Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #570992

Re: Successful flight by Blue Origin

Cross-posted to 4 groups.

Show key headers only | View raw

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.

 

-- 
Jim Pennino

Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

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