A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

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

gratitude etc. (was Apollo: One gas environment?)



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old May 13th 04, 10:53 PM
Mary Shafer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 13 May 2004 13:37:29 -0500, Pat Flannery
wrote:

....and the worst is "The Skunk"; an unpleasant smell that most Canadian
beer seems to develop if it's not consumed fairly quickly after it's
bottled.


That's not Canadian, that's chemical. All bottled beers can do it.
Just put them in the sunlight for a while. Even brown glass bottles
won't prevent it entirely, although they'll reduce it.

Mary

--
Mary Shafer Retired aerospace research engineer

  #32  
Old May 13th 04, 11:18 PM
OM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 13 May 2004 20:25:54 GMT, Doug...
wrote:

I have to say that, from a dietary standpoint, I am quite glad I've
never been in a position to have to try and keep kosher. (I was going
to say "I'm glad I'm not Jewish," but I have eaten and enjoyed quite a
few traditional Jewish foods. I just like a lot of things that kosher
rules prohibit.)


....Keep in mind, tho, that about 90% of the kosher regs came about in
an attempt to curtail food poisoning and other maladies associated
with improper food preparation. The primary motivation for the banning
of the consumption of pork products stemmed from the fact that if you
don't cook pork correctly, back then you pretty much guaranteed
yourself a case of parasitical trichinosis, if not botulism or other
diseases associated with eating swine and/or poultry products that
weren't cleaned properly before and during prep & cooking. The
additional fact that in a desert condition cleaning water is far less
important than drinking water, and therefore far less available, is an
additional factor.

....Nowadays, with today's modern technology and enhanced sanitation
procedures, most if not all of the kosher laws could easily be
discarded. The primary reason they aren't is, and always will be,
because God/Yahweh/Jehovah said "don't eat that!", and never really
sat down and explained why and when the ban should be lifted. Of
course, the good side is that as long as kosher is being followed by
the majority of practicing Jews, Coca-Cola will still be forced to
keep making their product available manufactured with real pure-cane
sugar instead of the wretched corn syrup. On the bad side, if
God/Yahweh/Jehovah/Roddenberry had any real compassion, he'd restore
that third stone tablet that Moses clumsily dropped on the way down
Mount Sinai and make sure that one of the Lost Commandments said "Thou
Shalt Not Use Corn Syrup To Produce Carbonated Soft Drinks!"

"The 13th Circle of Hell: Eternal Unresting Spot for Anti-NASA
politicians, hippies and scumbags, IRS workers, and those responsible
for the New Coke/Corn Syrup scam."

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
  #33  
Old May 14th 04, 12:26 AM
Doug...
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy... _facility.org says...
On Thu, 13 May 2004 20:25:54 GMT, Doug...
wrote:

I have to say that, from a dietary standpoint, I am quite glad I've
never been in a position to have to try and keep kosher. (I was going
to say "I'm glad I'm not Jewish," but I have eaten and enjoyed quite a
few traditional Jewish foods. I just like a lot of things that kosher
rules prohibit.)


...Keep in mind, tho, that about 90% of the kosher regs came about in
an attempt to curtail food poisoning and other maladies associated
with improper food preparation. The primary motivation for the banning
of the consumption of pork products stemmed from the fact that if you
don't cook pork correctly, back then you pretty much guaranteed
yourself a case of parasitical trichinosis, if not botulism or other
diseases associated with eating swine and/or poultry products that
weren't cleaned properly before and during prep & cooking. The
additional fact that in a desert condition cleaning water is far less
important than drinking water, and therefore far less available, is an
additional factor.


Oh, yeah -- no question. Now, that's not to say that Judaic scholars
over the past 4,000 years or so haven't spent ages and ages coming up
with complex and subtle spiritual justifications for the kosher laws.
But, to my reading of some of it, that's all they are -- justifications.
The real reason was, indeed, to prevent the kinds of "maladies" that
befell other middle eastern tribes of the time. (A really nasty mold or
outbreak of trichinosis could literally decimate a tribe... and the
kosher laws were one reason why the Jews tended to outlast a lot of
their contemporaries.)

I will point out, though, that many of the other Arabic tribes of the
time adopted similar (if not so complex) rules, especially in regards
the eating of pigs. Recall that pigs are very close to humans
genetically, so more of the diseases that thrive in pigs can also infect
people. It's only with a relatively modern understanding of the kinds
of foodborne illnesses that can be spread via pigs, poultry and seafood
can we eat such things in relative safety. And not courting some of the
epidemics we've witnessed in history.

...On the bad side, if
God/Yahweh/Jehovah/Roddenberry had any real compassion, he'd restore
that third stone tablet that Moses clumsily dropped on the way down
Mount Sinai and make sure that one of the Lost Commandments said "Thou
Shalt Not Use Corn Syrup To Produce Carbonated Soft Drinks!"


From your mouth to God's ear!

Doug

  #34  
Old May 14th 04, 12:34 AM
Doug...
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy... _facility.org says...
On Thu, 13 May 2004 20:00:53 GMT, Doug...
wrote:

I *know* that anyone who graduates from an American service academy has
been well-trained in what constitutes an illegal order, and how to
respond if you are given an illegal order by your superiors. I also
know that recruits and draftees *used to* get a lecture on the subject
as part of their classroom studies (at least they did 30 years ago). Is
there anyone out there reading this ng who has gone through basic
training recently and can tell us if they still train the grunts on what
an illegal order is and what you should do if you receive one?


...Funny you should bring this up. One of the managers at one of the
GC's I do websites for is in the ANG, and he pointed out that the
"Illegal Order Lecture" is now basically a 20-minute lecture on what
happens when you think an illegal order has been given, and what to do
about it if you feel it shouldn't be followed. Most grunts apparently
are told something along the lines of 'so long as you're not murdering
anyone in cold blood, or you're not running some fissionable
contraband past customs, or doing something that's outright treason,
use your best judgement as what you think might be illegal may either
be "legal" or "not illegal enough to worry about", and there goes your
balls and your career.

...This is *FAR* different from what we were taught in NROTC 20 years
ago. You do NOT follow an illegal order given by a superior officer,
and you do anything shy of mutiny to prevent from having to carry out
that order. On the other hand, trying to stop that order from being
prevented by anything more than passive resistance was something the
NOIs and MOIs discouraged *unless* it was obvious as hell that
carrying out the illegal order was going to get everyone killed for
the wrong reasons and/or was going to result in our side losing a
battle or even the war. The key in all this was the fact that there
are things going on in the upper levels of command that aren't
filtered down to the lower ranks - the old "need to know basis"
excuse. Most times that system works without a hitch, but when it's
used to manipulate troops and events for the wrong reasons, that's
when things fall apart and people get killed or worse.

...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.
Your captain has somehow gotten confirmation that the Soviets are
going to launch a sneak attack on the US within the hour. For [fill in
the blank with any reason you want(*)] you can't contact CINCUSNAVEUR,
the Pentagon, the White House, or even Domino's Pizza for delivery of
warning. The captain has decided to launch his own deterrent attack on
Moscow in hopes of stopping their launching and/or disrupting their
lines of communications long enough to allow the US to either launch
their own preemptive strike or at least attempt to give the Soviets
the chance to change their minds before the worst really does happen..
The question here is this: Since the captain hasn't gotten release of
his weapons, and is therefore committing an illegal act of war, do
you:

A) Follow his orders, turn the keys, and make sure everyone has their
stories straight for the UCMJ hearing;

B) Stand down and relieve yourself of duty on the fact that the
captain's lacking official weapons release from either the President
or from another officially authorized decision maker within the chain
of command;

C) Mutiny and/or otherwise take direct action to keep the missiles
from being launched until/unless official release is received

...The NOI who taught that course wouldn't reveal which answer got the
most responses, but everyone pretty much guessed at the time that A)
was pretty much it. Some guys admitted that B) was what they'd chosen,
but that it also depended on who the enemy was and how the captain had
gotten the information. One guy got honorable mention for ignoring C)
and using a coin toss to choose A) or B), because he figured that
honestly was the only way that God/Yahweh/Roddenberry was going to
have any say in which way he should go that was tangible and
believable.


Now, see -- when you're talking about the potential start of The War
That Really Will End All Wars 'Cause No One Will Be Left Alive, if you
don't have release authority AND you are but one of a dozen boomers on
patrol (another of which HAS to be able to get release authority in
time), I would opt for C) and kiss my balls AND my career good-bye if I
was wrong. Because launching those sumbitches without ABSOLUTE
CERTAINTY that some are already being launched towards me and mine (or
are DEFINITELY being launched shortly) means ain't nobody gonna be
worried about careers from that point on...

Doug

  #35  
Old May 14th 04, 12:55 AM
Christopher M. Jones
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Ami Silberman" wrote in message ...
The Geneva conventions, the FM on the Law of Land Warfare, and a number of
Army Regulations make it abundantly clear that those things are not
acceptable. There was a failure to properly educate the soldiers involved in
the correct and legal procedures.


Wrong. Some of those accused *claim* they were improperly
educated but that is almost certainly not the case. Every
soldier in the US gets taught the fundamentals of the
Geneva Conventions very early in basic training. Ignorance
cannot possibly be an excuse here, they knowingly did wrong.
  #36  
Old May 14th 04, 01:18 AM
OM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 13 May 2004 20:00:53 GMT, Doug...
wrote:

I *know* that anyone who graduates from an American service academy has
been well-trained in what constitutes an illegal order, and how to
respond if you are given an illegal order by your superiors. I also
know that recruits and draftees *used to* get a lecture on the subject
as part of their classroom studies (at least they did 30 years ago). Is
there anyone out there reading this ng who has gone through basic
training recently and can tell us if they still train the grunts on what
an illegal order is and what you should do if you receive one?


....Funny you should bring this up. One of the managers at one of the
GC's I do websites for is in the ANG, and he pointed out that the
"Illegal Order Lecture" is now basically a 20-minute lecture on what
happens when you think an illegal order has been given, and what to do
about it if you feel it shouldn't be followed. Most grunts apparently
are told something along the lines of 'so long as you're not murdering
anyone in cold blood, or you're not running some fissionable
contraband past customs, or doing something that's outright treason,
use your best judgement as what you think might be illegal may either
be "legal" or "not illegal enough to worry about", and there goes your
balls and your career.

....This is *FAR* different from what we were taught in NROTC 20 years
ago. You do NOT follow an illegal order given by a superior officer,
and you do anything shy of mutiny to prevent from having to carry out
that order. On the other hand, trying to stop that order from being
prevented by anything more than passive resistance was something the
NOIs and MOIs discouraged *unless* it was obvious as hell that
carrying out the illegal order was going to get everyone killed for
the wrong reasons and/or was going to result in our side losing a
battle or even the war. The key in all this was the fact that there
are things going on in the upper levels of command that aren't
filtered down to the lower ranks - the old "need to know basis"
excuse. Most times that system works without a hitch, but when it's
used to manipulate troops and events for the wrong reasons, that's
when things fall apart and people get killed or worse.

....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.
Your captain has somehow gotten confirmation that the Soviets are
going to launch a sneak attack on the US within the hour. For [fill in
the blank with any reason you want(*)] you can't contact CINCUSNAVEUR,
the Pentagon, the White House, or even Domino's Pizza for delivery of
warning. The captain has decided to launch his own deterrent attack on
Moscow in hopes of stopping their launching and/or disrupting their
lines of communications long enough to allow the US to either launch
their own preemptive strike or at least attempt to give the Soviets
the chance to change their minds before the worst really does happen..
The question here is this: Since the captain hasn't gotten release of
his weapons, and is therefore committing an illegal act of war, do
you:

A) Follow his orders, turn the keys, and make sure everyone has their
stories straight for the UCMJ hearing;

B) Stand down and relieve yourself of duty on the fact that the
captain's lacking official weapons release from either the President
or from another officially authorized decision maker within the chain
of command;

C) Mutiny and/or otherwise take direct action to keep the missiles
from being launched until/unless official release is received

....The NOI who taught that course wouldn't reveal which answer got the
most responses, but everyone pretty much guessed at the time that A)
was pretty much it. Some guys admitted that B) was what they'd chosen,
but that it also depended on who the enemy was and how the captain had
gotten the information. One guy got honorable mention for ignoring C)
and using a coin toss to choose A) or B), because he figured that
honestly was the only way that God/Yahweh/Roddenberry was going to
have any say in which way he should go that was tangible and
believable.

....Beady, your son's ANG, right? Can you call him and see what he's
got to say from his experience?

(*) And we got extra credit for coming up with really good reasons,
too. Mine was that the sub was being chased and had disguised itself
by moving into the middle of a pack of whales singing mating songs.
The problem was that if they attempted to raise the antenna buoy
they'd get detected, and those "secret extreme LF radios" that worked
underwater were being disrupted by harmonics from the whales' pickup
lines, so there simply wasn't any way to contact Washington.

....That one worked fine until I went on about how the Flying Sub was
in the shop getting overhauled, and the 2nd Lt NOI took off an EC
point because he *hated* "Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea" with a
passion. For his going away cake the next semester, we found an old
Aurora "Seaview" kit and had it imbedded on top of the cake, which had
been decorated like a beach by the ocean, with the sub upside down
like a beached whale. Despite his lack of taste, he was one hell of an
instructor!

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
  #37  
Old May 14th 04, 01:25 AM
Neil Gerace
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Scott Hedrick" wrote in message
...
I recall reading a science fiction story- the details of which, like the
name, I can't remember now- in which the "loyal opposition" was created by
the authoritiarian regime to give the illusion of dissent. The

"opposition"
didn't even know it was a puppet.


Interesting Times by Terry Pratchett?


  #38  
Old May 14th 04, 01:41 AM
Doug...
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy... _facility.org says...
On Thu, 13 May 2004 23:34:33 GMT, Doug...
wrote:

I would opt for C) and kiss my balls AND my career good-bye


...Especially if you can't learn to trim your quotes, you git :-P :-P


You know I almost always trim my quotes... I just figured that there may
be people who have you killfiled(*) who might like to have seen your
excellent recap of illegal orders.

At least, that's my story and I'm sticking to it...

*Of course, everyone on this ng who's politically somewhere to the right
of Attila the Hun, which seems to be a damn large number these days,
probably has *me* killfiled now, too, for being a dirty ****ing nig...
er, liberal -- but that's just fine with me.

Doug

  #39  
Old May 14th 04, 01:42 AM
OM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 13 May 2004 14:44:24 -0500, Doug...
wrote:

Light beer is arrived at by using less sugars and grains in the brewing
process, IIRC, thereby reducing the overall calories.


....My father was given a prescription for lite beer when Miller
introduced it in the early 70's when he made it clear to his doctor at
the time that there was no way in hell he'd ever give up beer. The
same quack tried to pull the same **** on me when neutrasweet came out
and Coke started using it. The instant 3-hour "vicodin? HAH!" migrane
I suffered after two sips was part of the study that showed the FDA
that, yes Virginia, there *are* people with massive neutrasweet
intolerance. At that point, I made it clear that the only time I'll
ever try another sugar substitute is when they finally find a way to
mass produce L-Sugar as cheap as the real stuff. I've had a spoonful
of that, and there was AbZero taste difference between L-Sugar and
R-Sugar.

However, I believe that beer in the U.S. has a standard alcohol content that all
brands are supposed to match. If a beer doesn't have that specific
alcohol content (something like 6%, or 12 proof), it is marked as such;
for example, in many states they have what's called "3.2 beer" that has
a 3.2% alcohol content. In Minnesota, for a long time, you could serve
3.2 beer without getting a full liquor license.


....Correct. In fact, although I'm not sure if it's still available,
there used to be a 1.6 beer that was sold in the commissaries and
ship's stores on some of the larger US Navy vessels, and was legal to
keep your own supply in your personal gear provided the captain hadn't
issued a no-booze order on his ship. However, drinking beer that weak
doesn't give you enough of a buzz to make it worth your while. All it
does is lower the blood pressure a notch, but not enough to really
matter, IMHO.

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
  #40  
Old May 14th 04, 01:42 AM
OM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 13 May 2004 14:57:46 -0500, Doug...
wrote:

Yeah, there are a lot of very good small and microbreweries in the U.S.
That may be one reason why there are no large beer brands that feature
really good beers; the high-end beer market is served by the small and
microbreweries, while the big guys (like Anheuser Busch and Miller
Brewing) make their money off the high-volume sales of the weak-ass crap
that Americans like to drink.


....Guys, keep in mind that the sole reason US mainstream beer is
weaker than the rest of the world's brew supply has to do with federal
and state alcohol regulations that keep mass-consumption beer at their
currently FNW alcohol levels. Above a certain level they're required
to be sold in liquor stores under a more controlled environment, and
taxed differently. If beer had twice the alcohol it currently does, it
wouldn't be sold at the supermarket, and would probably cost three
times what it does now.

....Which is why I gave up on beer in 1985 for good, and have had,
IIRC, only three oil cans of Foster's ever since. If I want to drink,
I currently drink only the following:

* Dr. McGillicuddy's Vanilla Schnappes. Mixed one shot with a 12-oz
Coke or Dr. Pepper, it becomes an ice cream float with a kick. Add in
real ice cream and the effect is even more McStaggering!

* Blueberry Schnappes and Mountain Dew. 100ml BS in 400ml of MD
produces the type of shoe dispersal kick that the original Mountain
Dew commericals in 1967 promised but never delivered. I'm serious on
this one, kids. Try it.

* Blue Creme Nehi and Monopolya Austrian Vodka. This is how you
synthesize Romulan Ale, kids. A word of warning, tho: this will turn
your turds blue if you drink more than three or four 500ml mixtures of
this. I'm serious on this one too.

* Johnny Walker Blue, chilled. Expensive as hell - $30/shot last I had
it - but worth it for special occasions. Caveat: once you drink this,
you will never be able to stomach JW Red, Black or Gold again. Ever.

* Pepto-Bismoll. This is a drink I invented that someone claims is
also called a B-52. Bailey's, Butterscotch Schnappes, and Creme De
Almond, all in equal amounts. Looks just like Pepto, and actually does
coat, sooth and relieve. Came about when I was trying to mix a Buttery
Nipple, and was too busy explaining to two gals why they were wrong
about how mating with guys who are losers with no jobs and no futures
is a good thing.

* Radar's Aphrodesiac (AKA Korean Fly). Grape Nehi or any other grape
soda, mixed with Purple Pucker grape schnappes. Caveat: If you burp,
don't burp through your nose, because this *will* burn your mucous
membranes.

* Pina Colostomy. Pina Colada Mix, Malibu coconut rum. Dr.
McGillicuddy's Vanilla Schnappes, Vanilla Ice Cream. Make a shake, but
don't ever try making a malt with this concoction. Caveat: I have
experienced, and known others who've suffered, if you mix this with
low-fat ice cream or some other ice cream substitute, a bad case of
the runs the next morning.

* TGI Enema. Same as a Pina Colostomy, but you replace the PC Mix with
a bottle of that Dreamsickle mix that TGI Friday's sells. Same effect
can be seen under same conditions, and serves as a lesson that if
you're going to eat ice cream, don't try and cheat with the low-fat
crap. Just bite the bullet and use the *real* stuff.

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
 




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 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


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:07 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.