|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
says... snip I'm keeping this list for future reference.... Yeah, I sent it to myself for just that reason. You never know when you might want to experiment with alcohol... did we ever hear back about the horrible results of the Tang/vodka experiment? I'm positive I read a progress report on that most important experiment, but for the life of me I can't remember how long ago. Doug |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
OM om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_researc h_facility.org
wrote: ...And I'm cuing Derek in on this one for his comments: The "Kobiashi Maru" scenario they used to give was this: you're stationed on a sub. And like the fictional Kobayashi Maru this one is filled with holes and contradictions in an attempt to force the trainee into giving the right answer without actually training him on how to reach that conclusion. In the ST KM scenario, the pre-ordained answer is 'die gallantly'. In your scenario, it's the Naval line; 'An officer can be wrong, but he cannot be indecisive or hesitant'. The simple fact of the matter is this; You do not launch, *EVER* without positive launch authority, *EVER*. (Such authority can be obtained by means other than a flash message, but that's enough said on that topic.) How we would have reacted as individuals was something rarely discussed, as an incorrect launch was a nightmare scenario, completely contrary to our training and philosphy. How I would have reacted personally is matter between myself and $DIETY. D. -- Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh. |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
OM wrote: ...Which are far more tolerable than his mating habits, natch. Years ago one of the tabloids got a shot of Teddy banging a girl in a speedboat; when shown it, a fellow senator said "Well Teddy, I see you've changed your position on offshore drilling." :-) Pat |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
|
#76
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 14 May 2004 20:14:44 GMT, (Derek
Lyons) wrote: OM om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_researc h_facility.org wrote: ...And I'm cuing Derek in on this one for his comments: The "Kobiashi Maru" scenario they used to give was this: you're stationed on a sub. And like the fictional Kobayashi Maru this one is filled with holes and contradictions in an attempt to force the trainee into giving the right answer without actually training him on how to reach that conclusion. In the ST KM scenario, the pre-ordained answer is 'die gallantly'. In your scenario, it's the Naval line; 'An officer can be wrong, but he cannot be indecisive or hesitant'. ....And that, as we were later made to understand during the final "Captain's Table" course that was always held at 0700 for no reason other than to mess with our senior year partying, was what that particular exam was about. The only thing the unit CO wished could be changed was that each midshipman was given x number of seconds to make the decision, but CNET didn't want to go *that* intensive. Wait until they get to actual service was apparently their idea. The simple fact of the matter is this; You do not launch, *EVER* without positive launch authority, *EVER*. ....Where nukes are concerned, yes. Conventional weapons don't fall under that category, apparently. (Such authority can be obtained by means other than a flash message, but that's enough said on that topic.) ....Agreed. No sense talking about the dolphin/porpoise relay system they developed, as it'll give Rand something else to twist into nonsense :-P How we would have reacted as individuals was something rarely discussed, as an incorrect launch was a nightmare scenario, completely contrary to our training and philosphy. How I would have reacted personally is matter between myself and $DIETY. ....And again, it was only raised during two points in the program: during a second-year course on leadership and following orders, and the "Captain's Table" course, which was, IMHO, both the biggest waste of sleep but the most insightful course I've ever taken. Everything we'd been taught was actually put into place where it all gelled and made sense. Wasn't as fun as Weapons Systems I & II, but it opened my eyes to why we were being taught what we were taught and why it was being taught that way. ....And, just for the record, while I won't say which answer I chose, I will point out that I'd also added a D) option of my own just to screw with the NOI giving the exam: D) Shoot the Captain, take over the sub, and launch the missiles myself so I could take the credit and the glory for having rid the world of the Evil Communist Menace. ....The scary part is that I wasn't the only one who'd made that one up. Apparently at least one or two midshipmen a year would go that route just to mess with the NOIs. OM -- "No ******* ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms poor dumb ******* die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society - General George S. Patton, Jr |
#77
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 14 May 2004 13:58:48 -0500, Pat Flannery
wrote: Although the Zima Citrus (now Zima Lime, or something like that) wasn't too bad....but then there was the horrifying Zima Dark...which was supposed to taste like either whiskey and coke or rum and coke...and actually tasted like acetone and ****; how that stuff ever got past the company's product development team is beyond me. ....Because it *was* acetone and ****. Some Zima marketing goon apparently found a couple of barrels of it in a warehouse, and decided that if he diluted it, he could market it. Hey, can you think of any *other* excuse for that drek? OM -- "No ******* ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms poor dumb ******* die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society - General George S. Patton, Jr |
#78
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 14 May 2004 13:50:25 -0500, Pat Flannery
wrote: A&W or Shasta Cream Soda with vodka...not bad at all. ....First off, A&W should only be drunk if it comes from the tap. A&W in can is fatal if consumed, and from the plastic bottle it can cause blindness. ....As for Shasta, we used to get that down here, but since Sam's went their own cola route we get theirs. It's not bad, but doesn't mix well with any sort of alcohol. ....And then there's Frostie. It's being sold again for about a buck a bottle now, but they also went the corn syrup route. It's not worth it. And then of course there was the Brandy Alexander Imperials: Remy Martin Cognac, Dom Perignon Champagne, Hagen-Daz ice cream with grated Godiva chocolate on it, topped by a macadamia nut. Very good....and very expensive. ....Oh great, someone else who likes that "gee, let's mix our lousy champange with a fruit punch and see if anyone bites when we claim it's the next 'in' thing!" crap that Remy's putting out these days. Between that and HQ, nobody better complain about my mixtures again. ....As for Godiva, the white choc liquore is pretty good, but a bit more expensive than I'm willing to dish out these days. $50 a bottle is too much for someone who has to drink 2-3 times more than most to stay buzzed due to his ability to process alcohol faster than most. OM -- "No ******* ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms poor dumb ******* die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society - General George S. Patton, Jr |
#79
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 14 May 2004 13:01:36 -0500, Pat Flannery
wrote: What's fascinating about the way the Book of Leviticus is written is that rather than just listing what you can and cannot eat, it tries to use a form of logic for what's mentioned, and some underlying reason for why it's unclean. The idea seems to be devise a set of rules that allow you to determine the cleanliness of a creature that you have never encountered before, based on its habits and attributes. So say a Great Fish vomits you out Jonah-style on the shore of Peru, and you are hungry...and there's a lama standing there..you can have a gander at it's feet and feeding habits to determine if you should eat it. Now if you were somehow transported to Tibet, and there was a Llama standing there, and his feet were not cloven, nor did he chew the cud....but he had legs above his feet for jumping, like a locust... ....So, when the Israeli Space Program finally makes a landing on the 8th planet of Beta Centauri, I assume Leviticus will be incorporated into the Flight Operations Manual for EVA procedures? :-) OM -- "No ******* ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms poor dumb ******* die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society - General George S. Patton, Jr |
#80
|
|||
|
|||
OM om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_researc h_facility.org
wrote: ...Because it *was* acetone and ****. Some Zima marketing goon apparently found a couple of barrels of it in a warehouse, and decided that if he diluted it, he could market it. My sister tells an interesting tale of Zima; In a weak moment, she bought a bottle to give it a try. Finding it wanting, she decided that since it was (supposedly) a malt beverage, she'd put it in saucers in her garden as she did with beer to attract slugs. She discovered Budweiser does attract slugs, but that Zima did not. The conclusion is left as an exercise for the student. D. -- Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The Apollo Hoax FAQ (is not spam) :-) | Nathan Jones | Misc | 6 | July 29th 04 06:14 AM |
Apollo | Buzz alDredge | Misc | 5 | July 28th 04 10:05 AM |
Apollo | Buzz alDredge | UK Astronomy | 5 | July 28th 04 10:05 AM |
The Apollo Hoax FAQ | darla | Misc | 10 | July 25th 04 02:57 PM |
The Apollo Hoax FAQ | darla | UK Astronomy | 11 | July 25th 04 02:57 PM |