Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.space.policy > #58054 > unrolled thread
| Started by | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-09-27 15:41 -0400 |
| Last post | 2017-03-16 20:19 -0400 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 380 — 21 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.space.policy
Musk plans for mars JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-09-27 15:41 -0400
Re: Musk plans for mars William Mook <mokmedical@gmail.com> - 2016-09-29 21:05 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars William Mook <mokmedical@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 04:15 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars William Mook <mokmedical@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 16:07 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-01 09:55 -0400
Re: Musk plans for mars JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-10-01 17:33 -0400
Re: Musk plans for mars bob haller <hallerb@aol.com> - 2016-10-01 15:49 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars bob haller <hallerb@aol.com> - 2016-10-01 15:54 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars William Mook <mokmedical@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 22:39 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 11:20 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-10-02 15:02 -0400
Re: Musk plans for mars William Mook <mokmedical@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 15:47 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars William Mook <mokmedical@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 15:39 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 18:44 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars William Mook <mokmedical@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 19:58 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 22:48 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars William Mook <mokmedical@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 03:55 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 12:13 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars William Mook <mokmedical@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 16:17 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 20:43 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars William Mook <mokmedical@gmail.com> - 2016-10-04 00:12 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-04 13:19 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars William Mook <mokmedical@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 00:39 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 11:28 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars William Mook <mokmedical@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 15:57 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 21:47 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars William Mook <mokmedical@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 04:06 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 12:20 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-02 10:06 -0400
Re: Musk plans for mars Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 11:00 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 10:58 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> - 2016-10-01 20:29 -0400
Re: Musk plans for mars JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-10-01 23:03 -0400
Re: Musk plans for mars Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-02 10:11 -0400
Re: Musk plans for mars William Mook <mokmedical@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 09:28 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-10-02 14:28 -0400
Re: Musk plans for mars Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-03 06:35 -0400
Re: Musk plans for mars Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 11:16 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars William Mook <mokmedical@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 16:52 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 22:14 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars William Mook <mokmedical@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 04:25 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 12:39 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars William Mook <mokmedical@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 21:21 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 11:17 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-02 09:59 -0400
Re: Musk plans for mars William Mook <mokmedical@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 10:16 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 10:57 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-10-02 14:53 -0400
Re: Musk plans for mars Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 18:24 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars jacob navia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-10-10 00:50 +0200
Re: Musk plans for mars Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-09 19:32 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-10-10 02:38 -0400
Re: Musk plans for mars Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-10 10:12 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-10 06:21 -0400
Re: Musk plans for mars JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-10-10 16:14 -0400
Re: Musk plans for mars dumpster4@hotmail.com - 2016-10-10 14:50 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-10 15:59 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2016-10-11 08:09 +0000
Re: Musk plans for mars Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 03:29 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2016-10-11 11:23 +0000
Re: Musk plans for mars Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 05:32 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars jacob navia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-10-11 23:54 +0200
Re: Musk plans for mars Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 20:42 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-10-12 00:42 -0400
Re: Musk plans for mars Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 12:57 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars William Mook <mokmedical@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 16:45 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars bob haller <hallerb@aol.com> - 2016-10-01 15:54 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars William Mook <mokmedical@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 16:59 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 22:21 -0700
A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-10-10 21:29 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. William Mook <mokmedical@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 05:39 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-11 08:45 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2016-10-11 14:57 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 10:21 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-11 18:54 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2016-10-11 19:05 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2016-10-11 22:56 +0300
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 10:13 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-11 18:56 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 12:44 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-11 21:46 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> - 2016-10-11 19:46 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 20:18 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-12 05:19 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 12:59 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-11 19:10 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-11 19:19 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> - 2016-10-11 20:51 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-11 20:50 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 20:58 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-12 05:23 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 13:09 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 17:42 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 17:03 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 19:40 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-13 01:20 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 21:26 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-13 08:15 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 19:05 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-13 08:13 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-13 13:36 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-14 11:02 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-14 12:40 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-16 09:21 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-16 19:32 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-18 08:53 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 11:36 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-14 18:54 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 03:49 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-15 10:10 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 21:07 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-16 14:39 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2016-10-16 22:13 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-16 19:27 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 17:21 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-18 08:46 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-18 08:45 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-18 17:18 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-18 21:44 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-19 07:14 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-18 08:23 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-13 08:10 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-13 23:48 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-14 06:09 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 18:03 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 02:27 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-15 10:14 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-15 17:52 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 21:28 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 21:10 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-16 14:44 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-16 09:25 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-16 18:29 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 17:17 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-16 20:00 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-17 05:19 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 05:51 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 14:03 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-17 23:40 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-18 07:30 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-18 10:01 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 17:45 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 20:49 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 05:28 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-16 14:48 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-16 23:45 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-18 08:48 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-18 10:07 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-19 07:15 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-19 09:02 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-19 16:29 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> - 2016-10-19 19:38 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-19 19:27 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-19 18:57 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-13 08:08 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-14 12:15 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-12 02:37 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 21:02 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-12 05:23 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 13:11 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-13 08:17 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-13 23:54 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 10:52 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-14 13:07 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 20:50 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 08:50 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 13:16 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 17:45 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 17:05 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 19:43 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-13 01:22 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 19:20 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 20:48 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-10-12 01:21 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 08:53 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2016-10-12 19:18 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 13:06 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-13 06:26 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 00:01 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-14 06:14 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 18:07 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 02:35 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-16 14:50 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-16 23:54 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 18:21 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 07:12 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 06:50 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 17:00 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-17 23:47 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-18 07:31 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-18 12:16 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-10-17 13:40 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 16:24 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. William Mook <mokmedical@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 00:00 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-16 09:32 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 10:58 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-12 02:36 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 21:01 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 08:56 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 14:12 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 17:49 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 17:06 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 19:45 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 21:08 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-13 11:48 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 10:42 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-10-12 00:38 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 08:59 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 14:14 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 17:52 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 17:13 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 20:02 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 21:18 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-13 08:05 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-13 09:38 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 00:06 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-13 21:26 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 02:51 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-14 06:01 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-14 07:25 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-14 07:29 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-14 10:20 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 11:30 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-14 13:48 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 21:08 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 02:57 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-15 10:16 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 21:11 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-16 14:53 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. William Mook <mokmedical@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 21:25 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. William Mook <mokmedical@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 03:46 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. William Mook <mokmedical@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 04:15 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. William Mook <mokmedical@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 04:27 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. William Mook <mokmedical@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 04:39 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 21:04 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 03:02 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-15 10:18 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 21:23 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-16 15:00 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-16 19:30 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-17 00:00 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> - 2016-10-16 20:17 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-17 05:28 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> - 2016-10-17 07:15 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-17 18:13 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 16:53 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. William Mook <mokmedical@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 04:48 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 06:47 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 16:50 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 18:09 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 20:58 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-15 07:29 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-15 18:03 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 21:52 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 21:01 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 09:51 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-13 08:34 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-13 08:06 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-13 01:54 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-13 08:30 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 00:11 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-10-13 21:40 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 02:57 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 10:30 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 21:14 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 19:11 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 23:28 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 19:59 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-15 02:23 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 04:07 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 08:29 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-17 18:19 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 16:54 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 17:14 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-18 12:19 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 16:15 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-15 07:37 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 03:45 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 03:17 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-15 07:32 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-16 09:17 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-16 18:36 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 18:48 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 08:42 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 16:27 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 17:19 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-10-17 13:40 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 16:21 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-18 08:42 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 11:16 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-14 08:00 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-14 10:21 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-14 09:47 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-14 06:28 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 21:18 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 03:20 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 08:56 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 11:09 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-10-15 16:17 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> - 2016-10-15 20:00 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 22:39 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 09:02 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-17 18:24 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 08:57 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 12:46 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 17:56 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 17:41 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 21:18 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-13 07:53 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-13 13:28 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 10:50 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-14 13:17 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 02:40 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-15 10:21 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-15 21:09 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-15 23:04 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 22:47 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 09:03 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 16:29 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 21:25 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Dr J R Stockton <reply1600@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2016-10-16 18:36 +0100
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> - 2016-10-14 20:08 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 04:00 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 09:20 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 16:34 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 20:42 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 21:23 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-10-13 09:38 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 09:37 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-13 02:04 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-13 07:44 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-13 02:00 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-13 07:42 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-13 08:29 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 00:14 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-14 06:32 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 12:27 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 21:28 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 21:26 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 03:34 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-15 10:25 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Sjouke Burry <burrynulnulfour@ppllaanneett.nnll> - 2016-10-15 19:28 +0200
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-15 18:23 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 22:22 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-15 18:21 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-15 18:38 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 22:17 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 09:07 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 13:29 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-17 18:38 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 20:28 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-18 00:58 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-10-18 07:32 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-18 08:12 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-18 17:24 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 17:38 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 16:32 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-19 13:43 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-19 16:32 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-19 19:00 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-19 18:48 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-10-18 11:15 -0400
ITS upper stage as an SSTO. (was Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars.) "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-03-15 10:34 -0400
Triple cored ITS upper stage as a 1,000,000 lbs launcher.(was: Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars.) "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-03-15 11:14 -0400
Re: Musk plans for mars eaglesondouglas@gmail.com - 2017-03-15 11:12 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-03-15 14:15 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-03-15 20:36 -0400
Re: Musk plans for mars JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2017-03-16 00:57 -0400
Re: Musk plans for mars Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-03-15 23:00 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2017-03-16 13:31 -0400
Re: Musk plans for mars Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-03-16 16:12 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-03-16 20:26 -0400
Re: Musk plans for mars Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-03-16 17:38 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-03-16 20:47 -0400
Re: Musk plans for mars nj_kruse@me.com (Niels Jørgen Kruse) - 2017-03-17 15:22 +0100
Re: Musk plans for mars Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-03-17 08:03 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-03-18 12:19 -0400
Re: Musk plans for mars JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2017-03-18 17:26 -0400
Re: Musk plans for mars Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-03-18 19:20 -0700
Re: Musk plans for mars Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-03-16 20:19 -0400
Page 9 of 19 — ← Prev page 1 … 7 8 [9] 10 11 … 19 Next page →
| From | Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-13 08:17 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. |
| Message-ID | <MPG.32694558b2fdd52a989838@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #58227 |
In article <29k0dd-vco.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com says... > > In sci.physics Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> wrote: > > On Oct/11/2016 at 8:19 PM, Serigo wrote : > >> On 10/11/2016 6:10 PM, Jeff Findley wrote: > >>> In article <ntiqdi$7gt$3@gioia.aioe.org>, invalid@invalid.com says... > > > >>> > >>>> no food, no water, no air. > >>> > >>> There is a bit of water on Mars (e.g. polar regions) > >> > >> conjecture, not proven and so little, unusable. > > > > Well, let's say it is a very strong conjecture. > > > >>> and again a CO2 > >>> atmosphere. Food could be grown. > >> > >> all moisture would leave the plant. > >> Not enough CO2 or atmosphereic pressure to support any plants. > >> Radiation will kill it off in a few years. > > > > You would do so in pressurized greenhouses. It can be done. > > Just because something can be done does not mean it should be done. > You mean like growing tomatoes in greenhouses in Canada instead of growing them in open fields in a more temperate climate? Go look up how much of the US tomato market is supplied by Canadian greenhouses, especially in the winter. Jeff -- All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone. These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends, employer, or any organization that I am a member of.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-13 23:54 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. |
| Message-ID | <jej5dd-cab.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #58289 |
In sci.physics Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> wrote: > In article <29k0dd-vco.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com > says... >> >> In sci.physics Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> wrote: >> > On Oct/11/2016 at 8:19 PM, Serigo wrote : >> >> On 10/11/2016 6:10 PM, Jeff Findley wrote: >> >>> In article <ntiqdi$7gt$3@gioia.aioe.org>, invalid@invalid.com says... >> > >> >>> >> >>>> no food, no water, no air. >> >>> >> >>> There is a bit of water on Mars (e.g. polar regions) >> >> >> >> conjecture, not proven and so little, unusable. >> > >> > Well, let's say it is a very strong conjecture. >> > >> >>> and again a CO2 >> >>> atmosphere. Food could be grown. >> >> >> >> all moisture would leave the plant. >> >> Not enough CO2 or atmosphereic pressure to support any plants. >> >> Radiation will kill it off in a few years. >> > >> > You would do so in pressurized greenhouses. It can be done. >> >> Just because something can be done does not mean it should be done. >> > > You mean like growing tomatoes in greenhouses in Canada instead of > growing them in open fields in a more temperate climate? Nope. If you are going have food on Mars you would have to have pressurized, sealed, and lighted greenhouses. The Cold War is over so there is no point in doing something that has no other point than our dicks are bigger than Russian dicks, which was the point of the Apollo program. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-14 10:52 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. |
| Message-ID | <lp620cpbu7c6ifk27394b5r9an2kn80trv@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #58304 |
jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>In sci.physics Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> wrote:
>> In article <29k0dd-vco.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
>> says...
>>>
>>> In sci.physics Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> wrote:
>>> > On Oct/11/2016 at 8:19 PM, Serigo wrote :
>>> >> On 10/11/2016 6:10 PM, Jeff Findley wrote:
>>> >>> In article <ntiqdi$7gt$3@gioia.aioe.org>, invalid@invalid.com says...
>>> >
>>> >>>
>>> >>>> no food, no water, no air.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> There is a bit of water on Mars (e.g. polar regions)
>>> >>
>>> >> conjecture, not proven and so little, unusable.
>>> >
>>> > Well, let's say it is a very strong conjecture.
>>> >
>>> >>> and again a CO2
>>> >>> atmosphere. Food could be grown.
>>> >>
>>> >> all moisture would leave the plant.
>>> >> Not enough CO2 or atmosphereic pressure to support any plants.
>>> >> Radiation will kill it off in a few years.
>>> >
>>> > You would do so in pressurized greenhouses. It can be done.
>>>
>>> Just because something can be done does not mean it should be done.
>>>
>>
>> You mean like growing tomatoes in greenhouses in Canada instead of
>> growing them in open fields in a more temperate climate?
>
>Nope.
>
>If you are going have food on Mars you would have to have pressurized,
>sealed, and lighted greenhouses.
>
>The Cold War is over so there is no point in doing something that has
>no other point than our dicks are bigger than Russian dicks, which
>was the point of the Apollo program.
>
So no reason to waste all that money on toasters, then. No Buck
Rogers, no bucks, bucko.
--
"Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute."
-- Charles Pinckney
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-14 13:07 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. |
| Message-ID | <ntr6t7$1qus$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #58337 |
On 10/14/2016 12:52 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote: > jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > >> In sci.physics Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> wrote: >>> In article <29k0dd-vco.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com >>> says... >>>> >>>> In sci.physics Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> wrote: >>>>> On Oct/11/2016 at 8:19 PM, Serigo wrote : >>>>>> On 10/11/2016 6:10 PM, Jeff Findley wrote: >>>>>>> In article <ntiqdi$7gt$3@gioia.aioe.org>, invalid@invalid.com says... >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> no food, no water, no air. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There is a bit of water on Mars (e.g. polar regions) >>>>>> >>>>>> conjecture, not proven and so little, unusable. >>>>> >>>>> Well, let's say it is a very strong conjecture. >>>>> >>>>>>> and again a CO2 >>>>>>> atmosphere. Food could be grown. >>>>>> all moisture would leave the plant. >>>>>> Not enough CO2 or atmosphereic pressure to support any plants. >>>>>> Radiation will kill it off in a few years. >>>>> >>>>> You would do so in pressurized greenhouses. It can be done. >>>> >>>> Just because something can be done does not mean it should be done. >>> >>> You mean like growing tomatoes in greenhouses in Canada instead of >>> growing them in open fields in a more temperate climate? >> >> Nope. >> >> If you are going have food on Mars you would have to have pressurized, >> sealed, and lighted greenhouses. >> >> The Cold War is over so there is no point in doing something that has >> no other point than our dicks are bigger than Russian dicks, which >> was the point of the Apollo program. >> > > So no reason to waste all that money on toasters, then. No Buck > Rogers, no bucks, bucko. > > but Hollywood can make FILMS ! show Musk and friends inside his burried rocket ship on Mars trying to get the internet from Earth, all on poop buckets to generate methane. Obama too! throw him in there, he wants to lead the USA to mars, he can be the first to go w Musk(rat), Trump too! He wants to be BIG on MARS. and take Hiellary !! and her evil husband that sex monster Bill.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-11 20:50 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. |
| Message-ID | <ckcrvbdhmc1lnb2pqmu5gqtphbs480uu12@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #58224 |
Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> wrote:
>On Oct/11/2016 at 8:19 PM, Serigo wrote :
>> On 10/11/2016 6:10 PM, Jeff Findley wrote:
>>> In article <ntiqdi$7gt$3@gioia.aioe.org>, invalid@invalid.com says...
>
>>>
>>>> no food, no water, no air.
>>>
>>> There is a bit of water on Mars (e.g. polar regions)
>>
>> conjecture, not proven and so little, unusable.
>
>Well, let's say it is a very strong conjecture.
>
It's not conjecture. It's a fact. Water has been detected and in
other places than the poles.
--
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore,
all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
--George Bernard Shaw
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-12 08:50 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. |
| Message-ID | <ntlf3b$hhe$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #58231 |
On 10/11/2016 10:50 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote: > Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> wrote: > >> On Oct/11/2016 at 8:19 PM, Serigo wrote : >>> On 10/11/2016 6:10 PM, Jeff Findley wrote: >>>> In article <ntiqdi$7gt$3@gioia.aioe.org>, invalid@invalid.com says... >> >>>> >>>>> no food, no water, no air. >>>> >>>> There is a bit of water on Mars (e.g. polar regions) >>> >>> conjecture, not proven and so little, unusable. >> Well, let's say it is a very strong conjecture. >> > > It's not conjecture. It's a fact. Water has been detected and in > other places than the poles. > > NASA says it is conjecture. Go read the orgional reports and studies. you can not provide any URLS to support your assertions.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-12 13:16 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. |
| Message-ID | <m76tvblcihtnmrs6hpa40rvf0u06or40lt@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #58242 |
Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
>On 10/11/2016 10:50 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
>> Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> On Oct/11/2016 at 8:19 PM, Serigo wrote :
>>>> On 10/11/2016 6:10 PM, Jeff Findley wrote:
>>>>> In article <ntiqdi$7gt$3@gioia.aioe.org>, invalid@invalid.com says...
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> no food, no water, no air.
>>>>>
>>>>> There is a bit of water on Mars (e.g. polar regions)
>>>>
>>>> conjecture, not proven and so little, unusable.
>
>>> Well, let's say it is a very strong conjecture.
>>>
>>
>> It's not conjecture. It's a fact. Water has been detected and in
>> other places than the poles.
>>
>
>NASA says it is conjecture.
>
Read something newer than half a century old.
>
>Go read the orgional reports and studies.
>
Go read something current. FLOWING SURFACE WATER is 'conjecture'. The
presence of large quantities of water as ices and frozen brines is
FACT.
>
>you can not provide any URLS to support your assertions.
>
I certainly can't list all the hits googling "water Mars" produces.
--
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the
truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."
-- Thomas Jefferson
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-12 17:45 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. |
| Message-ID | <ntmeeg$a00$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #58253 |
On 10/12/2016 3:16 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote: > Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote: > >> On 10/11/2016 10:50 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote: >>> Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> wrote: >>> >>>> On Oct/11/2016 at 8:19 PM, Serigo wrote : >>>>> On 10/11/2016 6:10 PM, Jeff Findley wrote: >>>>>> In article <ntiqdi$7gt$3@gioia.aioe.org>, invalid@invalid.com says... >>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> no food, no water, no air. >>>>>> >>>>>> There is a bit of water on Mars (e.g. polar regions) >>>>> >>>>> conjecture, not proven and so little, unusable. >>>> Well, let's say it is a very strong conjecture. >>>> >>> >>> It's not conjecture. It's a fact. Water has been detected and in >>> other places than the poles. >>> >> >> NASA says it is conjecture. >> > Read something newer than half a century old. > >> >> Go read the orgional reports and studies. >> > > Go read something current. FLOWING SURFACE WATER is 'conjecture'. The > presence of large quantities of water as ices and frozen brines is > FACT. wrong, it is only photos of a flowed surface, it is conjectured as water flow, not verified. try to keep up. > >> >> you can not provide any URLS to support your assertions. >> > > I certainly can't list all the hits googling "water Mars" produces. no need, find the one to the orgional NASA report that conjecturs it must be water. ALL the rest of the articals come from that one. > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-12 17:05 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. |
| Message-ID | <nrjtvbtb663mmuuofbtru17rhdqs30jc8d@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #58257 |
Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
>On 10/12/2016 3:16 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
>> Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/11/2016 10:50 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
>>>> Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Oct/11/2016 at 8:19 PM, Serigo wrote :
>>>>>> On 10/11/2016 6:10 PM, Jeff Findley wrote:
>>>>>>> In article <ntiqdi$7gt$3@gioia.aioe.org>, invalid@invalid.com says...
>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> no food, no water, no air.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There is a bit of water on Mars (e.g. polar regions)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> conjecture, not proven and so little, unusable.
>
>>>>> Well, let's say it is a very strong conjecture.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's not conjecture. It's a fact. Water has been detected and in
>>>> other places than the poles.
>>>>
>>>
>>> NASA says it is conjecture.
>>>
>
>> Read something newer than half a century old.
>>
>>>
>>> Go read the orgional reports and studies.
>>>
>>
>> Go read something current. FLOWING SURFACE WATER is 'conjecture'. The
>> presence of large quantities of water as ices and frozen brines is
>> FACT.
>
>wrong, it is only photos of a flowed surface, it is conjectured as water
>flow, not verified.
>
>try to keep up.
>
Wrong, it is much more than you claim.
Try to pull your head out.
>>
>>>
>>> you can not provide any URLS to support your assertions.
>>>
>>
>> I certainly can't list all the hits googling "water Mars" produces.
>
>no need, find the one to the orgional NASA report that conjecturs it
>must be water.
>
>ALL the rest of the articals come from that one.
>
You're still talking about FLOWING SURFACE WATER. A colony doesn't
need that and there is all sorts of evidence for various ices on Mars,
some of them in surprising places.
--
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the
truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."
-- Thomas Jefferson
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-12 19:43 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. |
| Message-ID | <ntmlbv$hmp$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #58262 |
On 10/12/2016 7:05 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote: > Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote: > >> On 10/12/2016 3:16 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote: >>> Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On 10/11/2016 10:50 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote: >>>>> Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Oct/11/2016 at 8:19 PM, Serigo wrote : >>>>>>> On 10/11/2016 6:10 PM, Jeff Findley wrote: >>>>>>>> In article <ntiqdi$7gt$3@gioia.aioe.org>, invalid@invalid.com says... >>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> no food, no water, no air. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There is a bit of water on Mars (e.g. polar regions) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> conjecture, not proven and so little, unusable. >> >>>>>> Well, let's say it is a very strong conjecture. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> It's not conjecture. It's a fact. Water has been detected and in >>>>> other places than the poles. >>>>> >>>> >>>> NASA says it is conjecture. >>>> >> >>> Read something newer than half a century old. >>> >>>> >>>> Go read the orgional reports and studies. >>>> >>> >>> Go read something current. FLOWING SURFACE WATER is 'conjecture'. The >>> presence of large quantities of water as ices and frozen brines is >>> FACT. >> >> wrong, it is only photos of a flowed surface, it is conjectured as water >> flow, not verified. >> >> try to keep up. >> > > Wrong, it is much more than you claim. > read material carefully. now provide a link. > >>> >>>> >>>> you can not provide any URLS to support your assertions. >>>> >>> >>> I certainly can't list all the hits googling "water Mars" produces. >> >> no need, find the one to the orgional NASA report that conjecturs it >> must be water. >> >> ALL the rest of the articals come from that one. >> > > You're still talking about FLOWING SURFACE WATER. A colony doesn't > need that and there is all sorts of evidence for various ices on Mars, > some of them in surprising places. so how do you get it ? mine it ? reduce it with heat ? how to transport it ? think it through, How much water does a colony, say one person need per day?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-13 01:22 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. |
| Message-ID | <5743dd-b93.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #58268 |
In sci.physics Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote: > On 10/12/2016 7:05 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote: >> Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote: >> >>> On 10/12/2016 3:16 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote: >>>> Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 10/11/2016 10:50 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote: >>>>>> Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Oct/11/2016 at 8:19 PM, Serigo wrote : >>>>>>>> On 10/11/2016 6:10 PM, Jeff Findley wrote: >>>>>>>>> In article <ntiqdi$7gt$3@gioia.aioe.org>, invalid@invalid.com says... >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> no food, no water, no air. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> There is a bit of water on Mars (e.g. polar regions) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> conjecture, not proven and so little, unusable. >>> >>>>>>> Well, let's say it is a very strong conjecture. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> It's not conjecture. It's a fact. Water has been detected and in >>>>>> other places than the poles. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> NASA says it is conjecture. >>>>> >>> >>>> Read something newer than half a century old. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Go read the orgional reports and studies. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Go read something current. FLOWING SURFACE WATER is 'conjecture'. The >>>> presence of large quantities of water as ices and frozen brines is >>>> FACT. >>> >>> wrong, it is only photos of a flowed surface, it is conjectured as water >>> flow, not verified. >>> >>> try to keep up. >>> >> >> Wrong, it is much more than you claim. >> > > read material carefully. > > now provide a link. > >> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> you can not provide any URLS to support your assertions. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I certainly can't list all the hits googling "water Mars" produces. >>> >>> no need, find the one to the orgional NASA report that conjecturs it >>> must be water. >>> >>> ALL the rest of the articals come from that one. >>> >> >> You're still talking about FLOWING SURFACE WATER. A colony doesn't >> need that and there is all sorts of evidence for various ices on Mars, >> some of them in surprising places. > > so how do you get it ? mine it ? reduce it with heat ? how to transport > it ? > > think it through, > > How much water does a colony, say one person need per day? About a gallon per day for intake, much more if you want to wash anything. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-12 19:20 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. |
| Message-ID | <t1rtvb96trsmnmvt86ej1fuil4vbeai97j@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #58268 |
Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
>On 10/12/2016 7:05 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
>> Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/12/2016 3:16 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
>>>> Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 10/11/2016 10:50 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
>>>>>> Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Oct/11/2016 at 8:19 PM, Serigo wrote :
>>>>>>>> On 10/11/2016 6:10 PM, Jeff Findley wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In article <ntiqdi$7gt$3@gioia.aioe.org>, invalid@invalid.com says...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> no food, no water, no air.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There is a bit of water on Mars (e.g. polar regions)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> conjecture, not proven and so little, unusable.
>>>
>>>>>>> Well, let's say it is a very strong conjecture.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's not conjecture. It's a fact. Water has been detected and in
>>>>>> other places than the poles.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> NASA says it is conjecture.
>>>>>
>>>
>>>> Read something newer than half a century old.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Go read the orgional reports and studies.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Go read something current. FLOWING SURFACE WATER is 'conjecture'. The
>>>> presence of large quantities of water as ices and frozen brines is
>>>> FACT.
>>>
>>> wrong, it is only photos of a flowed surface, it is conjectured as water
>>> flow, not verified.
>>>
>>> try to keep up.
>>>
>>
>> Wrong, it is much more than you claim.
>>
>
>read material carefully.
>
Have someone read the material and explain it to you.
>
>now provide a link.
>
http://www.space.com/30502-mars-giant-ice-sheet-discovery-mro.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martian_polar_ice_caps
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_on_Mars
http://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/the-coming-and-going-of-ice-on-mars
https://themis.asu.edu/node/5392
>
>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> you can not provide any URLS to support your assertions.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I certainly can't list all the hits googling "water Mars" produces.
>>>
>>> no need, find the one to the orgional NASA report that conjecturs it
>>> must be water.
>>>
>>> ALL the rest of the articals come from that one.
>>>
>>
>> You're still talking about FLOWING SURFACE WATER. A colony doesn't
>> need that and there is all sorts of evidence for various ices on Mars,
>> some of them in surprising places.
>>
>
>so how do you get it ? mine it ? reduce it with heat ? how to transport
>it ?
>
>think it through,
>
Great advice. If only you would take it you would not ask so many
stupid questions.
>
>How much water does a colony, say one person need per day?
>
If you live like you do on Earth, you'll use about 20 litres per day.
Almost all of that can be recovered and recycled. About 3.7 litres of
that are for human consumption, including water in food. With air and
waste recycling, almost all of that can be recovered, too.
--
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the
truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."
-- Thomas Jefferson
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-11 20:48 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. |
| Message-ID | <jbcrvbd2bhvvliq05mic51bjpueiu3vqia@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #58223 |
Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
>On 10/11/2016 6:10 PM, Jeff Findley wrote:
>> In article <ntiqdi$7gt$3@gioia.aioe.org>, invalid@invalid.com says...
>>>
>>> there is no reason for man to go to Mars.
>>
>> Opinion.
>
>Fact. Mars is Dead.
>
Not a fact. It's likely, but not a fact.
>>
>>> It is rocks and sand in a vaccum.
>>
>> False, Mars has a mostly CO2 atmosphere, albeit a very thin one.
>
>1% of Earths, 96% CO2, nothing on earth that uses its atmosphere can be
>used on Mars, therefor Mars has no air.
>
Define 'air'. You said it was vacuum. You now admit it isn't. You're
not even a GOOD troll.
>
>> If you
>> want rocks and sand in a vacuum, the moon is a better destination, but
>> even the moon looks to have water.
>
>"looks" => conjecture
>
Nope. We've detected it. And Mars actually has quite a bit of water.
>
>>
>>> no food, no water, no air.
>>
>> There is a bit of water on Mars (e.g. polar regions)
>>
>
>conjecture, not proven and so little, unusable.
>
There's more than he says and it is not conjecture. It's a fact.
>
>> and again a CO2
>> atmosphere. Food could be grown.
>
>all moisture would leave the plant.
>Not enough CO2 or atmosphereic pressure to support any plants.
>Radiation will kill it off in a few years.
>
Poppycock.
>
>>
>>> send a robot.
>>
>> Been there, done that. They're s-l-o-w and return very little science
>> compared to a manned mission.
>>
>
>silly opinion.
>
It's not an opinion. It's a fact. You really seem to have those two
things swapped in your head.
>
>>
>>> to hell with Musk and his gov funded R&D companies.
>>
>> Tell us how you really feel...
>
>I dont want Gov stealing my money for dead ideas.
>
You're not smart enough to have to pay taxes. You're just a parasite
on the system.
--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
only stupid."
-- Heinrich Heine
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-12 01:21 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. |
| Message-ID | <57fdc83e$0$31173$c3e8da3$a9097924@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #58230 |
On 2016-10-11 23:48, Fred J. McCall wrote: > Define 'air'. You said it was vacuum. You now admit it isn't. You're > not even a GOOD troll. Say I went on a camping trip to Mars. Would my tent widstand the winds ? (higher winds but thinner air). Forgetting abrasive nature of sand, would structures have to be stronger than on earth to widthstand the winds ?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-12 08:53 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. |
| Message-ID | <ntlf84$hhe$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #58237 |
On 10/12/2016 12:21 AM, JF Mezei wrote: > On 2016-10-11 23:48, Fred J. McCall wrote: > >> Define 'air'. You said it was vacuum. You now admit it isn't. You're >> not even a GOOD troll. > > > Say I went on a camping trip to Mars. Would my tent widstand the winds ? > (higher winds but thinner air). > > Forgetting abrasive nature of sand, would structures have to be stronger > than on earth to widthstand the winds ? > simple questions actually, just calculate the Mass flow rates and compair. mass*velocity stuff. if mars is 99% less than earth, then winds can be 100 times greater, simple ratios
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-12 19:18 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. |
| Message-ID | <ntm29e$5st$1@newsreader4.netcologne.de> |
| In reply to | #58237 |
JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> schrieb: > Say I went on a camping trip to Mars. Would my tent widstand the winds ? > (higher winds but thinner air). No problem. Wind speeds measured by Viking were around 30 m/s. Density of mars atmosphere is around 0.02 kg/m^3. This gives you a dynamic pressure of around 9 Pa, or 9 Newton per m^2. On earth, usual atmospheric density is around 1.2 kg/m^3. To get to the same dynamic pressure, you would have a wind speed of a bit less than 4 m/s, which is in the range for Beaufort 3. So, literally a gentle breeze.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-12 13:06 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. |
| Message-ID | <3l5tvb1sq1c9hkt0i6gkfi9jj86j2b8b4k@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #58237 |
JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
>On 2016-10-11 23:48, Fred J. McCall wrote:
>>
>> Define 'air'. You said it was vacuum. You now admit it isn't. You're
>> not even a GOOD troll.
>>
>
>Say I went on a camping trip to Mars. Would my tent widstand the winds ?
>(higher winds but thinner air).
>
Your tent won't always withstand the winds on Earth. It also won't
always withstand the winds on Mars.
>
>Forgetting abrasive nature of sand, would structures have to be stronger
>than on earth to widthstand the winds ?
>
Just how high do you think the winds on Mars are? Typical 'dust
storm' winds are only on the order of 60-70 miles per hour.
--
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the
truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."
-- Thomas Jefferson
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-13 06:26 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. |
| Message-ID | <MPG.32692b614bd1b535989833@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #58223 |
In article <ntjvi8$brk$1@gioia.aioe.org>, invalid@invalid.com says... > > On 10/11/2016 6:10 PM, Jeff Findley wrote: > > In article <ntiqdi$7gt$3@gioia.aioe.org>, invalid@invalid.com says... > >> > >> there is no reason for man to go to Mars. > > > > Opinion. > > Fact. Mars is Dead. Good, then there are no locals to object when we start using its natural resources. > >> It is rocks and sand in a vaccum. > > > > False, Mars has a mostly CO2 atmosphere, albeit a very thin one. > > 1% of Earths, 96% CO2, nothing on earth that uses its atmosphere can be > used on Mars, therefor Mars has no air. Chemistry. CO2 is one of the materials needed to make methane and oxygen for the return trip back to earth. Also, note people breathe oxygen, so this chemical process also is useful for life support. The chemistry needed to do this is quite well studied and has been done in the lab many times. We just need to send the necessary equipment to Mars and "just do it" (to steal a marketing phrase). > > If you > > want rocks and sand in a vacuum, the moon is a better destination, but > > even the moon looks to have water. > > "looks" => conjecture Actually, there is a lot of scientific of evidence for water deposits on the moon (I believe the location of interest is the south pole). No there are no flowing oceans, but if there is water and it can be extracted and used. It's a natural resource despite your whining to the contrary. > >> no food, no water, no air. > > > > There is a bit of water on Mars (e.g. polar regions) > > conjecture, not proven and so little, unusable. Actually, there is quite a bit of evidence for water on the Mars too. > > and again a CO2 > > atmosphere. Food could be grown. > > all moisture would leave the plant. > Not enough CO2 or atmosphereic pressure to support any plants. > Radiation will kill it off in a few years. Hydroponic greenhouses pressurized to 1 atmosphere of pressure (or nearly so since plants grow at lesser pressures right here on earth). Ever see how they grow tomatoes in Canada or the hydroponics garden at Disney Epcot? Pretty much just like that. > >> send a robot. > > > > Been there, done that. They're s-l-o-w and return very little science > > compared to a manned mission. > > silly opinion. Fact, not opinion. Look at the science returns from Apollo (e.g. kg of samples returned, experiments performed, and equipment set up). Look at how far the manned lunar rovers drove compared to the robotic rovers on Mars. Facts you are apparently either ignorant of, or are ignoring. > > > >> to hell with Musk and his gov funded R&D companies. > > > > Tell us how you really feel... > > I dont want Gov stealing my money for dead ideas. Capitalistic competition between SpaceX, Blue Origin, ULA, Boeing, and etc. is *far* better than throwing money down the glorious socialist SLS/Orion "rocket to nowhere" rat-hole. That program has spent many billions of dollars and flown zero times. At least SpaceX is "pushing the envelope" and lowering launch costs. High launch costs are arguably the biggest roadblock for any manned mission beyond LEO. Jeff -- All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone. These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends, employer, or any organization that I am a member of.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-14 00:01 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. |
| Message-ID | <4rj5dd-cab.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #58284 |
In sci.physics Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> wrote: > In article <ntjvi8$brk$1@gioia.aioe.org>, invalid@invalid.com says... >> >> On 10/11/2016 6:10 PM, Jeff Findley wrote: >> > In article <ntiqdi$7gt$3@gioia.aioe.org>, invalid@invalid.com says... >> >> >> >> there is no reason for man to go to Mars. >> > >> > Opinion. >> >> Fact. Mars is Dead. > > Good, then there are no locals to object when we start using its natural > resources. > >> >> It is rocks and sand in a vaccum. >> > >> > False, Mars has a mostly CO2 atmosphere, albeit a very thin one. >> >> 1% of Earths, 96% CO2, nothing on earth that uses its atmosphere can be >> used on Mars, therefor Mars has no air. > > Chemistry. CO2 is one of the materials needed to make methane and > oxygen for the return trip back to earth. Also, note people breathe > oxygen, so this chemical process also is useful for life support. > > The chemistry needed to do this is quite well studied and has been done > in the lab many times. We just need to send the necessary equipment to > Mars and "just do it" (to steal a marketing phrase). Which would be a big industrial plant, a nuclear reactor to power it, and a shitload of support equipment. >> > If you >> > want rocks and sand in a vacuum, the moon is a better destination, but >> > even the moon looks to have water. >> >> "looks" => conjecture > > Actually, there is a lot of scientific of evidence for water deposits on > the moon (I believe the location of interest is the south pole). No > there are no flowing oceans, but if there is water and it can be > extracted and used. It's a natural resource despite your whining to the > contrary. Generally something is called a natural resource when it is concentrated and easy to extract. The Earth's oceans are full of gold but no one is recovering it. >> >> no food, no water, no air. >> > >> > There is a bit of water on Mars (e.g. polar regions) >> >> conjecture, not proven and so little, unusable. > > Actually, there is quite a bit of evidence for water on the Mars too. But not in usefull amounts or convienient places. >> > and again a CO2 >> > atmosphere. Food could be grown. >> >> all moisture would leave the plant. >> Not enough CO2 or atmosphereic pressure to support any plants. >> Radiation will kill it off in a few years. > > Hydroponic greenhouses pressurized to 1 atmosphere of pressure (or > nearly so since plants grow at lesser pressures right here on earth). > Ever see how they grow tomatoes in Canada or the hydroponics garden at > Disney Epcot? Pretty much just like that. > >> >> send a robot. >> > >> > Been there, done that. They're s-l-o-w and return very little science >> > compared to a manned mission. >> >> silly opinion. > > Fact, not opinion. Look at the science returns from Apollo (e.g. kg of > samples returned, experiments performed, and equipment set up). Look at > how far the manned lunar rovers drove compared to the robotic rovers on > Mars. Facts you are apparently either ignorant of, or are ignoring. The Mars rovers ran for years 24/7. How long was the longest stay for humans on the Moon? How far away from the landing site did the lunar rovers go compared to the Martian rovers? The Martian rovers don't need to return rocks to Earth, they can analyze them on the spot. >> >> to hell with Musk and his gov funded R&D companies. >> > >> > Tell us how you really feel... >> >> I dont want Gov stealing my money for dead ideas. > > Capitalistic competition between SpaceX, Blue Origin, ULA, Boeing, and > etc. is *far* better than throwing money down the glorious socialist > SLS/Orion "rocket to nowhere" rat-hole. That program has spent many > billions of dollars and flown zero times. At least SpaceX is "pushing > the envelope" and lowering launch costs. High launch costs are arguably > the biggest roadblock for any manned mission beyond LEO. > > Jeff Well that and basic survival. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-14 06:14 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. |
| Message-ID | <MPG.326a79f16270fa1198983e@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #58305 |
In article <4rj5dd-cab.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com says... > > In sci.physics Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> wrote: > > In article <ntjvi8$brk$1@gioia.aioe.org>, invalid@invalid.com says... > >> > >> On 10/11/2016 6:10 PM, Jeff Findley wrote: > >> > In article <ntiqdi$7gt$3@gioia.aioe.org>, invalid@invalid.com says... > >> >> > >> >> there is no reason for man to go to Mars. > >> > > >> > Opinion. > >> > >> Fact. Mars is Dead. > > > > Good, then there are no locals to object when we start using its natural > > resources. > > > >> >> It is rocks and sand in a vaccum. > >> > > >> > False, Mars has a mostly CO2 atmosphere, albeit a very thin one. > >> > >> 1% of Earths, 96% CO2, nothing on earth that uses its atmosphere can be > >> used on Mars, therefor Mars has no air. > > > > Chemistry. CO2 is one of the materials needed to make methane and > > oxygen for the return trip back to earth. Also, note people breathe > > oxygen, so this chemical process also is useful for life support. > > > > The chemistry needed to do this is quite well studied and has been done > > in the lab many times. We just need to send the necessary equipment to > > Mars and "just do it" (to steal a marketing phrase). > > Which would be a big industrial plant, a nuclear reactor to power it, > and a shitload of support equipment. No, it's not "big". Mars reference missions include this because the "plant" needed can be small, if you give it many months to do its work. Hint: The life support equipment on ISS contains chemical "plants" as well. The Russians have been using them for quite some time. And they have the disadvantage that they had to work in zero gravity. > >> > If you > >> > want rocks and sand in a vacuum, the moon is a better destination, but > >> > even the moon looks to have water. > >> > >> "looks" => conjecture > > > > Actually, there is a lot of scientific of evidence for water deposits on > > the moon (I believe the location of interest is the south pole). No > > there are no flowing oceans, but if there is water and it can be > > extracted and used. It's a natural resource despite your whining to the > > contrary. > > Generally something is called a natural resource when it is concentrated > and easy to extract. > > The Earth's oceans are full of gold but no one is recovering it. On earth, fossil fuels are still relatively cheap, given advances in technologies like fracking. So, we simply won't ramp up on renewable energy on earth until its cost effective to do so. On Mars, it would likely be hideously expensive to try to mine fossil fuels, especially since we have no idea if there are any fossil fuels on Mars. Jeff -- All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone. These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends, employer, or any organization that I am a member of.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 9 of 19 — ← Prev page 1 … 7 8 [9] 10 11 … 19 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.space.policy
csiph-web