Subject:
|
Re: And now for something completely different...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 12 Mar 2003 16:37:05 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
643 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Leonard Hoffman writes:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Leonard Hoffman writes:
> > > > > > perhaps you should enlighten me on what's being proposed. What research
> > > > > > SHOULD I have done.
> > > > >
> > > > > Try this search string at Google: "moonbase cost estimates"
> > > >
> > > > okay.. let me get this straight. You *demand* cites from me, but then
> > > > expect me to do research to support *your* claims.
> > >
> > > No.
> > >
> > > You asked me what research *you* should have done. I gave you a search
> > > string you could use if you like. It doesn't matter to me whether you use it
> > > or not.
> >
> > ACTUALLY, that question was in responce to the statement: "You haven't done
> > your research." Implying I should have already done some research on "what's
> > being proposed," whatever that means.
ACTUALLY, you do need to do your research! You are not the first person to
note Larry’s willingness to demand others “provide a cite” whilst leaving his
own arguments unsubstantiated. Nor is this the first time that Larry has
resorted to name-calling rather than elucidation. Larry is often too willing to
criticise the “ungentlemanly conduct” of others in his own inimitable style,
but appears to feel name-calling and plagiarism is perfectly acceptable.
>
> Lets try to go all the way back to the beginning. Dave K started a thread
> asking a hypothetical about whether a person would want to know if an
> asteroid was coming. Some people responded to that question but mostly we've
> got off track.
>
> We're off track because I said if we had a proper industrial infrastructure
> it wouldn't be nearly as worrisome a problem, at which point you jumped in
> with a whole bunch of "we have too many problems on earth, it's too
> expensive to do that, the current ISS is expensive"... luddite ranting.
From the quote, how can you conclude he is a luddite? He is talking about
project appraisal, not uninviting technology!
>
> You're the one asserting how much it costs. You need to show that the costs
> that NASA have incurred up to now are relevant to a private enterprise
> industrial infrastructure,
Perhaps you need to show it is not? It is your argument afterall?
> if you want to convince me that building
> industrial infrastructure (out of native lunar/cometary/asteroidal
> materials, except for the initial bootstrap) is a bad idea from a cost basis.
>
> You haven't done that. And further, the thread is way off the rails to boot,
> I expect Dave K meant it to be more of a fun/philosophical thread.
>
> I'm ready to drop it because it's clear you have no idea what you're talking
> about as far as how one goes about creating infrastructure from scratch and
> you'd rather just take potshots at NASA and claim the money is better spent
> on solving current problems.
There is a strong argument that is the case. But the same can be said of many
human activities and endeavours. A child dies every 15 seconds due to lack of
water. Sending coke machines at into space 10,000 - 20,000 per pound isn’t
going to fix that:
http://www.ccssc.org/exhibit.htm
"The Coca-Cola drink dispenser is a replica of the first such beverage machine
taken into space. The dispenser was used during recent shuttle missions to test
the feasibility of creating and drinking carbonated beverages in space."
Scott A
> You haven't done the research and you would
> rather not. That's fine but don't turn it around.
>
> More generally than the cost question, I gave you a number of examples of
> how such short sighted thinking turned out to be wrong in the past. You
> chose to focus on one, Columbus, claiming that what he did was bad. I
> answered that and asked for alternatives but you haven't replied there either.
>
> Why don't you just drop the whole thing?
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
43 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
