 | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) I pride myself on my sophistrication. Dave! FUT ot.fun, because I'm having such a swell time! (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) So due to your lack of inclination to post a proper rebuttal, we're suppose to take the 'absolute nonsense' as the end of the arguement? "Hey Joe--you're an idiot!" "Wha--? Why???" "I don't have time nor the inclination to tell you, you're an (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) Personally, I like the spurious fake-quotation that raises (shouldn't that be "lowers"?) sophistry to a new level. ;-) -->Bruce<-- (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) From page 112 of (URL) The Libertarian Playbook:> "Though technically not a valid rhetorical device, argument by assertion is commonly employed when attempting to dismiss an argument by fiat." (...) Also (URL) from page 112:> "One may attempt (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) That's absolute nonsense. I could say more on this topic at this time but I'm not sure it's a good use of my time. (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) (URL) This> is interesting. "The Saturn 5 was also not cheap to operate... the launch cost of a single Saturn 5 at $431 million in 1967, or over $2.4 billion a launch in 2004 dollars... ...It’s not inconceivable that a new heavy-lift vehicle (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) Not from what I understand. Rutan did start work before the X-Prize became fully-funded at $10 million, but he was inspired to get started by the X-Prize itself. He is reported to have started his program in 2001, but the X-Prize was founded (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) Saturn V rockets would have, admittedly, had a lower cost per payload pound, but who would have been able to take advantage of that capacity besides the government? Commercial enterprise needs greater cost efficiency, not greater capacity. (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) Is that for development or launch? (...) NASA is also a governmental agency, and therefore bound by red tape. In other words, they have to spend money to spend money. The government has been cited as spending $300 on a hammer, but the hammer (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) S'funny...I've often thought much the same thing about you. BTW, did you ever track down your answer on using the (R) symbol when typing "The LEGO Company"? (...) Lessee, from what I've read, the OCST was formed as part of a bipartisan effort (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) Costs money to store - does Ford still have the tooling for the Model T? And let me express at least some skepticism regarding the alleged motivation you attribute to NASA. -->Bruce<-- (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) Probably. But how many major aerospace endeavors come off exactly like they sound on paper? Hindsight is always 20/20. I certainly wouldn't call the shuttle program a huge mistake. Sure, it didn't deliver the promised goods, but I believe the (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) True. But it's difficult if not impossible to divorce NASA and Congress. NASA does what Congress tells it to do. (...) You're sort of trying to put words in my mouth here and I have to correct you, I'm afraid... No, the point is why (in 1969) (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) Merely a stepping stone. (...) Well, knock me over with a feather. Somebody inside NASA is apparently considering whether NASA should give prizes too. Maybe nothing will come of it, maybe it was a misquote, who knows. But maybe??? (URL) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) Did it? Wasn't it Congress who wasn't too keen on buying more Saturns and cut the remaining moon missions and all the cool future Apollo applications projects that NASA DID want. The shuttle was then sold as a way to get more bang-for-the-buck (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Inside Bush's secret Afghan gulag
|
|
(URL) Inside Bush's secret Afghan gulag>: "They were kicking me and beating me and shouting like animals at me... Then they asked me which animals - they made the noise of goats, sheep, dogs, cows - I had had sexual activities with. They laughed at (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) This whole tooling issue reminds me about the destruction of the early Lego moulds. (...) If they had kept this stuff, I expect their critics would have harangued them for wasting tax payer’s money maintaining and storing obsolete equipment. (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) (I should have said 'and infrastructure') (...) Nope. But if you get rid of one element then it becomes easier to justify getting rid of the rest. The tooling was just the last thing to go in a whole sorry parade of wanton waste and (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) Well of course they did. Is there any reason to spend money to preserve and maintain the tooling viability for a rocket that can no longer be launched? All the existing Saturn launch infrastructure was modified for shuttle use. The launch (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
