Moon Laws

On Oct 18, 7:37 am, wrote:
On Oct 18, 10:04 am, BradGuth wrote:



Still think I'm wrong about these Usenet spooks, moles and semitic
brown-nosed rusemasters, as doing their usual anti-think-tank best at
snookering the likes of yourself?

Facts confuse them. They are at best clones of a lesser God.

There are many lesser Gods, whereas a Zion/Yiddish God is apparently
all-knowing and No.1 enforcer on behalf of protecting all Yids,
especiually on behalf of protecting those pesky bad Yids.

The rest of your SIG/STC group interactive thing seems interesting.
Is there a STC/SIG forum?
- Brad Guth -

I did not know the US recognized dual citizenship. Please tell me
more.

Check http://www.richw.org/dualcit/ for a good overview on this topic.

On Oct 15, 8:03 am, wrote:
On Oct 14, 9:23 pm, BradGuth wrote:





On Oct 14, 4:28 pm, wrote:

On Oct 14, 5:16 pm, Jim Davis wrote:

William Mook wrote:
I suppose when the voice of reason can't prove me wrong, they
call out the voice of unreason.

William, would you care to identify by whom you mean by "they"?

Surely you don't think there's a mysterious "they" out there trying
to make life difficult for you, do you?

I mean, that's always been *Brad's* complaint. :-)

Well, if this line of reasoning causes Brad to temper his responses
does it matter?

Now that's a weird contribution, Rabbi Mook. What part of MI5/NSA did
you say you worked for?
- Brad Guth -

Do you really expect an honest answer to that question? If not why
ask it? The fact is Brad, I work for myself and others work for me.
I'm just trying to help you see things a little differently from the
boneheaded approach you've been following since day one. You may
recall I have been nothing but consistent. I have asked you to stop
posting, failing that to stop posting to areas I post to, failing that
to be nice, failing that to temper your responses. I don't know that
this has any impact, you can be assured I will continue giving you
these consistent clear messages to shut the **** up and get out of my
damn life - until you understand. haha..

I was responding to Jim where he lives emotionally. He wanted to
imply so badly I was paranoid he forgot what it would cost him - the
possibility that you might be more temperate in your responses. Ah
well.

I will say my ex-wife got her PhD in education and she worked on using
computers to guage response latency of learners. Very interesting
topic. One interesting application was in lie-detection. If you
asked a question such as does a bird have wings a person replies yes.
does a bird have feathers yes. does a bird have skin - a pause - yes.

Now, do this enough times and you can construct a latency map between
concepts. Birds and feathers, birds and wings, are closely allied.
Bird and skin is not. In fact you can after a series of interactions
determine that there is another subject a subject not discussed at all
between bird and skin - call it animal - that you didn't talk about at
all.

Another interesting fact is that you can figure out whether or not
this item is there no matter how they answered the specific
questions!!

In a learning situation you can use this information to direct
teaching software very accurately to the needs of a learner.

In a spy situation you can use this information to figure out what two
people think about an subject neither talked about even if they were
lying through their teeth to one another.

Now, my EX- *did* get a DOD grant for her research, and they took
certain aspects of it and developed it further, but she couldn't tell
me about it.

The office of naval research I think was involved - but they may not
exist any more in the form that funded her stuff. This was back in
the day we were both young and foolish and in grad school together.
she was hot and so was i - haha..- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You are not telling me anything that I didn't need to know, except the
part about my "boneheaded approach" wasn't from the very get go (makes
you a damn liar), and as of lately is more than justified, especially
in seeing how the likes of yourself are getting summarily usenet
bashed and/or traumatised to death, or simply getting trashed over and
over by 99.9% of those involved, yet you see nothing the least bit
weird or unusual about any of that.

It as though nothing in Willie.Moo's (aka William Mook's) world is
faith-based anything, or much less otherwise government skewed. How
downright odd, that only those pretend atheists are in charge of your
world.

Deductive observationology is all of what you've offered, and then
some, because it involves the regular laws of physics and backed up
with the best available science that's easily replicated.

Just because you don't believe in anything off-world that's other than
inert energy or inert dead, doesn't mean that of all other physics and
science as to whatever's alive and kicking is dead wrong no matters
what.
- Brad Guth -

On Oct 18, 3:59 am, wrote:
On Oct 14, 9:23 pm, BradGuth wrote:


On Oct 14, 4:28 pm, wrote:

On Oct 14, 5:16 pm, Jim Davis wrote:

William Mook wrote:
I suppose when the voice of reason can't prove me wrong, they
call out the voice of unreason.

William, would you care to identify by whom you mean by "they"?

Surely you don't think there's a mysterious "they" out there trying
to make life difficult for you, do you?

I mean, that's always been *Brad's* complaint. :-)

Well, if this line of reasoning causes Brad to temper his responses
does it matter?

Now that's a weird contribution, Rabbi Mook. What part of MI5/NSA did
you say you worked for?
- Brad Guth -

Is it just me being Californicated watching all the specialty license
plates in Malibu, but does MI5/NSA when you squint at it look like
MENSA? Is Brad trying to tell us something? Is he sending a coded
message? Discuss among yourselves. Cause we're not going to get
much done talking about moon laws.. haha..

Of whomever has the biggest and best battery of SBLs (aka laser
cannons) is clearly in charge of whatever "moon laws" they'd care to
impose. The best location and energy resource for accommodating those
SBLs is directly related to my LSE-CM/ISS. Terribly sorry about all
that.

What do exactly you have against an efficient and safe Lunar Space
Elevator?

BTW, is there anyone else in this anti-think-tank of usenet naysayland
that likes 75+% of your research and ideas, besides myself?

Just wondering, can you list those of usenet as being constructively
in support of anything Willie.Moo/(William Mook)?
- Brad Guth -

On Oct 10, 4:21 am, wrote:

A $40 billion satellite networkthat provided 50 billion broadband
wireless channels to existing wireless hardware and has a $100 million
recurring cost, would provide basic services to existing providers at
such a cost that they would jump onto the systemd so fast. And you
could also steal some customers from those providers with slight
reduction in costs and improvements in service. And you could bring
more customers into service at today's prices or slightly below todays
prices. All this would gen up $35 billion a year and consume
something like 2 billion of your channels.

Now, you're in a position to win a price war and expand your income
to about $120 billion per year - and increase participation in the
market to about twice as many subscribers as you had in the market
before the system was created.

I agree, so when is William Mook, Warren Buffett and myself going to
accomplish this worthy task that's worth "$120 billion per year"?
- Brad Guth -

On Oct 19, 2:07 am, BradGuth wrote:
On Oct 18, 7:37 am, wrote:

On Oct 18, 10:04 am, BradGuth wrote:

Still think I'm wrong about these Usenet spooks, moles and semitic
brown-nosed rusemasters, as doing their usual anti-think-tank best at
snookering the likes of yourself?

Facts confuse them. They are at best clones of a lesser God.

There are many lesser Gods, whereas a Zion/Yiddish God is apparently
all-knowing and No.1 enforcer on behalf of protecting all Yids,
especiually on behalf of protecting those pesky bad Yids.

The rest of your SIG/STC group interactive thing seems interesting.
Is there a STC/SIG forum?
- Brad Guth -

There are actually International competitions you don't have to be
a member to participate:

http://www.stc.org/comp/internationalCompetitions01.asp

In addition to these communication and technical competitions,
there are STC Chapters that hold competitions for online
communications. There are about 20 or so chapters for contacting
a regional chapter. Some of the competitions in each one of these
regions have downloadable applications for the competition,
as well as blog sites regarding the rules & ideas in the competition.
A few of these competitions charge fees for non-members.

Some of the sites discuss things like job opportunities, defense
contracts, writing for the web, usability, policies and procedures,
etc:

STC Chapter Policies and Procedures:

http://www.stcatlanta.org/pdfs/STC%2...Procedures.pdf

The Quick Web for Technical Documentation, which can be
accessed he

http://www.stc.org/intercom/PDFs/200...0910_16-19.pdf

Info on entering an STC Public Relations Competition:

http://www.stc.org/intercom/PDFs/200...32contacts.pdf

Info for entering the trans-European Technical Communication
Competition: http://www.stc-europe.org/index.asp

Or how about a technical writer for XML in Paris, France:

http://www.stcfrance.org/node/3427

It seems that if you can get into one of these chapters as a
volunteer, then you might recieve a free membership to the STC
as a bonus, otherwise it usually costs around $90 to join. Some of
the dues and tier information:

http://www.stc.org/membership/duesTiersInfo.asp

Thanks for asking!

Ralph Linsey

On Oct 16, 6:24 am, Eivind Kjorstad wrote:
skreiv:





an automated system delivered over the internet that offered the
basics described above - using automated systems, operating off world
imagine that wireless broadband is available across the Earth
as already described.
imagine that through this broadband a plethora of financial services
are rendered.
Also, over time there develops a significant telepresence telerobot
capacity that provides employment for many.
imagine that a powersat network delivers power to wherever its needed
on Earth.
add to this an automated package delivery system consisting of a
network of VTOL aircraft powered from space
add to this an automated personal transport system of similar
vehicles.
add to this floating cities that are organized as commercial and
residential centers.

And a pony ! Gotta have ponies ! Powered from space !

Eivind Kjørstad- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Only if the pony's on your boat

see more at

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QmkhskEO4Yw

Lyle Lovett - good song!

The point is, something along these lines will happen in time as
technology advances. Should the United States continue to oppose such
developments in the name of national security, then those who develop
this technology will not hold the US in high regard and that will be
worse for the US than if the US were to lead down this path.

And if small children want to have ponies, why shouldn't we organize
our world to have them? My dad bought me a pony when I was 8 - I
haven't checked pony prices recently but I believe you could buy 10 of
them for about the price of an AK47 rifle in most places. Now
consider that most places in Africa have AK-47s around. Which says
that if Africa, or anyplace valued the dreams of their children more
than dreams of power and avarice, they'd invest in petting zoos
instead of military units - and in a generation or two of that sort of
investment, there would be no need of the AK47s.

On Oct 19, 10:47 am, BradGuth wrote:
On Oct 10, 4:21 am, wrote:



A $40 billion satellite networkthat provided 50 billion broadband
wireless channels to existing wireless hardware and has a $100 million
recurring cost, would provide basic services to existing providers at
such a cost that they would jump onto the systemd so fast. And you
could also steal some customers from those providers with slight
reduction in costs and improvements in service. And you could bring
more customers into service at today's prices or slightly below todays
prices. All this would gen up $35 billion a year and consume
something like 2 billion of your channels.

Now, you're in a position to win a price war and expand your income
to about $120 billion per year - and increase participation in the
market to about twice as many subscribers as you had in the market
before the system was created.

I agree, so when is William Mook, Warren Buffett and myself going to
accomplish this worthy task that's worth "$120 billion per year"?
- Brad Guth -

Well I'm working on some synfuel plants right now. Once that is
underway I will do some acquisitions in the US. I am not seeking
outside investors or participation.

On Oct 19, 9:25 am, wrote:
On Oct 19, 2:07 am, BradGuth wrote:





On Oct 18, 7:37 am, wrote:

On Oct 18, 10:04 am, BradGuth wrote:

Still think I'm wrong about these Usenet spooks, moles and semitic
brown-nosed rusemasters, as doing their usual anti-think-tank best at
snookering the likes of yourself?

Facts confuse them. They are at best clones of a lesser God.

There are many lesser Gods, whereas a Zion/Yiddish God is apparently
all-knowing and No.1 enforcer on behalf of protecting all Yids,
especiually on behalf of protecting those pesky bad Yids.

The rest of your SIG/STC group interactive thing seems interesting.
Is there a STC/SIG forum?
- Brad Guth -

There are actually International competitions you don't have to be
a member to participate:

http://www.stc.org/comp/internationalCompetitions01.asp

In addition to these communication and technical competitions,
there are STC Chapters that hold competitions for online
communications. There are about 20 or so chapters for contacting
a regional chapter. Some of the competitions in each one of these
regions have downloadable applications for the competition,
as well as blog sites regarding the rules & ideas in the competition.
A few of these competitions charge fees for non-members.

Some of the sites discuss things like job opportunities, defense
contracts, writing for the web, usability, policies and procedures,
etc:

STC Chapter Policies and Procedures:

http://www.stcatlanta.org/pdfs/STC%2...%20and%20Proce...

The Quick Web for Technical Documentation, which can be
accessed he

http://www.stc.org/intercom/PDFs/200...0910_16-19.pdf

Info on entering an STC Public Relations Competition:

http://www.stc.org/intercom/PDFs/200...32contacts.pdf

Info for entering the trans-European Technical Communication
Competition:http://www.stc-europe.org/index.asp

Or how about a technical writer for XML in Paris, France:

http://www.stcfrance.org/node/3427

It seems that if you can get into one of these chapters as a
volunteer, then you might recieve a free membership to the STC
as a bonus, otherwise it usually costs around $90 to join. Some of
the dues and tier information:

http://www.stc.org/membership/duesTiersInfo.asp

Thanks for asking!

Ralph Linsey- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

All good information to know about. Thanks much.

Because I'm not one of those all-knowing types, I have technical
questions that'll demand some level of expertise. In other words, I'm
looking for those willing to share and share alike.

Are there any within STC that have good enough physics and direct
science expertise? Or is STC all about the improvement of words on
behalf of communication skills?
- Brad Guth -

On Oct 20, 5:28 am, wrote:
On Oct 19, 10:47 am, BradGuth wrote:





On Oct 10, 4:21 am, wrote:

A $40 billion satellite networkthat provided 50 billion broadband
wireless channels to existing wireless hardware and has a $100 million
recurring cost, would provide basic services to existing providers at
such a cost that they would jump onto the systemd so fast. And you
could also steal some customers from those providers with slight
reduction in costs and improvements in service. And you could bring
more customers into service at today's prices or slightly below todays
prices. All this would gen up $35 billion a year and consume
something like 2 billion of your channels.

Now, you're in a position to win a price war and expand your income
to about $120 billion per year - and increase participation in the
market to about twice as many subscribers as you had in the market
before the system was created.

I agree, so when is William Mook, Warren Buffett and myself going to
accomplish this worthy task that's worth "$120 billion per year"?
- Brad Guth -

Well I'm working on some synfuel plants right now. Once that is
underway I will do some acquisitions in the US. I am not seeking
outside investors or participation.

But synfuels such as h2o2 have been a done deal for better than a
century (H2O2 was discovered in 1818), that is unless there's no
ongoing incentive or honest considerations for the new and improved
ICE that'll safely utilize such an energy rich fluid as h2o2, along
with a little conventional fossil fuel or whatever other synfuel.

All other conventional ICEs that'll burn whatever fuel along with our
mostly N2 atmosphere are going to get relatively poor empg as well as
keep polluting at maximum levels of NOx, plus unavoidably contributing
many other nasty byproducts in their birth-to-grave (aka all
inclusive) cycle. Even utilizing H2+atmosphere is not going to
entirely save our badly failing environment that's going to be
continually getting hotter because of what the basic laws of physics
has to do with any planet having recently obtained such a horrific
mascon of a nearby moon that's orbiting its mostly fluid planet, and
just fast enough as to keeping our inner planetology vary much alive
and geothermally kicking.

It seems the usenet gauntlet of naysayism is well enough polished to
see your self, and this faith-based cultism that's in charge of
keeping those mostly fossil fuels and yellowcake as spendy as
possible, is thereby keeping our environment as polluted and every bit
as lethal as possible, especially as we emerge into WWIII on behalf of
surviving their global energy domination quest.

Of one fairly recent contribution on behalf of the makings and
utilizing of h2o2: "Hydrogen Peroxide and Sugar"
http://www.americanenergyindependence.com/peroxide.html

Besides direct energy applied usage, there's lots of other nifty h2o2
applications that shouldn't go unnoticed:
http://www.h2o2.com/intro/faq.html

I'm not saying that plain old H2 or LH2 would ever be excluded, as
obviously H2, LH2 and LOx are each good to go as is, and should also
be produced along with the energy storage likes of aluminum and
magnesium from whatever's the cache of clean and renewable energy
that's in surplus. However, for the average end-user of liquid fuels
for our Hummers, SUVs and massive other trucks that are typically 10X
more macho than necessary is where the usage of h2o2 becomes one of
the most viable alternatives, especially once all those birth-to-grave
cards are turned face up.

The H2 fuel cell form of energy for personal and light commercial
transportation seems doable, although fairly complex, spendy and still
somewhat birth-to-grave polluting once the all-inclusive factors are
taken fully into account. This doesn't interpret as meaning that we
should not have such H2 fuel cell powered cars and light SUV/trucks.

What we badly need is your greatly improved terrestrial base of solar
derived energy (though also including wind, tidal and geothermal
alternatives) that'll fit into our future needs without imposing too
much land or ocean usage that's otherwise needed as is. Your SBLs are
clearly doable, especially if given a moon tethered platform that'll
reach safely to with 2r of mother Earth, as to safely operate from.
The problem seems that folks like yourself do not actually understand
much of anything about our moon's L1, or much less of what such
tethered configurations have to offer. Would you like to see this one
in a fully interactive 3D simulation, like a spendy Google/NOVA
animation production?
- Brad Guth -