If You Could Cause Someone to Land on the Moon Tomorrow by Sending NASA $5 Today, Would You Do it?

On Aug 9, 12:43 am, lorad wrote:

All I know is that one quart of available h2o per ton of surface
material is a large amount and sufficient to supply a lunar base.

You still don't get it.

Let me draw a picture for you:
http://clowder.net/hop/TMI/TwoMetersIce.jpg

ho hum...
say, what day is it, anyway?
anybody up for Space Tourism?

http://www.kansascity.com/2010/08/10...be-behind.html

On Aug 9, 4:32*pm, Pat Flannery wrote:
On 8/8/2010 11:43 PM, lorad wrote:



All I know is that one quart of available h2o per ton of surface
material is a large amount and sufficient to supply a lunar base.

Depends how easy it is to extract it.

Pat

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80...-a-lunar-base/

Water ice exists on the moon. This has been confirmed by recent
experiments done aboard Chandrayan-I.

This is likely the 'tip of the iceberg' as they say.

I have done some preliminary work detailing a hydrogen/oxygen rocket
based on the tool-set at Michoud Assembly Facility

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michoud_Assembly_Facility

Which will be redundant when the Shuttle/Ares stops flying. The MAF
built the first stage of the Saturn V and Saturn 1B rockets. Most
recently it built the Space Shuttle's External Tank.

My multi-element launcher uses the same cross-feed technology used by
the Space Shuttle to mate elements - about 20% larger than the Space
Shuttle's ET. Each element has its own aerospike engine, fed by six
RS-68 pump sets adapted to this purpose

http://www.pw.utc.com/Products/Pratt...cketdyne/RS-68

The multi-element launcher may be configured for different payload
masses. A single element operates as a SSTO vehicle that takes off
vertically and lands horizontally after executing a ballistic re-entry
into the Earth's atmosphere. A three element launcher uses two out-
board elements that feed the central element during launch. The two
out-board elements are dropped when empty, and the central element
continues on to orbit carrying a more massive payload than possible
with the SSTO version. All elements execute a ballistic re-entry then
deploy wings upon reaching subsonic speeds, and are picked up by an
airplane and towed back to the launch center to execute a gliding
landing. Instead of using wheels to land horizontally, the vehicle
stalls over the landing point fires up its engine and executes a
vertical power down maneuver and folds away its subsonic wings. This
provides for an absolute minimum of mass and simplicity of operation.
This sort of landing was done back in the 1950s by a variety of 'tail-
sitting' aircraft. The ability to do this with modern computers and
MEMS sensing and GPS is trivial.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tailsitter

The largest multi-element launcher I've studied using these concepts
is a seven element system. This seven-up version has four elements
elements added to the three just described. Two of the four feed on
out board element. Two others feed the other out board element. The
out board elements feed the central element. In this way the four act
as a first stage, the two act as a second stage and the third is a
third stage. 695 metric tons may be lofted into orbit this way. With
full reusability and appropriate attention paid to launch
infrastructure and provisioning the space vehicle costs are rather
low.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/30943696/ETDHLRLV
http://www.scribd.com/doc/31261680/Etdhlrlv-Addendum

The vehicle is built as part of an energy development program to put
up a solar power satellite. This satellite beams 1.25 MW of energy
from GEO to 8,000 locations across the globe. PPA for four satellites
generating 40 million kW total at 32,000 locations paying $0.06 per
kWh generate $24 million per hour. 8,766 hours per year x 25 years
totals $525.96 billion !! Discounted over 25 years at 6.5% discount
rate the value of the system at start-up is $256.6 billion. Dividing
this by a five to account for a five year construction program and
applying 40% per year to amounts loaned the program, a total may be
loaned of $104.4 billion.

A fleet of five launchers - 35 elements - along with launch
infrastructure may be built for a total cost of $6.5 billion. A
supply chain to build four power satellites may be built for a total
cost of $15.3 billion. So, the total program may be completed in five
years for $21.8 billion for the space portion. Ground stations cost
$700,000 each, and total $22.4 billion for 32,000 of them.

Total program costs are $44.2 billion.

An early adopter committing to this amount to the program would obtain
a 40% annualized return on all money at risk. The sponsor (me) would
split the difference 50:50 - and any cost over-runs would be paid 100%
from my (the sponsor's) portion.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/35439593/S...-Satellite-GEO
http://www.scribd.com/doc/35449912/S...tellite-Orbits

So, leveraging off the value of 32,000 PPAs of 1.25 MW each - with a
consortium of investment banks and others, would allow the private
development of this program.

Such a launcher would have other uses as well.

Building a detailed business plan around these ideas we first come
upon the make-buy strategy. Do we buy rockets and satellites from
vendors? Or do we make rockets and satellites in competition with
vendors? Or do we buy the vendors themselves?

NASA has spend nearly half a trillion dollars developing space flight
technologies. These reside principally in Lockheed Boeing Pratt &
Whitney and TRW and more recently United Space Alliance (USA) an LLC
formed between Lockheed and Boeing.

These vendors aren't doing too well with their space capabilities. A
$44.2 billion program would change that! This is nearly 10% of what
NASA has spent over its entire life. Its more than what NASA will
spend on space hardware over the next five years! Yet, it is a small
drop in the bucket compared to the nearly $500 billion spent since
1958 and even more by military and NSA.

So, the make-buy strategic decision favors buy, not of the hardware,
but of the companies themselves!

This makes even more sense when we consider that Boeing and Lockheed
are losing money in their space divisions and making money in
airplanes and military divisions.

This suggests that controlling interest could be obtained in both
companies, the companies then broken into profitable not profitable
divisions and the profitable divisions sold for more money than they
cost originally. In this way we obtain the assets we need and get
paid for them while reducing costs to a bare minimum. If we structure
the deal so that the new unified space agency of all the world's
privately held space faring assets owned a portion of the revenue
stream, space development would then proceed using these assets
without relying on the public purse.

40 million kW sold at $0.06 per kWh for 8,766 hours per year generate
$21.04 billion per year. Having 1/3 of this, or $7 billion per year,
flow into the unified space agency, allows continuing operations to
build additional satellites (2 per year) and increases revenues
accordingly.

A fleet of five vehicles gives us back up capability, and the ability
to do 1 launch every two weeks. With 2 satellites per year, we have
50 uncommitted launch slots that can be filled with other activities.

TOTAL USA portion
Billions per year

1 $21.04 $ 7.00
2 $31.56 $10.50
3 $42.08 $14.00
4 $52.60 $21.00
5 $63.12 $24.50

NASA's annual budget is $17 billion and only a fraction of that is
oriented toward actually flying in space.

A five year development program followed by a five year growth to 14
satellites of 10 million kW each provides substantial revenues to both
investors, sponsor and space business development.

Follow-on Investment Program

At half a billion dollars per flight by year 10, or year 5 after first
flight, the space section has enough money to buy up all 50 available
slots and fly significant payloads spending an additional $76 billion
in the process. Investors and sponsor get a portion of whatever
revenues are generated.

What do they spend their money on?

(1) Communications satellite network. Turning the world into a global
wireless hotspot with over 800 communications satellites. These
satellites have a phased array uplink/downlink and a peta-bit open
optical laser connection between satellites. Each satellite operates
as an optical router to implement 50 billion global broadband
channels. At 20 tons per satellite, and 695 ton launch capability -
34 satellites per launch, and 30 launches (including spares on orbit)
provides $100 billion + in revenues per year.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I81og...x=0&playnext=1

(2) Advanced Power Satellite Network. The 10 million kW power
satellite described here is quite an advance in the way we produce
energy. Each satellite consists of a concentrator and a CPV target/
emitter. That target operates at 1,600x solar intensity. By flying a
larger CPV target/emitter closer to the sun, the concentrator is
eliminated and beam distance is increased. Two 340 ton CPV elements
each 500 m in diameter are launched to LEO. One uses low thrust solar
powered system to fly to GEO. Another uses similar systems to fly to
L1 between Sun and Earth. This first step tests the concept of
beaming energy from L1 and then efficiently reforming the power and
beaming it to Earth from GEO. The satellite during test generates
100,000 kW and beams it to 100,000 receivers of 1 kW each. After
successful test, the L1 satellite then flies on a trajectory that
causes it to fly by Jupiter. There it executes a gravity sling shot
and zeroes out its speed relative to the Sun. It then falls into the
Sun, and uses light pressure to maintain a 3.75 million distance from
the Sun. There the 500 meter diameter system intercepts 440 million
kW and produces 250 million kW of laser energy. It beams that energy
to the GEO satellite and that satellite beams 220 million beams 1 kW
each to stationary and mobile receivers on Earth and in space.

Reducing beam cost from $0.06 per kWh to $0.03 per kWh this satellite
pair built and launched at the same cost as the 10 million kW
satellite with concentrator, produces 11x as much revenue and adds 11x
as much to the value of the company with each launch. Namely, $57.8
billion per year per satellite pair. 70 launches provide ALL the
world's energy needs. These are completed over a 3 year span. At the
end of the period the company is earning as much as OPEC - about $4
trillion per year - while producing zero pollution.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2QAUkt2VPHI

(3) Lunar Stage - 695 tonnes in LEO require a delta vee of 4 km/sec to
move into a trajectory that will take it to the Moon or Mars. Another
2.5 km/sec is required to land the stage on the moon. At Mars,
aerobraking works to slow it down. On the moon, to return to Earth
from the moon requires another 2.8 km/sec. To return to Earth from
the surface of Mars requires 5.3 km/sec. So, the total delta vee for
both stages is 9.3 km/sec. About what it takes to get to orbit.
Using hydrogen oxygen propellant with a 4.6 km/sec exhaust speed we
need 86.8% of the total as propellant. That's 603 tonnes out of 695
tonnes. Leaving 92 tonnes. With 70 tonnes of structure - this means
that 22 tonnes may be carried round trip without refueling. Taking
payloads one way and returning the empty adds another 16 tonnes -
allowing 38 tonnes to be taken one way.

Refueling on the moon and Mars, using water found on the surface of
both worlds, improves things. Here, solar panels, or beamed power
from solar panels, are used to power a base, and an electrolysis
system that produces hydrogen and oxygen from water. Since hydrogen
and oxygen are burned in a 6 to 1 ratio and made in an 8 to 1 ratio,
there is surplus oxygen for breathing and chemical processing.

Here 221 tonnes may be brought one way from Earth, while 150 tonnes
may be taken round trip - allowing for refueling on Mars.

18 month cycle times and 2.21 year synodic period between Earth and
Mars means that with a fleet of 5 - 5 ships depart every 2.21 years.
Prior to refueling capabilities on the Red planet 75 tonnes per
synodic period and 50 people aboard a small space flotilla go to the
red planet every few years. After the first flight cycle, payloads
are increased to 200 tonnes. This is enough to send 250 people per
flight cycle with a fleet of five, and ultimately support 5,000 people
on Mars with this capability.

On the moon, we have 4 days out and 4 days back. With refurbishment
of the spacecraft after landing a single vehicle can support 1 flight
per month. A fleet of three provide back up capability and a flight
to the moon every two weeks. The numbers of people are greater given
the short time frames involved. In the first year 25 flights are made
to the moon each carrying 30 people and 15 spare tonnes. After the
first year refueling capability from lunar water is added and we have
250 people per flight cycle and 200 tonnes - this is 5,000 tonnes per
year and 6,250 people per year. This is enough to support 25,000
people with a fleet this size. Doubling the fleet to six vehicles,
gives the ability to support 50,000 people on the Moon.

(4) Laser Propulsion from Space - Laser propulsion uses an intense
laser beam to create a high temperature jet - which gives a greater
exhaust velocity than is possible with chemical rockets. This reduces
propellant fractions. A 250 million kW beam produces 1,100 tonnes of
thrust force with an exhaust velocity of 50 km/sec. This means that a
834 tonne vehicle can carry 695 tonnes into LEO. In other words, the
hydrogen/oxygen rocket on each of the multi-element launchers is
replaced with a laser rocket using the full beam power of a single
satellite pair, and the five flight vehicles that we have been using
up to this time, are retooled into thirty-five flight vehicles with
the same launch capabilities. Going from weekly launch rates to daily
launches. Also, the chemical rockets aboard the lunar stage are
similarly replaced and payloads are increased to 570 tonnes and flight
times reduced to 3 months for the mars flights, and launch windows
expanded to six months from 6 days every 2.21 years. Lunar flights
are reduced from 4 days to 9 hours. The number of people that are
sustained on Mars increases from 5,000 to 150,000. The number of
people sustained on the Moon increases from 50,000 to 1,000,000 with
modest increases of fleet sizes.

(5) Laser propulsion from space - MEMS based laser powered jets make
possible a ballistic vehicle in every garage. This increases the
demand for energy while giving unprecedented access around the
world.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxV2F...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzXwctPXT4c

(6) Survey the Asteroid Belt - the small bodies of the solar system
are surveyed, and the richest of those are returned to sun synchronous
polar orbit. There, they are processed with remotely operated solar
powered space factories into products that are used in space, and
products that are used on Earth - brought back to users in response to
online orders - directly ballistically guided by GPS from orbit - in
minutes. The world uses 28 billion tons of raw materials per year.
10.5 billion tons are fuels. These are replaced with 70 power sat
pairs as described above. The balance are ores and other materials
processed in plants and farms and forests around the world. With a 50
km/sec exhaust speed the 15 km/sec delta vee to bring materials from
the asteroid belt into safe orbits around the Earth requires 380 kg of
ejected material per ton. This requires a jet energy of 475 GJ per
tonne. So, 15 kW of laser energy beamed to the asteroid belt returns
1 metric ton per year. This means that to return 17.5 billion tons to
meet today's requirements requires 1,100 power satellite pairs of the
type described. With daily launches, this could be obtained in 3
years. In 30 years enough material is returned to sustain everyone at
billionaire levels of consumption - with orbiting factories, farms and
forests providing for everyone's needs, while the Earth turned into a
vast environmental reserve.

(7) Space homes - SPOMES - the construction of large pressure vessels
for use on Earth has already been done. This is how FERMILAB and CERN
build particle accelerators miles across. This same technology may be
used to build pressure vessels in space. With significant capability
on orbit - using tele-robotic labor solar power and asteroids as raw
material - space homes purchased by individual families and small
groups, are created on orbit. MEMS based personal flying machines
allow people to move freely and simply to and from orbit.

454 kg payload
300 kg empty vehicle
480 kg to 904 kg propellant (water - 480 liters to 904 liters)
57 MWh to 107 MWh energy ($170 to $310 per trip)

*NOTE - Power at this time has been reduced to $3 per MWh -
approximately 1/20th the cost at the outset as uses grow.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_colonization

In this way billions would live and work on orbit joining the tens of
millions living and working on the Moon.

(8) Solar sail - increasing the size of launchers - The fleet of 35
launchers will reach the end of their useful lives, and be retired as
a fleet of 100 newer launchers, 6x larger capable of putting 4,000
tonnes into LEO. Increasing traffic volumes by 20x again. Power
satellites increase in area to 1.8 km in diameter. This increases
their range accuracy and power level. 10 trillion watt systems are
launched into orbit. This is sufficient to power very large rockets,
or small solar sails. Each power satellite produces 14,000 pounds of
thrust when reflected off solar sails. The energy density is such
that thrust to weight is quite substantial. A 1.4 million pound space
home is accelerated by solar sail at 1/100th gee. That's 8.4 km/sec
per day! So, a satellite can dispatch 500 space homes per year on
voyages across the solar system using zero propellant. They may also
bring 200 million tons per year to Earth using zero propellant from
the asteroid belt. Replacing the 10,000s of older power satellites
with newer higher powered satellites replaces laser rockets with laser
light sails and small ships with individually owned space homes. This
opens the solar system to industrial development and settlement.
Space factories in orbit around Mars, supports billions on orbit,
while they use personal laser powered spaceships to visit anywhere on
Mars. The same thing occurs throughout the solar system as people
move outward across the solar system supported by beamed power from
close to the Sun.

(9) TAU - thousand astronomical unit journey - 1.8 km diameter emitter
can focus to 1.8 km over 1000 AU away. At this distance the sun
itself may be used as a gravity lens to collimate beams. Thus the
sun's gravity may be used as a telescope or as a condenser to direct
beams accurately across the galaxy. This is used in a variety of
ways;

(9a) Solar sail space homes are dispatched to nearby stars using
multi-staged light sails

http://ffden-2.phys.uaf.edu/213.web....ightsails.html

(9b) Radio telescope beams are sent to the ergo-sphere of the
supermassive blackhole at the center of our galaxy. There it executes
a trajectory inside the ergosphere emerging before it arrived -
pointed back at Earth or anywhere else in the galaxy. This allows
communication instantly through space or communication through time.
Thus, you can go into a restaurant place your order, and have your
order arrive instantly since the order was sent back in time 20
minutes. Ditto for 10 week orders for new cars, furnishings, custom
fit clothing, etc., etc. Ditto for ques - waiting becomes a thing of
the past. More importantly, we have instant communication with far
flung space vehicles - most importantly, tele-operated robots. So,
virtual star exploration becomes interesting as do remotely operated
factories.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ergosphere
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Mallett
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_lens
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supermassive_black_hole

(9c) Survey remote star systems


http://www.centauri-dreams.org/?p=785

(9d) Advanced Artificial Intelligence - the ability to signal
through time can be used to an advanced form of AI to create goal
directed behavior in machines using time signaling and sensing only -
very little logic is required. Similar to a thermostat set a
temperature making simple decisions based on readings of conditions.
A desire is reduced to a configuration statement, and that statement
drives the machine's configuration in time - to achieve the desired
goal. Often before the user tells the machine his desire.

http://www.frc.ri.cmu.edu/~hpm/proje...mConEx.98.html


(10) Expand resource retrieval to the Kuiper Belt adding to the
reserves of the Asteroid belt.

(11) Arrange the multi-system collider (MSC) Here solar sailing
technology is used on a dozen star systems to arrange the collision of
shaped Iron-56 projectiles at 1/3 light speed and above to create
engineered black holes (EBH). EBH are arranged in a variety of useful
forms including;

(11a) Gravity wave communications - using gravity waves as
communictions media.

(11b) Gravity wave/neutrino rocket - using neutrinos and or gravity
waves as the rocket exhaust.

(11c) Dirct conversion of matter to energy - black hole decay is
used to create a stream of photons/gravitons/neutrinos -

(11d) Gravity bound rocket - intense gravity field from a collection
of black holes is used to attract payloads. When combined with rocket
action intense accelerations may be imparted to payloads without
associated gee forces on the payload. By arranging the EBH in a ring
or disk, tidal forces are reduced to nearly zero. In this way 100
gees to 10,000 gees may be achieved.

(11e) High speed interstellar travel - 1 gee takes 1 year to attain
near light speed. 41 years to traverse the universe. 100 gees takes
4 days to attain near light speed. 5 months to traverse the
universe. 10,000 gees takes 1 hour to attain light speed, and 2 days
to traverse the universe.

(11f) Travel through ergo-sphere of supermassive black hole to
travel through time or instantly through space or twin EBH black
holes. 4 million solar masses is 8e+36 kg. Four hundred billion
people traveling in 600,000 ton space homes accelerated by EBH arrays
at 10,000 gees, would use about 2 solar masses every 1,000,000 years.
This is obtained by carrying out replication procedures within the
ergo-sphere of the supermassive black hole at the center of our
galaxy. Since advanced star travel directs all interstellar traffic
through this location to provide instant travel throughout the cosmos,
this is the ideal location to replicate black hole stock, and is a
means to provide black hole driven machinery cheaply to all.

http://scitation.aip.org/getabs/serv...ifs=yes&ref=no

(11e) Movement of all industrial activities across the galaxy to
the galactic center. The ability to twin miniature black holes at the
galactic center, and then cause black holes to decay into a variety of
forms - including any sort of atom or molecule - is a powerful
incentive to develop technology that taps into the supermassive black
he at the center of galaxy.

3.6e21 kg is the mass of the asteroid belt
2.0e30 kg is the mass of the sun
8.0e36 kg is the mass of the black hole at the galaxy center

About 2 quadrillion asteroid belts are immediately available at one
location. The ability to travel near light speed into and out of the
ergosphere of this massive spinning object provides a means to take
patterns of atomic scale microscopic black holes into the ergosphere
and replicate them. Then, let them decay into patterns of powerful
particle bursts that result in a wide range of products.

Thus, charged black holes are held in a crystalline lattice - a
memory. At a remote command through time, they are shot off into the
black hole and a twin emerges along a slightly different trajectory.
The first is brought back to its storage location. The second is
caused to decay into an object. So, whether you need a sandwich, a
gallon of gas, or a spare part for your starship, it appears just by
sending a properly coded message into the local radio telescope based
internet the permeates and unites the galaxy.

(11g) Time travel - inter-galactic travel - since the black holes at
the centers of all galaxies have properties similar to that of the
Milky Way's black hole, and they have been around for billions of
years, and will be around for trillions more, these are all avenues
and gateways for cosmic exploration on a grand scale.

There are more than 100 billion (1e+11) galaxies. Each with 1e+37 kg
black holes at their centers. This is 1e+48 kg of material accessible
to this technology.

This is as far into the future as I can see at present.

William Mook wrote:

The vehicle is built as part of an energy development program to
put up a solar power satellite. This satellite beams 1.25 MW of
energy from GEO to 8,000 locations across the globe. PPA for
four satellites generating 40 million kW total at 32,000
locations paying $0.06 per kWh generate $24 million per hour.
8,766 hours per year x 25 years totals $525.96 billion !!
Discounted over 25 years at 6.5% discount rate the value of the
system at start-up is $256.6 billion. Dividing this by a five
to account for a five year construction program and applying 40%
per year to amounts loaned the program, a total may be loaned of
$104.4 billion.

Why didn't you present this plan at the 2010 International Space
Development Conference/Space Investment Summit held in Chicago this
past May? They had a two day Space Solar Power Symposium. It seems
like it would have been the perfect venue. You would have received
much more valuable feedback there than you could ever hope to receive
here.

Jim Davis

On Aug 11, 5:13*pm, Jim Davis wrote:
William Mook wrote:
The vehicle is built as part of an energy development program to
put up a solar power satellite. *This satellite beams 1.25 MW of
energy from GEO to 8,000 locations across the globe. *PPA for
four satellites generating 40 million kW total at 32,000
locations paying $0.06 per kWh generate $24 million per hour.
8,766 hours per year x 25 years totals $525.96 billion !!
Discounted over 25 years at 6.5% discount rate the value of the
system at start-up is $256.6 billion. *Dividing this by a five
to account for a five year construction program and applying 40%
per year to amounts loaned the program, a total may be loaned of
$104.4 billion.

Why didn't you present this plan at the 2010 International Space
Development Conference/Space Investment Summit held in Chicago this
past May? They had a two day Space Solar Power Symposium. It seems
like it would have been the perfect venue. You would have received
much more valuable feedback there' than you could ever hope to receive
here. *

Jim Davis

I wasn't invited to present anything. I spoke with them about it.
The total of $104.4 billion divided by 32,000 operating companies
totals $3,262,500 per ground station.

Paid over 5 years in the following installments

$298,064.98 $ 9.54 billion
$417,290.97 $13.35 billion
$584,207.35 $18.69 billion
$817,890.29 $26.17 billion
$1,145,046.41 $36.64 billion

$3,262,500.00 $104.40 billion

The revenue produced by the power purchase agreement by each ground
station, selling 1.25 MW at $0.06 per kWh is $657,450.00 per year or
$16,436,250.00 over 25 years. This revenue discounted at 6.5% per
year is worth $8,019,494.05 the day it is switched on. Credit Suisse
and other banks have expressed an interest in buying revenue streams
like this at this sort of discount once we are receiving revenues for
electrons.

Each payment is worth $1.6 million the day the ground station is
switched on.

1.25 MW represents about 1,000 homes in the USA, Europe, Australia,
Japan, about 2,500 homes elsewhere. So, this represents between 32
million and 72 million homes world-wide.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJ1D_eiHafY

Tail Sitter

On 8/11/2010 8:01 PM, john.whine wrote:

you seem like a smart fellow, well-meaning and all.
maybe you just got in with a bad crowd.
why don't you go straight and find something worthwhile to do?

If I may paraphrase my late father: "Beauty is only skin-deep; crazy
goes all the way to the bone." :-)

Pat

On Aug 12, 5:12*am, Pat Flannery wrote:
On 8/11/2010 8:01 PM, john.whine wrote:

you seem like a smart fellow, well-meaning and all.
maybe you just got in with a bad crowd.
why don't you go straight and find something worthwhile to do?

If I may paraphrase my late father: "Beauty is only skin-deep; crazy
goes all the way to the bone." :-)

Pat

Haha, this from a grown man who plays with Sharkit models to display
with 50 year old blue prints and thinks he's making a real difference
in the world. lol.

"How is promoting a new primary energy source competitive with
existing
primary energy sources not 'straight' in your opinion while promoting
the legalization of narcotics and other drugs that destroy lives is
'straight'? Interesting to hear your response. " - mook
***************-------------________+++++++++++

yes, i'm 'certain' you'll find my response interesting.
ha ha
it all seems a little complicated.
candles rock.
narcotics and other drugs are bad but they're already here.
can't put the genie back in the bottle, pal.
and would it be so much worse if they were legal?
the effects of the drug war are worse than the effects of the drugs.
ever heard of ''harm-reduction''?
better start taking some steps toward educating yerself.
it's never too late.

On Aug 12, 12:59*pm, "john.whine" wrote:
"How is promoting a new primary energy source competitive with
existing
primary energy sources not 'straight' in your opinion while promoting
the legalization of narcotics and other drugs that destroy lives is
'straight'? *Interesting to hear your response. " - mook
***************-------------________+++++++++++

yes, i'm 'certain' you'll find my response interesting.
ha ha
it all seems a little complicated.
candles rock.
narcotics and other drugs are bad but they're already here.
can't put the genie back in the bottle, pal.

Nonsense. Narcotics use was far higher at the end of the 19th century
than it is today. Criminalizing drugs cannot work in a free
society. Other methods will work. Treating addiction as the medical
problem it is. Treating the call to adventure as the social problem
it is.

and would it be so much worse if they were legal?

Depends on the details and how much you value individual liberty for
all. If illicit drugs were freely available at all Emergency Rooms at
the 10,000 hospitals in the USA, and their availability made part of a
program to reinforce ending their use among individuals who enter that
program, street crime and sex trade would be radically reduced, as
would revenue to major suppliers. In such an environment of reduced
use, decriminalization (not legalization) would make sense.
Especially if religious leaders and psychological counselors could
make use of drugs in the context of the larger culture. Finally the
demand for such drug induced experiences would not be compelling or
desired by the vast majority of people if we lived in a society that
embraced its frontiers fully and the call to adventure was real
instead of drug induced fantasy.


the effects of the drug war are worse than the effects of the drugs.
ever heard of ''harm-reduction''?

You are creating a false choice. Other choices are available.

better start taking some steps toward educating yerself.
it's never too late.

Words you should live by but you do not I fear.