Ares I - Launch Vehicles for Creationists

Pat Flannery wrote:


kT wrote:

In addition to that, he doesn't judge scientific projects. He
appoints other people (e.g., Mike Griffin) to do that for him.

George is the deciderizer. He gave the VSE speech. It's his problem.

Here's The Great Decider at work:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9ff2...eature=related

Pat
Gee Pat I don't know. That video looks like it might be doctored to me.

Leo

Leopold Stotch wrote:

Here's The Great Decider at work:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9ff2...eature=related

Pat
Gee Pat I don't know. That video looks like it might be doctored to me.

It would be interesting to know how that was done; it was some pretty
fancy work on someone's part.
Meanwhile, back on the campaign trail, Hillery _almost_ cried
today...but she didn't really cry, because that would play right into
the hands of those evil sexist men who want to show that women are weak,
and that will never happen while she's around, I'll have you know.
Later, evil sexist men (ESM's) heckled her with demands that she should
iron their shirts...but even under terrible insults like that, she
remained under control, and unbroken.
You go girl! You go!
You wear _both_ those diamonds and pearls! Don't let evil sexist gay
fashion police men (ESGFPM's) tell you the two would clash!
And wear briefs and _boxers_ too!
With the pee-pee slot in the front...you're a liberated woman, and you
can use a urinal as well as the guys.
No, you aren't supposed to sit on it, like a bidet. Don't let the ESM
see you do that, or it's all over.
You just take that little pink deodorant cake thing right out of that
urinal, and you replace it with a campaign button!
That'll show them! :-D

Pat

"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
...
You go girl! You go!

Yes, please, as far away as possible.

You just take that little pink deodorant cake thing right out of that
urinal, and you replace it with a campaign button!

"Say NO to hungs, *BILL*"

On Jan 7, 12:35*pm, (Rand Simberg)
wrote:
On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 09:22:21 -0800 (PST), in a place far, far away,
Eric Chomko made the phosphor on my monitor
glow in such a way as to indicate that:





On Jan 7, 9:32*am, kT wrote:
Rand Simberg wrote:
On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 04:21:26 -0600, in a place far, far away, Pat
Flannery made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:

Leopold Stotch wrote:
I am aware that Bush considers himself to be a Christian but have not
heard him say that he is a creationist. *The two are not synonymous
and given that I believe that he attends a Methodist church there is a
good chance that he is not a creationist. *Of course, I might be wrong.
Actually, he described himself as a "Reborn" Christian...which left
everyone wondering how he could tell lies constantly, start wars, *and
have people tortured, while somehow supporting "The Prince Of Peace" and
the concept of "turn the other cheek".

It only leaves loons who believe that wondering such nonsense.

I can parse that, I think. Ok. I can't parse it. I tried, though.

Rand claims to be a "recovering" engineer from the aerospace industry.
The key word being 'recovering'. Perhaps not being fully recovered has
him produce sentences that are unable to be parsed? It would explain a
lot more about his behavior as well.

My sentences are quite capable of being parsed, by non-idiots and
non-trolls.

I used to think of you as an idiot-savant but lately there exists no
evidence of the latter.

On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 05:35:58PM +0000, Rand Simberg wrote:
On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 09:22:21 -0800 (PST), in a place far, far away,
Eric Chomko made the phosphor on my monitor
glow in such a way as to indicate that:

On Jan 7, 9:32*am, kT wrote:
Rand Simberg wrote:
On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 04:21:26 -0600, in a place far, far away, Pat
Flannery made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:

Leopold Stotch wrote:
I am aware that Bush considers himself to be a Christian but have not
heard him say that he is a creationist. *The two are not synonymous
and given that I believe that he attends a Methodist church there is a
good chance that he is not a creationist. *Of course, I might be wrong.
Actually, he described himself as a "Reborn" Christian...which left
everyone wondering how he could tell lies constantly, start wars, *and
have people tortured, while somehow supporting "The Prince Of Peace" and
the concept of "turn the other cheek".

It only leaves loons who believe that wondering such nonsense.

I can parse that, I think. Ok. I can't parse it. I tried, though.

Rand claims to be a "recovering" engineer from the aerospace industry.
The key word being 'recovering'. Perhaps not being fully recovered has
him produce sentences that are unable to be parsed? It would explain a
lot more about his behavior as well.

My sentences are quite capable of being parsed, by non-idiots and
non-trolls.

You omitted the fine-print. There simply must be a caveat in there
somewhere specifying the requirement of lost cognitive integrity, if that
sentence is to be 'understood'.


Regards,

Steve

--
On average, subtlty in the contemporary use of the English language more
often resembles a brick to the head than the caress of a feather.

Eric Chomko wrote:
On Jan 7, 1:18 pm, kT wrote:
Eric Chomko wrote:
On Jan 7, 9:32 am, kT wrote:
Rand Simberg wrote:
On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 04:21:26 -0600, in a place far, far away, Pat
Flannery made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:
Leopold Stotch wrote:
I am aware that Bush considers himself to be a Christian but have not
heard him say that he is a creationist. The two are not synonymous
and given that I believe that he attends a Methodist church there is a
good chance that he is not a creationist. Of course, I might be wrong.
Actually, he described himself as a "Reborn" Christian...which left
everyone wondering how he could tell lies constantly, start wars, and
have people tortured, while somehow supporting "The Prince Of Peace" and
the concept of "turn the other cheek".
It only leaves loons who believe that wondering such nonsense.
I can parse that, I think. Ok. I can't parse it. I tried, though.
Rand claims to be a "recovering" engineer from the aerospace industry.
The key word being 'recovering'. Perhaps not being fully recovered has
him produce sentences that are unable to be parsed? It would explain a
lot more about his behavior as well.
Usually my quantum neuralizer is able to grok those things, but this one
is one of the more challenging examples of ungrokkable grammar errors.

Most of these things are the result of fast look ahead speed reading and
typing, so we really can't blame him for that. We all do it regularly.
How much time do we want to invest in usenet nuts with nothing to offer.

In fact, a really bad grammar error like that crept into the very first
paragraph of my COTS proposal, do you know how embarrassing that is?

It's usually not poor grammar, although many of my sentences are long
and technical, it's more just typing errors - mixed up prepositions
because of the look ahead speed reading and typing, which the spell
checker doesn't catch, and you can read over many times before catching
because of the same phenomena. One can usually grok an incorrect
sentence. The previous sentence itself is a good example of it.

Rand's sentence meaning is fairly ambiguous; one might grok it
incorrectly. Although with Rand, his intent if almost always obvious.

Yes, I write documents all the time and poor grammar is embarrassing.

I was so rushed to get that thing into the Fed-Ex at the last minute,
that I missed it. That alone is enough to disqualify me, for sure.

Not necessarily. I good idea put forth badly does not make the idea a
bad idea.

I think it was 'the' instead of 'of'.

Or maybe it was 'the' instead of 'to'. Anyways, I fixed it. I just last
night found another double 'the'. I just can't afford a proofreader.

Ian Parker wrote:
On 7 Jan, 18:21, kT wrote:
Ian Parker wrote:
On 7 Jan, 15:34, kT wrote:
Fred J. McCall wrote:
Ian Parker wrote:
:
:There is delegation and delegation. Who do you ask? To take a simple
:example none of the people who made the Iraq decision spoke Arabic -
:
Probably true.
:
r indeed knew anything about the Middle East.
:
Almost certainly false, and stupidly so into the bargain.
:
:A manned lunar base and a manned expedition to Mars involve big bucks.
:It is some $60bn even if you can produce methane from CO2 and
:hydrogen.
:
Pretty much the same price tag even if you can't, too.
:
:Mind this technology would come in handy on Earth too.
:Suppose we burn coal and sequester the CO2. Suppose too that we cover
:the South West with photovoltaic panels.
:
Suppose we don't. If you want to junk up someone's home, junk up your
own.
:
:The latest technology will
:recover its cost in about a year in a sunny environment.
:
Apparently nobody with sense and money believes that or they'd be
building facilities.
:
:Suppose too
:that we obtain hydrogen by electrolysing water. The ability to produce
:methane will be pretty handy.
:
Why? It makes more sense to just skip the 'making methane' stage and
go to a hydrogen economy at that point.
:
:One word about timescales and technology. Technology in the year 2121
:is irrelevant since we are not comparing it with anything. 2020 and
:2031 are relevant dates as they refer (perhaps optimistically) to a
:manned lunar base and a manned expedition to Mars.
:
But since you can't know the answer to "what's technology A look like
20 years out", why does it make any difference what year you pick? If
you're always betting your billions on future technology you never get
anything done.
:
:To my way of thinking if you are making a $60bn+ decision you should
:be consulting experts in all fields, not just heavy rocketry. I
:believe myself that the whole strategy of heavy rockets, heavy
:indivisible loads and an emphasis on manned space flight is
:fundamentally flawed.
:
Yes, but what you believe is irrelevant, since you have no experience
or knowledge about making multi-billion dollar decisions, managing
multi-billion dollar programs, rocketry (either heavy or light), space
flight (either manned or unmanned), or much of anything else anyone
has been able to discern.
The only place we've seen you demonstrate any sort of skill at all is
in being fundamentally flawed.
Your fundamental flaw :
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/-Hide quoted text -
The question of debt is quite complex.
Not really, George W. Bush destroyed America, thus by simple logical
deduction, Americans destroyed America, that's you and me and everyone
else for that matter. The big question is, what can we do about it.





The dollar is a reserve
currency, this means that the countries (like China) that have
surpluses tend to hold dollars. This means, in effect, that you can
print dollars - at least some. As soon as your deficit gets to a
certain critical level people will no longer have confidence, they
will start to hold Euros. A loss of confidence tends to be rapid.
The fact of the matter is that China is holding up the dollar. China
is in fact the big one, countries in the Middle East hold smaller
reserves and conversion to the Euro would be less catastrophic.
Another worrying trend is sovereign funds. These are held by countries
like Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states. Sovereign funds are owned by
Arab governments, are invested (largely) in Wesern countries and are a
means of recycling petrodollars. Up to now sovereign investment has
been non political, although potentially sovereign investment could be
used politically.
Have these funds been used politically? Well the US rates secular
Syria as being an "axis of evil" whilst Wahabbi Saudi is given the red
carpet treatment. Don't tell me that SF are not being used
politically.
There is debate about Global Warming is it real or not? To me it is
clear that the consumption of oil must be drastically curbed - not
because of Global Warming, but because of the threat that the oil
producing countries pose financially. Steps should also be taken to
make sovereign funds difficult to transfer between one country and
another. One possibility would be a system of Sovereign credits
whereby countries receiving Sovereign investments undertake to
reimburse countries not receiving the same level of investment.
Credits could be used as part of foreign exchange reserves.
You are indeed correct if you are implying that large expenditures of
public money for space, or indeed for anything else not commanding a
foreseeable return is to be avoided.
I am of the opinion that we are in such a deep dark hole now, the only
thing that can save us is large expenditures in space. I would rather
have them be rational expenditures, instead of irrational expenditures.

Thus my COTS proposal.- Hide quoted text -

You can't simply spend your way out of as crisis.

We need both a post Sputnik type educational system reinstated, and the
complete dissociation of religion, politics and government, in a science
based society, with a current modern rational functional space program.

We have none of that now. We have a lot of good space assets, and the
space program itself could easily be redirected towards rationality and
sustainability, but not within the VSE and ESAS framework, it has to be
an Earth centric observational and low Earth orbit space transportation
system, that, such as you have indicated, can evolve into a lunar and
extraterrestrial space exploration program. But not right now, and not
with the money we have to spend. Earth first, and that involves energy
conversion, solar and hydrogen power, Earth to orbit transportation and
low Earth orbit infrastructure, which remarkably, we are overloaded with
assets and components which can be quickly converted to flyable assets.

All I can say is : Read my COTS proposal. There is a solution to this.

Scott Hedrick wrote:
You just take that little pink deodorant cake thing right out of that
urinal, and you replace it with a campaign button!


"Say NO to hungs, *BILL*"


Latest scuttlebutt...current campaign strategists out, James Carville
(Snakeman) to be brought in.
Daring new shade of lipstick to be applied to political pig.
Clinton campaign searching far and wide for illegitimate Obama baby.
"He's a person of color... there must by a ******* around here somewhere!"
ESM respond: "Lasso us up some dinner, Wonder Woman." :-D

Pat

kT wrote:

We need both a post Sputnik type educational system reinstated, and
the complete dissociation of religion, politics and government, in a
science based society, with a current modern rational functional space
program.

That, and fallout shelters everywhere...as well as constant school
H-bomb drills.
And cars with really big tail fins on them and pointy chrome breasts on
the bumpers.
No halfway measures when flying into the past ASAP like a X-15.
Build that fallout shelter now!:
http://www.1134.org/adventures/atomic/cold-war.html
And imagine a tasty martini mixed from grain alcohol and milspec water:
http://www.1134.org/adventures/atomic/water.jpg
You don't want to be using rainwater, Mandrake!
Too much Commie radioactive fluoride in it after The Big One! It'll
shrivel your testicles into raisins! ;-)

Pat

Pat Flannery wrote:


kT wrote:

We need both a post Sputnik type educational system reinstated, and
the complete dissociation of religion, politics and government, in a
science based society, with a current modern rational functional space
program.

That, and fallout shelters everywhere...

No, earth sheltered houses, heated with hydroponic greenhouses.

Sorry if you find reality unmanageable, that that's how things work.