Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #571139
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.space.policy, sci.physics, sci.astro, rec.arts.sf.science |
| Subject | Re: Successful flight by Blue Origin |
| Date | 2016-04-17 05:24 +0000 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <g9jbuc-lvo.ln1@mail.specsol.com> (permalink) |
| References | (7 earlier) <ju05hb5k5a0j4uk833d3r0l1v3v987c6ti@4ax.com> <rnfauc-4gl.ln1@mail.specsol.com> <lu55hbdjpn2l5rahvojpbl9sl04imeev60@4ax.com> <45lauc-10m.ln1@mail.specsol.com> <rqt5hb92o4k39g7t7ep0fkru3507fjoj18@4ax.com> |
Cross-posted to 4 groups.
In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote: > jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > >>In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote: >>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>> >>>>In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hpe.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>In sci.space.policy Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> They're reasonable if they work. SpaceX is trying to avoid adding >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other engines to the Falcon 9 first stage. The stage could hover >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and land, for example, if it added Super Draco engines to the first >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stage. But, they require different fuel and oxidizer than the first >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stage carries. This would mean adding completely different tanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> plumbing, and etc. for those engines. Also, if Super Dracos were >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> used, it would be advantageous to deplete the kerosene and then vent >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any remaining LOX in the tanks before landing. So, any "leftover" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fuel and oxidizer would be "wasted". In my book, this would not be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a good trade to make. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>If one wanted to give the Falcon 9 first stage the ability to hover, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>wouldn't the most straightforward way to do that be create a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>deeply-throttled Merlin? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Straightforward, perhaps, but it's a very big design change so you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> start with having to requalify as if it's a whole new engine. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Yet you were just saying in another thread space stuff doesn't have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>bureaucrat bullshit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cite? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Sure, it was by someone called Fred J. McCall talking about nuclear >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>reactors on Mars being cheap for lack of bureaucrat bullshit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wow, you REALLY don't comprehend English, do you? Either that or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you're just so intellectually dishonest everything sounds different to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you. Note that even if you interpret that one instance the way you do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (which is twisted) it doesn't say what you claim I've said. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stop making up lies, Chimp. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Stop taking mind altering drugs, space cadet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stop begging to suck my dick, Chimp. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Sounds like someone would really like being in an all male isolated >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>environment. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yeah, but it doesn't matter how much you beg. You're not my type. I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prefer them female, smart, cute, and human. You miss on all four. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Yet you seem to know nothing about them such as they have been putting >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>diapers on their babies since antiquity. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's called 'cloth', not 'diapers', you stupid twat. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Cloth is raw stock. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Diapers, shirts, pants, sheets, etc. are finished goods, you stupid twat. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And BOTH cloth and finished goods were IMPORTED to the Colonies, you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dumb cunt. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>So what, space cadet? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So your claims in this regard, like so many of your claims, are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chimpshit, chimpshit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Both cloth and finished goods are imported to the US from Sri Lanka. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yeah, they are, so we still don't qualify as a successful colony by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your definitions because we can't cloth ourselves without imports. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Does that mean you can not survive in the US without imports from >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Sri Lanka, space cadet? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There's more of that chimpshit wriggling between "survive" and "live >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in a rich suburb"... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Nope, I've never deviated from the facts that it is trivial to survive >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>on the Earth just about anywhere and impossible to survive on Mars without >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>21st century technology, and a lot of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And you've never explained all those failed colonies and dead people. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Sure I have but they have nothing to do with surviving on Mars. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But they do have everything to do with your proclaimed ease of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> survival in the Americas naked and unafraid, you intellectually >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dishonest twat. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As the Americas had somewhere between 50 million and 100 million, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>growing, people before the Europeans arrived, ... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And then it didn't. Apparently survival isn't as easy as you claim. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>It is if you don't have invaders killing off roughly 80% of the population >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>with imported diseases. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Diseases are a part of that 'nature' thing. Apparently you only count >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it when it HELPS survival. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No life and no disease on Mars, so what happened the the American >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>indiginous population is irrelevant. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Unknown, even if you assume we don't bring something with us. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Odds are there are no diseases on Mars and it is trivial to prevent >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>carrying any to Mars. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So you go from an absolute statement to "odds are". What are the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> odds, then, Jim? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I's say somewhere around .9 with a shitload of 9s after it to 1. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And just what do you base that on, other than an almost total lack of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> information? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> "There are ongoing investigations assessing the past habitability >>>>>>>>>>>>> potential of Mars, as well as the possibility of extant life." >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sounds like they think the odds are much higher than you do. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>Sounds like ass covering to me so no matter the outcome they can't >>>>>>>>>>>>be called wrong. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Of course it does, because, as you've made obvious, reality never >>>>>>>>>>> intrudes into a Chimp Position. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Of course ignoring the fact that none of your links contain the probability >>>>>>>>>>number YOU demanded from me. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I didn't state a positive opinion. You did. I *ASKED* what you >>>>>>>>> thought the odds of your opinion being correct were. You stupidly >>>>>>>>> pulled one out of your ass and then denied that that was the source >>>>>>>>> and now you're caught. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>When did I EVER say it was other than MY estimate, space cadet? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> When you posted cites that you purported were in support of your >>>>>>> number, chimp. >>>>>> >>>>>>When did I EVER say it was other than MY estimate, space cadet? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> When you posted cites that you purported were in support of your >>>>> number, chimp. >>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Can you prove the number wrong, space cadet? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It's a 'sci' hierarchy newsgroup, chimp. That's not how it works. YOU >>>>>>> put forward claims then YOU support them. It's not everyone else's >>>>>>> job to research your shit for you and disprove your silly opinions. >>>>>> >>>>>>When did I EVER say it was other than MY estimate, space cadet? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> When you posted cites that you purported were in support of your >>>>> number, chimp. >>>>> >>>>>>> Assertion: The Sun is powered by angels lighting their farts. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Can you PROVE that wrong, chimpshit? >>>>>> >>>>>>Of course. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Do so. >>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetary_habitability >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Nothing really germane to the discussion except that Mars seems to >>>>>>>>>>>>> fall within the 'habitable band' where there could be life. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_on_Mars >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Lots of speculation about life (particularly microbial life) on Mars >>>>>>>>>>>>> and no reason to put the odds of no life where you do. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_on_Mars >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Read the section titled "Possible biosignatures". Sounds like the >>>>>>>>>>>>> odds are a lot higher than your opinion. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_Mars >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> And yet another cite that doesn't support Jimp the Chimp's conclusion. >>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we've discovered the problem... >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>Yes we have, you are a know-it-all, blow hard, bile spewing, bully. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> How does your cites not supporting your position that you claim is >>>>>>>>>>> based on them make me any of those things, much less all of them? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>How do any of my cites NOT support the position that life on Mars >>>>>>>>>>is highly unlikely, space cadet? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Why, because they don't, Chimp, any more than they "support the >>>>>>>>> position" that magic makes everything work. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Sure, all those links about the conditions being outside the parameters >>>>>>>>for life as we know it would lead one to the conlusion that life MUST >>>>>>>>exist in some shelted, special place. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Chimp, we've found life HERE ON EARTH in conditions that were outside >>>>>>> the parameters for life as we knew them at the time. No one has said >>>>>>> what your last sentence says. However, even NASA seems to be putting >>>>>>> the odds a lot higher than you do since the discovery of liquid water >>>>>>> (which puts you right back into those 'parameters for life' you claim >>>>>>> Mars is outside of. >>>>>> >>>>>>So the odds of finding life on Mars is what? >>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>And we are talking about now, not what might have been millions of >>>>>>>>years ago when Mars may have had oceans. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yes, we are. And yes, you're making remarkably stupid statements >>>>>>> (again). >>>>>> >>>>>>So the odds of finding life on Mars is what? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> You tell me. >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Blot before you short out your keyboard, Chimp. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Wipe the spittle and drool from you chin, space cadet. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The best you can manage is tu quoque? Really? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>Notice that nowhere did anyone give any numeric odds of life on Mars >>>>>>>>>>>>as you demanded of me, space cadet. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> "Demanded"? I just asked. You spit out a number. I asked what it >>>>>>>>>>> was based on. You cited a bunch of stuff that doesn't support your >>>>>>>>>>> number. You would have embarrassed yourself less if you'd simply said >>>>>>>>>>> "I pulled it out of my ass", since that's what you did. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>The number was my estimate, as requested by you, based on the available >>>>>>>>>>evidence. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The number is your estimate. You got that right. But it's based on >>>>>>>>> nothing but your own biases. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>What you call biases I call reading the literature and forming an opinion. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Except "the literature" as you've cited it doesn't seem to support >>>>>>> your pathologically opinionated view. >>>>>> >>>>>>So the odds of finding life on Mars is what? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> You tell me. >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>If in your space cadet fantasies you are expecting to find life on Mars, >>>>>>>>too bad. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Gods, but you are remarkably stupid. >>>>>> >>>>>>So the odds of finding life on Mars is what? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> You tell me. >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>That the available evidence makes the likelyhood of life on Mars very >>>>>>>>>>small is not my problem, space cadet. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Except it doesn't, chimpshit. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>None of which is relevant to Mars as there is zero life on Mars, which >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>includes diseases. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Unproven. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>The people that go to Mars better hope there are no diseases on Mars. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>... and you can not live >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>longer than about 5 seconds on Mars without 21st century technology, ... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So you keep claiming. It's everyone else that's nuts and not you, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> right? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>So you are saying it doesn't take 21st century technology to be able >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>to live and work in what is for all practical purposes a vacuum? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>the difference in ease of survival should be obvious to everyone other >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>than starry eyed space cadets who read too many comic books. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh, so now it's EASE of survival. You do keep moving the goalposts, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> don't you, chimp? See Biosphere. Right down the road from here. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Ease as in the amount of required support equipment and the complexity >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>of the support equipment, space cadet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For colonies to survive they historically needed 'leading edge' >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> technology in support. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Nope, just about everything needed in the New World was centuries old. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>About the only thing that was 'leading edge' was firearms, which they >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>wouldn't NEED if they didn't piss of the natives. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Don't be silly. Why wouldn't they import the latest available rather >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than breaking tools out of museums, as you seem to think they did? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Don't be silly. The latest available, except for firearms, was the same >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>as it had been for a thousand years or so. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Don't be silly. It was your American indigenes that were static, not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Europe. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Don't be an ignorant fool. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Don't be stupid chimp droppings. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>Don't be a bile spewing, school yard bully. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Don't be a bile spewing, school yard bully lying hypocrite. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>Talking to yourself? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Sometimes it feels that way, what with me being the only intellect >>>>>>>>>>> involved. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Yep, you are the only one in the parade that is in step. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Gods, ANOTHER tu quoque argument? You really are remarkably stupid. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>My statement would have to be a logical fallacy, which it is not. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Your statement is, BY DEFINITION, a logical fallacy. Ad Hominem (tu >>>>>>> quoque). >>>>>> >>>>>>Says the wacko denier every bit as wacko as the Holocaust deniers. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> You're a lying sack of shit, Jim. >>>>> >>>> >>>>Racist deniers such as yourself are not worth talking to. >>>> >>> >>> Yet here you are, lying like the asshole you are. >> >> >>Is is obvious you concider the indiginous peoples of the Americas to >>be wogs and you are in denial of what happened to them. >> > > It seems like many things are 'obvious' to you that aren't in precise > 1:1 accord with our present reality. It's a product of you being so > pathologically opinionated. > >> >>Racist deniers aren't worth talking to. >> > > Yet here you are, lying like the asshole you are. Bully, liar, racist; not worth talking to. -- Jim Pennino
Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: Successful flight by Blue Origin Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 15:36 -0700
Re: Successful flight by Blue Origin jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-12 23:19 +0000
Re: Successful flight by Blue Origin Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 22:23 -0700
Re: Successful flight by Blue Origin jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-13 18:18 +0000
Re: Successful flight by Blue Origin Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 13:06 -0700
Re: Successful flight by Blue Origin jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-13 20:44 +0000
Re: Successful flight by Blue Origin Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 19:24 -0700
Re: Successful flight by Blue Origin jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-14 04:29 +0000
Re: Successful flight by Blue Origin Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2016-04-14 01:06 -0600
Re: Successful flight by Blue Origin jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-14 18:22 +0000
Re: Successful flight by Blue Origin Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-04-14 00:56 -0700
Re: Successful flight by Blue Origin jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-14 18:28 +0000
Re: Successful flight by Blue Origin Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-04-14 14:42 -0700
Re: Successful flight by Blue Origin jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-14 22:35 +0000
Re: Successful flight by Blue Origin Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-04-14 17:22 -0700
Re: Successful flight by Blue Origin jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-15 00:47 +0000
Re: Successful flight by Blue Origin Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-04-14 19:30 -0700
Re: Successful flight by Blue Origin jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-15 21:45 +0000
Re: Successful flight by Blue Origin Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-04-15 16:09 -0700
Re: Successful flight by Blue Origin jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-16 00:02 +0000
Re: Successful flight by Blue Origin Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-04-16 02:59 -0700
Re: Successful flight by Blue Origin jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-16 17:03 +0000
Re: Successful flight by Blue Origin Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-04-16 11:28 -0700
Re: Successful flight by Blue Origin jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-16 19:17 +0000
Re: Successful flight by Blue Origin Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-04-16 12:52 -0700
Re: Successful flight by Blue Origin jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-16 20:50 +0000
Re: Successful flight by Blue Origin Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-04-16 19:40 -0700
Re: Successful flight by Blue Origin jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-17 05:24 +0000
Re: Successful flight by Blue Origin Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-04-16 23:59 -0700
Re: Successful flight by Blue Origin HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-16 12:42 -0700
csiph-web