A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Policy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

and now, Ladies and Gentlemen, the NSF "slow motion experts" have(finally) "invented" MY "Multipurpose Orbital Rescue Vehicle"... just 20



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 28th 08, 10:36 PM posted to sci.space.policy
gaetanomarano
external usenet poster
 
Location: Italy
Posts: 493
Default and now, Ladies and Gentlemen, the NSF "slow motion experts" have(finally) "invented" MY "Multipurpose Orbital Rescue Vehicle"... just 20

..

and now, Ladies and Gentlemen, the NSF's "slow motion experts" have
(finally) "invented" MY "Multipurpose Orbital Rescue Vehicle"...

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/ind...?topic=14161.0

.... just 20 months LATER my article...

http://www.gaetanomarano.it/articles/017morv.html

..
Ads
  #2  
Old August 29th 08, 12:06 PM posted to sci.space.policy
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 558
Default and now, Ladies and Gentlemen, gaetanomarano shows hisstupidity again

On Aug 28, 5:36*pm, gaetanomarano wrote:
.

and now, Ladies and Gentlemen, the NSF's "slow motion experts" have
(finally) "invented" MY "Multipurpose Orbital Rescue Vehicle"...

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/ind...?topic=14161.0

... just 20 months LATER my article...

http://www.gaetanomarano.it/articles/017morv.html


The NSF thread has nothing to do with your thread.

Let me change that, actually there is a post on that thread that is a
applicable to your MORV

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/ind...0374#msg310374

"You are so off base on all of this I won't even go into any detail.
"



.


  #3  
Old August 29th 08, 12:08 PM posted to sci.space.policy
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 558
Default and now, Ladies and Gentlemen, gaetanomarano shows hisstupidity again

On Aug 29, 7:06*am, wrote:
On Aug 28, 5:36*pm, gaetanomarano wrote:

.


and now, Ladies and Gentlemen, the NSF's "slow motion experts" have
(finally) "invented" MY "Multipurpose Orbital Rescue Vehicle"...


http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/ind...?topic=14161.0


... just 20 months LATER my article...


http://www.gaetanomarano.it/articles/017morv.html


The NSF thread has nothing to do with your thread.

Let me change that, actually there is a post on that thread that is a
applicable to your MORV

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/ind...0451#msg310451

"You are so off base on all of this I won't even go into any detail."



Updated link
  #4  
Old August 29th 08, 12:14 PM posted to sci.space.policy
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 558
Default and now, Ladies and Gentlemen, gaetanomarano shows hisstupidity again

On Aug 28, 5:36*pm, gaetanomarano wrote:
.

and now, Ladies and Gentlemen, the NSF's "slow motion experts" have
(finally) "invented" MY "Multipurpose Orbital Rescue Vehicle"...

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/ind...?topic=14161.0

... just 20 months LATER my article...

http://www.gaetanomarano.it/articles/017morv.html

gaetanomarano,

Why are you posting on Usenet about threads on NSF?
Let me answer that. Because you are an ass and have been banned from
every credible spaceflight forum.
The next one you will be banned from is Space Politics. It won't be
me doing it, you will do it all by yourself.

  #5  
Old August 29th 08, 04:17 PM posted to sci.space.policy
gaetanomarano
external usenet poster
 
Location: Italy
Posts: 493
Default and now, Ladies and Gentlemen, gaetanomarano shows hisstupidity again

On 29 Ago, 13:14, wrote:
it won't be
me doing it, you will do it all by yourself.



don't be angry, charlie/Me/etc...

it's not my guilt if you are unable to think and propose just ONE new
idea, but only to post insults against people who don't support
Direct...

..
  #6  
Old August 29th 08, 05:09 PM posted to sci.space.policy
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 558
Default and now, Ladies and Gentlemen, gaetanomarano shows hisstupidity again

On Aug 29, 11:17*am, gaetanomarano wrote:
On 29 Ago, 13:14, wrote:

it won't be
me doing it, you will do it all by yourself.


don't be angry, charlie/Me/etc...

it's not my guilt if you are unable to think and propose just ONE new
idea, but only to post insults against people who don't support
Direct...


1. Your "ideas" don't count because they are not viable. So it
doesn't matter how many of them exist. One piece of garbage vs many
pieces of garbage, it still is garbage.

2. I worked on SDLV's in the early 1980's, long before you knew about
shuttle

3. Those SDLV's looked just like Direct and not your fast-slv

4. I have worked on one idea that has more of a chance of happening
than any of your ideas. A manned spacecraft on EELV's

5. I don't feel the need to put my ideas on the internet. The
internet is not the only place for ideas. I have better avenues to
circulate my ideas.
  #8  
Old August 29th 08, 06:55 PM posted to sci.space.policy
gaetanomarano
external usenet poster
 
Location: Italy
Posts: 493
Default and now, Ladies and Gentlemen, gaetanomarano shows hisstupidity again

On 29 Ago, 18:09, wrote:

1. *Your "ideas" don't count because they are not viable.


just the time it was/are/will be adopted by NASA or ESA or (at least)
some space forums' "experts"...

2. I worked on SDLV's in the early 1980's, long before you knew about
shuttle


words, words. words, words, words... (and no one evidence, as
usual...)


3. *Those SDLV's looked just like Direct and not your fast-slv


I've already written an article and (posted everywhere) with clear and
strong evidences of the exact DAY and HOUR where the Direct concept
and name was born

4. *I have worked on one idea that has more of a chance of happening
than any of your ideas. *A manned spacecraft on EELV's


assuming it's true, you're just one of several thousands peoples that
have "worked" about manned EELV spacecrafts from '50s to today

5. *I don't feel the need to put my ideas on the internet. The
internet is not the only place for ideas. * I have better avenues to
circulate my ideas.


internet is not a "bad place" but (simply) the modern version of books
and magazines (as Wikipedia clearly shows) and it's not the ORIGIN of
the idea but (simply) the "mirror" of the real world, so, an idea is
available on the web, not because you put it here, but (simply)
because this idea was BORN (someday) then EXISTS (somwhere)

if your "avenues" have not a "mirror" on the web (or on a paper book
or magazine or university lecture, etc.) they (simply) don't exist!

rockets, spacecrafts, engines, etc. are NOT "secret weapons" but
(simply) TECHNOLOGIES that must be revelaled and built to be useful

all technologies become OLD in a few years... so, it NOT credible that
you, a space company, a lab, a space agency, an industry or anyone
else "invent" something new and useful in the '80s but NEVER REVEAL IT
in the next 20-30 years!!!!!!!!

it's not credible that a concept developed in '80s was NEVER PUBLISHED
in a book or a study or a document that now could be an evidence of
them!!!

just words, words, words, words, words

you haven't invented NOTHING, you haven't worked on NOTHING, you have
NO evidence of NOTHING... ALL peoples that have REALLY worked on
"something" in '80s or before or later, are well known, they have a
name, their name is on the web, on wikipedia, on NASA and aerospace
companies' public documents, on books, etc.

you (simply) don't exist! you're just a Direct's PR-man (or part of a
Direct's PR-"crew") that posts hidden under several nicknames
everywhere on the web to support the Direct-lobby and insults
everybody else

you contradict yourself and your own words!!! ...WHY should one that
worked on rocket projects HIDES these projects (that could have some
real interests for many peoples on the web) because "has better avenue
than the web" but, in the same time (lireally) SUBMERGE the web (he
"don't like") with a flow of words, words, words, words

all peoples that actually HAVE "ideas" want their ideas to be known
everywhere, developed and built, they don't HIDE an idea for 20+
years, just to post on a forum to say "I've invented it in '80s but
I've no evidence of that since I've some special "avenues" to run
it"

you have NOT just ONE idea! all peoples that HAVE ideas are HAPPY to
talk of them with other and always want to demonstrate to be the first
that have had it (and give evidence of that) NOT saying just words,
words, words, words...

..
  #9  
Old August 29th 08, 10:43 PM posted to sci.space.policy
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 558
Default and now, Ladies and Gentlemen, gaetanomarano shows hisstupidity again

On Aug 29, 1:55*pm, gaetanomarano wrote:

assuming it's true, you're just one of several thousands peoples that
have "worked" about manned EELV spacecrafts from '50s to today


Wrong. EELV's are specific ELV's. They are the Atlas V and Delta-IV,
which have only been around in the 2000's


internet is not a "bad place" but (simply) the modern version of books
and magazines (as Wikipedia clearly shows) and it's not the ORIGIN of
the idea but (simply) the "mirror" of the real world, so, an idea is
available on the web, not because you put it here, but (simply)
because this idea was BORN (someday) then EXISTS (somwhere)


Not on the open web.

if your "avenues" have not a "mirror" on the web (or on a paper book
or magazine or university lecture, etc.) they (simply) don't exist!


Wrong again. I have many documents that aren't on the web. NASA and
aerospace contractors do not use the open web. Less than 1% of the
information of current or future spaceflight missions is on the web.
I have written documents that are not releasable to the public


rockets, spacecrafts, engines, etc. are NOT "secret weapons" but
(simply) TECHNOLOGIES that must be revelaled and built to be useful


Wrong. Most of the information is ITAR or SBU

all technologies become OLD in a few years... so, it NOT credible that
you, a space company, a lab, a space agency, an industry or anyone
else "invent" something new and useful in the '80s but NEVER REVEAL IT
in the next 20-30 years!!!!!!!!


Wrong. They are called spy satellites

it's not credible that a concept developed in '80s was NEVER PUBLISHED
in a book or a study or a document that now could be an evidence of
them!!!


Wrong. I have documents of a vehicle called the ULV. Show me it on
the web.

you haven't invented NOTHING, you haven't worked on NOTHING, you have
NO evidence of NOTHING... ALL peoples that have REALLY worked on
"something" in '80s or before or later, are well known, they have a
name, their name is on the web, on wikipedia, on NASA and aerospace
companies' public documents, on books, etc.


Wrong again. You won't find any evidence of me, in the 1980's, yet my
wall is covered with awards for working on many projects. I am on
the web now for work in the 1990's and 2000

you (simply) don't exist! you're just a Direct's PR-man (or part of a
Direct's PR-"crew") that posts hidden under several nicknames
everywhere on the web to support the Direct-lobby and insults
everybody else


I don't insult everyone else. I just reveal your lies.

you contradict yourself and your own words!!! ...WHY should one that
worked on rocket projects HIDES these projects (that could have some
real interests for many peoples on the web) because "has better avenue
than the web"


Because the web is not where the real work is down.


  #10  
Old August 30th 08, 12:05 AM posted to sci.space.policy
gaetanomarano
external usenet poster
 
Location: Italy
Posts: 493
Default and now, Ladies and Gentlemen, gaetanomarano shows hisstupidity again

On 29 Ago, 23:43, wrote:

They are the Atlas V and Delta-IV,
which have only been around in the 2000's


an option thousands NASA engineers have evaluated before the Ares-1
choice


Not on the open web.


yes, they're in the Mulder & Scully X-Files' drawers...

*I have many documents that aren't on the web.


NASA has revealed (and is revealing daily) everything about the ESAS
hardware including the most minute details... you can't have any
further document, or, if you have it, it's a completely useless
garbage

I have written documents that are not releasable to the public


you're only a young boy (or girl) that, hidden behind several
nicknames, plays the role of "NASA engineer", "aerospace contractor",
"astronaut" and (maybe, in other forums) "Spiderman", "Batman", "Harry
Potter", "Paris Hilton", etc.

Most of the information is ITAR or SBU


the shuttle-derived rockets are not "secret weapons", everything is
known about them (including some internal issues like the vibrations
problems) there are no secrets and you are not James Bond...

*They are called spy satellites


the Ares rockets are NOT "spy satellites" (and, also the latter, was
not secrets hidden 20, 30 years or more!)

I have documents of a vehicle called the ULV.


it's not enough to beat me... I've secret documents about vehicles
called GBrN, UTcYo, OOu3T, VNxyz, ZZ4g, LMNop7, etc. ...but I can't
reveal them... sorry...

You won't find any evidence of me, in the 1980's, yet my
wall is covered with awards for working on many projects.


your college room's wall is covered with several posters of Britney
Spears, Cameron Diaz, Justin Timberlake, Bruce Willis, etc.

*I am on
the web now for work in the 1990's and 2000


but STILL you can't say/we can't know WHO you are!

I just reveal your lies.


well, then, now start reveal us YOUR lies... like the LOTS of claims
on yourself and your "rocket projects" (without post just ONE
evidence!) you write in your posts...

Because the web is not where the real work is down.


the ONLY "real work" you have is "crew member of Direct's Web
Supporters' Team"

..
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
the (NSF's Direct-like) new-uplink.forum's "experts" STRIKE BACK(now with "their" ARES-H) gaetanomarano Policy 11 August 27th 08 02:11 AM
15 answers to nonsense being spread by "creation science,""intelligent design," and "Expelled" Kickin' Ass and Takin' Names[_1_] Amateur Astronomy 1 April 29th 08 01:29 PM
"Constant failure"; "The greatest equations ever"; "The Coming Revolutions in Particle Physics" fishfry Astronomy Misc 0 February 13th 08 02:38 AM
FOUND TO-DAY: finally, the "experts" have "invented" the upgraded J-2X gaetanomarano Policy 3 November 15th 07 06:32 AM
The "experts" strike again... :) :) :) "Direct" version of my "open Service Module" on NSF gaetanomarano Policy 0 August 17th 07 02:19 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:31 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2020 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.