
Michael Gallagher wrote:
On Fri, 24 Feb 2017 10:01:48 -0700, Fred J. McCall wrote: ...My definition of 'the truth' is quite simple - THE TRUTH. And according to you, does Trump speak THE TRUTH? About what particular thing? Are you incapable of actual intelligent discussion without direction from the voices in your head or are you merely so stupid as to think individual always speak the truth or always speak lies? -- "Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is only stupid." -- Heinrich Heine |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Musk remains on Advisory Council
On Sat, 25 Feb 2017 13:36:09 -0700, Fred J. McCall
asked me if I... ....think individual always speak the truth or always speak lies? (Insults deleted.) In Trump's case, his track record of lying is well documented. And that includes the times he repeats something you already beieve that is demonstrably false. If someone repeats a lie, it's still a lie. |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Musk remains on Advisory Council
Michael Gallagher wrote:
On Sat, 25 Feb 2017 13:36:09 -0700, Fred J. McCall asked me if I... ....think individual always speak the truth or always speak lies? (Insults deleted.) In Trump's case, his track record of lying is well documented. And that includes the times he repeats something you already beieve that is demonstrably false. If someone repeats a lie, it's still a lie. Yes, it is, so you should stop repeating your political bull**** in a sci.space newsgroup. -- "You take the lies out of him, and he'll shrink to the size of your hat; you take the malice out of him, and he'll disappear." -- Mark Twain |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Musk remains on Advisory Council
On Sun, 26 Feb 2017 04:41:14 -0700, Fred J. McCall
wrote: ...... you should stop repeating your political bull**** in a sci.space newsgroup. This group is sci.space.POLICY. I would assume that's government policy. That means people in government can't be ignored. That means Trump's motives in character are very much relevant. And it's not a moderated group, so for all your ranting and raving you can't stop people from posting what you don't want to read. To bring it back to the question at hand, what is Trump's position on space, in particular the manned space program? Before the election, his position was best summed up by this line from page 124 of "Crippled America: How to Make America Great Again:" "Before we build bridges to Mars, let's make sure the bridges over the Mississippi river aren't going to fall down." That's it. That's all there is in the book. And it jives with a public statement he made late last year. Now, for the last couple of months, I've followed the reporting from Space News, and tha has included articles like this: http://spacenews.com/the-big-changes...oming-to-nasa/ ....so in the face of that, the idea that Mr. Musk has pursuaded Trump to cancel SLS/Orion and go whole hog for Mars colonization with SpaceX hardware might be a bit premature. If anything, they seem to be looking at a greater role for Orion, not less. It's possible that since this is not a top priority for him, Trump may be inclined to follow Congress' lead and pander where he wants to. So other than the predictable action of cutting or ending the earth sciences program, there may not be an appetite for major changes to the manned program. Of course, at the moment, this is all specuation. I just favor the idea that they want consistency, as opposed to entertaning the idea that the long-hope-for cancelation of SLS and Orion will finally happen. (cue organ music) We'll know more when they release their budget and name the new NASA administrator. But so far, this most we can say is it's business as usual at NASA and this is a part of the goverment Trump has not screwed up. |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Musk remains on Advisory Council
Michael Gallagher wrote:
On Sun, 26 Feb 2017 04:41:14 -0700, Fred J. McCall wrote: ...... you should stop repeating your political bull**** in a sci.space newsgroup. This group is sci.space.POLICY. I would assume that's government policy. Government policy ON SPACE. That means people in government can't be ignored. That means Trump's motives in character are very much relevant. Wrong. And it's not a moderated group, so for all your ranting and raving you can't stop people from posting what you don't want to read. Correct. That doesn't mean I can't identify and mock the stupid ****s who post such things. Consider yourself mocked. To bring it back to the question at hand, what is Trump's position on space, in particular the manned space program? Before the election, his position was best summed up by this line from page 124 of "Crippled America: How to Make America Great Again:" "Before we build bridges to Mars, let's make sure the bridges over the Mississippi river aren't going to fall down." That's it. That's all there is in the book. And it jives with a public statement he made late last year. Nice of you to actually return to the topic. I'll just note that the book and public statements like that are 'lowest common denominator'. Most voters don't care about space, so candidates will tend to give it pretty short shrift in political screeds. Now, for the last couple of months, I've followed the reporting from Space News, and tha has included articles like this: http://spacenews.com/the-big-changes...oming-to-nasa/ ...so in the face of that, the idea that Mr. Musk has pursuaded Trump to cancel SLS/Orion and go whole hog for Mars colonization with SpaceX hardware might be a bit premature. If anything, they seem to be looking at a greater role for Orion, not less. It's possible that since this is not a top priority for him, Trump may be inclined to follow Congress' lead and pander where he wants to. So other than the predictable action of cutting or ending the earth sciences program, there may not be an appetite for major changes to the manned program. Of course, at the moment, this is all specuation. I just favor the idea that they want consistency, as opposed to entertaning the idea that the long-hope-for cancelation of SLS and Orion will finally happen. (cue organ music) We'll know more when they release their budget and name the new NASA administrator. Orion (and SLS) are intended for a much different mission space than the two 'commercial space' capsule efforts. The entire mission space for 'commercial space' is considered as a secondary emergency mission for Orion. But so far, this most we can say is it's business as usual at NASA and this is a part of the goverment Trump has not screwed up. You were doing so well until the last part of that sentence. Then your innate dip****tery apparently overwhelmed you. Try and watch that, won't you? -- "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man." --George Bernard Shaw |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
Musk remains on Advisory Council
On Fri, 17 Feb 2017 07:07:05 -0800 (PST), bob haller
wrote: .... [Trump] wants to restart the draft and put ground troops in syria. plus the wall. there will be no money left for space exploration It is hard to discern Trump's intentions; he's the king of mixed signals. On the one hand there is this report from space news: http://spacenews.com/the-big-changes...oming-to-nasa/ But on the other hand there's this report from the New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/26/u...T.nav=top-news .....which may or may not bolster your argument of the military eating the NASA budget, because the article doesn't mention it one way or another. A report on the radio this morning described the agencies targeted for cuts as "long-time Republican targets" and AFAIK, that's not NASA. Add to this mix this action from Congress: http://spacenews.com/house-ready-to-...pending-bills/ And it appears that commercial space backers have warmed to SLS a smidge: http://spacenews.com/commercial-grou...launch-system/ My impression is that both Congress and many players in the space industry don't want a repeat of the upheaval touched off by the FY 2011 budget. Reports also seem to indicate that if the Trump administration favors shaking things up, it appears to be in favor of SLS/Orion, not against it. This is not implausible because Trump's AG, Jeff Sessions, was the senator from Alabama, and so has the Marshall Spaceflight Center in mind. But I'm the first to admit this is all speculation based on scant evidence. We won't know for certain until Trump releases his budget and names his NASA administrator. The lead for that is a House member who's run a space museum and so is knowledgeable, but knowing Trump he could tap a member of the Flat Earth Society who contributed a lot of money. At the moment, this is my best guess. To coin a phrase, watch this space. |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
Musk remains on Advisory Council
Michael Gallagher wrote:
On Fri, 17 Feb 2017 07:07:05 -0800 (PST), bob haller wrote: .... [Trump] wants to restart the draft and put ground troops in syria. plus the wall. there will be no money left for space exploration It is hard to discern Trump's intentions; he's the king of mixed signals. On the one hand there is this report from space news: http://spacenews.com/the-big-changes...oming-to-nasa/ Which has no idea of what Trump might propose. But on the other hand there's this report from the New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/26/u...T.nav=top-news Which has no idea what Trump might propose. Add to this mix this action from Congress: http://spacenews.com/house-ready-to-...pending-bills/ Which is probably closer to what will actually happen, although it includes funding for the Earth Sciences stuff, which Trump wants to move elsewhere and reduce funding for. And it appears that commercial space backers have warmed to SLS a smidge: http://spacenews.com/commercial-grou...launch-system/ Largely a political position with some support for missions that commercial space can't currently do. So right now, what there is is a bunch of people speculating, essentially in a vacuum. My impression is that both Congress and many players in the space industry don't want a repeat of the upheaval touched off by the FY 2011 budget. Reports also seem to indicate that if the Trump administration favors shaking things up, it appears to be in favor of SLS/Orion, not against it. This is not implausible because Trump's AG, Jeff Sessions, was the senator from Alabama, and so has the Marshall Spaceflight Center in mind. But I'm the first to admit this is all speculation based on scant evidence. We won't know for certain until Trump releases his budget and names his NASA administrator. The lead for that is a House member who's run a space museum and so is knowledgeable, but knowing Trump he could tap a member of the Flat Earth Society who contributed a lot of money. At the moment, this is my best guess. I doubt there will be any significant change in the funding line for SLS or Orion this year. It takes a (far too) long time to kill things like this. Unless some reasonable missions for this system can be put forward, I'd expect it to be killed over the next year or two. Congressional action on requiring a report that Constellation can (or cannot) be used to support ISS without the SLS booster indicates a likely direction. Personally, I'd like to see NASA put out specifications for what they want and let commercial space folks bid on it. Taking SLS development and operations money and diverting it to SpaceX, Blue Origin, etc, would probably be a more efficient approach but NASA is unlikely to want to let go of that much control. -- "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man." --George Bernard Shaw |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Martian cell remains were impregnated onto Earthly osteon remains. | Lin Liangtai | Amateur Astronomy | 0 | July 19th 08 10:16 AM |
Martian cell remains were impregnated onto Earthly osteon remains. | Lin Liangtai | Astronomy Misc | 0 | July 19th 08 10:15 AM |
I am today advisory, so I lift you. | Ghassan al Jiburi | Amateur Astronomy | 0 | August 13th 07 08:52 AM |
New NASA Advisory Council Holds Inaugural Meeting | Jacques van Oene | News | 0 | December 3rd 05 10:47 AM |
80mm ED price advisory (Canada) | RichA | Amateur Astronomy | 0 | November 7th 04 03:16 AM |