Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > rec.arts.sf.written > #486962 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-02-18 15:58 -0600 |
| Last post | 2018-02-19 16:08 -0600 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 143 — 19 participants |
Back to article view | Back to rec.arts.sf.written
_Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2018-02-18 15:58 -0600
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford David Johnston <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> - 2018-02-18 15:05 -0700
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2018-02-19 16:06 -0600
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford David Johnston <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> - 2018-02-19 15:15 -0700
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2018-02-19 20:00 -0600
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@excite.com> - 2018-02-19 18:34 -0800
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford David Johnston <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> - 2018-02-19 21:00 -0700
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2018-02-19 23:04 -0500
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford David Johnston <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> - 2018-02-19 21:19 -0700
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2018-02-20 07:44 -0500
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford David Johnston <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> - 2018-02-20 12:59 -0700
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@excite.com> - 2018-02-20 13:14 -0800
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2018-02-20 21:17 -0500
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford mcdowell_ag@sky.com - 2018-02-20 21:15 -0800
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2018-02-21 01:59 -0500
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> - 2018-02-20 23:07 -0800
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2018-02-21 21:11 -0500
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> - 2018-02-21 21:35 -0800
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2018-02-22 07:06 -0500
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford "Default User" <defaultuserbr@yahoo.com> - 2018-02-22 19:25 +0000
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford "Michael F. Stemper" <michael.stemper@gmail.com> - 2018-02-24 12:58 -0600
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2018-02-22 20:09 -0600
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> - 2018-02-22 18:59 -0800
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2018-02-22 22:10 -0600
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@excite.com> - 2018-02-22 23:32 -0800
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2018-02-23 13:25 -0600
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford mcdowell_ag@sky.com - 2018-02-21 21:38 -0800
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2018-02-22 07:14 -0500
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) - 2018-02-22 15:20 +0000
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford D B Davis <g@crcomp.net> - 2018-02-22 16:26 +0000
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@excite.com> - 2018-02-22 14:05 -0800
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2018-02-22 21:11 -0500
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford David Johnston <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> - 2018-02-22 19:35 -0700
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Bernard Peek <bap@shrdlu.com> - 2018-02-23 11:00 +0000
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2018-02-23 07:38 -0500
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford David Johnston <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> - 2018-02-23 13:43 -0700
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2018-02-23 07:37 -0500
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford David Johnston <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> - 2018-02-23 13:52 -0700
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford D B Davis <g@crcomp.net> - 2018-02-24 03:12 +0000
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2018-02-24 01:08 -0500
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford D B Davis <g@crcomp.net> - 2018-02-24 15:05 +0000
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2018-02-24 11:33 -0500
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2018-02-24 10:09 -0700
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford D B Davis <g@crcomp.net> - 2018-02-24 18:26 +0000
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2018-02-24 17:39 -0500
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford D B Davis <g@crcomp.net> - 2018-02-25 01:27 +0000
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford David Johnston <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> - 2018-02-24 10:21 -0700
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2018-02-26 15:04 +0000
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford David Johnston <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> - 2018-02-22 10:17 -0700
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford "Default User" <defaultuserbr@yahoo.com> - 2018-02-22 19:58 +0000
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford D B Davis <g@crcomp.net> - 2018-02-22 20:58 +0000
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Lawrence Watt-Evans <misenchantedpress@gmail.com> - 2018-02-22 16:57 -0500
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2018-02-22 21:14 -0500
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford David Johnston <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> - 2018-02-22 19:41 -0700
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2018-02-23 07:40 -0500
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) - 2018-02-23 04:31 +0000
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Bernard Peek <bap@shrdlu.com> - 2018-02-23 11:05 +0000
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2018-02-23 07:41 -0500
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> - 2018-02-23 07:34 -0800
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) - 2018-02-23 16:16 +0000
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2018-02-23 19:52 -0500
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) - 2018-02-24 01:08 +0000
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2018-02-24 01:14 -0500
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) - 2018-02-24 06:27 +0000
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2018-02-24 01:53 -0500
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) - 2018-02-24 07:16 +0000
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2018-02-24 08:40 -0500
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) - 2018-02-24 17:05 +0000
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2018-02-24 12:38 -0500
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2018-02-24 10:10 -0700
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> - 2018-02-26 21:45 -0600
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2018-02-27 07:35 -0500
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford jdnicoll@panix.com (James Nicoll) - 2018-02-27 05:20 +0000
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford David Johnston <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> - 2018-02-23 18:19 -0700
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2018-02-24 01:14 -0500
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford David Johnston <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> - 2018-02-23 23:28 -0700
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Bernard Peek <bap@shrdlu.com> - 2018-02-24 12:51 +0000
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2018-02-24 08:43 -0500
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2018-03-02 16:54 -0600
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2018-03-02 21:54 -0500
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 14:30 -0600
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> - 2018-03-04 15:03 -0800
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 14:38 -0600
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> - 2018-03-05 18:06 -0800
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 22:15 -0500
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford hamish.laws@gmail.com - 2018-03-06 00:58 -0800
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Bernard Peek <bap@shrdlu.com> - 2018-03-06 21:29 +0000
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> - 2018-03-14 01:30 -0500
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford hamish.laws@gmail.com - 2018-03-03 04:40 -0800
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@excite.com> - 2018-03-04 03:15 -0800
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford mcdowell_ag@sky.com - 2018-03-04 05:30 -0800
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 14:31 -0600
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2018-03-05 19:28 +0000
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2018-03-05 20:07 +0000
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford David Johnston <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> - 2018-03-05 13:17 -0700
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2018-03-05 21:13 +0000
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford jdnicoll@panix.com (James Nicoll) - 2018-03-05 20:35 +0000
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 14:42 -0600
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 22:18 -0500
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford David Johnston <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> - 2018-03-05 21:14 -0700
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 23:03 -0600
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 07:06 -0500
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford David Johnston <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> - 2018-03-06 10:29 -0700
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 12:20 -0600
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford David Johnston <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> - 2018-03-06 11:38 -0700
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 14:20 -0600
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> - 2018-03-06 13:09 -0800
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) - 2018-03-06 22:04 +0000
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Ahasuerus <ahasuerus@email.com> - 2018-03-06 14:49 -0800
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 22:28 -0500
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2018-03-07 14:17 +0000
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2018-03-07 23:26 -0700
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2018-03-07 23:25 -0700
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> - 2018-03-14 01:34 -0500
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> - 2018-03-06 13:09 -0800
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 14:33 -0600
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford William Hyde <wthyde1953@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 15:04 -0800
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 17:57 -0600
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford William Hyde <wthyde1953@gmail.com> - 2018-03-08 12:44 -0800
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2018-03-08 16:35 -0600
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford William Hyde <wthyde1953@gmail.com> - 2018-03-09 13:06 -0800
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@excite.com> - 2018-03-07 16:30 -0800
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford David Johnston <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> - 2018-03-07 19:24 -0700
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford David Johnston <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> - 2018-03-03 09:52 -0700
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 14:40 -0600
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford mcdowell_ag@sky.com - 2018-02-23 22:56 -0800
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford David Johnston <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> - 2018-02-24 00:04 -0700
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> - 2018-02-26 21:43 -0600
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2018-02-27 07:38 -0500
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2018-02-23 13:45 -0600
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford William Hyde <wthyde1953@gmail.com> - 2018-02-23 14:35 -0800
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> - 2018-02-26 21:33 -0600
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2018-02-27 07:40 -0500
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2018-02-21 03:05 -0700
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2018-02-20 19:19 -0700
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2018-02-20 12:40 -0600
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford David Johnston <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> - 2018-02-20 13:00 -0700
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> - 2018-02-19 22:15 -0800
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2018-02-20 12:41 -0600
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> - 2018-02-26 21:29 -0600
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford "Default User" <defaultuserbr@yahoo.com> - 2018-02-19 05:40 +0000
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> - 2018-02-18 22:50 -0800
Re: _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2018-02-19 16:08 -0600
Page 3 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 Next page →
| From | D B Davis <g@crcomp.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-02-24 15:05 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <20180224a@crcomp.net> |
| In reply to | #487183 |
J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, 24 Feb 2018 03:12:51 -0000 (UTC), D B Davis <g@crcomp.net> > wrote: >>Those pieces (bits) of paper empower America to pay for ten billion >>dollar aircraft carriers. > > The goverment funds aircraft carriers by selling financial instruments > in "financial centers"? Do tell. How does the government debt issued to purchase aircraft carriers end up in pension funds? >>Those bits allow America to surreptitiously >>balance its books with a twenty-one trillion dollar "plug" to cover >>unauthorized expenditures. [1] > > Still nothing to do with "financial centers". How does government issue twenty-one trillion dollars of debt? > A bottle of Glenlivet costs me about an hour's pay. Maybe Heinlein > struggles to pay for liquor but people with real jobs don't. Why can't people with real jobs purchase 2" X 4" lumber that actually measures 2" X 4"? Note. 1. http://msutoday.msu.edu/news/2017/msu-scholars-find-21-trillion-in-unauthorized-government-spending-defense-department-to-conduct/ Thank you, -- Don
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-02-24 11:33 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <7e439dl292aas0dhlqg3p23pj63m5qq821@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #487197 |
On Sat, 24 Feb 2018 15:05:04 -0000 (UTC), D B Davis <g@crcomp.net> wrote: > >J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sat, 24 Feb 2018 03:12:51 -0000 (UTC), D B Davis <g@crcomp.net> >> wrote: >>>Those pieces (bits) of paper empower America to pay for ten billion >>>dollar aircraft carriers. >> >> The goverment funds aircraft carriers by selling financial instruments >> in "financial centers"? Do tell. > >How does the government debt issued to purchase aircraft carriers end up >in pension funds? If the pension funds did not buy it directly from the government then they bought it from someone else who bought it directly from the government. >>>Those bits allow America to surreptitiously >>>balance its books with a twenty-one trillion dollar "plug" to cover >>>unauthorized expenditures. [1] >> >> Still nothing to do with "financial centers". > >How does government issue twenty-one trillion dollars of debt? It prints pieces of paper that say "I O U 21 trillion dollars" and sells them to someone for something under 21 trillion dollars. More seriously, government debt is sold directly--the Treasury holds auctions periodically. No "financial centers" involved unless you want to count the treasury building as a "financial center". If you don't know how this stuff actually works you shouldn't be pontificating about it. >> A bottle of Glenlivet costs me about an hour's pay. Maybe Heinlein >> struggles to pay for liquor but people with real jobs don't. > >Why can't people with real jobs purchase 2" X 4" lumber that actually >measures 2" X 4"? Because it's easier to say tubafor than it is to say "oneanahalfbythreeananhalf". Try repairing your house using lumber that is actually 2 x 4 inches and see how well it fits. However if you think that lumber standards have anything to do with finance you really are clueless.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-02-24 10:09 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ffdki7F9d0hU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #487199 |
J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >>Why can't people with real jobs purchase 2" X 4" lumber that actually >>measures 2" X 4"? > >Because it's easier to say tubafor than it is to say >"oneanahalfbythreeananhalf". Try repairing your house using lumber >that is actually 2 x 4 inches and see how well it fits. > >However if you think that lumber standards have anything to do with >finance you really are clueless. The 1913 house I grew up in was built in several stages. 1) 3 BR up, living dining kitchen down; plus outhouse. 2) Add new kitchen and bathroom on back. Old kitchen is ground floor MBR 3) Add mudroom and bath to side of #2 and re-roof. Old bath is laundry and workshop. 4) Add two bedrooms to side of core house. When my father was doing #4, he commented on the nuisance of mating up his 1.5x2.5 new walls with the true, planed, 2x4s of the core house. -- We are geeks. Resistance is voltage over current.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | D B Davis <g@crcomp.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-02-24 18:26 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <20180224b@crcomp.net> |
| In reply to | #487199 |
J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: > D B Davis <g@crcomp.net> wrote: >>J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >>> D B Davis <g@crcomp.net> wrote: <snip> >>>>Those bits allow America to surreptitiously >>>>balance its books with a twenty-one trillion dollar "plug" to cover >>>>unauthorized expenditures. [1] >>> >>> Still nothing to do with "financial centers". >> >>How does government issue twenty-one trillion dollars of debt? > > It prints pieces of paper that say "I O U 21 trillion dollars" and > sells them to someone for something under 21 trillion dollars. > > More seriously, government debt is sold directly--the Treasury holds > auctions periodically. No "financial centers" involved unless you > want to count the treasury building as a "financial center". If you > don't know how this stuff actually works you shouldn't be > pontificating about it. > Where do primary dealers sell government debt? Note. 1. http://msutoday.msu.edu/news/2017/msu-scholars-find-21-trillion-in-unauthorized-government-spending-defense-department-to-conduct/ Thank you, -- Don
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-02-24 17:39 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <rbq39d9dsnidlv229budugmsjnvc1cpcsh@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #487212 |
On Sat, 24 Feb 2018 18:26:40 -0000 (UTC), D B Davis <g@crcomp.net> wrote: > >J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >> D B Davis <g@crcomp.net> wrote: >>>J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> D B Davis <g@crcomp.net> wrote: > ><snip> > >>>>>Those bits allow America to surreptitiously >>>>>balance its books with a twenty-one trillion dollar "plug" to cover >>>>>unauthorized expenditures. [1] >>>> >>>> Still nothing to do with "financial centers". >>> >>>How does government issue twenty-one trillion dollars of debt? >> >> It prints pieces of paper that say "I O U 21 trillion dollars" and >> sells them to someone for something under 21 trillion dollars. >> >> More seriously, government debt is sold directly--the Treasury holds >> auctions periodically. No "financial centers" involved unless you >> want to count the treasury building as a "financial center". If you >> don't know how this stuff actually works you shouldn't be >> pontificating about it. >> > >Where do primary dealers sell government debt? Who cares? They bought it from the government, if they don't want to keep it that's their problem.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | D B Davis <g@crcomp.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-02-25 01:27 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <20180224c@crcomp.net> |
| In reply to | #487218 |
J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, 24 Feb 2018 18:26:40 -0000 (UTC), D B Davis <g@crcomp.net> > wrote: > >> >>J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >>> D B Davis <g@crcomp.net> wrote: >>>>J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> D B Davis <g@crcomp.net> wrote: >> >><snip> >> >>>>>>Those bits allow America to surreptitiously >>>>>>balance its books with a twenty-one trillion dollar "plug" to cover >>>>>>unauthorized expenditures. [1] >>>>> >>>>> Still nothing to do with "financial centers". >>>> >>>>How does government issue twenty-one trillion dollars of debt? >>> >>> It prints pieces of paper that say "I O U 21 trillion dollars" and >>> sells them to someone for something under 21 trillion dollars. >>> >>> More seriously, government debt is sold directly--the Treasury holds >>> auctions periodically. No "financial centers" involved unless you >>> want to count the treasury building as a "financial center". If you >>> don't know how this stuff actually works you shouldn't be >>> pontificating about it. >>> >> >>Where do primary dealers sell government debt? > > Who cares? They bought it from the government, if they don't want to > keep it that's their problem. The world's largest markets in the City provide the lion's share of liquidity when non-sovereigns sell their government debt holdings. Liquidity matters because no one will buy government debt at auction unless they know that they can liquidate later it if need be. Note. 1. http://msutoday.msu.edu/news/2017/msu-scholars-find-21-trillion-in-unauthorized-government-spending-defense-department-to-conduct/ Thank you, -- Don
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Johnston <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-02-24 10:21 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <p6s6vc$qii$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #487183 |
On 2018-02-23 11:08 PM, J. Clarke wrote: >>> We were talking about _dominance_. "Financial centers" don't provide >>> much dominance of anything but pieces of paper. >> >> Those pieces (bits) of paper empower America to pay for ten billion >> dollar aircraft carriers. > > The goverment funds aircraft carriers by selling financial instruments > in "financial centers"? Do tell. > >> Those bits enable America afford a thousand >> foreign military bases. > > The goverment funds aircraft carriers by selling financial instruments > in "financial centers"? Do tell. Yes it does. That's what the ever-exploding national debt is.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-02-26 15:04 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <XlVkC.124415$KA7.84235@fx05.iad> |
| In reply to | #487183 |
J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> writes: >On Sat, 24 Feb 2018 03:12:51 -0000 (UTC), D B Davis <g@crcomp.net> >wrote: >>> We were talking about _dominance_. "Financial centers" don't provide >>> much dominance of anything but pieces of paper. >> >>Those pieces (bits) of paper empower America to pay for ten billion >>dollar aircraft carriers. > >The goverment funds aircraft carriers by selling financial instruments >in "financial centers"? Do tell. T-Bills, Bonds, TIPS, need one continue?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Johnston <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-02-22 10:17 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <p6mtvq$19c9$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #487081 |
On 2018-02-21 7:11 PM, J. Clarke wrote: > On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 23:07:22 -0800, Dimensional Traveler > <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote: > >> On 2/20/2018 10:59 PM, J. Clarke wrote: >>> On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 21:15:28 -0800 (PST), mcdowell_ag@sky.com wrote: >>> >>>> On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 7:59:55 PM UTC, David Johnston wrote: >>>>> On 2018-02-20 5:44 AM, J. Clarke wrote: >>>>>> On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 21:19:07 -0700, David Johnston >>>>>> <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 2018-02-19 9:04 PM, J. Clarke wrote: >>>>>>>> On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 21:00:55 -0700, David Johnston >>>>>>>> <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 2018-02-19 7:00 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 2/19/2018 4:15 PM, David Johnston wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 2018-02-19 3:06 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/18/2018 4:05 PM, David Johnston wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2018-02-18 2:58 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.amazon.com/dp/0756411890/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Book number three of a three books series. I read the excellent >>>>>>>>>>>>>> printed and bound MMPB. I doubt that there will be any more books >>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the series since this book fairly closed all of the loose ends. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is the best of the best SF genre for me, space opera with psi. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The story concerns the the fact that the Folds, used for FTL space >>>>>>>>>>>>>> travel, have become dangerous for space ship passage. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The booked was flawed for me though by the constant mention of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> man-made climate change supposedly almost rendering the Earth >>>>>>>>>>>>>> uninhabitable in the 21st century. Man-made climate change theory >>>>>>>>>>>>>> is junk science >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> So's the EMP apocalypse. But a depopulating catastrophe is an >>>>>>>>>>>>> excellent way to move your science fiction universe into the state >>>>>>>>>>>>> where interstellar civilization is no longer Earth centered. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Half of the Earth's population would leave the planet if they could >>>>>>>>>>>> right now. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Lynn >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> The other half wouldn't. And "if they could" is a big sticking point. >>>>>>>>>>> The mere ability to move some people offworld does not convert into >>>>>>>>>>> the capacity to move vast quantities of people inexpensively. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I was replying to your statement that Ms. Bedford needed a plot device >>>>>>>>>> to get people off the Earth. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Yeah, that wasn't my statement. As long as Earth is the oldest, most >>>>>>>>> populous, most developed world, it most most likely be the most >>>>>>>>> powerful. Thus you end up with an Earth centered setting with the >>>>>>>>> colony worlds on the periphery. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Doesn't really work that way. China and India are both more >>>>>>>> "populous" than the US or Europe, and have older civilizations, but >>>>>>>> they have not been dominant. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> They were dominant for a very long time. >>>>>> >>>>>> Who did they dominate? >>>>>> >>>>>>> The Europeans only overtook >>>>>>> them because they were so dominant that the Europeans wanted to come to >>>>>>> them for trade >>>>>> >>>>>> The US engaged in a lot of trade with Africa during the early 1800s. >>>>>> Does that make Africa "dominant"? I'm sorry but you are conflating >>>>>> "having a valuable good to sell" and "representing a large potential >>>>>> market" with "being dominant". >>>>>> >>>>>>> and ended up traveling the world looking for better >>>>>>> routes to get there while they had no interest in venturing far afield. >>>>>> >>>>>> So if they didn't "venture afield" then who did they dominate? >>>>>> >>>>>>> The same thing does not apply to an Earth that is actually founding >>>>>>> colonies. >>>>>> >>>>>> So by you logic Hong Kong, India and the US are dominated by England, >>>>> >>>>> Britain was the dominant world power for quite a long time >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> the Phillippines are dominated by Spain, Brazil is dominated by >>>>>> Portugal, and so on. >>>>>> >>>>>>> Now it's possible for such an Earth to just lose interest but >>>>>>> unless you are set unimaginably far in the future all you'll still end >>>>>>> up with all the well-developed populous and powerful worlds being the >>>>>>> ones that were initially close to Earth and hospitable. Still Earth >>>>>>> centered. >>>>>> >>>>>> Yeah, until one of them turns into Rome/the US/Manticore. >>>>>> >>>> >>>> Unfortunately for Hornblower in Space, Britain had geographical advantages that determined its strategy - geographical advantages that don't have an obvious equivalent in space. >>>> >>>> 1) Even before it gained control of the seas, the English channel sheltered Britain from most risk of invasion from the continent. It could therefore make as much or as little trouble on the continent as it wanted, while still having the option to retreat back across the channel if things got too hot for it. In particular, it had the incentive to put much more of its resource into a Navy and much less into a standing Army. >>>> >>>> 2) A large Navy, plus good ports and a blocking position translates into the ability to blockade ports in the continent and make commercial as well as military use of those ports less attractive, hence the predominance over Holland, and the rise to command of the seas. >>>> >>>> Unless you have an FTL technology which gives travel between the stars a very non-uniform difficulty, no one planet is likely to have this sort of a positional advantage. >>> >>> And how exactly did that "positional advantage" help them in India, >>> China, and the New World? >>> >> It gave the natural incentive to build a massive navy; > > Nice notion. Except the Royal Navy was not much bigger than the > French navy in 1792. Which in other words means "it was the larger of the two largest fleets on the planet". > >> and strong >> maritime tradition, which gave rise to the mindset and ability to go to >> far away places and interfere in other people's business. > > So how did that work out in the New World? > They dominated large expanses of it for centuries.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Default User" <defaultuserbr@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-02-22 19:58 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <p6n7d2$2me$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #487099 |
David Johnston wrote: > They dominated large expanses of it for centuries. To be fair, I'll complain about lack of snippage from you as well. Brian
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | D B Davis <g@crcomp.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-02-22 20:58 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <20180222b@crcomp.net> |
| In reply to | #487099 |
David Johnston <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 2018-02-21 7:11 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
<snip>
>> Except the Royal Navy was not much bigger than the
>> French navy in 1792.
>
> Which in other words means "it was the larger of the two largest fleets
> on the planet".
>
Historic fleet size seems a difficult nut to crack. Perhaps the military
secrecy back in the day makes it so. This data comes from a 2004 book.
Caveat emptor: read the footnotes at the link.
Ships of the line
Year GBR FRA NLD ESP DNK RUS
1790 145 73 48 72 32 58
1795 123 56 28 76 30 61
1800 127 44 16 66 28 67
1805 136 41 15 40 20 47
1810 152 46 13 28 2 43
1815 126 52 19 16 2 48
Cruisers
Year GBR FRA NLD ESP DNK RUS
1790 131 64 36 46 16 52
1795 160 65 30 51 13 40
1800 158 43 6 41 9 34
1805 160 35 10 26 11 16
1810 183 31 7 17 0 14
1815 151 31 14 15 3 21
Source: The Command of the Ocean, N.A.M Rodger (Allen Lane, 2004)
derived from data by Prof. J.Glete
https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/6235/comparison-of-naval-fleet-strengths-during-the-napoleonic-wars
Thank you,
--
Don
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence Watt-Evans <misenchantedpress@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-02-22 16:57 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <d3fu8dl76l2h7m2caba272lq6aucnpcqhr@reader80.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #487108 |
On Thu, 22 Feb 2018 20:58:32 -0000 (UTC), D B Davis <g@crcomp.net> wrote: > >David Johnston <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> wrote: >> On 2018-02-21 7:11 PM, J. Clarke wrote: > ><snip> > >>> Except the Royal Navy was not much bigger than the >>> French navy in 1792. >> >> Which in other words means "it was the larger of the two largest fleets >> on the planet". >> > >Historic fleet size seems a difficult nut to crack. Perhaps the military >secrecy back in the day makes it so. This data comes from a 2004 book. >Caveat emptor: read the footnotes at the link. > >Ships of the line > >Year GBR FRA NLD ESP DNK RUS >1790 145 73 48 72 32 58 >1795 123 56 28 76 30 61 >1800 127 44 16 66 28 67 >1805 136 41 15 40 20 47 >1810 152 46 13 28 2 43 >1815 126 52 19 16 2 48 > >Cruisers > >Year GBR FRA NLD ESP DNK RUS >1790 131 64 36 46 16 52 >1795 160 65 30 51 13 40 >1800 158 43 6 41 9 34 >1805 160 35 10 26 11 16 >1810 183 31 7 17 0 14 >1815 151 31 14 15 3 21 > >Source: The Command of the Ocean, N.A.M Rodger (Allen Lane, 2004) > derived from data by Prof. J.Glete > >https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/6235/comparison-of-naval-fleet-strengths-during-the-napoleonic-wars The comparison I find most interesting on that page is ships lost. The number for French ships captured is terrifying. -- My webpage is at http://www.watt-evans.com My latest novel is Stone Unturned: A Legend of Ethshar. See http://www.ethshar.com/StoneUnturned.shtml
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-02-22 21:14 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <v2uu8dl95e667iluu8gqgrb5d2g04ck6k6@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #487099 |
On Thu, 22 Feb 2018 10:17:48 -0700, David Johnston <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> wrote: >On 2018-02-21 7:11 PM, J. Clarke wrote: >> On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 23:07:22 -0800, Dimensional Traveler >> <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote: >> >>> On 2/20/2018 10:59 PM, J. Clarke wrote: >>>> On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 21:15:28 -0800 (PST), mcdowell_ag@sky.com wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 7:59:55 PM UTC, David Johnston wrote: >>>>>> On 2018-02-20 5:44 AM, J. Clarke wrote: >>>>>>> On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 21:19:07 -0700, David Johnston >>>>>>> <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 2018-02-19 9:04 PM, J. Clarke wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 21:00:55 -0700, David Johnston >>>>>>>>> <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 2018-02-19 7:00 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 2/19/2018 4:15 PM, David Johnston wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 2018-02-19 3:06 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/18/2018 4:05 PM, David Johnston wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2018-02-18 2:58 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.amazon.com/dp/0756411890/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Book number three of a three books series. I read the excellent >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> printed and bound MMPB. I doubt that there will be any more books >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the series since this book fairly closed all of the loose ends. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is the best of the best SF genre for me, space opera with psi. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The story concerns the the fact that the Folds, used for FTL space >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> travel, have become dangerous for space ship passage. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The booked was flawed for me though by the constant mention of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> man-made climate change supposedly almost rendering the Earth >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> uninhabitable in the 21st century. Man-made climate change theory >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is junk science >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> So's the EMP apocalypse. But a depopulating catastrophe is an >>>>>>>>>>>>>> excellent way to move your science fiction universe into the state >>>>>>>>>>>>>> where interstellar civilization is no longer Earth centered. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Half of the Earth's population would leave the planet if they could >>>>>>>>>>>>> right now. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Lynn >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> The other half wouldn't. And "if they could" is a big sticking point. >>>>>>>>>>>> The mere ability to move some people offworld does not convert into >>>>>>>>>>>> the capacity to move vast quantities of people inexpensively. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I was replying to your statement that Ms. Bedford needed a plot device >>>>>>>>>>> to get people off the Earth. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Yeah, that wasn't my statement. As long as Earth is the oldest, most >>>>>>>>>> populous, most developed world, it most most likely be the most >>>>>>>>>> powerful. Thus you end up with an Earth centered setting with the >>>>>>>>>> colony worlds on the periphery. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Doesn't really work that way. China and India are both more >>>>>>>>> "populous" than the US or Europe, and have older civilizations, but >>>>>>>>> they have not been dominant. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> They were dominant for a very long time. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Who did they dominate? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The Europeans only overtook >>>>>>>> them because they were so dominant that the Europeans wanted to come to >>>>>>>> them for trade >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The US engaged in a lot of trade with Africa during the early 1800s. >>>>>>> Does that make Africa "dominant"? I'm sorry but you are conflating >>>>>>> "having a valuable good to sell" and "representing a large potential >>>>>>> market" with "being dominant". >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> and ended up traveling the world looking for better >>>>>>>> routes to get there while they had no interest in venturing far afield. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So if they didn't "venture afield" then who did they dominate? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The same thing does not apply to an Earth that is actually founding >>>>>>>> colonies. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So by you logic Hong Kong, India and the US are dominated by England, >>>>>> >>>>>> Britain was the dominant world power for quite a long time >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> the Phillippines are dominated by Spain, Brazil is dominated by >>>>>>> Portugal, and so on. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Now it's possible for such an Earth to just lose interest but >>>>>>>> unless you are set unimaginably far in the future all you'll still end >>>>>>>> up with all the well-developed populous and powerful worlds being the >>>>>>>> ones that were initially close to Earth and hospitable. Still Earth >>>>>>>> centered. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yeah, until one of them turns into Rome/the US/Manticore. >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Unfortunately for Hornblower in Space, Britain had geographical advantages that determined its strategy - geographical advantages that don't have an obvious equivalent in space. >>>>> >>>>> 1) Even before it gained control of the seas, the English channel sheltered Britain from most risk of invasion from the continent. It could therefore make as much or as little trouble on the continent as it wanted, while still having the option to retreat back across the channel if things got too hot for it. In particular, it had the incentive to put much more of its resource into a Navy and much less into a standing Army. >>>>> >>>>> 2) A large Navy, plus good ports and a blocking position translates into the ability to blockade ports in the continent and make commercial as well as military use of those ports less attractive, hence the predominance over Holland, and the rise to command of the seas. >>>>> >>>>> Unless you have an FTL technology which gives travel between the stars a very non-uniform difficulty, no one planet is likely to have this sort of a positional advantage. >>>> >>>> And how exactly did that "positional advantage" help them in India, >>>> China, and the New World? >>>> >>> It gave the natural incentive to build a massive navy; >> >> Nice notion. Except the Royal Navy was not much bigger than the >> French navy in 1792. > >Which in other words means "it was the larger of the two largest fleets >on the planet". You're acting like their navy had the same superiority over France that the US Navy today has over, well, everybody. It didn't. It was a little bigger with no signfiicant technological advantages. >>> and strong >>> maritime tradition, which gave rise to the mindset and ability to go to >>> far away places and interfere in other people's business. >> >> So how did that work out in the New World? >> > >They dominated large expanses of it for centuries. You mean Canada and its large expanses of snow?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Johnston <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-02-22 19:41 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <p6nv06$1rql$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #487125 |
On 2018-02-22 7:14 PM, J. Clarke wrote: >>>>> And how exactly did that "positional advantage" help them in India, >>>>> China, and the New World? >>>>> >>>> It gave the natural incentive to build a massive navy; >>> >>> Nice notion. Except the Royal Navy was not much bigger than the >>> French navy in 1792. >> >> Which in other words means "it was the larger of the two largest fleets >> on the planet". > > You're acting like their navy had the same superiority over France > that the US Navy today has over, well, everybody. It didn't. It was > a little bigger with no signfiicant technological advantages. A future Earth with interstellar colonies if considered analogous to colonial Britain /has no equivalent to France/. Britain had no head start versus France because France was not a British colony. Of course the more accurate analogy would probably be to all of Western Europe combined.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-02-23 07:40 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <cs209dprlm25s1f07il7tct9ibqjkmcncj@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #487130 |
On Thu, 22 Feb 2018 19:41:11 -0700, David Johnston <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> wrote: >On 2018-02-22 7:14 PM, J. Clarke wrote: >>>>>> And how exactly did that "positional advantage" help them in India, >>>>>> China, and the New World? >>>>>> >>>>> It gave the natural incentive to build a massive navy; >>>> >>>> Nice notion. Except the Royal Navy was not much bigger than the >>>> French navy in 1792. >>> >>> Which in other words means "it was the larger of the two largest fleets >>> on the planet". >> >> You're acting like their navy had the same superiority over France >> that the US Navy today has over, well, everybody. It didn't. It was >> a little bigger with no signfiicant technological advantages. > >A future Earth with interstellar colonies if considered analogous to >colonial Britain /has no equivalent to France/. Britain had no head >start versus France because France was not a British colony. Of course >the more accurate analogy would probably be to all of Western Europe >combined. Which is beside the point. British dominance was not the result of an all-powerful navy. It was good, no doubt about that, but it didn't have the opposition hopelessly ouclassed like the modern US navy does.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-02-23 04:31 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ff9jp4Fc7euU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #487125 |
In article <v2uu8dl95e667iluu8gqgrb5d2g04ck6k6@4ax.com>, J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >On Thu, 22 Feb 2018 10:17:48 -0700, David Johnston ><davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> wrote: > >>On 2018-02-21 7:11 PM, J. Clarke wrote: >>> On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 23:07:22 -0800, Dimensional Traveler >>> <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote: >>> >>>> On 2/20/2018 10:59 PM, J. Clarke wrote: >>>>> On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 21:15:28 -0800 (PST), mcdowell_ag@sky.com wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 7:59:55 PM UTC, David Johnston wrote: >>>>>>> On 2018-02-20 5:44 AM, J. Clarke wrote: >>>>>>>> On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 21:19:07 -0700, David Johnston >>>>>>>> <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 2018-02-19 9:04 PM, J. Clarke wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 21:00:55 -0700, David Johnston >>>>>>>>>> <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On 2018-02-19 7:00 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/19/2018 4:15 PM, David Johnston wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2018-02-19 3:06 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/18/2018 4:05 PM, David Johnston wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2018-02-18 2:58 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _Nimbus (A Psi-Tech Novel) _ by Jacey Bedford >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.amazon.com/dp/0756411890/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Book number three of a three books series. I read the excellent >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> printed and bound MMPB. I doubt that there will be any >more books >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the series since this book fairly closed all of the >loose ends. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is the best of the best SF genre for me, space >opera with psi. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The story concerns the the fact that the Folds, used for >FTL space >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> travel, have become dangerous for space ship passage. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The booked was flawed for me though by the constant mention of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> man-made climate change supposedly almost rendering the Earth >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> uninhabitable in the 21st century. Man-made climate >change theory >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is junk science >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So's the EMP apocalypse. But a depopulating catastrophe is an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> excellent way to move your science fiction universe into >the state >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> where interstellar civilization is no longer Earth centered. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Half of the Earth's population would leave the planet if >they could >>>>>>>>>>>>>> right now. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lynn >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> The other half wouldn't. And "if they could" is a big >sticking point. >>>>>>>>>>>>> The mere ability to move some people offworld does not convert into >>>>>>>>>>>>> the capacity to move vast quantities of people inexpensively. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I was replying to your statement that Ms. Bedford needed a >plot device >>>>>>>>>>>> to get people off the Earth. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Yeah, that wasn't my statement. As long as Earth is the oldest, most >>>>>>>>>>> populous, most developed world, it most most likely be the most >>>>>>>>>>> powerful. Thus you end up with an Earth centered setting with the >>>>>>>>>>> colony worlds on the periphery. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Doesn't really work that way. China and India are both more >>>>>>>>>> "populous" than the US or Europe, and have older civilizations, but >>>>>>>>>> they have not been dominant. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> They were dominant for a very long time. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Who did they dominate? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The Europeans only overtook >>>>>>>>> them because they were so dominant that the Europeans wanted to come to >>>>>>>>> them for trade >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The US engaged in a lot of trade with Africa during the early 1800s. >>>>>>>> Does that make Africa "dominant"? I'm sorry but you are conflating >>>>>>>> "having a valuable good to sell" and "representing a large potential >>>>>>>> market" with "being dominant". >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> and ended up traveling the world looking for better >>>>>>>>> routes to get there while they had no interest in venturing far afield. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> So if they didn't "venture afield" then who did they dominate? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The same thing does not apply to an Earth that is actually founding >>>>>>>>> colonies. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> So by you logic Hong Kong, India and the US are dominated by England, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Britain was the dominant world power for quite a long time >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> the Phillippines are dominated by Spain, Brazil is dominated by >>>>>>>> Portugal, and so on. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Now it's possible for such an Earth to just lose interest but >>>>>>>>> unless you are set unimaginably far in the future all you'll still end >>>>>>>>> up with all the well-developed populous and powerful worlds being the >>>>>>>>> ones that were initially close to Earth and hospitable. Still Earth >>>>>>>>> centered. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Yeah, until one of them turns into Rome/the US/Manticore. >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Unfortunately for Hornblower in Space, Britain had geographical >advantages that determined its strategy - geographical advantages that >don't have an obvious equivalent in space. >>>>>> >>>>>> 1) Even before it gained control of the seas, the English channel >sheltered Britain from most risk of invasion from the continent. It >could therefore make as much or as little trouble on the continent as it >wanted, while still having the option to retreat back across the channel >if things got too hot for it. In particular, it had the incentive to put >much more of its resource into a Navy and much less into a standing >Army. >>>>>> >>>>>> 2) A large Navy, plus good ports and a blocking position >translates into the ability to blockade ports in the continent and make >commercial as well as military use of those ports less attractive, hence >the predominance over Holland, and the rise to command of the seas. >>>>>> >>>>>> Unless you have an FTL technology which gives travel between the >stars a very non-uniform difficulty, no one planet is likely to have >this sort of a positional advantage. >>>>> >>>>> And how exactly did that "positional advantage" help them in India, >>>>> China, and the New World? >>>>> >>>> It gave the natural incentive to build a massive navy; >>> >>> Nice notion. Except the Royal Navy was not much bigger than the >>> French navy in 1792. >> >>Which in other words means "it was the larger of the two largest fleets >>on the planet". > >You're acting like their navy had the same superiority over France >that the US Navy today has over, well, everybody. It didn't. It was >a little bigger with no signfiicant technological advantages. > >>>> and strong >>>> maritime tradition, which gave rise to the mindset and ability to go to >>>> far away places and interfere in other people's business. >>> >>> So how did that work out in the New World? >>> >> >>They dominated large expanses of it for centuries. > >You mean Canada and its large expanses of snow? Vast.. tracts of land. -- ------ columbiaclosings.com What's not in Columbia anymore..
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bernard Peek <bap@shrdlu.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-02-23 11:05 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <XzSjC.208009$t77.197132@fx29.am4> |
| In reply to | #487099 |
On 22/02/18 17:17, David Johnston wrote: >> >> Nice notion. Except the Royal Navy was not much bigger than the >> French navy in 1792. > > Which in other words means "it was the larger of the two largest fleets > on the planet". There was also a critical difference in that the British navy was far better trained. > >> >>> and strong >>> maritime tradition, which gave rise to the mindset and ability to go to >>> far away places and interfere in other people's business. >> >> So how did that work out in the New World? >> > > They dominated large expanses of it for centuries. At one point Britain controlled a third of the Earth's surface. -- Bernard Peek bap@shrdlu.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-02-23 07:41 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <lv209ddumlpk6ocupk2oa33m4lae8j3cl4@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #487146 |
On Fri, 23 Feb 2018 11:05:27 +0000, Bernard Peek <bap@shrdlu.com> wrote: >On 22/02/18 17:17, David Johnston wrote: > > >>> >>> Nice notion. Except the Royal Navy was not much bigger than the >>> French navy in 1792. >> >> Which in other words means "it was the larger of the two largest fleets >> on the planet". > >There was also a critical difference in that the British navy was far >better trained. > > >> >>> >>>> and strong >>>> maritime tradition, which gave rise to the mindset and ability to go to >>>> far away places and interfere in other people's business. >>> >>> So how did that work out in the New World? >>> >> >> They dominated large expanses of it for centuries. > >At one point Britain controlled a third of the Earth's surface. And how did that work out for them?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-02-23 07:34 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <p6pc9n$odv$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #487151 |
On 2/23/2018 4:41 AM, J. Clarke wrote: > On Fri, 23 Feb 2018 11:05:27 +0000, Bernard Peek <bap@shrdlu.com> > wrote: > >> On 22/02/18 17:17, David Johnston wrote: >> >> >>>> >>>> Nice notion. Except the Royal Navy was not much bigger than the >>>> French navy in 1792. >>> >>> Which in other words means "it was the larger of the two largest fleets >>> on the planet". >> >> There was also a critical difference in that the British navy was far >> better trained. >> >> >>> >>>> >>>>> and strong >>>>> maritime tradition, which gave rise to the mindset and ability to go to >>>>> far away places and interfere in other people's business. >>>> >>>> So how did that work out in the New World? >>>> >>> >>> They dominated large expanses of it for centuries. >> >> At one point Britain controlled a third of the Earth's surface. > > And how did that work out for them? > Quite well for a while. -- Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation instinct are running screaming.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-02-23 16:16 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ffat2tFl81dU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #487151 |
In article <lv209ddumlpk6ocupk2oa33m4lae8j3cl4@4ax.com>, J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >On Fri, 23 Feb 2018 11:05:27 +0000, Bernard Peek <bap@shrdlu.com> >wrote: > >>On 22/02/18 17:17, David Johnston wrote: >> >> >>>> >>>> Nice notion. Except the Royal Navy was not much bigger than the >>>> French navy in 1792. >>> >>> Which in other words means "it was the larger of the two largest fleets >>> on the planet". >> >>There was also a critical difference in that the British navy was far >>better trained. >> >> >>> >>>> >>>>> and strong >>>>> maritime tradition, which gave rise to the mindset and ability to go to >>>>> far away places and interfere in other people's business. >>>> >>>> So how did that work out in the New World? >>>> >>> >>> They dominated large expanses of it for centuries. >> >>At one point Britain controlled a third of the Earth's surface. > >And how did that work out for them? Um, pretty well? -- ------ columbiaclosings.com What's not in Columbia anymore..
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | rec.arts.sf.written
csiph-web