China 'could reach Moon by 2020'

On 18 Jul, 01:24, (Rand Simberg) wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 14:19:57 -0700 (PDT), in a place far, far away,
Ian Parker made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:





On 17 Jul, 21:30, (Rand Simberg) wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 07:07:14 -0700 (PDT), in a place far, far away,
Ian Parker made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:

On 16 Jul, 02:34, calvin wrote:

Michael Griffin is a delusional liar who will say or do anything to
salvage his legacy, which is now beyond salvaging, but he doesn't
realize that. This guy is almost an exact clone of George W. Bush..

Bush is not a liar, whatever this Michael Griffin is.

Oh, so there was WMD in Iraq.

Whether or not there was WMD in Iraq has nothing to do with whether or
not Bush is a liar. *Only an illogical ignoramus would think there is.

He said there were. It was not true.

Thank you. *You indisputably demonstrate that you equate saying
something is not true with a lie. *Thus, you also demonstrate my point
about ignorant illogical idiots, with no understanding of the meaning
of the word "liar," and "lie."

And actually, we still don't even know that it wasn't true.- Hide quoted text -

You talk the most complete rot. The criteria for resolution is 1.22
lambda/d and if you are looking down on the Earth you are diffraction
limited. Lets take

d = 1m
height = 250km
lamda (green) = 0.5 micron

This gives us resolution of 1.22*250*10^3/0.5*10^6 = 1.22/8 m or about
14cm

How can WMD NOT be seen you tell me. C'mon they were lying through
their teeth - Admit it.


- Ian Parker

PS - Are the laws of Phsical Optics going to be disputed like
Relativity?

Ian Parker wrote:

:On 18 Jul, 01:24, (Rand Simberg) wrote:
:
: And actually, we still don't even know that it wasn't true.- Hide quoted text -
:
:You talk the most complete rot. The criteria for resolution is 1.22
:lambda/d and if you are looking down on the Earth you are diffraction
:limited. Lets take
:
:d = 1m
:height = 250km
:lamda (green) = 0.5 micron
:
:This gives us resolution of 1.22*250*10^3/0.5*10^6 = 1.22/8 m or about
:14cm
:
:How can WMD NOT be seen you tell me. C'mon they were lying through
:their teeth - Admit it.
:

Now ask yourself how big an area you can watch at that resolution.

:
:PS - Are the laws of Phsical Optics going to be disputed like
:Relativity?
:

PS - Apparently the laws of Reason have already gone by the wayside in
your immediate neighborhood.

--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
only stupid."
-- Heinrich Heine

On 19 Jul, 02:12, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Ian Parker wrote:

:On 18 Jul, 01:24, (Rand Simberg) wrote:
:
: And actually, we still don't even know that it wasn't true.- Hide quoted text -
:
:You talk the most complete rot. The criteria for resolution is 1.22
:lambda/d and if you are looking down on the Earth you are diffraction
:limited. Lets take
:
:d = 1m
:height = 250km
:lamda (green) = 0.5 micron
:
:This gives us resolution of 1.22*250*10^3/0.5*10^6 = 1.22/8 m or about
:14cm
:
:How can WMD NOT be seen you tell me. C'mon they were lying through
:their teeth - Admit it.
:

Now ask yourself how big an area you can watch at that resolution.

:
:PS - Are the laws of Phsical Optics going to be disputed like
:Relativity?
:

PS - Apparently the laws of Reason have already gone by the wayside in
your immediate neighborhood.

Certainly the area Ralph Ikea could see. Basically the evice is
programmable to sweep out the area required. It will this take
pictures of the areas of interest. With 3.5 micron IR and 1m
resollution it will detect signs of activity even if that activity is
concealed.. This activity can then be sen at high optical resolution.

Basically a satellite will make a programmed sweep take in several GB
which it downloads at a different point in its orbit.

There is one further point. Iraq has been ethnically cleansed. This
started with the US Army being depoyed searching for WMD. The correct
way of looking for WMD is multispectral images. Not taking soliers
away from other tasks.


- Ian Parker

Ian Parker wrote:

:On 19 Jul, 02:12, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: Ian Parker wrote:
:
: :On 18 Jul, 01:24, (Rand Simberg) wrote:
: :
: : And actually, we still don't even know that it wasn't true.- Hide quoted text -
: :
: :You talk the most complete rot. The criteria for resolution is 1.22
: :lambda/d and if you are looking down on the Earth you are diffraction
: :limited. Lets take
: :
: :d = 1m
: :height = 250km
: :lamda (green) = 0.5 micron
: :
: :This gives us resolution of 1.22*250*10^3/0.5*10^6 = 1.22/8 m or about
: :14cm
: :
: :How can WMD NOT be seen you tell me. C'mon they were lying through
: :their teeth - Admit it.
: :
:
: Now ask yourself how big an area you can watch at that resolution.
:
: :
: :PS - Are the laws of Phsical Optics going to be disputed like
: :Relativity?
: :
:
: PS - Apparently the laws of Reason have already gone by the wayside in
: your immediate neighborhood.
:
:Certainly the area Ralph Ikea could see.
:

Which was what?

:
:Basically the evice is
rogrammable to sweep out the area required. It will this take
ictures of the areas of interest. With 3.5 micron IR and 1m
:resollution it will detect signs of activity even if that activity is
:concealed.. This activity can then be sen at high optical resolution.
:
:Basically a satellite will make a programmed sweep take in several GB
:which it downloads at a different point in its orbit.
:

Yes, and when it's not looking it's not looking.

:
:There is one further point. Iraq has been ethnically cleansed. This
:started with the US Army being depoyed searching for WMD.
:

Hogwash. It 'started' with us taking the minority Sunni boot off the
necks of the majority Shiites.

:
:The correct
:way of looking for WMD is multispectral images. Not taking soliers
:away from other tasks.
:

You're an ignorant idiot. Explain to us how such devices can see
through sand, into buildings, etc...

--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
only stupid."
-- Heinrich Heine

On 19 Jul, 21:02, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Ian Parker wrote:

:On 19 Jul, 02:12, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: Ian Parker wrote:
:
: :On 18 Jul, 01:24, (Rand Simberg) wrote:
: :
: : And actually, we still don't even know that it wasn't true.- Hide quoted text -
: :
: :You talk the most complete rot. The criteria for resolution is 1.22
: :lambda/d and if you are looking down on the Earth you are diffraction
: :limited. Lets take
: :
: :d = 1m
: :height = 250km
: :lamda (green) = 0.5 micron
: :
: :This gives us resolution of 1.22*250*10^3/0.5*10^6 = 1.22/8 m or about
: :14cm
: :
: :How can WMD NOT be seen you tell me. C'mon they were lying through
: :their teeth - Admit it.
: :
:
: Now ask yourself how big an area you can watch at that resolution.
:
: :
: :PS - Are the laws of Phsical Optics going to be disputed like
: :Relativity?
: :
:
: PS - Apparently the laws of Reason have already gone by the wayside in
: your immediate neighborhood.
:
:Certainly the area Ralph Ikea could see.
:

Which was what?

:
:Basically the evice is
rogrammable to sweep out the area required. It will this take
ictures of the areas of interest. With 3.5 micron IR and 1m
:resollution it will detect signs of activity even if that activity is
:concealed.. This activity can then be sen at high optical resolution.
:
:Basically a satellite will make a programmed sweep take in several GB
:which it downloads at a different point in its orbit.
:

Yes, and when it's not looking it's not looking.

:
:There is one further point. Iraq has been ethnically cleansed. This
:started with the US Army being depoyed searching for WMD.
:

Hogwash. *It 'started' with us taking the minority Sunni boot off the
necks of the majority Shiites.

:
:The correct
:way of looking for WMD is multispectral images. Not taking soliers
:away from other tasks.
:

You're an ignorant idiot. *Explain to us how such devices can see
through sand, into buildings, etc...

--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
*only stupid."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * -- Heinrich Heine

You don't need coverage all the time. The movement of lorries could be
tracked. If you are telling me that a WMD program cannot be seen in a
sunny desert I just don't believe you. I don't think anyone else will.

Basically the movement of lorries can be traced. Tracks can be seen,
cooling engines and indeed any activity can be spotted in IR. Oh no.


- Ian Parker

Ian Parker wrote:

:On 19 Jul, 21:02, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: Ian Parker wrote:
:
: :On 19 Jul, 02:12, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : Ian Parker wrote:
: :
: : :On 18 Jul, 01:24, (Rand Simberg) wrote:
: : :
: : : And actually, we still don't even know that it wasn't true.- Hide quoted text -
: : :
: : :You talk the most complete rot. The criteria for resolution is 1.22
: : :lambda/d and if you are looking down on the Earth you are diffraction
: : :limited. Lets take
: : :
: : :d = 1m
: : :height = 250km
: : :lamda (green) = 0.5 micron
: : :
: : :This gives us resolution of 1.22*250*10^3/0.5*10^6 = 1.22/8 m or about
: : :14cm
: : :
: : :How can WMD NOT be seen you tell me. C'mon they were lying through
: : :their teeth - Admit it.
: : :
: :
: : Now ask yourself how big an area you can watch at that resolution.
: :
: : :
: : :PS - Are the laws of Phsical Optics going to be disputed like
: : :Relativity?
: : :
: :
: : PS - Apparently the laws of Reason have already gone by the wayside in
: : your immediate neighborhood.
: :
: :Certainly the area Ralph Ikea could see.
: :
:
: Which was what?
:
: :
: :Basically the evice is
: rogrammable to sweep out the area required. It will this take
: ictures of the areas of interest. With 3.5 micron IR and 1m
: :resollution it will detect signs of activity even if that activity is
: :concealed.. This activity can then be sen at high optical resolution.
: :
: :Basically a satellite will make a programmed sweep take in several GB
: :which it downloads at a different point in its orbit.
: :
:
: Yes, and when it's not looking it's not looking.
:
: :
: :There is one further point. Iraq has been ethnically cleansed. This
: :started with the US Army being depoyed searching for WMD.
: :
:
: Hogwash. *It 'started' with us taking the minority Sunni boot off the
: necks of the majority Shiites.
:
: :
: :The correct
: :way of looking for WMD is multispectral images. Not taking soliers
: :away from other tasks.
: :
:
: You're an ignorant idiot. *Explain to us how such devices can see
: through sand, into buildings, etc...
:
: --
: "Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
: *only stupid."
: * * * * * * * * * * * * * * -- Heinrich Heine
:
:You don't need coverage all the time. The movement of lorries could be
:tracked. If you are telling me that a WMD program cannot be seen in a
:sunny desert I just don't believe you. I don't think anyone else will.
:

Frankly, I don't give a flying **** what you believe, Ian. You're a
long-standing loonie who routinely ignores reality.

:
:Basically the movement of lorries can be traced. Tracks can be seen,
:cooling engines and indeed any activity can be spotted in IR. Oh no.
:

Gee, so there must not be an insurgency in Iraq, then, since
presumably everything could be seen from satellites.

You're an idiot, Ian...

--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
only stupid."
-- Heinrich Heine

On 20 Jul, 15:35, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Ian Parker wrote:

:On 19 Jul, 21:02, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: Ian Parker wrote:
:
: :On 19 Jul, 02:12, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : Ian Parker wrote:
: :
: : :On 18 Jul, 01:24, (Rand Simberg) wrote:
: : :
: : : And actually, we still don't even know that it wasn't true.- Hide quoted text -
: : :
: : :You talk the most complete rot. The criteria for resolution is 1.22
: : :lambda/d and if you are looking down on the Earth you are diffraction
: : :limited. Lets take
: : :
: : :d = 1m
: : :height = 250km
: : :lamda (green) = 0.5 micron
: : :
: : :This gives us resolution of 1.22*250*10^3/0.5*10^6 = 1.22/8 m or about
: : :14cm
: : :
: : :How can WMD NOT be seen you tell me. C'mon they were lying through
: : :their teeth - Admit it.
: : :
: :
: : Now ask yourself how big an area you can watch at that resolution.
: :
: : :
: : :PS - Are the laws of Phsical Optics going to be disputed like
: : :Relativity?
: : :
: :
: : PS - Apparently the laws of Reason have already gone by the wayside in
: : your immediate neighborhood.
: :
: :Certainly the area Ralph Ikea could see.
: :
:
: Which was what?
:
: :
: :Basically the evice is
: rogrammable to sweep out the area required. It will this take
: ictures of the areas of interest. With 3.5 micron IR and 1m
: :resollution it will detect signs of activity even if that activity is
: :concealed.. This activity can then be sen at high optical resolution.
: :
: :Basically a satellite will make a programmed sweep take in several GB
: :which it downloads at a different point in its orbit.
: :
:
: Yes, and when it's not looking it's not looking.
:
: :
: :There is one further point. Iraq has been ethnically cleansed. This
: :started with the US Army being depoyed searching for WMD.
: :
:
: Hogwash. *It 'started' with us taking the minority Sunni boot off the
: necks of the majority Shiites.
:
: :
: :The correct
: :way of looking for WMD is multispectral images. Not taking soliers
: :away from other tasks.
: :
:
: You're an ignorant idiot. *Explain to us how such devices can see
: through sand, into buildings, etc...
:
: --
: "Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
: *only stupid."
: * * * * * * * * * * * * * * -- Heinrich Heine
:
:You don't need coverage all the time. The movement of lorries could be
:tracked. If you are telling me that a WMD program cannot be seen in a
:sunny desert I just don't believe you. I don't think anyone else will.
:

Frankly, I don't give a flying **** what you believe, Ian. *You're a
long-standing loonie who routinely ignores reality.

:
:Basically the movement of lorries can be traced. Tracks can be seen,
:cooling engines and indeed any activity can be spotted in IR. Oh no.
:

Gee, so there must not be an insurgency in Iraq, then, since
presumably everything could be seen from satellites.

You're an idiot, Ian...

I don't deny there is an insurency. Very largely the fault of the
Americans who allowed it to develop. You are just the sort of person
who calls black white. The CIA knew there was no WMD all along and
there is absolutely no escaping that fact.


- Ian Parker

On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 08:52:44 -0700 (PDT), in a place far, far away,
Ian Parker made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:


I don't deny there is an insurency. Very largely the fault of the
Americans who allowed it to develop. You are just the sort of person
who calls black white. The CIA knew there was no WMD all along and
there is absolutely no escaping that fact.

There's no escaping it because it isn't a fact. It's just another of
Ian Parker's many delusions.

Ian Parker wrote:

:On 20 Jul, 15:35, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: Ian Parker wrote:
:
: :On 19 Jul, 21:02, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : Ian Parker wrote:
: :
: : :On 19 Jul, 02:12, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : : Ian Parker wrote:
: : :
: : : :On 18 Jul, 01:24, (Rand Simberg) wrote:
: : : :
: : : : And actually, we still don't even know that it wasn't true.- Hide quoted text -
: : : :
: : : :You talk the most complete rot. The criteria for resolution is 1.22
: : : :lambda/d and if you are looking down on the Earth you are diffraction
: : : :limited. Lets take
: : : :
: : : :d = 1m
: : : :height = 250km
: : : :lamda (green) = 0.5 micron
: : : :
: : : :This gives us resolution of 1.22*250*10^3/0.5*10^6 = 1.22/8 m or about
: : : :14cm
: : : :
: : : :How can WMD NOT be seen you tell me. C'mon they were lying through
: : : :their teeth - Admit it.
: : : :
: : :
: : : Now ask yourself how big an area you can watch at that resolution.
: : :
: : : :
: : : :PS - Are the laws of Phsical Optics going to be disputed like
: : : :Relativity?
: : : :
: : :
: : : PS - Apparently the laws of Reason have already gone by the wayside in
: : : your immediate neighborhood.
: : :
: : :Certainly the area Ralph Ikea could see.
: : :
: :
: : Which was what?
: :
: : :
: : :Basically the evice is
: : rogrammable to sweep out the area required. It will this take
: : ictures of the areas of interest. With 3.5 micron IR and 1m
: : :resollution it will detect signs of activity even if that activity is
: : :concealed.. This activity can then be sen at high optical resolution.
: : :
: : :Basically a satellite will make a programmed sweep take in several GB
: : :which it downloads at a different point in its orbit.
: : :
: :
: : Yes, and when it's not looking it's not looking.
: :
: : :
: : :There is one further point. Iraq has been ethnically cleansed. This
: : :started with the US Army being depoyed searching for WMD.
: : :
: :
: : Hogwash. *It 'started' with us taking the minority Sunni boot off the
: : necks of the majority Shiites.
: :
: : :
: : :The correct
: : :way of looking for WMD is multispectral images. Not taking soliers
: : :away from other tasks.
: : :
: :
: : You're an ignorant idiot. *Explain to us how such devices can see
: : through sand, into buildings, etc...
: :
: : --
: : "Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
: : *only stupid."
: : * * * * * * * * * * * * * * -- Heinrich Heine
: :
: :You don't need coverage all the time. The movement of lorries could be
: :tracked. If you are telling me that a WMD program cannot be seen in a
: :sunny desert I just don't believe you. I don't think anyone else will.
: :
:
: Frankly, I don't give a flying **** what you believe, Ian. *You're a
: long-standing loonie who routinely ignores reality.
:
: :
: :Basically the movement of lorries can be traced. Tracks can be seen,
: :cooling engines and indeed any activity can be spotted in IR. Oh no.
: :
:
: Gee, so there must not be an insurgency in Iraq, then, since
: presumably everything could be seen from satellites.
:
: You're an idiot, Ian...
:
:
:I don't deny there is an insurency.
:

But gee, Ian, why can't they just see them all from the same magic
satellites you claim that WMD couldn't be hidden from?

:
:Very largely the fault of the
:Americans who allowed it to develop.
:

And what do you suggest should have been done to stop it?

:
:You are just the sort of person
:who calls black white.
:

No, I'm just the sort of person who sort of insists that people like
you should stop lying and making **** up.

:
:The CIA knew there was no WMD all along and
:there is absolutely no escaping that fact.
:

You're lying again. Cite for your previous claim?

--
"You take the lies out of him, and he'll shrink to the size of
your hat; you take the malice out of him, and he'll disappear."
-- Mark Twain

On 20 Jul, 17:07, (Rand Simberg) wrote:
On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 08:52:44 -0700 (PDT), in a place far, far away,
Ian Parker made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:

I don't deny there is an insurency. Very largely the fault of the
Americans who allowed it to develop. You are just the sort of person
who calls black white. The CIA knew there was no WMD all along and
there is absolutely no escaping that fact.

There's no escaping it because it isn't a fact. *It's just another of
Ian Parker's many delusions.

If you look at the technology available it is incredible whatever you
say. Your cluster makes absolutely no differrence. We all know you are
a smearer amoungst other things.


- Ian Parker