Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #155734 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-01-01 10:49 -0800 |
| Last post | 2016-01-03 17:11 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 320 — 37 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers
I Feel Old Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-01 10:49 -0800
Re: I Feel Old "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-01 13:33 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-01 12:05 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-01-02 04:41 -0400
Re: I Feel Old "Joe Morris" <j.c.morris@verizon.net> - 2016-01-02 11:50 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-02 17:14 +0000
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-02 17:36 -0800
Re: I Feel Old John Garza <john@127.0.0.1> - 2016-01-03 08:07 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-03 15:06 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-03 11:05 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-03 17:59 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-03 18:08 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-04 06:44 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-04 12:24 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-03 09:45 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Lon <lon.stowell@comcast.net> - 2016-01-03 13:12 -0700
Re: I Feel Old Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-03 16:56 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-03 14:27 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-03 23:53 +0000
Re: I Feel Old John Garza <john@127.0.0.1> - 2016-01-04 07:42 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-04 14:32 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-04 16:55 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-04 11:41 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-03 17:37 +0100
Re: I Feel Old Lon <lon.stowell@comcast.net> - 2016-01-03 13:11 -0700
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-04 07:48 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-04 16:01 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-04 16:23 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-01-03 17:30 -0400
Re: I Feel Old "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-04 14:55 -0600
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-04 13:15 -0800
Re: I Feel Old "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-05 14:59 -0600
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-05 13:31 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-01-05 22:11 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-04 17:07 -0800
Re: I Feel Old philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2016-01-06 19:21 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-01 21:33 +0000
Re: I Feel Old mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-01 22:52 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-01 15:57 -0800
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-01 20:52 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-02 00:45 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-02 06:40 +0000
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-02 17:25 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-03 08:18 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-03 07:26 -0500
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-04 07:34 -0800
Re: I Feel Old mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-02 14:27 +0000
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-02 17:28 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-02 19:56 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-03 07:26 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-03 10:00 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-17 08:48 -0800
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-04 07:44 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-04 13:42 -0600
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-05 11:15 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-06 11:27 -0600
Re: I Feel Old "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-01-06 12:02 -0600
Re: I Feel Old scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-06 18:52 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-06 18:06 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-07 12:04 -0500
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-07 09:22 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-13 15:55 -0600
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-07 09:36 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-07 17:47 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-07 18:47 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-07 19:23 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-08 10:58 +0100
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-08 06:37 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-08 15:53 +0100
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-08 11:26 -0600
Re: I Feel Old "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-09 09:53 +1100
Re: I Feel Old Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-09 11:24 +0100
Re: I Feel Old "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-10 06:06 +1100
Re: I Feel Old Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-08 10:13 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-08 17:42 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-09 07:30 -0500
Re: I Feel Old "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-01-09 07:07 -0600
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-09 11:55 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-09 15:40 -0600
Re: I Feel Old "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-10 06:13 +1100
Re: I Feel Old Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-01-09 13:36 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-09 15:30 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-08 10:43 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-08 10:33 -0600
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-08 10:46 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-08 10:59 -0600
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-08 10:44 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-08 22:53 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-09 12:53 +1100
Re: I Feel Old Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-09 11:29 +0100
Re: I Feel Old Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-09 11:26 +0100
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-12 16:22 -0600
Re: I Feel Old "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-13 10:03 +1100
Re: I Feel Old "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-01-12 21:01 -0600
Re: I Feel Old "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-13 14:22 +1100
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-13 10:14 -0800
Re: I Feel Old mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-13 18:51 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-14 07:02 +1100
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-13 13:06 -0600
Re: I Feel Old "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-09 09:51 +1100
Re: I Feel Old "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-09 06:01 +1100
Re: I Feel Old Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-08 13:21 -0600
Re: I Feel Old scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-08 20:58 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "Jack Myers" <jmyers@n6wuz.net> - 2016-01-08 20:36 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-09 11:31 +0100
Re: I Feel Old Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-01-09 18:33 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-09 07:30 -0500
Re: I Feel Old mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-09 12:59 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-09 15:31 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-09 17:22 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-09 17:07 -0800
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-10 11:25 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-11 17:08 -0600
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-12 07:43 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-12 08:44 -0800
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-12 09:52 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-12 12:28 -0600
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-12 10:58 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-12 14:49 -0600
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-12 13:57 -0800
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 18:19 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-12 17:37 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-12 18:46 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-08 16:08 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-01-09 18:38 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-09 21:43 -0600
Re: I Feel Old "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-01-09 22:56 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-11 23:49 -0600
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-12 07:46 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-12 11:28 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-12 14:58 -0600
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-12 14:01 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-12 16:42 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-12 22:07 +0000
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-08 10:36 -0800
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-09 05:04 -0500
Re: I Feel Old scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-11 14:48 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-01-11 17:28 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 19:01 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-09 07:30 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-09 16:59 -0600
Re: I Feel Old "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-01-07 13:13 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-07 18:55 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-08 17:40 +0000
Re: I Feel Old mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-08 23:20 +0000
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-04 07:29 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-04 18:30 +0100
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-04 10:59 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-04 19:48 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-05 06:27 -0800
Re: I Feel Old mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-05 16:26 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-05 12:27 -0600
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-05 11:08 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-04 13:14 -0600
Re: I Feel Old "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-01-04 14:43 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-04 22:38 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-12 17:47 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-13 01:27 +0100
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-13 11:18 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-01-13 19:05 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-13 20:22 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-14 14:09 -0600
Re: I Feel Old jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-15 14:51 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-15 09:48 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-15 17:26 +0100
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-15 13:19 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-15 09:20 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-15 17:44 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-15 12:57 -0600
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-19 12:42 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-19 15:27 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-15 19:15 +0100
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-15 13:44 -0600
Re: I Feel Old "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-01-15 15:02 -0600
Re: I Feel Old "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-16 08:58 +1100
Re: I Feel Old Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-15 23:51 +0100
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-17 16:01 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-15 17:11 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-16 08:03 -0500
Re: I Feel Old "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-01-16 08:29 -0600
Re: I Feel Old "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-17 03:38 +1100
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-16 15:32 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-16 16:59 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-16 16:45 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-17 02:11 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-17 14:02 +1100
Re: I Feel Old Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-17 14:22 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-18 05:09 +1100
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-17 15:00 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-18 03:59 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-16 16:15 +0100
Re: I Feel Old mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-17 11:39 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-18 04:41 +1100
Re: I Feel Old mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-16 16:33 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-01-16 11:19 -0600
Re: I Feel Old mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-16 18:36 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-16 17:23 -0500
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-16 13:01 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-16 20:55 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-16 14:53 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-17 05:43 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-16 19:50 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-17 09:22 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-17 14:33 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-17 15:19 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-17 19:27 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-17 15:00 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-16 15:32 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-16 22:49 -0600
Re: I Feel Old "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-17 16:12 +1100
Re: I Feel Old mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-17 11:32 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-17 12:06 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-17 09:22 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-17 10:05 -0500
Re: I Feel Old jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-17 15:26 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 05:14 +1100
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-17 15:38 -0600
Re: I Feel Old jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-16 14:09 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-16 15:19 +0100
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-15 19:29 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-15 14:25 -0800
Re: I Feel Old "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-14 13:46 +1100
Re: I Feel Old Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-14 05:17 +0100
Re: I Feel Old Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-14 13:11 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-04 22:37 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-01-05 04:44 -0400
Re: I Feel Old Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-05 18:46 +0000
Re: I Feel Old mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-05 11:06 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-05 18:46 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-04 17:04 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-04 17:36 -0800
Re: I Feel Old jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-02 15:01 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-02 15:58 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-04 06:40 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-04 12:31 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-04 22:06 -0500
Re: I Feel Old "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-01-03 07:09 +1100
Re: I Feel Old Uncle Steve <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2016-01-03 12:11 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-03 20:42 -0800
Re: I Feel Old "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-04 16:43 +1100
Re: I Feel Old Uncle Steve <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2016-01-05 22:05 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-04 18:21 +0100
Re: I Feel Old Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-04 17:47 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-04 16:10 -0500
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-04 13:26 -0800
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-04 21:57 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Uncle Steve <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2016-01-06 19:46 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-07 12:04 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-07 17:36 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-07 13:43 -0600
Re: I Feel Old "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-08 15:35 +1100
Re: I Feel Old Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-08 00:15 -0600
Re: I Feel Old "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-08 19:41 +1100
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-07 12:44 -0800
Re: I Feel Old mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-07 21:32 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-05 14:51 -0600
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-05 12:59 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-05 22:17 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-08 14:35 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-05 22:17 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-05 19:24 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-05 17:31 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-06 07:38 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-06 06:50 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-06 13:26 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-06 05:49 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-06 14:32 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-06 07:13 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-06 16:08 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-08 14:39 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-01-06 09:14 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-06 10:22 -0500
Re: I Feel Old "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-15 17:45 -0600
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-06 18:42 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-06 14:20 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-06 14:34 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-06 19:52 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-06 12:35 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-06 20:54 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-06 18:44 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-06 23:48 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-06 19:38 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-07 07:46 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-07 06:44 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-09 21:47 -0800
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-10 05:45 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-10 12:18 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-10 08:12 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-10 13:40 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-07 12:04 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-07 08:15 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-06 05:48 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-06 11:29 -0500
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-06 10:20 -0800
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-05 20:52 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-06 06:54 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-06 11:34 -0500
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-06 18:40 -0500
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-06 18:39 -0500
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-06 10:22 -0800
Re: I Feel Old "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-15 17:43 -0600
Re: I Feel Old JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 20:13 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-06 11:26 -0500
Re: I Feel Old "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-08 14:37 -0600
Re: I Feel Old mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-08 23:25 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Freddy1 <something@something.com> - 2016-01-02 21:35 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-03 05:34 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-03 08:33 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Freddy1 <something@something.com> - 2016-01-03 15:17 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-03 20:52 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-04 05:09 -0800
Re: I Feel Old "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-05 14:57 -0600
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-01 20:46 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Bob Martin <bob.martin@excite.com> - 2016-01-02 07:00 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Louis Krupp <lkrupp@nospam.pssw.com.invalid> - 2016-01-02 01:44 -0700
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-02 13:46 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-02 09:11 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-01-02 11:49 -0600
Re: I Feel Old John Garza <john@127.0.0.1> - 2016-01-03 08:14 -0600
Re: I Feel Old mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-03 17:11 +0000
Page 15 of 16 — ← Prev page 1 … 13 14 [15] 16 Next page →
| From | Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-06 23:48 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <KrGdnVzIO-BSOhDLnZ2dnUU78TmdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #156159 |
On 06/01/2016 23:44, J. Clarke wrote: > In article <lI2dnSPPxLkGvxDLnZ2dnUU78QmdnZ2d@giganews.com>, > am.swallow@btinternet.com says... >> >> On 06/01/2016 13:26, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote: >>> On Wed, 6 Jan 2016 06:50:57 -0500 >>> "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> That's been the big problem right along. Even the ISS is treated as a >>>> stunt--the most expensive artifact ever created, and the plan is to >>>> destroy it at some point in the next decade or so, instead of using it >>>> to build something better. >>> >>> Oh ye gods, I thought letting Skylab drop was criminally insane. Now >>> they plan to repeat themselves. I do hope they at least take a little more >>> care about arranging where it lands this time. >>> >>> That old line about the conquest of space being too important to >>> leave to governments is ringing true. >>> >> >> When a ship gets old it costs more to repair it every year than to buy a >> new one. The ISS will need rewiring, replumbing and the airtight seals >> between modules replacing. > > A ship doesn't have to be hauled into orbit piece by piece at a cost of > $2000 or so a pound. > Unfortunately the replacement parts for the ISS do. We can only replace entire modules or small parts. The habitat area of the replacement space station for the ISS is likely to be a Bigelow BA-330 <http://bigelowaerospace.com/b330> http://bigelowaerospace.com/b330
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-06 19:38 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.30f77d95a818eca989db6@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #156161 |
In article <KrGdnVzIO-BSOhDLnZ2dnUU78TmdnZ2d@giganews.com>, am.swallow@btinternet.com says... > > On 06/01/2016 23:44, J. Clarke wrote: > > In article <lI2dnSPPxLkGvxDLnZ2dnUU78QmdnZ2d@giganews.com>, > > am.swallow@btinternet.com says... > >> > >> On 06/01/2016 13:26, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote: > >>> On Wed, 6 Jan 2016 06:50:57 -0500 > >>> "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>>> That's been the big problem right along. Even the ISS is treated as a > >>>> stunt--the most expensive artifact ever created, and the plan is to > >>>> destroy it at some point in the next decade or so, instead of using it > >>>> to build something better. > >>> > >>> Oh ye gods, I thought letting Skylab drop was criminally insane. Now > >>> they plan to repeat themselves. I do hope they at least take a little more > >>> care about arranging where it lands this time. > >>> > >>> That old line about the conquest of space being too important to > >>> leave to governments is ringing true. > >>> > >> > >> When a ship gets old it costs more to repair it every year than to buy a > >> new one. The ISS will need rewiring, replumbing and the airtight seals > >> between modules replacing. > > > > A ship doesn't have to be hauled into orbit piece by piece at a cost of > > $2000 or so a pound. > > > Unfortunately the replacement parts for the ISS do. We can only replace > entire modules or small parts. Then it's time we learned how to take them apart and reassemble them in orbit. > The habitat area of the replacement space station for the ISS is likely > to be a Bigelow BA-330 > <http://bigelowaerospace.com/b330> And a large enough Bigelow hab can be used as a workshop to repair one of those modules that you seem to believe cannot be repaired for less cost than orbiting another module. > http://bigelowaerospace.com/b330
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-07 07:46 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <OoOdndTKMpFaihPLnZ2dnUU78Y2dnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #156170 |
On 07/01/2016 00:38, J. Clarke wrote: > In article <KrGdnVzIO-BSOhDLnZ2dnUU78TmdnZ2d@giganews.com>, > am.swallow@btinternet.com says... >> >> On 06/01/2016 23:44, J. Clarke wrote: >>> In article <lI2dnSPPxLkGvxDLnZ2dnUU78QmdnZ2d@giganews.com>, >>> am.swallow@btinternet.com says... >>>> >>>> On 06/01/2016 13:26, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote: >>>>> On Wed, 6 Jan 2016 06:50:57 -0500 >>>>> "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> That's been the big problem right along. Even the ISS is treated as a >>>>>> stunt--the most expensive artifact ever created, and the plan is to >>>>>> destroy it at some point in the next decade or so, instead of using it >>>>>> to build something better. >>>>> >>>>> Oh ye gods, I thought letting Skylab drop was criminally insane. Now >>>>> they plan to repeat themselves. I do hope they at least take a little more >>>>> care about arranging where it lands this time. >>>>> >>>>> That old line about the conquest of space being too important to >>>>> leave to governments is ringing true. >>>>> >>>> >>>> When a ship gets old it costs more to repair it every year than to buy a >>>> new one. The ISS will need rewiring, replumbing and the airtight seals >>>> between modules replacing. >>> >>> A ship doesn't have to be hauled into orbit piece by piece at a cost of >>> $2000 or so a pound. >>> >> Unfortunately the replacement parts for the ISS do. We can only replace >> entire modules or small parts. > > Then it's time we learned how to take them apart and reassemble them in > orbit. > >> The habitat area of the replacement space station for the ISS is likely >> to be a Bigelow BA-330 >> <http://bigelowaerospace.com/b330> > > And a large enough Bigelow hab can be used as a workshop to repair one > of those modules that you seem to believe cannot be repaired for less > cost than orbiting another module. > >> http://bigelowaerospace.com/b330 > > Before you can repair your module you would have the cost of launching an entire Bigelow space station.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-07 06:44 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.30f8198ec3b8154c989db8@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #156192 |
In article <OoOdndTKMpFaihPLnZ2dnUU78Y2dnZ2d@giganews.com>, am.swallow@btinternet.com says... > > On 07/01/2016 00:38, J. Clarke wrote: > > In article <KrGdnVzIO-BSOhDLnZ2dnUU78TmdnZ2d@giganews.com>, > > am.swallow@btinternet.com says... > >> > >> On 06/01/2016 23:44, J. Clarke wrote: > >>> In article <lI2dnSPPxLkGvxDLnZ2dnUU78QmdnZ2d@giganews.com>, > >>> am.swallow@btinternet.com says... > >>>> > >>>> On 06/01/2016 13:26, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote: > >>>>> On Wed, 6 Jan 2016 06:50:57 -0500 > >>>>> "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> That's been the big problem right along. Even the ISS is treated as a > >>>>>> stunt--the most expensive artifact ever created, and the plan is to > >>>>>> destroy it at some point in the next decade or so, instead of using it > >>>>>> to build something better. > >>>>> > >>>>> Oh ye gods, I thought letting Skylab drop was criminally insane. Now > >>>>> they plan to repeat themselves. I do hope they at least take a little more > >>>>> care about arranging where it lands this time. > >>>>> > >>>>> That old line about the conquest of space being too important to > >>>>> leave to governments is ringing true. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> When a ship gets old it costs more to repair it every year than to buy a > >>>> new one. The ISS will need rewiring, replumbing and the airtight seals > >>>> between modules replacing. > >>> > >>> A ship doesn't have to be hauled into orbit piece by piece at a cost of > >>> $2000 or so a pound. > >>> > >> Unfortunately the replacement parts for the ISS do. We can only replace > >> entire modules or small parts. > > > > Then it's time we learned how to take them apart and reassemble them in > > orbit. > > > >> The habitat area of the replacement space station for the ISS is likely > >> to be a Bigelow BA-330 > >> <http://bigelowaerospace.com/b330> > > > > And a large enough Bigelow hab can be used as a workshop to repair one > > of those modules that you seem to believe cannot be repaired for less > > cost than orbiting another module. > > > >> http://bigelowaerospace.com/b330 > > > > > Before you can repair your module you would have the cost of launching > an entire Bigelow space station. Which is one more module for the ISS, adding on to it when not being used for repairs. Why do you see that to be a problem?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-09 21:47 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <a1s39bhqafaoflua9c8s1m70u678hhcvfu@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #156200 |
On Thu, 7 Jan 2016 06:44:05 -0500, "J. Clarke"
<j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>In article <OoOdndTKMpFaihPLnZ2dnUU78Y2dnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>am.swallow@btinternet.com says...
[snip]
>> Before you can repair your module you would have the cost of launching
>> an entire Bigelow space station.
>
>Which is one more module for the ISS, adding on to it when not being
>used for repairs. Why do you see that to be a problem?
Possibly, he is thinking that having redundancy is useful.
Sincerelky,
Gene Wirchenko
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-10 05:45 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.30fc003d10f79839989dd5@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #156346 |
In article <a1s39bhqafaoflua9c8s1m70u678hhcvfu@4ax.com>, genew@telus.net says... > > On Thu, 7 Jan 2016 06:44:05 -0500, "J. Clarke" > <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: > > >In article <OoOdndTKMpFaihPLnZ2dnUU78Y2dnZ2d@giganews.com>, > >am.swallow@btinternet.com says... > > [snip] > > >> Before you can repair your module you would have the cost of launching > >> an entire Bigelow space station. > > > >Which is one more module for the ISS, adding on to it when not being > >used for repairs. Why do you see that to be a problem? > > Possibly, he is thinking that having redundancy is useful. > > Sincerelky, > > Gene Wirchenko Since this branch of the discussions started with the notion that ISS should be discarded because it's cheaper to build a new space station than to maintain ISS, I don't think so.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-10 12:18 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <20160110121813.54b85b32ed221f578453e3d7@eircom.net> |
| In reply to | #156200 |
On Thu, 7 Jan 2016 06:44:05 -0500 "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: > In article <OoOdndTKMpFaihPLnZ2dnUU78Y2dnZ2d@giganews.com>, > am.swallow@btinternet.com says... > > > > On 07/01/2016 00:38, J. Clarke wrote: > > > In article <KrGdnVzIO-BSOhDLnZ2dnUU78TmdnZ2d@giganews.com>, > > > am.swallow@btinternet.com says... > > >> > > >> On 06/01/2016 23:44, J. Clarke wrote: > > >>> In article <lI2dnSPPxLkGvxDLnZ2dnUU78QmdnZ2d@giganews.com>, > > >>> am.swallow@btinternet.com says... > > >>>> > > >>>> On 06/01/2016 13:26, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote: > > >>>>> On Wed, 6 Jan 2016 06:50:57 -0500 > > >>>>> "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> That's been the big problem right along. Even the ISS is > > >>>>>> treated as a stunt--the most expensive artifact ever created, > > >>>>>> and the plan is to destroy it at some point in the next decade > > >>>>>> or so, instead of using it to build something better. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Oh ye gods, I thought letting Skylab drop was criminally > > >>>>> insane. Now they plan to repeat themselves. I do hope they at > > >>>>> least take a little more care about arranging where it lands this > > >>>>> time. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> That old line about the conquest of space being too > > >>>>> important to leave to governments is ringing true. > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> When a ship gets old it costs more to repair it every year than to > > >>>> buy a new one. The ISS will need rewiring, replumbing and the > > >>>> airtight seals between modules replacing. > > >>> > > >>> A ship doesn't have to be hauled into orbit piece by piece at a > > >>> cost of $2000 or so a pound. > > >>> > > >> Unfortunately the replacement parts for the ISS do. We can only > > >> replace entire modules or small parts. > > > > > > Then it's time we learned how to take them apart and reassemble them > > > in orbit. > > > > > >> The habitat area of the replacement space station for the ISS is > > >> likely to be a Bigelow BA-330 > > >> <http://bigelowaerospace.com/b330> > > > > > > And a large enough Bigelow hab can be used as a workshop to repair one > > > of those modules that you seem to believe cannot be repaired for less > > > cost than orbiting another module. > > > > > >> http://bigelowaerospace.com/b330 > > > > > > > > Before you can repair your module you would have the cost of launching > > an entire Bigelow space station. > > Which is one more module for the ISS, adding on to it when not being > used for repairs. Why do you see that to be a problem? Sounds like a plan to me, with the option of junking modules that become too old to maintain - I'd be inclined to park any such nearby with the airlocks open (to kill anything in them) and consider them as a source of spare parts rather than dropping them - after all every kilo up there cost around $10000 plus whatever it cost to make. Those Bigelow habitats look very good, add fuel tanks and motors (hypergols not H2/LOX) and you have a really neat OTV with great crew and cargo capabilities - it'd cost maybe a quarter of a billion to lift - just the sort of thing the Mars One folks need, heck a few billion would lift a small fleet of Mars shuttles, just add fuel and payload - maybe a billion per trip. I'd be a lot happier with the Mars One plan if it included shuttles instead of a one way, one shot drop and die. -- Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-10 08:12 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.30fc22b74db7be17989ddc@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #156350 |
In article <20160110121813.54b85b32ed221f578453e3d7@eircom.net>, steveo@eircom.net says... > > On Thu, 7 Jan 2016 06:44:05 -0500 > "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: > > > In article <OoOdndTKMpFaihPLnZ2dnUU78Y2dnZ2d@giganews.com>, > > am.swallow@btinternet.com says... > > > > > > On 07/01/2016 00:38, J. Clarke wrote: > > > > In article <KrGdnVzIO-BSOhDLnZ2dnUU78TmdnZ2d@giganews.com>, > > > > am.swallow@btinternet.com says... > > > >> > > > >> On 06/01/2016 23:44, J. Clarke wrote: > > > >>> In article <lI2dnSPPxLkGvxDLnZ2dnUU78QmdnZ2d@giganews.com>, > > > >>> am.swallow@btinternet.com says... > > > >>>> > > > >>>> On 06/01/2016 13:26, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote: > > > >>>>> On Wed, 6 Jan 2016 06:50:57 -0500 > > > >>>>> "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>>> That's been the big problem right along. Even the ISS is > > > >>>>>> treated as a stunt--the most expensive artifact ever created, > > > >>>>>> and the plan is to destroy it at some point in the next decade > > > >>>>>> or so, instead of using it to build something better. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> Oh ye gods, I thought letting Skylab drop was criminally > > > >>>>> insane. Now they plan to repeat themselves. I do hope they at > > > >>>>> least take a little more care about arranging where it lands this > > > >>>>> time. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> That old line about the conquest of space being too > > > >>>>> important to leave to governments is ringing true. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> When a ship gets old it costs more to repair it every year than to > > > >>>> buy a new one. The ISS will need rewiring, replumbing and the > > > >>>> airtight seals between modules replacing. > > > >>> > > > >>> A ship doesn't have to be hauled into orbit piece by piece at a > > > >>> cost of $2000 or so a pound. > > > >>> > > > >> Unfortunately the replacement parts for the ISS do. We can only > > > >> replace entire modules or small parts. > > > > > > > > Then it's time we learned how to take them apart and reassemble them > > > > in orbit. > > > > > > > >> The habitat area of the replacement space station for the ISS is > > > >> likely to be a Bigelow BA-330 > > > >> <http://bigelowaerospace.com/b330> > > > > > > > > And a large enough Bigelow hab can be used as a workshop to repair one > > > > of those modules that you seem to believe cannot be repaired for less > > > > cost than orbiting another module. > > > > > > > >> http://bigelowaerospace.com/b330 > > > > > > > > > > > Before you can repair your module you would have the cost of launching > > > an entire Bigelow space station. > > > > Which is one more module for the ISS, adding on to it when not being > > used for repairs. Why do you see that to be a problem? > > Sounds like a plan to me, with the option of junking modules that > become too old to maintain - I'd be inclined to park any such nearby with > the airlocks open (to kill anything in them) and consider them as a source > of spare parts rather than dropping them - after all every kilo up there > cost around $10000 plus whatever it cost to make. > > Those Bigelow habitats look very good, add fuel tanks and motors > (hypergols not H2/LOX) and you have a really neat OTV with great crew and > cargo capabilities - it'd cost maybe a quarter of a billion to lift - just > the sort of thing the Mars One folks need, heck a few billion would lift a > small fleet of Mars shuttles, just add fuel and payload - maybe a billion > per trip. I'd be a lot happier with the Mars One plan if it included > shuttles instead of a one way, one shot drop and die. I'll feel better about them once they have one attached to ISS and it's actually doing what they say it will, but I won't feel real good until they've got one of the larger ones up. What's worrisome is that they seem to be planning their third generation to need a NASA booster instead of finding a way to break it down into pieces that can ride Falcon.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-10 13:40 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <20160110134039.6568d25458c9f73d89360117@eircom.net> |
| In reply to | #156351 |
On Sun, 10 Jan 2016 08:12:08 -0500 "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: > In article <20160110121813.54b85b32ed221f578453e3d7@eircom.net>, > steveo@eircom.net says... > > Those Bigelow habitats look very good, add fuel tanks and motors > > (hypergols not H2/LOX) and you have a really neat OTV with great crew > > and cargo capabilities - it'd cost maybe a quarter of a billion to lift > > - just the sort of thing the Mars One folks need, heck a few billion > > would lift a small fleet of Mars shuttles, just add fuel and payload - > > maybe a billion per trip. I'd be a lot happier with the Mars One plan > > if it included shuttles instead of a one way, one shot drop and die. > > I'll feel better about them once they have one attached to ISS and it's > actually doing what they say it will, Sure, proof of the pudding and all that. I certainly wouldn't want to use one as an OTV until (at least) one had been in use as a habitat for a good while (say a year). > What's worrisome is that they > seem to be planning their third generation to need a NASA booster > instead of finding a way to break it down into pieces that can ride > Falcon. That sounds like a bad idea. -- Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-07 12:04 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <1240704112.473877843.301501.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #156170 |
J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: > In article <KrGdnVzIO-BSOhDLnZ2dnUU78TmdnZ2d@giganews.com>, > am.swallow@btinternet.com says... >> >> On 06/01/2016 23:44, J. Clarke wrote: >>> In article <lI2dnSPPxLkGvxDLnZ2dnUU78QmdnZ2d@giganews.com>, >>> am.swallow@btinternet.com says... >>>> >>>> On 06/01/2016 13:26, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote: >>>>> On Wed, 6 Jan 2016 06:50:57 -0500 >>>>> "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> That's been the big problem right along. Even the ISS is treated as a >>>>>> stunt--the most expensive artifact ever created, and the plan is to >>>>>> destroy it at some point in the next decade or so, instead of using it >>>>>> to build something better. >>>>> >>>>> Oh ye gods, I thought letting Skylab drop was criminally insane. Now >>>>> they plan to repeat themselves. I do hope they at least take a little more >>>>> care about arranging where it lands this time. >>>>> >>>>> That old line about the conquest of space being too important to >>>>> leave to governments is ringing true. >>>>> >>>> >>>> When a ship gets old it costs more to repair it every year than to buy a >>>> new one. The ISS will need rewiring, replumbing and the airtight seals >>>> between modules replacing. >>> >>> A ship doesn't have to be hauled into orbit piece by piece at a cost of >>> $2000 or so a pound. >>> >> Unfortunately the replacement parts for the ISS do. We can only replace >> entire modules or small parts. > > Then it's time we learned how to take them apart and reassemble them in > orbit. > Some of the old SF stories make interesting reaing, about assembling a space station in orbit by welding girders and plates. >> The habitat area of the replacement space station for the ISS is likely >> to be a Bigelow BA-330 >> <http://bigelowaerospace.com/b330> > > And a large enough Bigelow hab can be used as a workshop to repair one > of those modules that you seem to believe cannot be repaired for less > cost than orbiting another module. > >> http://bigelowaerospace.com/b330 > -- Pete
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-07 08:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <20160107081511.7bf17882036139b5ddf25db1@eircom.net> |
| In reply to | #156161 |
On Wed, 6 Jan 2016 23:48:43 +0000 Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> wrote: > On 06/01/2016 23:44, J. Clarke wrote: > > In article <lI2dnSPPxLkGvxDLnZ2dnUU78QmdnZ2d@giganews.com>, > > A ship doesn't have to be hauled into orbit piece by piece at a cost of > > $2000 or so a pound. > > > Unfortunately the replacement parts for the ISS do. We can only replace > entire modules or small parts. That's a pity - not designed for maintenance then. Still that's a common problem everywhere these days not just in space. > The habitat area of the replacement space station for the ISS is likely > to be a Bigelow BA-330 > <http://bigelowaerospace.com/b330> > > http://bigelowaerospace.com/b330 Nice piece of kit. Now the real challenge is to find a way to make a profit out of having one in orbit (about $200M plus whatever the thing costs to buy invested* - 20 years to amortise over) and we'll get decent use of space. * Yes I know we have to add crew costs as well. -- Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-06 05:48 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <8e7195f9-b53a-4d62-a1e9-5d08e516a102@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #156059 |
On Wednesday, January 6, 2016 at 1:00:03 AM UTC-7, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote: > On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 17:31:48 -0800 (PST) > Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote: > > So if you want to blame someone, I suppose you could blame Ronald Reagan, > > as he can be credited with bringing the Cold War to an end! > Really ? He caused the Soviet Union to collapse internally ? The Strategic Defense Initiative did help put the pressure on. John Savard
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-06 11:29 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <n6jf7d$fr9$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #156047 |
Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> writes: > On Tuesday, January 5, 2016 at 5:24:26 PM UTC-7, Peter Flass wrote: >> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote: > >> > Your average user has more computer power on his desk (heck, even >> > in his phone these days) than the combined power of all the computers >> > used to put a man on the moon. But nobody's going to the moon anymore. >> > What happened? > >> Obama ;-) > > Now, really. > > If one _was_ going to blame a President, why not Nixon? After all, he was the > one who cancelled Apollo 18, 19, and 20. And presumably that also entailed > cancelling whatever plans might have been in the works to prepare for a Mars > mission. > > Under Bush - and under Obama as well - NASA has been conducting automated > missions to Mars that certainly _appear_ to be preparations for a manned Mars > landing. The ISS, which has been around for some time, has had endurance > testing of astronauts under weightlessness as one of its goals, and that, > again, would largely be relevant in the context of a manned Mars mission. > > Sending astronauts to the Moon - and even more so, to Mars - costs a lot of > money. Thus, it requires a *good reason*. > > There was a reason for Apollo, even if it wasn't "good" from some perspectives. > The U.S. felt it needed to demonstrate to the unaligned nations of the world > that it was "ahead" of Russia. If this saved the people of India, say, from > living under a Communist dictatorship, then, yes, it was worth it. > > But spending that kind of money to make scientists and astronomers happy really > isn't likely to happen. Under any Administration, under any Congress. > > So if you want to blame someone, I suppose you could blame Ronald Reagan, as he > can be credited with bringing the Cold War to an end! Only if you ignore the actions of Gorbachev who accomplished that feat single handed. -- Dan Espen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-06 10:20 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <e70a8b68-ef82-4999-b248-db697b2c2994@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #156047 |
On Tuesday, January 5, 2016 at 8:31:50 PM UTC-5, Quadibloc wrote: > There was a reason for Apollo, even if it wasn't "good" from some perspectives. > The U.S. felt it needed to demonstrate to the unaligned nations of the world > that it was "ahead" of Russia. If this saved the people of India, say, from > living under a Communist dictatorship, then, yes, it was worth it. I can't help but suspect that various NASA efforts through Apollo helped the computer industry--and us--because NASA funded enable research into better computer circuits that otherwise would've taken much longer to develop. > > But spending that kind of money to make scientists and astronomers happy really > isn't likely to happen. Under any Administration, under any Congress. > > So if you want to blame someone, I suppose you could blame Ronald Reagan, as he > can be credited with bringing the Cold War to an end! > > John Savard
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-05 20:52 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.30f63d6669c43f49989da1@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #156038 |
In article <397341809.473730964.998635.peter_flass- yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>, peter_flass@yahoo.com says... > > Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote: > > On 2016-01-05, Charles Richmond <numerist@aquaporin4.com> wrote: > > > >> "Quadibloc" <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in message > >> news:6080e724-4d4a-4f96-a0b6-06d6c86668d8@googlegroups.com... > >> > >>> [snip...] [snip...] [snip...] > >>> > >>> One way or another, the future will be exciting. > >> > >> And the future will find a way to make all of us look *stupid* and > >> plodding... attempting to do big things with underpowered machines. The > >> future has always done this to people. > >> > >> The fact is: People in the present *must* continue to work the best way > >> they can, so that the *future* people will get the better hardware and > >> software. IMO. > > > > Still, just because a machine is underpowered by today's standards, > > that doesn't make it unusable. Look at what those space probes out > > there are doing - and think of the kinds of computers the builders > > had available when making them. > > > > Your average user has more computer power on his desk (heck, even > > in his phone these days) than the combined power of all the computers > > used to put a man on the moon. But nobody's going to the moon anymore. > > What happened? > > > > Obama ;-) The last time anybody went to the Moon was 1972, when Obama was a small boy who had just come back from Indonesia. It is rather difficult to find a way to plausibly blame him for the lack of a manned lunar program.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-06 06:54 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <1103050932.473772799.994295.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #156050 |
J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: > In article <397341809.473730964.998635.peter_flass- > yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>, peter_flass@yahoo.com says... >> >> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote: >>> On 2016-01-05, Charles Richmond <numerist@aquaporin4.com> wrote: >>> >>>> "Quadibloc" <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in message >>>> news:6080e724-4d4a-4f96-a0b6-06d6c86668d8@googlegroups.com... >>>> >>>>> [snip...] [snip...] [snip...] >>>>> >>>>> One way or another, the future will be exciting. >>>> >>>> And the future will find a way to make all of us look *stupid* and >>>> plodding... attempting to do big things with underpowered machines. The >>>> future has always done this to people. >>>> >>>> The fact is: People in the present *must* continue to work the best way >>>> they can, so that the *future* people will get the better hardware and >>>> software. IMO. >>> >>> Still, just because a machine is underpowered by today's standards, >>> that doesn't make it unusable. Look at what those space probes out >>> there are doing - and think of the kinds of computers the builders >>> had available when making them. >>> >>> Your average user has more computer power on his desk (heck, even >>> in his phone these days) than the combined power of all the computers >>> used to put a man on the moon. But nobody's going to the moon anymore. >>> What happened? >>> >> >> Obama ;-) > > The last time anybody went to the Moon was 1972, when Obama was a small > boy who had just come back from Indonesia. It is rather difficult to > find a way to plausibly blame him for the lack of a manned lunar > program. > > GWB had plans to start up a lunar program and Obama cancelled them. -- Pete
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-06 11:34 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <n6jfid$fr9$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #156074 |
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes: > J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >> In article <397341809.473730964.998635.peter_flass- >> yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>, peter_flass@yahoo.com says... >>> >>> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote: >>>> On 2016-01-05, Charles Richmond <numerist@aquaporin4.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> "Quadibloc" <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in message >>>>> news:6080e724-4d4a-4f96-a0b6-06d6c86668d8@googlegroups.com... >>>>> >>>>>> [snip...] [snip...] [snip...] >>>>>> >>>>>> One way or another, the future will be exciting. >>>>> >>>>> And the future will find a way to make all of us look *stupid* and >>>>> plodding... attempting to do big things with underpowered machines. The >>>>> future has always done this to people. >>>>> >>>>> The fact is: People in the present *must* continue to work the best way >>>>> they can, so that the *future* people will get the better hardware and >>>>> software. IMO. >>>> >>>> Still, just because a machine is underpowered by today's standards, >>>> that doesn't make it unusable. Look at what those space probes out >>>> there are doing - and think of the kinds of computers the builders >>>> had available when making them. >>>> >>>> Your average user has more computer power on his desk (heck, even >>>> in his phone these days) than the combined power of all the computers >>>> used to put a man on the moon. But nobody's going to the moon anymore. >>>> What happened? >>>> >>> >>> Obama ;-) >> >> The last time anybody went to the Moon was 1972, when Obama was a small >> boy who had just come back from Indonesia. It is rather difficult to >> find a way to plausibly blame him for the lack of a manned lunar >> program. > > GWB had plans to start up a lunar program and Obama cancelled them. Another proof of the incompetence of GWB and the good judgment of Obama. Even Reagan had enough good judgment to shut down Apollo. -- Dan Espen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-06 18:40 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.30f76fffb5b3d6db989dad@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #156126 |
In article <n6jfid$fr9$3@dont-email.me>, despen@verizon.net says... > > Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes: > > > J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: > >> In article <397341809.473730964.998635.peter_flass- > >> yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>, peter_flass@yahoo.com says... > >>> > >>> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote: > >>>> On 2016-01-05, Charles Richmond <numerist@aquaporin4.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> "Quadibloc" <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in message > >>>>> news:6080e724-4d4a-4f96-a0b6-06d6c86668d8@googlegroups.com... > >>>>> > >>>>>> [snip...] [snip...] [snip...] > >>>>>> > >>>>>> One way or another, the future will be exciting. > >>>>> > >>>>> And the future will find a way to make all of us look *stupid* and > >>>>> plodding... attempting to do big things with underpowered machines. The > >>>>> future has always done this to people. > >>>>> > >>>>> The fact is: People in the present *must* continue to work the best way > >>>>> they can, so that the *future* people will get the better hardware and > >>>>> software. IMO. > >>>> > >>>> Still, just because a machine is underpowered by today's standards, > >>>> that doesn't make it unusable. Look at what those space probes out > >>>> there are doing - and think of the kinds of computers the builders > >>>> had available when making them. > >>>> > >>>> Your average user has more computer power on his desk (heck, even > >>>> in his phone these days) than the combined power of all the computers > >>>> used to put a man on the moon. But nobody's going to the moon anymore. > >>>> What happened? > >>>> > >>> > >>> Obama ;-) > >> > >> The last time anybody went to the Moon was 1972, when Obama was a small > >> boy who had just come back from Indonesia. It is rather difficult to > >> find a way to plausibly blame him for the lack of a manned lunar > >> program. > > > > GWB had plans to start up a lunar program and Obama cancelled them. > > Another proof of the incompetence of GWB and the good judgment of Obama. > Even Reagan had enough good judgment to shut down Apollo. Reagan?!?!?!?! Apollo had been shut down for nine years when Reagan took office.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-06 18:39 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.30f76fbcbce22c02989dac@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #156074 |
In article <1103050932.473772799.994295.peter_flass- yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>, peter_flass@yahoo.com says... > > J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: > > In article <397341809.473730964.998635.peter_flass- > > yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>, peter_flass@yahoo.com says... > >> > >> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote: > >>> On 2016-01-05, Charles Richmond <numerist@aquaporin4.com> wrote: > >>> > >>>> "Quadibloc" <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in message > >>>> news:6080e724-4d4a-4f96-a0b6-06d6c86668d8@googlegroups.com... > >>>> > >>>>> [snip...] [snip...] [snip...] > >>>>> > >>>>> One way or another, the future will be exciting. > >>>> > >>>> And the future will find a way to make all of us look *stupid* and > >>>> plodding... attempting to do big things with underpowered machines. The > >>>> future has always done this to people. > >>>> > >>>> The fact is: People in the present *must* continue to work the best way > >>>> they can, so that the *future* people will get the better hardware and > >>>> software. IMO. > >>> > >>> Still, just because a machine is underpowered by today's standards, > >>> that doesn't make it unusable. Look at what those space probes out > >>> there are doing - and think of the kinds of computers the builders > >>> had available when making them. > >>> > >>> Your average user has more computer power on his desk (heck, even > >>> in his phone these days) than the combined power of all the computers > >>> used to put a man on the moon. But nobody's going to the moon anymore. > >>> What happened? > >>> > >> > >> Obama ;-) > > > > The last time anybody went to the Moon was 1972, when Obama was a small > > boy who had just come back from Indonesia. It is rather difficult to > > find a way to plausibly blame him for the lack of a manned lunar > > program. > > > > > > GWB had plans to start up a lunar program and Obama cancelled them. And instead planned a Mars program that has no more hope of actually delivering anything than Bush's program.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-06 10:22 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <b20a9176-4d26-49ef-b1ee-8554173afcd0@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #156050 |
On Tuesday, January 5, 2016 at 8:46:23 PM UTC-5, J. Clarke wrote: > The last time anybody went to the Moon was 1972, when Obama was a small > boy who had just come back from Indonesia. It is rather difficult to > find a way to plausibly blame him for the lack of a manned lunar > program. Talk to one of the "true believers". They'll find a way to blame him. Heck, they'll blame him for Pearl Harbor. Or if your pizza delivery is late. They sit around all night and figure out new ways to blame him.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 15 of 16 — ← Prev page 1 … 13 14 [15] 16 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers
csiph-web