JimO reams snarky Brit TV news guy
Jim Oberg
...but with a smile!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R33-0uvSX1c
And what was with that 'NASA trainee' ID? Huh?
Josey
"Jim Oberg" <job...@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
news:46ab5b01$0$16526$4c36...@roadrunner.com...
>
> ...but with a smile!
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R33-0uvSX1c
>
> And what was with that 'NASA trainee' ID? Huh?
>
No one watches the news on channel 4 anyway :-)
Jc.
Derek Lyons
>
>...but with a smile!
>
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R33-0uvSX1c
I love how the rumor the flights involved were a T-38 and a Soyuz is
being reported as fact - even by JimO.
D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.
http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/
-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL
Eric
"Jim Oberg" <job...@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
news:46ab5b01$0$16526$4c36...@roadrunner.com...
>
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R33-0uvSX1c
>
> And what was with that 'NASA trainee' ID? Huh?
>
Outstanding, Mr. Oberg! Thank God someone brought logic into that trash.
Is it just me or were others rolling their eyes only seconds into this
"news" segment?
It would be easy to laugh it off, but pieces of it really pissed me off.
Especially:
"Buzz Aldin, the second man on the Moon, is a self-confessed alcoholic. He
is one of many."
As a journalist, I'm sure you have already seen this, but for those have
not...
(Warning: Don't be drinking anything, alcoholic or non-alcoholic, while
watching this. It is insanely funny because it is so true.)
What We Call The News
http://www.jibjab.com/originals/what_we_call_the_news
John Doe
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R33-0uvSX1c
While I agree that the media have gone overboard, I felt your interview
went a little too far. There would have been ways to bring this guy down
to earth without having to really insult the reporter and interviewer.
My guess is that you aren't going to get business from those folks for a
long while :-)
I think the media exagerations are probably also nasa's fault for not
initially providing the details to keep the story from exploding.
Question: You allude to the NASA report available on NASA's web site.
Was this made available at the same time as the press conference ?
Prior to the press conference, NASA had already leaked information about
drunken astronauts and sabotage of the computer. Was the report already
available at that time ? If the media started with only sketchy
information, it is normal that they will continue with the story as they
began in. Media rarely publically correct themselves for such stories,
and it would be NASA's fault for leaking that information in such a way
that it would allow the media to blow it out of proportions.
Unless, of course, NASA did this on purpose to force change of attitudes
towards (or within) the astronaut corps.
Jim Oberg
guesses and misinterpretations and misstatements, and i don't have
time to sort them out tonight.
"John Doe" <jd...@doe.org> wrote in message
news:13e85$46ac12fa$cef8887a$26...@TEKSAVVY.COM...
John Doe
> Most of what you report as facts in your narrative are
> guesses and misinterpretations and misstatements, and i don't have
> time to sort them out tonight.
FACTS ? I placed an opinion and then asked question on how NASA released
the information.
If that is your state of mind, then don't bother "sorting them out".
I've had enough of the condencending tone of the "NASA Know It All"
types here who go out of their way to insult and misinterpret in order
to discredit those who would like to learn through discussions.
Vandar
> Most of what you report as facts in your narrative are
> guesses and misinterpretations and misstatements, and i don't have
> time to sort them out tonight.
Cop out. He posted his thoughts and asked you a simple yes or no
question, the answer of which would have been shorter than your post
saying you "don't have time" to answer.
Derek Lyons
>I've had enough of the condencending tone of the "NASA Know It All"
>types here who go out of their way to insult and misinterpret in order
>to discredit those who would like to learn through discussions.
We treat those who wish to learn through discussions in no such
manner. What you describe is how we treat idiots and trolls.
Like yourself.
Brian Gaff
Soyuz. all that buffeting and banging and jerking.
Brian
--
Brian Gaff - bri...@blueyonder.co.uk
Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name may be lost.
Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Derek Lyons" <fair...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:46ae73c9....@news.supernews.com...
Brian Gaff
second hand info, and is trying to over simplify things too much. I do so
hate news where the viewer is considered to be so thick that they have to
dumb down the facts.
I'm sure the audience would be capable of understanding the concept that
the guys who are in charge, supposedly, of certifying a person fit to fly,
are in fact ignored too often for comfort. If you employ an expert in
health, then why ignore the recommendations? Seems to me a certain recent
memo, or the attitude within it, is not being practiced by the top people
in the decision making chain.
Brian
--
Brian Gaff - bri...@blueyonder.co.uk
Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name may be lost.
Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Jim Oberg" <job...@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
news:46ab5b01$0$16526$4c36...@roadrunner.com...
>
Brian Gaff
their jets. I'd imagine that means their wings are clipped, literally.
Brian
--
Brian Gaff - bri...@blueyonder.co.uk
Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name may be lost.
Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Jim Oberg" <job...@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
news:46ab5b01$0$16526$4c36...@roadrunner.com...
>
OM
>I've had enough of the condencending tone of the "NASA Know It All"
>types here who go out of their way to insult and misinterpret in order
>to discredit those who would like to learn through discussions.
...And we got sick and tired of dipshit trolls who pop up using really
lame aliases, asking loaded questions that they claim are "honest" and
"innoculous", but are clearly designed to cause flame wars in an
effort to forward an anti-NASA agenda.
Which is why you not only need to fuck off and die, you need to do so
in Killfile Hell with the rest of the trolls.
<PLONK>
OM
--
]=====================================[
] OMBlog - http://www.io.com/~o_m/omworld [
] Let's face it: Sometimes you *need* [
] an obnoxious opinion in your day! [
]=====================================[
OM
>Cop out. He posted his thoughts and asked you a simple yes or no
>question, the answer of which would have been shorter than your post
>saying you "don't have time" to answer.
...Hmm. Looks like "John Doe" has a cellmate.
<PLONK>
...Hope they don't decide to breed.
OM
<job...@houston.rr.com> wrote:
>Most of what you report as facts in your narrative are
>guesses and misinterpretations and misstatements, and i don't have
>time to sort them out tonight.
...Especially since he and his bugger-buddy, "Vandar", are obvious
trolls. Just killfile the catamite bastards and put them out of all
our misery.
Brian Thorn
>While I agree that the media have gone overboard, I felt your interview
>went a little too far.
Shocked! Shocked I am...
>There would have been ways to bring this guy down
>to earth without having to really insult the reporter and interviewer.
But not nearly so fun, I bet.
>I think the media exagerations are probably also nasa's fault for not
>initially providing the details to keep the story from exploding.
NASA reacted with a press conference within 24 hours. Exactly how fast
a response do you expect from a bloated government bureaucracy?
>Question: You allude to the NASA report available on NASA's web site.
>Was this made available at the same time as the press conference ?
>
>Prior to the press conference, NASA had already leaked information about
>drunken astronauts and sabotage of the computer.
The drunk astronauts story came from Aviation Week. It's unclear how
much this was "leak" and how much was just good investigative
reporting.
The sabotage announcement was in a press release, hardly a "leak".
>Unless, of course, NASA did this on purpose to force change of attitudes
>towards (or within) the astronaut corps.
*chuckle*
And you express dismay that Jim ignores you and the sci.space regulars
think you're an anti-NASA troll? Look no further...
Brian
Pat Flannery
Brian Gaff wrote:
> I'd imagine you would need a stiff drink before your first return in a
> Soyuz. all that buffeting and banging and jerking.
>
That's only when there is a female in the capsule, comrade! ;-)
Pat
John Doe
> We treat those who wish to learn through discussions in no such
> manner. What you describe is how we treat idiots and trolls.
>
> Like yourself.
Perhaps then you should have a regular posting on this newsgroup
advising any newbies to first get permission to post from a certain
retired NASA employee because without her approval, she will ensure said
persons will be discredited for no reason other than wanting to control
who gets to have discussions and who gets ridiculed.
But your response pretty well confirms my statement. You can only have
"experts" or "idiots and trolls". Nothing in between.
Jorge R. Frank
> PS, this could be why they all were flown in the other day, instead of using
> their jets.
No, it wasn't.
Damon Hill
> But your response pretty well confirms my statement. You can only have
> "experts" or "idiots and trolls". Nothing in between.
Pretty much so, yes. We've been dealing with this for
years and are tired of the idiots and trolls.
You can either stay and defend your position, or leave.
If you're really honest, you'll treat subjects with
the same honesty and objectivity we attempt to do.
Somebody might learn something useful.
But I think you'll just huff and puff and get the heck
out of the kitchen because you can't take the heat.
--Damon
Vandar
> John Doe <jd...@doe.org> wrote in
> news:9d0cc$46acca9d$cef8887a$10...@TEKSAVVY.COM:
>
>
>>But your response pretty well confirms my statement. You can only have
>>"experts" or "idiots and trolls". Nothing in between.
>
>
> Pretty much so, yes.
So the bulk of this group are arrogant pricks who only want to cavort
with other arrogant pricks?
> We've been dealing with this for
> years and are tired of the idiots and trolls.
>
> You can either stay and defend your position, or leave.
What exactly do you think his position is? He offered an opinion and
asked a question and has been met by vitriol and baseless accusations by
a bunch of wannabe Nastards.
> If you're really honest, you'll treat subjects with
> the same honesty and objectivity we attempt to do.
> Somebody might learn something useful.
Highly doubtful.
> But I think you'll just huff and puff and get the heck
> out of the kitchen because you can't take the heat.
Yeah, because if you ask a legitimate question here, you should expect
to be accused, ridiculed, and ultimately ignored.
Damon Hill
news:gF5ri.13024$B25....@news01.roc.ny:
out of the kitchen because you can't take the heat.
>
> Yeah, because if you ask a legitimate question here, you should expect
> to be accused, ridiculed, and ultimately ignored.
Can't take the heat, eh? Go away, crybaby.
--Damon, who wonders who was really drunk, when, and where.
Vandar
> Vandar <vand...@yahoo.com> wrote in
> news:gF5ri.13024$B25....@news01.roc.ny:
>
>
> out of the kitchen because you can't take the heat.
>
>>Yeah, because if you ask a legitimate question here, you should expect
>>to be accused, ridiculed, and ultimately ignored.
>
>
> Can't take the heat, eh? Go away, crybaby.
I'm still here and you're still acting like an arrogant, childish prick.
Jonathan
The NASA supporters are getting a bit sensitive these days.
After all, it's been a bad year...or two for all things NASA.
They have an agency goal, going to the moon and mars, that
is widely seen by the public as wasteful at best. If not ignorant
or corrupt at worst. And now one insider after another seems
to be airing NASA dirty laundry as the ships starts sinking.
With a wildly unpopular lame duck President for over another
year, they have little to look forward to for now.
But they should have more faith. By the time the next election
rolls around, the global warming movement will find Space Solar
Power (hopefully) and a new mandate for NASA will emerge.
Where NASA will no longer be a minor and troubled agency which
is little more than a curiosity for the public. And becomes a source
of the solutions to the most pressing needs of the nation
and the world.
NASA....I mean Space Solar Power, could be a central solution
to our dependence on foriegn oil, and the wars oil causes.
While also being a solution for global warming.
It's a simple question, do we want a future with ever more expensive
and dirtier energy as time goes by? Or a future with ever cheaper
and cleaner energy as SSP matures?
It's a simple question for NASA. Become relevant again or continue
to become just another Defense Dept subcontractor.
Rand Simberg
"Jonathan" <wr...@bellsouth.net> made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:
>
>"John Doe" <jd...@doe.org> wrote in message
>news:e798d$46ac3660$cef8887a$28...@TEKSAVVY.COM...
>> Jim Oberg wrote:
>> > Most of what you report as facts in your narrative are
>> > guesses and misinterpretations and misstatements, and i don't have
>> > time to sort them out tonight.
>>
>> FACTS ? I placed an opinion and then asked question on how NASA released
>> the information.
>>
>> If that is your state of mind, then don't bother "sorting them out".
>>
>> I've had enough of the condencending tone of the "NASA Know It All"
>> types here who go out of their way to insult and misinterpret in order
>> to discredit those who would like to learn through discussions.
>
>
>The NASA supporters are getting a bit sensitive these days.
>After all, it's been a bad year...or two for all things NASA.
Few of us object to "John Doe's" idiotic comments because we're "NASA
supporters." We object to them because we're reality supporters.
But we don't expect you to understand anything about that...
Derek Lyons
>Yeah, because if you ask a legitimate question here, you should expect
>to be accused, ridiculed, and ultimately ignored.
Legitimate questions from legitimate posters get answered and
discussed at length all the time.
Questions of any type from idiots and trolls get treated in the manner
you describe. "John Doe" long ago made his own bed.
Jonathan
"Rand Simberg" <simberg.i...@org.trash> wrote in message
news:46d747eb....@news.giganews.com...
Of course not. My hobby isn't about reality, but about the future.
But you classical objective types will never understand
the simple truth of reality. Which is that understanding
reality flows from our ability to imagine the ideal future.
Or, fundamental law is derived from the most complex
the universe has to offer, not the simplest.
You fail to see that objectively determining the present
or past is an attempt to derive truth from the simplest.
While failing to see that predicting the future and
conceiving perfection is the most difficult/complex of all.
You fail to see that without a finite point in the future to
aim for, it's impossible to draw a path from the present
to the future. How do you know what to do next, if you
don't have a clear picture of where you want to
end up?
You can't see that is NASA's problem, no rational long term
vision which balances tangible returns with utopian dreams.
SSP maximizes those two things, so it is the ideal goal.
Do you have an abstract bone in your body?
Do you want to see NASA succeed?
Why is NASA so afraid of the 'Big Idea'?
A forward looking research agency should be all about
big ideas.
Jonathan
s
Derek Lyons
>The drunk astronauts story came from Aviation Week. It's unclear how
>much this was "leak" and how much was just good investigative
>reporting.
Maybe you should get off your ass and actually read the NASA report.
The issue of astronauts drinking is neither a leak, nor investigative
reporting - it's a statement by a NASA convened review committee.
It's official.
http://www.nasa.gov/audience/formedia/features/astronautreport.html
OM
wrote:
>"John Doe" long ago made his own bed.
...In a dark, dank cell in block Q down in Killfile Hell, natch.
OM
<damon...@comcast.netnet> wrote:
>--Damon, who wonders who was really drunk, when, and where.
...His mom, about 12 years ago, in the middle of a crack house.
Darren Griffin - PocketGPSWorld.Com
> The whole problem here is that I gather the British guy is just being given
> second hand info, and is trying to over simplify things too much. I do so
> hate news where the viewer is considered to be so thick that they have to
> dumb down the facts.
I'm well aware that the Media can and often do get things wrong or
concentrate on certain headline quotes to garner readers but having
just watched the YouTube clip I'm afraid my impression was the Jim
Oberg did not comver over well at all. His attitude and responces were
far too defensive.
He had a legitimate point to get across and I can understand how
frustrating hearing the same rubbish over and over must be maddening
but ranting like that does not do his cause any good whatsoever.
--
Darren Griffin
PocketGPSWorld - www.PocketGPSWorld.com
The Premier GPS Resource for News, Reviews and Forums
Vandar
> On 2007-07-29 09:35:40 +0100, "Brian Gaff" <bri...@blueyonder.co.uk> said:
>
>> The whole problem here is that I gather the British guy is just being
>> given
>> second hand info, and is trying to over simplify things too much. I do so
>> hate news where the viewer is considered to be so thick that they
>> have to
>> dumb down the facts.
>
>
> I'm well aware that the Media can and often do get things wrong or
> concentrate on certain headline quotes to garner readers but having just
> watched the YouTube clip I'm afraid my impression was the Jim Oberg did
> not comver over well at all. His attitude and responces were far too
> defensive.
>
> He had a legitimate point to get across and I can understand how
> frustrating hearing the same rubbish over and over must be maddening but
> ranting like that does not do his cause any good whatsoever.
That's exactly what I got out of it as well. It was like watching
Michaal Moore on CNN a couple weeks ago - be loud but don't address the
point.
Jim Oberg
Watching it again my biggest surprise is the voice delay,
probably because they went via satellite and not cable.
That introduces enough pause that many of my
spontaneous answers do indeed look slow and contrived.
Gotta admit the sin of enjoying it too much -- watch my grin
throughout.
But I was the one reading from reality checks, not poor benighted Krishnan.
Vandar
> Watching it again my biggest surprise is the voice delay,
> probably because they went via satellite and not cable.
> That introduces enough pause that many of my
> spontaneous answers do indeed look slow and contrived.
>
> Gotta admit the sin of enjoying it too much -- watch my grin
> throughout.
That's what struck me, Jim. You seemed to be enjoying being snarky.
Leave that stuff to Michael Moore. You're a better man than him. Then
again, most women are better men than him.
Pat Flannery
Vandar wrote:
>
> That's what struck me, Jim. You seemed to be enjoying being snarky.
> Leave that stuff to Michael Moore. You're a better man than him. Then
> again, most women are better men than him.
http://madmikey.mu.nu/archives/Michael%20Moore.jpg
Pat
JF Mezei
> Maybe you should get off your ass and actually read the NASA report.
The question still stands: When was the report made available, and at
that point, had the media already begun to sensationalise the story
(which once done, they won't retract). The stories were rampant prior to
NASA holding its press conference to explain it. So timing of the
release of the report in important here.
Danny Deger
news:46ab5b01$0$16526$4c36...@roadrunner.com...
>
> ...but with a smile!
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R33-0uvSX1c
>
> And what was with that 'NASA trainee' ID? Huh?
>
>
>
That's the last time Channel 4 will have you as a paid consultant.
Danny Deger
Jeff Findley
"Danny Deger" <danny...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:46aea4f6$0$12176$4c36...@roadrunner.com...
Hard to tell with today's "news" media. Someone in management may have
actually liked the little on air conflict, since space news is generally
seen as boring to the general public.
Jeff
--
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a
little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor
safety"
- B. Franklin, Bartlett's Familiar Quotations (1919)
Brian Thorn
wrote:
>>The drunk astronauts story came from Aviation Week. It's unclear how
>>much this was "leak" and how much was just good investigative
>>reporting.
>
>Maybe you should get off your ass and actually read the NASA report.
Geez, Derek, all of those years locked up in a glorified tin can under
the waves sure took a toll on your attitude. :-)
>The issue of astronauts drinking is neither a leak, nor investigative
>reporting - it's a statement by a NASA convened review committee.
>It's official.
Um, doesn't that make it a leak? NASA didn't release the report until
Friday, after Aviation Week somehow got ahold of it and highlighted it
on Thursday...
http://www.spaceflightnow.com/news/n0707/27astrohealth/
Note the "released today" line. So Aviation Leak, er, Week had it
before NASA released it.
Brian
Danny Deger
"Brian Thorn" <bth...@suddenlink.net> wrote in message
news:pshva39gnh2atv0lh...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 02:25:25 GMT, fair...@gmail.com (Derek Lyons)
> wrote:
>
>>>The drunk astronauts story came from Aviation Week. It's unclear how
>>>much this was "leak" and how much was just good investigative
>>>reporting.
>>
>>Maybe you should get off your ass and actually read the NASA report.
>
> Geez, Derek, all of those years locked up in a glorified tin can under
> the waves sure took a toll on your attitude. :-)
This explains his problems :-)
--
Danny Deger
NASA offered me $15,000 to take down my web site. Take a look and see why.
www.dannydeger.net
Craig Fink
I thought the same thing when I saw the video. Getting extremely
argumentative over what is really a nit in a reasonably good newscast.
Showing the Shuttle launch was appropriate, as the one anecdotal example
stated in the report seemed to indicate that the astronaut would flown had
the launch not been scrubbed. Instead of launching, flew a T-38 back home.
The report also had an anecdotal example of the Soyuz and indicated that
there are possibly more examples.
I don't think Talking Heads (consultants) can get away with pulling a
Michael Moore with a News Anchorman.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=JpKoN40K7mA
Michael Moore is the story, while consultant Jim Oberg isn't the story. I
would have thought a better approach would have been to make the minor nit
corrections, agreed that drunk flying or hung-over flying isn't good, then
finesse the story over to NASA culture or whatever point (rest of the
report) he was trying to make. The uninteresting stuff.
TimK
"Jim Oberg" <job...@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
news:46ab5b01$0$16526$4c36...@roadrunner.com...
>
> ...but with a smile!
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R33-0uvSX1c
>
> And what was with that 'NASA trainee' ID? Huh?
>
Spank!
Nicely done.
WeBe...@gmail.com
Mail-Copies-To: WeBe...@GMail.Com
No, it wasn't. Then what was it?
.
.
.
Wait a minute, you like working fo..., has the NASA Culture changed
for the better yet?
--
Craig Fink
Courtesy E-Mail welcome, WeBe...@GMail.Com
How do I add this google groups to add all the proper headers?
I feel like an Earthlink/Comcast/TimeWarner/RoadRunner ping pong ball
right about now.
--
Brian Thorn
>No, it wasn't. Then what was it?
Bad weather. Hardly the first time.
Brian
WeBe...@gmail.com
Mail-Copies-To: WeBeGood@G...
And how do I get google groups to show my correct E-Mail address, It's
not WeBeG...@gmail.com, it is WeBeGood at G.... That's an @ not at.
On Aug 5, 8:55 pm, "WeBeG...@gmail.com" <WeBeG...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Reply-To: WeBeG...@GMail.Com
> Mail-Copies-To: WeBeG...@GMail.Com
>
> No, it wasn't. Then what was it?
> .
> .
> .
> Wait a minute, you like working fo..., has the NASA Culture changed
> for the better yet?
>
> --
> Craig Fink
> Courtesy E-Mail welcome, WeBeG...@GMail.Com
>
> How do I get this google groups to add all the proper headers?
WeBe...@gmail.com
Have you no respect for others? I'm counting the number of people who
top post and bottom post to this thread and I counted three since
Brian changed the subject slightly. He like top posting, because he is
blind, I like top posting, because... and Jorge well, I don't
know ..., that's 2 out of...
My Firefox browser still shows it's active ... how weird.... Hello
Google, what's going on with my browser?????
On Aug 5, 9:00 pm, Brian Thorn <bth...@suddenlink.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 05 Aug 2007 18:55:44 -0700, "WeBeG...@gmail.com"
WeBe...@gmail.com
No supersedes on Google News Reader, lots of missing capabilities, It
filters outgoing posts, even if it is only the E-Mail Address.
Overall, I'd rate Google online News Reader as ...
Bad weather, that's understandable, NASA likes to keep a nice wax job
on the little jets. But I would think that it's important to give
Barbra Morgan the full Astronaut treatment. I would think the ride in
the T-38 from JSC to KSC before launch would be part experience.
--
Craig Fink
Courtesy E-Mail welcome, WeBeGood @ GMail.Com
I feel like an Earthlink/Comcast/TimeWarner/RoadRunner ping pong ball
right about now.
--
On Aug 5, 9:00 pm, Brian Thorn <bth...@suddenlink.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 05 Aug 2007 18:55:44 -0700, "WeBeG...@gmail.com"
WeBe...@gmail.com
Brian Thorn
>I'm sorry dude, but, I'm going to say it anyway.
>
>Have you no respect for others? I'm counting the number of people who
>top post and bottom post to this thread and I counted three since
>Brian changed the subject slightly. He like top posting, because he is
>blind, I like top posting, because... and Jorge well, I don't
>know ..., that's 2 out of...
Bottom-posting makes discussions vastly easier to follow. You'll find
the great majority of experienced posters bottom-post.
Brian
Brian Thorn
> I would think the ride in
>the T-38 from JSC to KSC before launch would be part experience.
This wasn't "before launch" this was before the Countdown
Demonstration Test two weeks ago.
Brian