|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Fearless Leader Makes NASA Solumn Promise!
On Apr 19, 10:24�pm, Buster Norris wrote:
Marvin the Martian wrote: On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 02:35:04 +0000, Buster Norris wrote: Marvin the Martian wrote: On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 15:12:18 -0400, Patriot Games wrote: On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 19:59:18 -0500, Marvin the Martian wrote: On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 16:29:10 -0400, Patriot Games wrote: Guess what the cost is per trip per astronaut? $51,000,000.00 (each). Part of the problem is that NASA and NASA's contractors started to treat the program as a cash cow to be milked for all it is worth. Bull****. I'm sure you've expressed yourself to the full extent of your ability. He shoulda called you what you are - a retard. The entire NASA budget is less than one-fifth of one percent! Generally speaking, people who use the word "retard" like you did hear it often. I've been calling retards like you retards for years! So I heard me say it often, RETARD.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Ok we understand your describing yourself...... how sad |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Fearless Leader Makes NASA Solumn Promise!
Buster Norris wrote:
" wrote: You seem like a retard. Are you a retard or a Democrat-in-training? There is no cost-per-year, retard. The cost isbased per shuttle mission, retard. You may want to read up on how the government actually works. Yes, there is a cost per year. Federal budgets are appropriated on a yearly basis. The cost per mission is $450 million. Was. Unfortunately the fixed costs of shuttle flights is very high and at this point about $1 billion per flight is a far more realistic number. Do the math, you stupid ****. so using russia still saves big bucks. You're a liar. Are you a liar or a Democrat-in-training? And you can't do the math. Try again. Even if we assume your number for a shuttle flight, having 6 American crew on the station is still cheaper than a single shuttle flight. Up it to 15 and you're still cheaper than 3 shuttle flights. But as they say, "Math is Hard". -- Greg Moore Ask me about lily, an RPI based CMC. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Fearless Leader Makes NASA Solumn Promise!
On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 16:05:46 -0400, "Jonathan"
wrote: "Patriot Games" wrote in message .. . On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 02:02:23 -0400, "Jonathan" wrote: President Whoever ; I 'promise' to land a man on the surface of wherever by the year whatever. ( whispers to his VP ) President Whoever ; F'ing rubes will believe anything whatsoever if it's whatever they want to hear. Bwahahahahahaha!!! Meanwhile... The world's ONLY Space Ship gets mothballed while the world's ONLY Space Station (built 95% by America and Americans) is floating in space and WE CAN'T GET THERE... We'll be PAYING THE RUSSIANS to take us to OUR Space Station. Guess what the cost is per trip per astronaut? $51,000,000.00 (each). Well ya know the military has figured out a way to dramatically reduce launch costs, the solution was so obvious it seemed to have escaped everyone. The solution is to launch ...unmanned...spacecraft. I could be wrong but I think if you check with the Viking Project folks they will tell you they kinda-sorta heard about that new-fangled 'unmanned' stuff... Granted that people are much faster at building things, and hands-down winner of the sticky bolt competition. But considering the huge difference in expense? We can upgrade our 'fastener technology', and what's the big hurry anyway? There's nothing wrong with unmanned exploration, it makes a lot of sense to send a machine out there a few times just in case there are face-eating aliens hiding out there. But it's gonna take HUMANS to build the orbiting solar power stations... And all that aside... Maybe it was bred out of you, or beaten out of you, but as HUMANS we NEED TO EXPLORE. We have a primal NEED to see what's on the other side of that hill, we MUST go deeper, higher, farther, and faster than we did the last time we tried to go deeper, higher, farther, and faster. If the DemocRATs and/or Socialists and/or Communists and/or Marxists and/or Muslims take that away from us, or beat it out of us, or breed it out of us WE WILL CEASE TO BE A VIABLE INTELLIGENT SPECIES IN THIS UNIVERSE and will become just another ****ing insect. Do you think it's a coincidence that the Buckwheat Moron PresiChimp cancels the WORLD'S ONLY SPACESHIP and within TWO DAYS the ****ing Russians already have an entire billing plan in place to taxi our lame ass up to the WORLD'S ONLY SPACE STATION (that WE built and WE paid for)? Do you think the Buckwheat Moron PresiChimp's canceling the WORLD'S ONLY SPACESHIP, visiting 50 countries and apologizing for America, and then complaining about being the WORLD'S ONLY SUPER-POWER "whether we like it or not" are UNRELATED? You need to wise up.... |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Fearless Leader Makes NASA Solumn Promise!
"Patriot Games" wrote in message ... On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 16:05:46 -0400, "Jonathan" wrote: "Patriot Games" wrote in message . .. On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 02:02:23 -0400, "Jonathan" wrote: President Whoever ; I 'promise' to land a man on the surface of wherever by the year whatever. ( whispers to his VP ) President Whoever ; F'ing rubes will believe anything whatsoever if it's whatever they want to hear. Bwahahahahahaha!!! Meanwhile... The world's ONLY Space Ship gets mothballed while the world's ONLY Space Station (built 95% by America and Americans) is floating in space and WE CAN'T GET THERE... We'll be PAYING THE RUSSIANS to take us to OUR Space Station. Guess what the cost is per trip per astronaut? $51,000,000.00 (each). Well ya know the military has figured out a way to dramatically reduce launch costs, the solution was so obvious it seemed to have escaped everyone. The solution is to launch ...unmanned...spacecraft. I could be wrong but I think if you check with the Viking Project folks they will tell you they kinda-sorta heard about that new-fangled 'unmanned' stuff... And NASA's manned space program is finding out the hard way which form is more competitive. We use to build both forms, now just the one. Granted that people are much faster at building things, and hands-down winner of the sticky bolt competition. But considering the huge difference in expense? We can upgrade our 'fastener technology', and what's the big hurry anyway? There's nothing wrong with unmanned exploration, it makes a lot of sense to send a machine out there a few times just in case there are face-eating aliens hiding out there. But it's gonna take HUMANS to build the orbiting solar power stations... Maybe a few, for a time. But still some 99 launches out of a 100 will still be unmanned. And all that aside... Maybe it was bred out of you, or beaten out of you, but as HUMANS we NEED TO EXPLORE. And it takes 2 or 3 years to land a rover on Mars, it takes 30 or 40 years to get men there. So humans need to explore in the ....slowest most exensive form possible? Sounds anti-exploration to me. We have a primal NEED to see what's on the other side of that hill, And when a rover goes over the hill, hundreds of millions of people can be watching as if they were there. we MUST go deeper, higher, farther, and faster Right, unmanned spacecraft can go places no human would dare. It could visit far more inhospitable environments, and in fact go deeper, higher, farther and faster than manned spacecraft. than we did the last time we tried to go deeper, higher, farther, and faster. If the DemocRATs and/or Socialists and/or Communists and/or Marxists and/or Muslims take that away from us, or beat it out of us, or breed it out of us WE WILL CEASE TO BE A VIABLE INTELLIGENT SPECIES IN THIS UNIVERSE and will become just another ****ing insect. Do you think it's a coincidence that the Buckwheat Moron PresiChimp cancels the WORLD'S ONLY SPACESHIP and within TWO DAYS the ****ing Russians already have an entire billing plan in place to taxi our lame ass up to the WORLD'S ONLY SPACE STATION (that WE built and WE paid for)? Do you think the Buckwheat Moron PresiChimp's canceling the WORLD'S ONLY SPACESHIP, visiting 50 countries and apologizing for America, and then complaining about being the WORLD'S ONLY SUPER-POWER "whether we like it or not" are UNRELATED? You need to wise up.... It was Lockheed that wanted to go back to the Moon. In order to pocket just as much taxpayer money that their best friend and 'Vision' creator, Dick Cheney could manage to stuff in their pocket. Do you think Mrs. Cheney was on the Lockheed Board because of her vast knowledge of military contracts? Who needs to wise up. NASA has suffered at the hands of self serving, big-money and back-room politics for decades. It's why NASA is in the shape it's in today. It's time the people decide a sensible goal that benefits society first, and Big-Aero last. And if you asked the people they would answer Space Solar Power. Space Energy Inc http://www.spaceenergy.com/s/Default.htm Laying the Foundation for Space Solar Power http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10202&page=1 Space-Based Solar Power As an Opportunity for Strategic Security http://www.nss.org/settlement/ssp/library/nsso.htm Business Presentation for Space Solar Power http://www.spaceenergy.com/i/flash/ted_presentation War Without Oil: A Catalyst For True Transformation "Complicating the matter is a lack of professional consensus on the actual expected date of global peak oil production, with credible organizations such a ExxonMobil predicting that the non-OPEC Hubbert's Peak will arrive within 5 years and the U.S. Government claiming the planet's absolute peak will occur somewhere around 2037" http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/cst/csat56.pdf |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Fearless Leader Makes NASA Solumn Promise!
"Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)" wrote:
Buster Norris wrote: " wrote: You seem like a retard. Are you a retard or a Democrat-in-training? There is no cost-per-year, retard. The cost isbased per shuttle mission, retard. You may want to read up on how the government actually works. Yes, there is a cost per year. Federal budgets are appropriated on a yearly basis. The cost per mission is $450 million. Was. Unfortunately the fixed costs of shuttle flights is very high and at this point about $1 billion per flight is a far more realistic number. Prove it, put that cite right he_____________ |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Fearless Leader Makes NASA Solumn Promise!
The cost per mission is $450 million. Was. � Unfortunately the fixed costs of shuttle flights is very high and at this point about $1 billion per flight is a far more realistic number. Prove it, put that cite right he_____________ Buster why bother you wouldnt be able to understand it in any case. Its beyond your ability You need a job? there are openings nationwide for garbagemen. True it will be tough for you but with effort you may be able to master putting trash bags in a compactor....... |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Fearless Leader Makes NASA Solumn Promise!
bob haller LIAR advocate wrote:
The cost per mission is $450 million. Was. � Unfortunately the fixed costs of shuttle flights is very high and at this point about $1 billion per flight is a far more realistic number. Prove it, put that cite right he_____________ Buster why bother you You can **** off now, LIAR!!! You need a job? No, LIAR, I'm doing very well, LIAR. You can **** off now, LIAR!!! |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Fearless Leader Makes NASA Solumn Promise!
On Apr 21, 8:20�am, Buster Norris wrote:
bob haller LIAR advocate wrote: The cost per mission is $450 million. Was. Unfortunately the fixed costs of shuttle flights is very high and at this point about $1 billion per flight is a far more realistic number.. Prove it, put that cite right he_____________ Buster why bother you You can **** off now, LIAR!!! You need a job? No, LIAR, I'm doing very well, LIAR. You can **** off now, LIAR!!! buster please dont hold back tell us how you really feel. kinda surprised at your posts, when did they start allowing internet access from jails and mental hospitals??? |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Fearless Leader Makes NASA Solumn Promise!
Buster Norris wrote:
"Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)" wrote: Buster Norris wrote: " wrote: You seem like a retard. Are you a retard or a Democrat-in-training? There is no cost-per-year, retard. The cost isbased per shuttle mission, retard. You may want to read up on how the government actually works. Yes, there is a cost per year. Federal budgets are appropriated on a yearly basis. The cost per mission is $450 million. Was. Unfortunately the fixed costs of shuttle flights is very high and at this point about $1 billion per flight is a far more realistic number. Prove it, put that cite right he_____________ Typically when one makes the original, they're expected to provide the cite. However, since you can't seem to do that: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d0534.pdf This estimates the additional cost of the Hubble mission at well over $1B dollars. Now that mission had some unique requirements, including making sure a 2nd shuttle was on the pad as a rescue orbiter. So let's assume the $2.4B number is way off and the $1.7B is still a bit high. Or from 2000: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d011000r.pdf and I quote": For fiscal year 2000, NASA calculated an average cost per launch of $759 million based on four shuttle launches." Those costs have gone up since then. Tossing into on example inflation calculator I get inflation along bringing the costs up to $936 Million. So that's with 10% of my Billion estimate. In any case, any realistic number at this point is far more than $450 million. -- Greg Moore Ask me about lily, an RPI based CMC. |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Fearless Leader Makes NASA Solumn Promise!
On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 19:56:40 -0400, "Jonathan"
wrote: "Patriot Games" wrote in message .. . On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 16:05:46 -0400, "Jonathan" wrote: "Patriot Games" wrote in message ... On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 02:02:23 -0400, "Jonathan" wrote: President Whoever ; I 'promise' to land a man on the surface of wherever by the year whatever. ( whispers to his VP ) President Whoever ; F'ing rubes will believe anything whatsoever if it's whatever they want to hear. Bwahahahahahaha!!! Meanwhile... The world's ONLY Space Ship gets mothballed while the world's ONLY Space Station (built 95% by America and Americans) is floating in space and WE CAN'T GET THERE... We'll be PAYING THE RUSSIANS to take us to OUR Space Station. Guess what the cost is per trip per astronaut? $51,000,000.00 (each). Well ya know the military has figured out a way to dramatically reduce launch costs, the solution was so obvious it seemed to have escaped everyone. The solution is to launch ...unmanned...spacecraft. I could be wrong but I think if you check with the Viking Project folks they will tell you they kinda-sorta heard about that new-fangled 'unmanned' stuff... And NASA's manned space program is finding out the hard way which form is more competitive. We use to build both forms, now just the one. Granted that people are much faster at building things, and hands-down winner of the sticky bolt competition. But considering the huge difference in expense? We can upgrade our 'fastener technology', and what's the big hurry anyway? There's nothing wrong with unmanned exploration, it makes a lot of sense to send a machine out there a few times just in case there are face-eating aliens hiding out there. But it's gonna take HUMANS to build the orbiting solar power stations... Maybe a few, for a time. But still some 99 launches out of a 100 will still be unmanned. And all that aside... Maybe it was bred out of you, or beaten out of you, but as HUMANS we NEED TO EXPLORE. And it takes 2 or 3 years to land a rover on Mars, it takes 30 or 40 years to get men there. We could do it in 15, maybe 20 years. So humans need to explore in the ....slowest most exensive form possible? Sounds anti-exploration to me. Maybe it sounds anti-exploration to you because you've been down-bred? We have a primal NEED to see what's on the other side of that hill, And when a rover goes over the hill, hundreds of millions of people can be watching as if they were there. "As if" isn't the same. Humans don't identify with machines , humans identify with their kind. we MUST go deeper, higher, farther, and faster Right, unmanned spacecraft can go places no human would dare. Which is precisely why we should use them for that. It could visit far more inhospitable environments, and in fact go deeper, higher, farther and faster than manned spacecraft. Correct. Machines are an extension of humans, not a replacement for humans. than we did the last time we tried to go deeper, higher, farther, and faster. If the DemocRATs and/or Socialists and/or Communists and/or Marxists and/or Muslims take that away from us, or beat it out of us, or breed it out of us WE WILL CEASE TO BE A VIABLE INTELLIGENT SPECIES IN THIS UNIVERSE and will become just another ****ing insect. Do you think it's a coincidence that the Buckwheat Moron PresiChimp cancels the WORLD'S ONLY SPACESHIP and within TWO DAYS the ****ing Russians already have an entire billing plan in place to taxi our lame ass up to the WORLD'S ONLY SPACE STATION (that WE built and WE paid for)? Do you think the Buckwheat Moron PresiChimp's canceling the WORLD'S ONLY SPACESHIP, visiting 50 countries and apologizing for America, and then complaining about being the WORLD'S ONLY SUPER-POWER "whether we like it or not" are UNRELATED? You need to wise up.... It was Lockheed that wanted to go back to the Moon. In order to pocket just as much taxpayer money that their best friend and 'Vision' creator, Dick Cheney could manage to stuff in their pocket. Do you think Mrs. Cheney was on the Lockheed Board because of her vast knowledge of military contracts? I think Mrs. Cheney was on the Board because prior to that she had been a Director with Lockheed. And she resigned her position as Board member about TEN years ago... Of course Lockheed wants us to go to the Moon. If you asked ANY of the large gov't contractors if they wanted to go to the Moon they'd all say YES. But if you asked ANY of the large gov't contractors if they wanted to go to the bottom of the ocean, or Uranus, they'd all also say YES. Who needs to wise up. You do. NASA has suffered at the hands of self serving, big-money and back-room politics for decades. It's why NASA is in the shape it's in today. Wrong. NASA is in the shape it's in today because NASA was forced to "share" with the world's idiots. The only thing NOT "international" about the Space Station is WHO PAID FOR IT. It's time the people decide a sensible goal that benefits society first, and Big-Aero last. Society? **** society. NASA is by and for AMERICA and Americans. And if you asked the people they would answer Space Solar Power. Unfortunately you're wrong. They SHOULD give that answer BUT they aren't smart enough to give that answer. But the REALLY BIG problem is that our Buckwheat PresiChimp thinks "Space Solar Power" is a BattleStar Galactica episode and thinks the answer is do nothing and wait for somebody to hand you something for free... |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Our fearless Leader at Work .. | Hagar[_1_] | Misc | 0 | November 6th 09 03:53 PM |
Our fearless Leader at Work .. | jughead | Misc | 0 | November 6th 09 04:05 AM |
etter, Faster Spacecraft Designs: New Software System Offers Promise Of NASA-Wide Collaboration | [email protected] | News | 0 | May 18th 06 09:37 PM |
Nasa Makes A Disgusting Political Decision | OhBrother | Astronomy Misc | 35 | March 31st 04 07:11 AM |
NASA Portal Makes A Little Bit Of Mars Available To Everyone On Earth | Thomas Lee Elifritz | Policy | 0 | February 20th 04 01:03 AM |