tomcat's Nice Little Sub-Orbital Runabout

Brad Guth wrote:
"tomcat" wrote in message
ups.com

This is very heartening news because at last civilian technology has
reached the proper level for serious and extensive exploration and
exploitation of Outer Space.

Well, at least under the shield benefits of our badly failing
magnetosphere, as otherwise it's mostly up to robotics that'll
accomplish the vast bulk of interplanetary space travel explorations,
and thankfully at not 1% the cost nor much less risking a single strand
of our frail DNA.
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG




Robot probes do make sense and NASA is using them expertly. Especially
the two rovers on Mars, Spirit and Opportunity. It is not, however,
beneficial for all of our exploration into the vast reaches of Outer
Space to be robotic.

Man must venture forth into the bewildering array of meteors,
asteroids, moons, and planets and establish mining operations as well
as habitats. Our DOD has to begin taking control of nearby Outer Space
and that means Space Command Operations in Outer Space.


tomcat

"tomcat" wrote in message
ups.com

Man must venture forth into the bewildering array of meteors,
asteroids, moons, and planets and establish mining operations as well
as habitats. Our DOD has to begin taking control of nearby Outer Space
and that means Space Command Operations in Outer Space.

Don't worry, China and a few others have all of that covered.
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

"tomcat" wrote in message
ps.com

Enough as you've well said about our warm and fuzzy though quite silly
borg. Back to the viable spaceplane or fat waverider inert tonnage.

Each substantial landing gear and/or accommodation per crew/passenger
seating is I believe worth roughly an all inclusive metric tonne per
item.

By way of cutting out whatever inert mass of such potentially occupied
spare seats and/or of those spare landing gears that are only necessary
if planning upon managing the entire GLOW fiasco, as it rather
inefficiently roles off for miles upon miles upon that rather spendy
tarmac, is an absolute win-win for otherwise getting the most payload
bang at the least possible cost into LEO/ISS orbit.

However, if whatever payload space or deployed tonnage isn't an honest
factor, then so what's the difference?
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

"Brad Guth" wrote in message
news:57606c99f0599b5a52542ec3bbc9aab8.49644@mygate .mailgate.org

The Venusian Composite Rigid Airship; so what's the big insurmountable
deal?

Why the hell not invest R&D into creating a composite rigid airship
(Skylon or fat waverider spaceplane), on behalf of our doing Venus?

It's not even all that hocus-pocus or having to involve the pesky likes
of all those NASA/Apollo smoke and mirrors, instead it's simply doable
within the regular laws of physics as is. The actual rigid airship as a
Venusian atmospheric probe that'll function rather nicely below their
nighttime season of clouds needn't be manned, and therefore needn't be
all that large.

Unlike most other planets, or even moons that we know of, Venus is just
getting itself started at kicking it's own DNA butt, and otherwise Mars
DNA has long been kicked, nicely cosmic zapped and then rather nicely
freeze dried to death.

The composite rigid airship as efficiently operating within the highly
buoyant Venusian environment can at least accommodate intelligent other
life in more viable ways than it's being given credit for. There has
even been good enough pictures of what's been doable by others. Yet lo
and behold, Venus remains as the most nearby and absolute most
accessible taboo/nondisclosure other orb in our solar system, that's
none the less easier and much safer than doing our moon.

Unlike our nearly frozen solid to the very core of that silly old Mars,
that's also representing an environment that's worthy of getting
yourself cosmic TBI and otherwise rather easily pulverised to death
while on that nearly naked surface, whereas on the relatively newish and
evolving planetology of Venus there's hardly any cosmic or nasty forms
of solar energy that's DNA lethal getting through all of that thick soup
of atmosphere, nor is there hardly any need of your having to dig in in
order to find more than your fair share of geothermal or terrific gas
vent issues that can be put directly to the task of extracting renewable
energy on the spot.

The vertical atmospheric thick soup of such nifty pressure and thermal
differential factors alone are clearly by themselves more than
sufficient means to sustain most any mere halfwit intelligent form of
life. That is unless you are one of these warm and fuzzy naysay Usenet
village idiots, in which case absolutely nothing is possible in the
past, present or future, so why bother.

The ongoing devoid or rather ongoing topic/author banishment of such
viable energy related ideas or even honest swags of viable
considerations from this anti-think-tank of our status quo or bust
naysay Usenet land, that's having been really good at their typically
sucking and blowing worth of infomercial crapolla spewing on behalf of
all things government and big-energy, is simply further proof-positive
that such renewable energy while on Venusian deck has been doable.

Venus is in fact a hot place, though actually it's not all that nasty of
an environment. But so what if it's hot, as long as you've got such
access to and having the sufficient smarts on behalf of utilizing the
vast amounts of renewable energy that's already there to behold?

Just because a given planet or moon is a little too hot, too cold or
even too wet for our naked bodies or physiological grasp, doesn't in of
itself mean that it's 100+% taboo. Escaping the lethal forms of cosmic
and solar radiation seems by far more of a life essential important
issue, and secondly avoiding whatever's physically incoming seems like
yet another win-win for the old gipper, especially if it's having to do
with avoiding getting seriously smacked in the butt by way of something
that has your name on it.

Venus simply couldn't possibly be any more newish, alive and kicking on
the various doors of accommodating other life, especially on behalf of
rather easily accommodating intelligent other life that's merely
visiting, possibly even of a few locally evolved species isn't outside
of this toasty Venusian box. Although, I suppose if there's lots of
cosmic radiated and otherwise meteorite pulverised dry-ice, plus
whatever remains of that sub-frozen regular old Mars ice that's perhaps
near solid to the very icy dead (older than Earth) core of Mars is still
somehow life worthy, then so be it.

These pro-Mars folks should simply impress us, as in knocking our socks
off, if they can. I'm absolutely certain that as of millions of years
ago Mars could have had a touch of life to spare, and back a good
billion some odd years even better odds yet for having sustained sizable
(larger than rad-hard microbe) forms of such other local life
(intelligent being yet to be proven unless merely visiting).

On the other real and honest hands of utilizing those regular laws of
physics, as such there is absolutely nothing that's so insurmountable
about Venus. Thinking otherwise is only the proof-positive as to how
terribly snookered and dumbfounded past the mindset point of no return
you have become.

BTW; if the absolutely bleak realm of that Mars of today has any
remainders of life to behold, then upon our own pesky moon that's still
more than a touch salty is absolutely loaded to the gills, with it's
local and cosmic DNA morgue worth of nifty spores, and you name it.
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

Brad Guth wrote:
"Brad Guth" wrote in message
news:57606c99f0599b5a52542ec3bbc9aab8.49644@mygate .mailgate.org

The Venusian Composite Rigid Airship; so what's the big insurmountable
deal?

Why the hell not invest R&D into creating a composite rigid airship
(Skylon or fat waverider spaceplane), on behalf of our doing Venus?

It's not even all that hocus-pocus or having to involve the pesky likes
of all those NASA/Apollo smoke and mirrors, instead it's simply doable
within the regular laws of physics as is. The actual rigid airship as a
Venusian atmospheric probe that'll function rather nicely below their
nighttime season of clouds needn't be manned, and therefore needn't be
all that large.

Unlike most other planets, or even moons that we know of, Venus is just
getting itself started at kicking it's own DNA butt, and otherwise Mars
DNA has long been kicked, nicely cosmic zapped and then rather nicely
freeze dried to death.

The composite rigid airship as efficiently operating within the highly
buoyant Venusian environment can at least accommodate intelligent other
life in more viable ways than it's being given credit for. There has
even been good enough pictures of what's been doable by others. Yet lo
and behold, Venus remains as the most nearby and absolute most
accessible taboo/nondisclosure other orb in our solar system, that's
none the less easier and much safer than doing our moon.

Unlike our nearly frozen solid to the very core of that silly old Mars,
that's also representing an environment that's worthy of getting
yourself cosmic TBI and otherwise rather easily pulverised to death
while on that nearly naked surface, whereas on the relatively newish and
evolving planetology of Venus there's hardly any cosmic or nasty forms
of solar energy that's DNA lethal getting through all of that thick soup
of atmosphere, nor is there hardly any need of your having to dig in in
order to find more than your fair share of geothermal or terrific gas
vent issues that can be put directly to the task of extracting renewable
energy on the spot.

The vertical atmospheric thick soup of such nifty pressure and thermal
differential factors alone are clearly by themselves more than
sufficient means to sustain most any mere halfwit intelligent form of
life. That is unless you are one of these warm and fuzzy naysay Usenet
village idiots, in which case absolutely nothing is possible in the
past, present or future, so why bother.

The ongoing devoid or rather ongoing topic/author banishment of such
viable energy related ideas or even honest swags of viable
considerations from this anti-think-tank of our status quo or bust
naysay Usenet land, that's having been really good at their typically
sucking and blowing worth of infomercial crapolla spewing on behalf of
all things government and big-energy, is simply further proof-positive
that such renewable energy while on Venusian deck has been doable.

Venus is in fact a hot place, though actually it's not all that nasty of
an environment. But so what if it's hot, as long as you've got such
access to and having the sufficient smarts on behalf of utilizing the
vast amounts of renewable energy that's already there to behold?

Just because a given planet or moon is a little too hot, too cold or
even too wet for our naked bodies or physiological grasp, doesn't in of
itself mean that it's 100+% taboo. Escaping the lethal forms of cosmic
and solar radiation seems by far more of a life essential important
issue, and secondly avoiding whatever's physically incoming seems like
yet another win-win for the old gipper, especially if it's having to do
with avoiding getting seriously smacked in the butt by way of something
that has your name on it.

Venus simply couldn't possibly be any more newish, alive and kicking on
the various doors of accommodating other life, especially on behalf of
rather easily accommodating intelligent other life that's merely
visiting, possibly even of a few locally evolved species isn't outside
of this toasty Venusian box. Although, I suppose if there's lots of
cosmic radiated and otherwise meteorite pulverised dry-ice, plus
whatever remains of that sub-frozen regular old Mars ice that's perhaps
near solid to the very icy dead (older than Earth) core of Mars is still
somehow life worthy, then so be it.

These pro-Mars folks should simply impress us, as in knocking our socks
off, if they can. I'm absolutely certain that as of millions of years
ago Mars could have had a touch of life to spare, and back a good
billion some odd years even better odds yet for having sustained sizable
(larger than rad-hard microbe) forms of such other local life
(intelligent being yet to be proven unless merely visiting).

On the other real and honest hands of utilizing those regular laws of
physics, as such there is absolutely nothing that's so insurmountable
about Venus. Thinking otherwise is only the proof-positive as to how
terribly snookered and dumbfounded past the mindset point of no return
you have become.

BTW; if the absolutely bleak realm of that Mars of today has any
remainders of life to behold, then upon our own pesky moon that's still
more than a touch salty is absolutely loaded to the gills, with it's
local and cosmic DNA morgue worth of nifty spores, and you name it.
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG




Check out Opportunity Rover Sol 1042 Navigation Camera. And, while
your at it, check out Opportunity Rover Sol 1044 Panoramic Camera.
Look for the thumbnail that appears -- in the far distance -- to be a
light colored ledge jutting out from the crater wall.

Close inspection will reveal that it is a . . . house sitting near the
edge of the crater. There are interesting things close to it as well.

Ref: http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/galle...portunity.html

Clearly, in my mind at least, resonable evidence that a civilization
either once existed or does exist on Mars.


tomcat

"tomcat" wrote in message
ups.com

Good grief, you are one of them, arn't you.

Those cameras simply do not detect the sorts of rad-hard microvbes
capable of surviving under such horrific anti-life conditions.

If it used to live on Mars, it has been quite cosmic TBI dead and frozen
soild for perhaps the last 100 million years, if not longer.
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

"tomcat" wrote in message
oups.com

Brad, here's something that's as close to proof as you can imagine that
NASA put a man on the Moon July 20, 1969.

"Shooting the moon
By Bruce Lieberman Sunday, August 13 2006, 05:20 PM"

MEASURING THE MOON

"On July 21, 1969, Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin propped an array of
reflectors in the lunar soil - one of several science experiments they
deployed a day after becoming the first humans to set foot on the moon.

A month later, a small group of astronomers bounced a pulse of laser
light off the reflectors and caught the return signal with a telescope
at Lick Observatory near San Jose, in Northern California. By measuring
the time it took for the pulse traveling at the speed of light to
return, scientists could determine the distance between the Earth and
moon.

And so in the summer of 1969, the era of modern lunar ranging was born.
Today, 37 years later, scientists at University of California San Diego
are firing lasers at the same reflectors. Equipped with 21st century
technology and new techniques, they plan to measure the distance
between the Earth and moon down to an astounding 1 millimeter - the
width of a paper clip."

That only proves something sufficiently reflective (such as the moon
itself if the laser were IR), or perhaps otherwise a vaporised aluminum
or zinc oxide coated impact crater had accomplished the reflective task
(just as it should have).

Besides, Russia supposedly proved that a purely robotic deployed
retroreflector was more than doable, and supposedly those USSR types
were far less than village idiots compared to our 10 fold spendy NASA
wizards, which at the time included all of those Jewish Third Reich
wizards to boot.

tomcat,
I'd noticed how the borgs you continually brown-nose with (namely the
likes of lord all-knowing William Mook) pretty much vaporised your
"Electrogravitics is Reality!" topic. Besides public information that's
somewhat topic related and certainly interesting, was there even one
actual topic constructive soul to be found, other than the usual
space-toilet buttology of naysayers?

It seems these MIB damage control posy types are pretty much all that
you ever encounter, and yet you think you're anywhere in their class of
rusemaster expertise. Sorry, you're not good enough, yet.
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG