Subject:
|
Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 8 Jul 2004 20:15:11 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1271 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Laswell wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
| |
That’s absolute nonsense.
|
|
The exact term you used, I think, wasn’t it?
|
Indeed it was, but you wholy missed the point in your zealous rush to criticize
me yet again. I wasn’t objecting to your use of my own words, but to your
callous treatment of my statements by way of making a big public show of
ignoring them. You sidestep the issues more than any other person on this site.
I can’t think of any other person who regularly uses spelling errors as a way of
trying to invalidate an opinion. What’s worse is that you only seem to point
out typos when you disagree with what’s being said, and you almost never follow
up with any solid evidence to disprove those same statements, just leaving it at
“it dilutes your argument”. In fact, the only other instances I can remember of
seeing people point out typos and grammatical errors during a debate are when
you make them, especially when you’re making them in the same posts where you
point out the typos of others.
I still stand by my statement from
this post, where I dismissed
your opinion that anyone who wasn’t jumping for joy at the successful launch of
June 21st is directly at fault for the fact that commercial space ventures
haven’t happened yet. As proof of my opinion, I present you with
this article, where many of your CSV
heroes state quite plainly that they don’t see this as a high-margin market,
they still don’t think SS1 can be directly profitable, investors still aren’t
leaping at the chance to throw money into this technology (including Paul Allen,
who said he wouldn’t be the sole investor in any commercial enterprise that
might result from all of this), and the possibility of expensive flight
insurance might kill the possibility of affordable space tourism. Indeed, Pat
Bahn suggests that space tourism, while exciting to talk about, is a horrible
direction for this budding industry to take, given the relative youth of the
industry. Instead, he feels this industry should follow in the footsteps of
commercial aviation, which went from “Wright Brothers” style novelty to military
and low-risk non-touristy stuff.
Also, if you look back to early aviation, it wasn’t until Charles Lindbergh won
a cash prize (directly paralleling the X-Prize) that aviation advanced to the
point of commercial travel applications. It’s not that there hasn’t been
interest in privatized space flight, but rather that the people who have been
most interested in it were the ones that didn’t have the money to pay for it.
You can’t just expect this industry to spring up from nothing with the ability
to present you with an orbital hotel trip at $1000 per head, and you can’t lay
all the blame at the feet of NASA, when they’ve been using privatized unmanned
spaceflight capability for almost 20 years.
| |
I don’t recall ever making any such claim, I think you have me confused with
someone else.
|
Indeed I did, for which I apoligize.
| |
However, if you can provide a cite where I said it, I’ll gladly retract any
statement I may have made in which I asserted that tritium is an economic
power source at this time.
|
Why is it, though, that you only ever offer to apologize for being wrong in
situations where you know you aren’t? I’m still waiting to hear an apology for
telling me that I was wrong about typing “The LEGO Company” instead of “The
LEGO(R) Company”...
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
| (...) Sorry, I can't help notice, Dave, that you left off the end of Larry's message talking about baiting. Also, I'm not sure that anyone else cares who is right, you or him, other than the two of you. I've watched the two of you get into it on (...) (20 years ago, 9-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
| (...) The exact term you used, I think, wasn't it? (...) I don't recall ever making any such claim, I think you have me confused with someone else. However, if you can provide a cite where I said it, I'll gladly retract any statement I may have made (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
81 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
|
|
|
|
