Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.space.policy > #56657 > unrolled thread
| Started by | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-06-03 13:14 -0400 |
| Last post | 2016-06-19 22:40 -0400 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 250 — 13 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.space.policy
Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-06-03 13:14 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-06-03 14:08 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-06-03 14:12 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-06-03 15:43 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-03 17:57 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-06-03 15:50 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-03 17:55 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-06-03 15:48 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-06-04 04:16 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 nj_kruse@me.com (Niels Jørgen Kruse) - 2016-06-04 10:58 +0200
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-04 08:26 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-06-04 14:23 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-04 15:16 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hpe.com> - 2016-06-06 18:51 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Dr J R Stockton <reply1600@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2016-06-05 22:49 +0100
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-06-06 07:14 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Dr J R Stockton <reply1600@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2016-06-09 22:11 +0100
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-06-10 14:00 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-10 13:56 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-06-10 18:30 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-11 02:42 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-06-15 11:47 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-06-15 18:02 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-06-15 18:53 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-06-15 19:41 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-06-15 20:12 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-06-15 22:18 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-06-16 05:57 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-18 08:47 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-06-18 12:59 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-19 08:45 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-06-19 13:49 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-20 10:56 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-06-20 15:41 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-20 14:30 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-06-20 18:41 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-06-20 21:55 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-06-21 01:32 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-06-21 06:09 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-06-21 09:04 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-06-21 18:23 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-06-21 23:41 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-06-21 13:16 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-21 12:47 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-06-21 20:18 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-06-21 16:12 -0500
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-06-21 21:31 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 12:25 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-06-22 21:57 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-06-22 22:30 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 bob haller <hallerb@aol.com> - 2016-06-23 00:25 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 bob haller <hallerb@aol.com> - 2016-06-23 00:27 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-23 09:09 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-23 09:06 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-06-23 06:27 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-23 10:19 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-06-24 06:43 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-23 05:12 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 12:23 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-06-22 20:53 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 14:37 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-06-22 22:20 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-23 00:31 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-06-23 17:45 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-23 14:27 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-06-23 22:51 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-24 05:42 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-06-24 15:54 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-30 20:30 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-01 05:47 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-01 17:31 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-02 00:57 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-01 19:55 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-02 05:28 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 14:25 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-02 23:15 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 21:39 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-03 05:52 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-03 22:43 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-04 16:28 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-07 17:06 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-08 01:03 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-09 02:00 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-09 17:06 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-10 11:23 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-10 19:41 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-11 00:21 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-11 15:50 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-12 09:35 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-12 18:08 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-12 17:46 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-13 02:56 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-07-04 09:33 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-06 16:58 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-07 00:17 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-07-07 14:07 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-07 19:05 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-08 02:48 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-08 18:42 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-10 11:03 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-10 19:00 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-10 23:47 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-11 15:28 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-12 08:47 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-12 17:20 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-12 17:43 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-13 02:54 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-07-02 23:01 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 21:43 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-03 05:55 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-03 22:46 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-04 16:34 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-07 17:11 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-08 01:10 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-09 02:07 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-09 17:20 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-10 11:37 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-10 19:57 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-11 00:33 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-11 15:59 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-12 09:59 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-12 18:28 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-12 18:06 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-13 03:11 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-07-08 01:16 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-09 02:18 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-07-03 22:25 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-05 19:40 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 nj_kruse@me.com (Niels Jørgen Kruse) - 2016-07-03 11:24 +0200
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-04 20:57 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 bob haller <hallerb@aol.com> - 2016-07-05 04:40 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-07-06 06:44 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-07-07 14:00 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hpe.com> - 2016-07-07 18:39 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-07-07 23:06 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-08 02:57 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-07-08 06:52 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-07-08 06:47 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-07 17:21 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hpe.com> - 2016-07-05 17:14 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-07-05 13:33 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-07 23:31 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-07-05 15:29 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-07 23:34 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-06-22 18:51 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-23 00:35 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-06-22 18:26 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-23 00:32 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-06-21 22:39 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-06-22 05:01 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 13:50 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-06-22 18:25 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 15:07 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-06-22 18:11 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-06-22 23:31 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-06-22 20:15 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-23 05:05 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-06-23 05:50 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-23 10:22 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-06-23 17:54 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-23 15:24 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-06-23 22:58 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-24 05:47 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-06-24 16:03 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-06-24 22:56 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-06-25 08:54 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-06-25 14:21 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-06-25 16:33 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-30 23:32 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-30 20:41 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-30 20:35 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-01 05:56 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-01 17:32 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-02 01:03 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-01 19:56 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-02 05:34 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 14:27 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-02 23:20 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 21:41 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-03 05:56 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-04 20:53 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-05 06:11 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-07 17:12 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-08 01:12 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-09 02:08 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-09 17:23 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-10 11:38 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-10 19:57 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-11 00:35 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-11 15:59 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-12 10:01 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-12 18:29 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-12 18:09 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-13 03:14 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-07-02 23:03 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-03 05:57 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-06-24 22:44 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-06-25 08:57 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 bob haller <hallerb@aol.com> - 2016-06-25 06:10 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-06-25 16:13 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-06-25 16:41 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-06-25 16:48 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-06-25 14:31 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-06-25 16:39 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-06-25 16:43 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-06-26 00:05 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-06-26 15:40 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Dr J R Stockton <reply1600@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2016-06-27 21:31 +0100
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-06-28 06:18 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-06-26 22:29 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-30 23:36 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-30 23:28 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-23 00:26 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 12:36 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-21 06:31 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hpe.com> - 2016-06-21 15:37 +0000
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-06-21 18:27 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-20 20:11 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-06-21 09:02 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-21 07:59 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Jonathan <writeInstead@gmail.com> - 2016-07-03 05:12 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-07-04 20:55 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-07-05 06:06 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-06-20 20:04 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-06-20 21:59 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-06-21 01:42 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-06-21 06:21 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-06-21 13:36 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-21 06:34 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-06-21 13:54 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 10:24 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-06-21 07:42 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-20 20:12 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-18 04:30 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-06-18 12:45 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-19 08:37 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-06-18 14:27 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-18 04:18 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-06-17 06:25 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-06-20 08:12 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-06-20 13:57 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-20 11:05 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-06-20 21:47 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-06-20 22:34 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-20 20:17 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-06-03 17:53 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 bob haller <hallerb@aol.com> - 2016-06-18 15:09 -0700
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-06-19 15:55 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-06-19 22:05 -0400
Re: Leaning tower of falcon 9 Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-06-19 22:40 -0400
Page 10 of 13 — ← Prev page 1 … 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 Next page →
| From | Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-04 20:53 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <hnbmnbdl0tfvvhfits3i2f71q4a3mskjrh@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #56892 |
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:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>><snip>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Buy a fucking dictionary and look it up, Chimpshit.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>manufacture: the making of goods or wares by manual labor or by machinery,
>>>>>>>>>especially on a large scale
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>goods: articles of trade; wares; merchandise
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Note nothing about 'selling' the results. You're done.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>wares: articles of merchandise or manufacture; goods
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>merchandise: the manufactured goods bought and sold in any business
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>goods: articles of trade; wares; merchandise
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Note that orbital services are 'wares'.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>services: the performance of any duties or work for another
>>>>>
>>>>>SpaceX is a delivery service who's business model is almost identical
>>>>>to UPS and FedX, i.e. all three accept cargo to be delivered to a
>>>>>specific location.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The difference is that SpaceX is also the truck manufacturer in your
>>>> inapt example.
>>>
>>>Both FedEx and UPS use highly customized COTS delivery vehicles.
>>>
>>
>> Note: "COTS delivery vehicles".
>>
>>>
>>>As there are no COTS orbital delivery vehicles (at the present time),
>>>SpaceX has little choice in the matter.
>>>
>>>But they are still nothing more than a freight delivery service.
>>>
>>
>> That manufactures rockets and orbital capsules.
>>
>
>So what?
>
So that's 'production', you stupid shit. Just like Ford produces the
trucks that the companies in your inapt comparison to freight delivery
services use.
--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-05 06:11 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <jlvr4d-dn9.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #56908 |
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: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>><snip> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Buy a fucking dictionary and look it up, Chimpshit. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>manufacture: the making of goods or wares by manual labor or by machinery, >>>>>>>>>>especially on a large scale >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>goods: articles of trade; wares; merchandise >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Note nothing about 'selling' the results. You're done. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>wares: articles of merchandise or manufacture; goods >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>merchandise: the manufactured goods bought and sold in any business >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>goods: articles of trade; wares; merchandise >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Note that orbital services are 'wares'. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>services: the performance of any duties or work for another >>>>>> >>>>>>SpaceX is a delivery service who's business model is almost identical >>>>>>to UPS and FedX, i.e. all three accept cargo to be delivered to a >>>>>>specific location. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The difference is that SpaceX is also the truck manufacturer in your >>>>> inapt example. >>>> >>>>Both FedEx and UPS use highly customized COTS delivery vehicles. >>>> >>> >>> Note: "COTS delivery vehicles". >>> >>>> >>>>As there are no COTS orbital delivery vehicles (at the present time), >>>>SpaceX has little choice in the matter. >>>> >>>>But they are still nothing more than a freight delivery service. >>>> >>> >>> That manufactures rockets and orbital capsules. >>> >> >>So what? >> > > So that's 'production', you stupid shit. Just like Ford produces the > trucks that the companies in your inapt comparison to freight delivery > services use. Ford sells the trucks it makes, SpaceX only sells delivery service. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-07 17:12 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7vrtnb5otfigm5uvuag0gadj50ddd8nnvq@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #56913 |
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:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>><snip>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Buy a fucking dictionary and look it up, Chimpshit.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>manufacture: the making of goods or wares by manual labor or by machinery,
>>>>>>>>>>>especially on a large scale
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>goods: articles of trade; wares; merchandise
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Note nothing about 'selling' the results. You're done.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>wares: articles of merchandise or manufacture; goods
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>merchandise: the manufactured goods bought and sold in any business
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>goods: articles of trade; wares; merchandise
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Note that orbital services are 'wares'.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>services: the performance of any duties or work for another
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>SpaceX is a delivery service who's business model is almost identical
>>>>>>>to UPS and FedX, i.e. all three accept cargo to be delivered to a
>>>>>>>specific location.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The difference is that SpaceX is also the truck manufacturer in your
>>>>>> inapt example.
>>>>>
>>>>>Both FedEx and UPS use highly customized COTS delivery vehicles.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Note: "COTS delivery vehicles".
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>As there are no COTS orbital delivery vehicles (at the present time),
>>>>>SpaceX has little choice in the matter.
>>>>>
>>>>>But they are still nothing more than a freight delivery service.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That manufactures rockets and orbital capsules.
>>>>
>>>
>>>So what?
>>>
>>
>> So that's 'production', you stupid shit. Just like Ford produces the
>> trucks that the companies in your inapt comparison to freight delivery
>> services use.
>>
>
>Ford sells the trucks it makes, SpaceX only sells delivery service.
>
Which is irrelevant to the idea of 'production'.
--
"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 | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-08 01:12 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <78b35d-ic9.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #56934 |
In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote: > jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: <snip> >>Ford sells the trucks it makes, SpaceX only sells delivery service. >> > > Which is irrelevant to the idea of 'production'. Correct; selling delivery service is irrelevant to the idea of 'production'. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-09 02:08 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1of1obhv0jn1ott26n33cmr123glsd1flp@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #56938 |
jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote:
>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>>>Ford sells the trucks it makes, SpaceX only sells delivery service.
>>>
>>
>> Which is irrelevant to the idea of 'production'.
>
>Correct; selling delivery service is irrelevant to the idea of 'production'.
>
But producing the fucking vehicles to perform that service with is
not.
--
"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 | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-09 17:23 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <rgo75d-smp.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #56955 |
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: >> >><snip> >> >>>>Ford sells the trucks it makes, SpaceX only sells delivery service. >>>> >>> >>> Which is irrelevant to the idea of 'production'. >> >>Correct; selling delivery service is irrelevant to the idea of 'production'. >> > > But producing the fucking vehicles to perform that service with is > not. When "producing" is defined in an extremely narrow sense of the word simply to provoke an argument. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-10 11:38 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <pf55obllie34m31c9ppja8s7d579m3jq3p@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #56959 |
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:
>>>
>>><snip>
>>>
>>>>>Ford sells the trucks it makes, SpaceX only sells delivery service.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Which is irrelevant to the idea of 'production'.
>>>
>>>Correct; selling delivery service is irrelevant to the idea of 'production'.
>>>
>>
>> But producing the fucking vehicles to perform that service with is
>> not.
>
>When "producing" is defined in an extremely narrow sense of the word simply
>to provoke an argument.
>
You mean like what you're doing, where you have to narrow the
definition of "produce" to only include things put forward for direct
commercial sale?
--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-10 19:57 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <3vla5d-7q5.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #56965 |
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: >>>> >>>><snip> >>>> >>>>>>Ford sells the trucks it makes, SpaceX only sells delivery service. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Which is irrelevant to the idea of 'production'. >>>> >>>>Correct; selling delivery service is irrelevant to the idea of 'production'. >>>> >>> >>> But producing the fucking vehicles to perform that service with is >>> not. >> >>When "producing" is defined in an extremely narrow sense of the word simply >>to provoke an argument. >> > > You mean like what you're doing, where you have to narrow the > definition of "produce" to only include things put forward for direct > commercial sale? Which is the commonly used definition of production when talking about a company. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-11 00:35 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7vi6obt851lfvqr36lj8dj5lebkj21j7g7@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #56970 |
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:
>>>>>
>>>>><snip>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>Ford sells the trucks it makes, SpaceX only sells delivery service.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Which is irrelevant to the idea of 'production'.
>>>>>
>>>>>Correct; selling delivery service is irrelevant to the idea of 'production'.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> But producing the fucking vehicles to perform that service with is
>>>> not.
>>>
>>>When "producing" is defined in an extremely narrow sense of the word simply
>>>to provoke an argument.
>>>
>>
>> You mean like what you're doing, where you have to narrow the
>> definition of "produce" to only include things put forward for direct
>> commercial sale?
>
>Which is the commonly used definition of production when talking about
>a company.
>
Bullshit.
--
"You take the lies out of him, and he'll shrink to the size of
your hat; you take the malice out of him, and he'll disappear."
-- Mark Twain
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-11 15:59 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vcsc5d-iuc.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #56976 |
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: >>>>>> >>>>>><snip> >>>>>> >>>>>>>>Ford sells the trucks it makes, SpaceX only sells delivery service. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Which is irrelevant to the idea of 'production'. >>>>>> >>>>>>Correct; selling delivery service is irrelevant to the idea of 'production'. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> But producing the fucking vehicles to perform that service with is >>>>> not. >>>> >>>>When "producing" is defined in an extremely narrow sense of the word simply >>>>to provoke an argument. >>>> >>> >>> You mean like what you're doing, where you have to narrow the >>> definition of "produce" to only include things put forward for direct >>> commercial sale? >> >>Which is the commonly used definition of production when talking about >>a company. >> > > Bullshit. Yes, you are full of it. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-12 10:01 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <lf8aobpfgj8jbta50f1q7dstclgehro64s@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #56984 |
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:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>><snip>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Ford sells the trucks it makes, SpaceX only sells delivery service.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Which is irrelevant to the idea of 'production'.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Correct; selling delivery service is irrelevant to the idea of 'production'.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But producing the fucking vehicles to perform that service with is
>>>>>> not.
>>>>>
>>>>>When "producing" is defined in an extremely narrow sense of the word simply
>>>>>to provoke an argument.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You mean like what you're doing, where you have to narrow the
>>>> definition of "produce" to only include things put forward for direct
>>>> commercial sale?
>>>
>>>Which is the commonly used definition of production when talking about
>>>a company.
>>>
>>
>> Bullshit.
>
>Yes, you are full of it.
>
No, I'm just buried under it from you shoveling so much.
Let me make it clear. Your statement about the "commonly used
definition of production" is incorrect. It is false. It is a lie.
--
"You take the lies out of him, and he'll shrink to the size of
your hat; you take the malice out of him, and he'll disappear."
-- Mark Twain
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-12 18:29 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <jhpf5d-m9m.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #56995 |
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: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>><snip> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Ford sells the trucks it makes, SpaceX only sells delivery service. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Which is irrelevant to the idea of 'production'. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Correct; selling delivery service is irrelevant to the idea of 'production'. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But producing the fucking vehicles to perform that service with is >>>>>>> not. >>>>>> >>>>>>When "producing" is defined in an extremely narrow sense of the word simply >>>>>>to provoke an argument. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> You mean like what you're doing, where you have to narrow the >>>>> definition of "produce" to only include things put forward for direct >>>>> commercial sale? >>>> >>>>Which is the commonly used definition of production when talking about >>>>a company. >>>> >>> >>> Bullshit. >> >>Yes, you are full of it. >> > > No, I'm just buried under it from you shoveling so much. > > Let me make it clear. Your statement about the "commonly used > definition of production" is incorrect. It is false. It is a lie. Says you, tosser. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-12 18:09 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d15bob17iup88fnmqu3k06i5rqg8opvure@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #57001 |
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:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>><snip>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Ford sells the trucks it makes, SpaceX only sells delivery service.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Which is irrelevant to the idea of 'production'.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Correct; selling delivery service is irrelevant to the idea of 'production'.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But producing the fucking vehicles to perform that service with is
>>>>>>>> not.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>When "producing" is defined in an extremely narrow sense of the word simply
>>>>>>>to provoke an argument.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You mean like what you're doing, where you have to narrow the
>>>>>> definition of "produce" to only include things put forward for direct
>>>>>> commercial sale?
>>>>>
>>>>>Which is the commonly used definition of production when talking about
>>>>>a company.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bullshit.
>>>
>>>Yes, you are full of it.
>>>
>>
>> No, I'm just buried under it from you shoveling so much.
>>
>> Let me make it clear. Your statement about the "commonly used
>> definition of production" is incorrect. It is false. It is a lie.
>
>Says you, tosser.
>
Says pretty much everyone but you, wanker. Try buying a dictionary.
Try asking anyone who actually knows what SpaceX and the Falcon
booster are whether SpaceX produces the Falcon booster.
--
"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 | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-13 03:14 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <daog5d-3ap.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #57009 |
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: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>><snip> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>Ford sells the trucks it makes, SpaceX only sells delivery service. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Which is irrelevant to the idea of 'production'. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Correct; selling delivery service is irrelevant to the idea of 'production'. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> But producing the fucking vehicles to perform that service with is >>>>>>>>> not. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>When "producing" is defined in an extremely narrow sense of the word simply >>>>>>>>to provoke an argument. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You mean like what you're doing, where you have to narrow the >>>>>>> definition of "produce" to only include things put forward for direct >>>>>>> commercial sale? >>>>>> >>>>>>Which is the commonly used definition of production when talking about >>>>>>a company. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Bullshit. >>>> >>>>Yes, you are full of it. >>>> >>> >>> No, I'm just buried under it from you shoveling so much. >>> >>> Let me make it clear. Your statement about the "commonly used >>> definition of production" is incorrect. It is false. It is a lie. >> >>Says you, tosser. >> > > Says pretty much everyone but you, wanker. Try buying a dictionary. > Try asking anyone who actually knows what SpaceX and the Falcon > booster are whether SpaceX produces the Falcon booster. No wonder you know nothing about 14 CFR. Well hot flash, the aviation regs in the UK are essentially identical to the US. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-02 23:03 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <57788099$0$9125$c3e8da3$5d8fb80f@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #56868 |
On 2016-07-02 01:34, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > SpaceX is a delivery service who's business model is almost identical > to UPS and FedX, i.e. all three accept cargo to be delivered to a > specific location. You mean that SpaceX will leave a card in low orbit and return the satellite to some distant depot like UPS does ? :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-03 05:57 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <l3mm4d-ill.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #56882 |
In sci.physics JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: > On 2016-07-02 01:34, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > >> SpaceX is a delivery service who's business model is almost identical >> to UPS and FedX, i.e. all three accept cargo to be delivered to a >> specific location. > > > You mean that SpaceX will leave a card in low orbit and return the > satellite to some distant depot like UPS does ? :-) Only if no one is home and the delivery requires a signed receipt. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-24 22:44 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <576df025$0$25299$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #56792 |
On 2016-06-23 18:58, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > SpaceX manufactures as needed for their own use. SpaceX is > selling launch services, not space ships, Space Cadet McCrap. Obviously the case for commercial launches. But what about NASA launches to ISS ? I assume NASA buys the Dragon spacecraft and owns it? What about stage2 and stage1 ? Do they remain SpaceX property despite being lauched by NASA ? Or does KSC and Houston mission controls really just play an observer role in this and Hawthorne is the real driver seat ? (NASA TV seems to make it look like KSC and Houston play a major role with Hawthorne just "monitoring things".
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-25 08:57 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.31d849e29e53f7f7989780@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #56801 |
In article <576df025$0$25299$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>, jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca says... > > On 2016-06-23 18:58, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > > SpaceX manufactures as needed for their own use. SpaceX is > > selling launch services, not space ships, Space Cadet McCrap. > > > Obviously the case for commercial launches. But what about NASA > launches to ISS ? I assume NASA buys the Dragon spacecraft and owns it? Wrong. They're buying cargo delivery service. That's kind of the whole point of "commercial cargo". Paying for services instead of hardware that NASA middle management will want to micro-manage (at a very high cost). > What about stage2 and stage1 ? Do they remain SpaceX property despite > being lauched by NASA ? > > Or does KSC and Houston mission controls really just play an observer > role in this and Hawthorne is the real driver seat ? NASA does not launch *any* Falcons. Mission control for Falcon is is Hawthorne California. Watch the live stream of a launch sometime! > (NASA TV seems to make it look like KSC and Houston play a major role > with Hawthorne just "monitoring things". Don't watch NASA TV. Watch the SpaceX live-stream! 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 | bob haller <hallerb@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-25 06:10 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <a81d9017-629c-4198-af42-e78c33c7f72b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #56804 |
On Saturday, June 25, 2016 at 8:58:01 AM UTC-4, Jeff Findley wrote: > In article <576df025$0$25299$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>, > jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca says... > > > > On 2016-06-23 18:58, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > > > SpaceX manufactures as needed for their own use. SpaceX is > > > selling launch services, not space ships, Space Cadet McCrap. > > > > > > Obviously the case for commercial launches. But what about NASA > > launches to ISS ? I assume NASA buys the Dragon spacecraft and owns it? > > Wrong. They're buying cargo delivery service. That's kind of the whole > point of "commercial cargo". Paying for services instead of hardware > that NASA middle management will want to micro-manage (at a very high > cost). > > > What about stage2 and stage1 ? Do they remain SpaceX property despite > > being lauched by NASA ? > > > > Or does KSC and Houston mission controls really just play an observer > > role in this and Hawthorne is the real driver seat ? > > NASA does not launch *any* Falcons. Mission control for Falcon is is > Hawthorne California. Watch the live stream of a launch sometime! > > > > (NASA TV seems to make it look like KSC and Houston play a major role > > with Hawthorne just "monitoring things". > > Don't watch NASA TV. Watch the SpaceX live-stream! > > 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. nasa for launching has become obsolete........ which is really good news, cuts costs
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-25 16:13 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.31d8b00634892a9e989782@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #56806 |
In article <a81d9017-629c-4198-af42-e78c33c7f72b@googlegroups.com>, hallerb@aol.com says... > > On Saturday, June 25, 2016 at 8:58:01 AM UTC-4, Jeff Findley wrote: > > In article <576df025$0$25299$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>, > > jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca says... > > > What about stage2 and stage1 ? Do they remain SpaceX property > > > despite being lauched by NASA ? > > > > > > Or does KSC and Houston mission controls really just play an observer > > > role in this and Hawthorne is the real driver seat ? > > > > NASA does not launch *any* Falcons. Mission control for Falcon is is > > Hawthorne California. Watch the live stream of a launch sometime! > > > > > > > (NASA TV seems to make it look like KSC and Houston play a major role > > > with Hawthorne just "monitoring things". > > > > Don't watch NASA TV. Watch the SpaceX live-stream! > > > > nasa for launching has become obsolete........ > > which is really good news, cuts costs Tell that to your Congressman and Senator, because they likely have not gotten the message and are still supporting SLS. 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 10 of 13 — ← Prev page 1 … 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.space.policy
csiph-web