"NASA Watch" gets really pissed off.
Pat Flannery
That damn woman...that damn _Bush_ woman.
This could destroy the entire impeccable tradition of the NASA PAO
having no political agenda whatsoever. :-D
Meanwhile, back on the ISS, the Mir glycol cooling system spill gets
repeated with freon:
http://www.nasawatch.com/archives/2008/05/iss_freon_spill.html#more
Uh...excuse me... but wasn't freon supposed to be a no-no due to
depletion of the ozonosphere long before they started building the ISS?
Like someone having a scrimshawed sperm whale tooth from before the
whaling ban, I have my unused firefighting bottle of liquefied Halon
1301/1211 gas from 1988 sitting on the shelf next to my desk....Serial
Number M-416760.
Like Professor Chaos and General Disarray from South Park, I hold this
over _ONE POUND_ of pure Halon above the world's head as a perpetual
threat.
One wrong move and you all die of third degree sunburn, cataracts, and
skin cancer!
But, of course... that doesn't need happen, does it?
In fact, if $30.00 in small unmarked bills were given to me, this threat
to all life could leave my hands, and the world be safe again.
So think about it.
...okay, $25.00 dollars in a pinch... but that must be in
_gold_...deposited to a numbered Swiss bank account. :-)
Pat
Alan Erskine
news:WOOdnYjO38MEhLHV...@posted.northdakotatelephone...
> Uh...excuse me... but wasn't freon supposed to be a no-no due to
> depletion of the ozonosphere long before they started building the ISS?
> Like someone having a scrimshawed sperm whale tooth from before the
> whaling ban, I have my unused firefighting bottle of liquefied Halon
> 1301/1211 gas from 1988 sitting on the shelf next to my desk....Serial
> Number M-416760.
Probably wouldn't work anymore, Pat. 20 years is a long time to store
anything, let alone a liquified gas. What does the guage say (in the red,
probably)?
Brian Thorn
wrote:
>"NASA Watch" gets really pissed off.
Lemme guess...
- Someone at a NASA center didn't update a web page this week?
- Keith didn't get an invite to another Constellation teleconference?
- The DIRECT guys dared to suggest their approach was superior to Ares
and Keith's beloved EELVs?
- A political appointee got a job Keith thinks he/she doesn't deserve?
NASA Watch has bitched and whined itself into irrelevance. Nothing to
see here, move along...
Brian
Terrell Miller
"Pat Flannery" <fla...@daktel.com> wrote in message
news:WOOdnYjO38MEhLHV...@posted.northdakotatelephone...
> Uh...excuse me... but wasn't freon supposed to be a no-no due to depletion
> of the ozonosphere long before they started building the ISS?
no ozone in LEO = no problema!
--
Terrell Miller
mill...@bellsouth.net
"If computers get too powerful, we can organize them into a committee - that
will do them in."
- Bradley's Bromide
Pat Flannery
Alan Erskine wrote:
> Probably wouldn't work anymore, Pat. 20 years is a long time to store
> anything, let alone a liquified gas. What does the guage say (in the red,
> probably)?
>
It's still fairly full. It's quite small (8" tall by 2" diameter). I
assume they used some sort of sealant on the valve.
Shake it, and you can feel the Halon moving around inside. The Halon
appears to be within two inches of the top.
IIRC, that's about where it was when I bought it.
Pat
Pat Flannery
Brian Thorn wrote:
> On Thu, 15 May 2008 06:08:02 -0500, Pat Flannery <fla...@daktel.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>> "NASA Watch" gets really pissed off.
>>
>
> Lemme guess...
>
>
> - A political appointee got a job Keith thinks he/she doesn't deserve?
>
Bingo!
Pat
Pat Flannery
Terrell Miller wrote:
>> Uh...excuse me... but wasn't freon supposed to be a no-no due to depletion
>> of the ozonosphere long before they started building the ISS?
>>
>
> no ozone in LEO = no problema!
>
Which brings up a interesting question... when the ISS is
decommissioned, what exactly happens to it?
Does it do a Mir-style dive into the South Pacific?
That would be some fireworks show.
Pat
OM
<btho...@suddenlink.net> wrote:
>On Thu, 15 May 2008 06:08:02 -0500, Pat Flannery <fla...@daktel.com>
>wrote:
>
>>"NASA Watch" gets really pissed off.
>
>Lemme guess...
>
>- Someone at a NASA center didn't update a web page this week?
>- Keith didn't get an invite to another Constellation teleconference?
>- The DIRECT guys dared to suggest their approach was superior to Ares
>and Keith's beloved EELVs?
>- A political appointee got a job Keith thinks he/she doesn't deserve?
...You left out the most obvious one:
- Keith is just ragging on and trying to make something out of
nothing, just because he's still pissed that he was fired from NASA
for being a fuckup.
>NASA Watch has bitched and whined itself into irrelevance. Nothing to
>see here, move along...
...Agreed. Best thing that could happen right about now is for some
h@kk3r to go replace the entire site with a picture of a middle finger
and an advisory for Keith to shut the fuck up and go away. He's worn
out his welcome long ago.
OM
--
]=====================================[
] OMBlog - http://www.io.com/~o_m/omworld [
] Let's face it: Sometimes you *need* [
] an obnoxious opinion in your day! [
]=====================================[
thom...@flash.net
> Which brings up a interesting question... when the ISS is decommissioned, what exactly happens to it?
> Does it do a Mir-style dive into the South Pacific?
> That would be some fireworks show.
The South Pacific is pretty much standard for such events. I guess you
could do it in the southern Indian Ocean, but the South Pacific is
bigger.
Should be pretty gaudy.
When the time comes, I suppose the competent authorities of the day
could consider taking ISS apart module by module, launch a deorbit
package for each. But dumping the whole thing at one time seems
easier.
Cosmic Ray
> On Thu, 15 May 2008 06:08:02 -0500, Pat Flannery <flan...@daktel.com>
You got that right. A phenomenal waste of time.
kT
> On Thu, 15 May 2008 06:08:02 -0500, Pat Flannery <flan...@daktel.com>
> wrote:
>
> >"NASA Watch" gets really pissed off.
>
> Lemme guess...
>
> - Someone at a NASA center didn't update a web page this week?
> - Keith didn't get an invite to another Constellation teleconference?
> - The DIRECT guys dared to suggest their approach was superior to Ares
> and Keith's beloved EELVs?
> - A political appointee got a job Keith thinks he/she doesn't deserve?
>
> NASA Watch has bitched and whined itself into irrelevance. Nothing to
> see here, move along...
So tell us o' html guru, how many hits per day does your website get?
Jorge R. Frank
And cheaper, and more likely to work. If the authorities of the day
choose the former, then by definition they aren't competent.
kT
If the authorities of the day choose to deorbit it at all, by
Dale Carlson
wrote:
>On May 16, 7:18 pm, "Jorge R. Frank" <jrfr...@ibm-pc.borg> wrote:
>> thoms...@flash.net wrote:
>> > On May 16, 12:34 am, Pat Flannery <flan...@daktel.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> Which brings up a interesting question... when the ISS is decommissioned, what exactly happens to it?
>> >> Does it do a Mir-style dive into the South Pacific?
>> >> That would be some fireworks show.
>> > When the time comes, I suppose the competent authorities of the day
>> > could consider taking ISS apart module by module, launch a deorbit
>> > package for each. But dumping the whole thing at one time seems
>> > easier.
>>
>> And cheaper, and more likely to work. If the authorities of the day
>> choose the former, then by definition they aren't competent.
>
>If the authorities of the day choose to deorbit it at all, by
>definition they aren't competent.
What would you suggest- boosting it up to orbit forever, while being
inaccessible in any practical sense?
My understanding is that the plan is to scrap it in India, at a
dockyard with few environmental or workplace safety standards :)
Dale
V-for-Vendicar
Nothing.
Incomptent AmeriKKKan design, Incompetent AmeriKKKan implementation,
Incompetent AmeriKKKan management.
Another Failure of AmeriKKKa in space.
Dale Carlson
wrote:
>> What would you suggest- boosting it up to orbit forever, while being
>> inaccessible in any practical sense?
>
>It's already in orbit. It has to be boosted only so that it remains in
>orbit, a mere fraction of it's orbital velocity, depending on its
>drag. It took hundreds of billions of dollars to design, build, launch
>and construct, including shuttle and Soyuz development and operational
>costs. Keeping it in orbit only requires only a small fraction of
>those costs.
But how would it then be reached with our current manned craft? I
don't see how Shuttle and especially Soyuz development costs enter
into it. But raising ISS's orbit to eliminate drag isn't a trivial
thing. And as I asked before, how then do we access it? Is it
just an orbital monument?
>> My understanding is that the plan is to scrap it in India, at a
>> dockyard with few environmental or workplace safety standards :)
>
>Your understanding is very weak, let's call it non-existent for
>brevity.
It was a joke. Your inability to grasp that says a lot. I almost
apologized to the group for even responding to you. I'll do
that now.
Sorry, but you are an idiot. But have a nice life anyway.
Dale
Pat Flannery
thom...@flash.net wrote:
> The South Pacific is pretty much standard for such events. I guess you
> could do it in the southern Indian Ocean, but the South Pacific is
> bigger.
>
> Should be pretty gaudy.
>
> When the time comes, I suppose the competent authorities of the day
> could consider taking ISS apart module by module, launch a deorbit
> package for each. But dumping the whole thing at one time seems
> easier.
>
When exactly is this supposed to happen?
The original retirement for the ISS was supposed to be 2015, but the
Russians are pushing to get it extended to 2020.
Considering the amount of money and effort thrown at it, 2015 doesn't
seem like a very long operational lifespan.
Pat
Pat Flannery
Jorge R. Frank wrote:
>>
>> easier.
>
> And cheaper, and more likely to work. If the authorities of the day
> choose the former, then by definition they aren't competent.
Given the potential air drag of the solar arrays on it when deployed as
airbrakes, it shouldn't take much of a retro burn to get it to come down
where you want.
Somebody's got to film it when they do it, because that's going to light
up the whole sky for a couple of hundred mile's radius.
Pat
Scott Hedrick
> Given the potential air drag of the solar arrays on it when deployed as
> airbrakes, it shouldn't take much of a retro burn to get it to come down
> where you want.
I once suggested that Mir be wired with sensors for the reentry, but I was
about a year too late- the last flight to Mir was already onboard. The last
flight to ISS should definitely wire it with cameras and other sensors and
several black boxes that can survive the heat and impact. Maybe a few boxes
should be mounted outside.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
BradGuth
As opposed to our having a robust Moon L1 platform/outpost of mostly
robotic instruments, or that of a cool POOF City at Venus L2 would be
absolutely terrific.
. - Brad Guth
Dale Carlson
>I grasp a pathetic right wing nut case's attempt at conservative humor.
OK, you got me there. I guess I should stop my frequent (although
small ) contributions to the Obama campaign, and be true to my
actual right wing beliefs. Thanks for clearing that up for me, and bye
bye.
Dale
I must really be a right wing "nut case", as i always vote liberal.
How nutty can a guy get? :)
kT
> On Sat, 17 May 2008 11:24:53 -0500, kT <cos...@lifeform.org> wrote:
>
>> I grasp a pathetic right wing nut case's attempt at conservative humor.
>
> OK, you got me there. I guess I should stop my frequent (although
> small ) contributions to the Obama campaign, and be true to my
> actual right wing beliefs. Thanks for clearing that up for me, and bye
> bye.
> I must really be a right wing "nut case", as i always vote liberal.
> How nutty can a guy get? :)
So you don't think Obama is another status quo candidate?
Hahahaha hahahahah ahahah ahahaha ... fucking rubes.
Dale Carlson
>So you don't think Obama is another status quo candidate?
Why would you care what I think, as you've dismissed me as
being a "pathetic right wing nut case"?
>Hahahaha hahahahah ahahah ahahaha ... fucking rubes.
Plonk (again- you got out somehow)
Dale
d.l...@live.com
> You got that right. A phenomenal waste of time.
You know, it actually didn't use to be.
But now that it has morphed into "Everest Watch" instead of NASA
Watch, it is really quite different. I submitted some comments to his
site pointing out that while what Scott Parazynski is doing a
wonderful personal adventure, it actually isn't relevant to watching
NASA, and only vaguely has anything to do with real exploration for
any one but Scott. In that Scott is doing what many others have
already done, and actually following in their footprints as well as
their footsteps, there is some symbolic reference to the whole "return
to the Moon for the first time" effort.
But Keith threw me off his site. "You made your point", he curtly e-
mailed me.
So let's just all be aware that the "comments" that NASA Watch is now
inviting are well filtered, and if they appear to disagree with Keith,
even if they are civil and in the spirit of good discourse, they're
just not going to show up. That's his prerogative, of course, since
it's his website. But the experiment has been done, and the results
are pretty clear.
Fortunately, there are many other forums that welcome different
perspectives, and actually tolerate some intellectual contrariness.
kT
> On Sat, 17 May 2008 21:09:00 -0500, kT <cos...@lifeform.org> wrote:
>
>
>> So you don't think Obama is another status quo candidate?
>
> Why would you care what I think, as you've dismissed me as
> being a "pathetic right wing nut case"?
In America, the centrists are the problem.
V-for-Vendicar
> On May 17, 2:01 am, "V-for-Vendicar"
> <Just...@ExecuteTheBushTraitor.com> wrote:
>
>> What is the ISS useful for?
"kT" <cos...@lifeform.org> wrote
> Existing.
Why pretend to be doing something other than keeping the AmeriKKKan
failure in orbit?
>> Nothing.
"kT" <cos...@lifeform.org> wrote
> On the contrary, it exists.
Your claimed use is simple existance?
According to it's own mission goals, it's a complete failure.
>> Incomptent AmeriKKKan design, Incompetent AmeriKKKan implementation,
>> Incompetent AmeriKKKan management.
"kT" <cos...@lifeform.org> wrote
> That may be true, but it exists, nevertheless.
Other than existing what initial mission goals has it accomplished?
>> Another Failure of AmeriKKKa in space.
"kT" <cos...@lifeform.org> wrote
> You can't fail unless you try.
The AmeriKKKan pattern is clear. Lofty rhetoric and goals, followed by a
pattern of repeated budget cuts and a continuing redefinition of mission
goals along with re-engineering to match the funding, until the program is
essentially a worthless boondoggle. At which point funding dries up and the
program is dropped like a hot potato.
This is not trying... It's the sloven history of a sloven nation.
Apollo was trying.
The only way an AmeriKKKan will get to Mars is on a IndoEuropean mars
shuttle.
V-for-Vendicar
"BradGuth" <brad...@gmail.com> wrote
> As opposed to our having a robust Moon L1 platform/outpost of mostly
> robotic instruments
Doing what? the Space Interferrometry Mission is cancelled due to lack of
Funding.
Pat Flannery
d.l...@live.com wrote:
>> You got that right. A phenomenal waste of time.
>>
>
> You know, it actually didn't use to be.
>
> But now that it has morphed into "Everest Watch" instead of NASA
> Watch, it is really quite different. I submitted some comments to his
> site pointing out that while what Scott Parazynski is doing a
> wonderful personal adventure, it actually isn't relevant to watching
> NASA, and only vaguely has anything to do with real exploration for
> any one but Scott. In that Scott is doing what many others have
> already done, and actually following in their footprints as well as
> their footsteps, there is some symbolic reference to the whole "return
> to the Moon for the first time" effort.
>
I can't figure that out either.
He also became fascinated with the astronauts in the underwater habitat
around a year back, as well as the crew up on Devon Island pretending
they're on Mars.
Maybe he got bored with space? :-\
Pat
Terrell Miller
"Pat Flannery" <fla...@daktel.com> wrote in message
news:HpGdnTKUR7VjgbDV...@posted.northdakotatelephone...
> Which brings up a interesting question... when the ISS is decommissioned,
> what exactly happens to it?
they'll probably just put it up on eBay
--
Terrell Miller
mill...@bellsouth.net
"If computers get too powerful, we can organize them into a committee - that
will do them in."
- Bradley's Bromide
Brian Thorn
wrote:
>as well as the crew up on Devon Island pretending
>they're on Mars.
>Maybe he got bored with space? :-\
Well, I sure got bored with Devon Island. Don't give a hoot about
Scott's Everest Quest, either. Keith still occasionally has useful
NASA information, but the signal to noise ratio is so low (even worse
than sci.space, where at least you can use filters) that it is hardly
worth the effort.
Brian
d.l...@live.com
I think there is a thread here. Keith's point is that what Scott is
doing is "in the spirit of exploration", and that's why it is worth
following -- to teach NASA followers what "exploration" really is.
This is a bit perplexing, because he is confusing "adventure" with
"exploration". I think "adventure" is pretty cool, especially with
risk involved, and may well be a national need. But what the
administration and agency pledged to do is "exploration" -- and that
is NOT what Scott is doing. (In many respects, it's not what the
Vision is doing either.) As you say, one can look at NEMO and Devon
Island in the same way. It's kinda neat to hear about them, but let's
not wallow in them, please.
The NASA Watch site has really changed. It used to be an insightful,
and somewhat biting glimpse into space policy. It was quite unique in
doing this, but has now gone somewhat off the rail. There are several
other excellent sites that serve the purpose that NASA Watch used to
serve, and they are forums that actually allow and encourage civil
discourse, rather than just applause. "Yay, Scott!", "Go for it,
Scott!" I really think those folks made their point in dozens of posts
that NASA Watch welcomed, but it may take a hundred such posts for
Keith to see that.
Also, NASA Watch seems to be positively besotten with Gen-Y marketing.
I think that's kind of amusing. The product that NASA should be
offering should be attractive as a cultural mandate. This Gen-Y
business is that the problem with the product is seen as a problem in
marketing, which is a sad situation.
But again, this is Keith's prerogative. It's his website. He can go
off rails and get pissed off all he wants. But the site is floating
slowly down in my list of useful blogs. Much as for Scott Parazynski,
this site is becoming more the record of a personal journey than a
tool for others -- "It's YOUR space agency. Get involved. Take it
back. Make it work - for YOU."
I'm posting about it here not so much to complain, but just as an
observation. The site has served real needs, and Keith deserves a lot
of kudos.
V-for-Vendicar
>> Your claimed use is simple existance?
"kT" <cos...@lifeform.org> wrote
> Yes, obviously it's existence is crucial to its usefulness.
So far it's primary use has been to suck funding from robotic planetary
exploration.
It's an expensive rock.
>> According to it's own mission goals, it's a complete failure.
"kT" <cos...@lifeform.org> wrote
> It's mission goals are completely wrong and now obsolete, of course,
Now it's mission is strictly to exist apparently.
"kT" <cos...@lifeform.org> wrote
> but they could be changed by simple decree. It needs to be an
> international space station for life sciences research, closed
> ecological life support systems, in other words, astronaut tourists
> from hostile nations growing plants. Psychotropic plants, preferably.
> That would get hostile nations working together and respecting one
> another quickly.
Just think of what it could do for Afghan opium production.
>> >> Incomptent AmeriKKKan design, Incompetent AmeriKKKan implementation,
>> >> Incompetent AmeriKKKan management.
"kT" <cos...@lifeform.org> wrote
> I never claimed otherwise, I'm talking about a salvage operation.
It can be salvaged of course, and can still do useful work. All that
needs be done is to get AmeriKKKa out of the picutre.
>> This is not trying... It's the sloven history of a sloven nation.
>>
>> Apollo was trying.
"kT" <cos...@lifeform.org> wrote
> It's history. I am truly outrages they are trying to repeat it.
> Salvaging the ISS is one method of discouraging further madness in
> this direction, and discouraging further madness in launch vehicle
> design.
I blame AmeriKKKan RepubliKKKans for the perpetual stream of U.S. white
elephants in manned space flight.
>> The only way an AmeriKKKan will get to Mars is on a IndoEuropean mars
>> shuttle.
"kT" <cos...@lifeform.org> wrote
> I don't want to go to Mars, I want to go to the space station, and use
> that as a testbed for long duration spacecraft to go the Phobos,
> Deimos, the Asteroids, and that remarkable fifth planet Ceres.
I see little value in manned space flight to these orbiting piles of
rubble.
"kT" <cos...@lifeform.org> wrote
> By doing this we might just have a chance to salvage something from
> the Earth. If we can't salvage the space station, we'll never be able
> to salvage this planet. Get it? I doubt it.
Put the Japanese in charge of design and the Russians in charge of
implementation.
Sell NASA to China. AmeriKKKa could use the cash.
Neil Gerace
> The South Pacific is pretty much standard for such events. I guess you
> could do it in the southern Indian Ocean, but the South Pacific is
> bigger.
The entire Pacific is bigger still :)
V-for-Vendicar
>> It's an expensive rock.
"kT" <cos...@lifeform.org> wrote
> I agree entirely, it's a poor design, and I was opposed to building it
> at all in that form, and I indeed predicted after Challenger it would
> never be built. But they went ahead and built it, and now we're stuck
> with it, so with a little creativity it should be much cheaper to
> maintain now that it is built. What I am advocating is creativity in
> the launch and life support markets, something thus far Americans are
> unwilling to do.
Creativity apparently means going back to Apollo.
>> It can be salvaged of course, and can still do useful work. All that
>> needs be done is to get AmeriKKKa out of the picutre.
"kT" <cos...@lifeform.org> wrote
> I agree entirely, but I would prefer America to become more rational.
That only has the potential of being realized several decades after the
Collapse of the AmeriKKKan state.
The U.S. population is still too deeply disconnected from the reality of
thier ongoing rapid decline.
>> I blame AmeriKKKan RepubliKKKans for the perpetual stream of U.S. white
>> elephants in manned space flight.
"kT" <cos...@lifeform.org> wrote
> So do I, but there is no time like the present to change that.
Not possible. There is way too much KKKonservative poison flowing through
AmeriKKKa.
>> I see little value in manned space flight to these orbiting piles of
>> rubble.
"kT" <cos...@lifeform.org> wrote
> Except to keep the mammals from fighting among themselves by giving
> them something to do.
Appolo didn't stop Vietnam.
>> Sell NASA to China. AmeriKKKa could use the cash.
"kT" <cos...@lifeform.org> wrote
> NASA is a problem, but that's an entirely different salvage operation.
I don't see how NASA is a problem. Mission constraints are set by the
budget, it's charter, and congressional mandate.
BradGuth
Our Zionist DARPA and their Rothschild Federal Reserve banking cartel
are calling all the shots, along with their mainstream media wizard
Murdock keeping a straight and narrow butt-crack so that only their
infowar crapolla of disinformation spews out, as representing the one
and only word of their extremely white God.
. - Brad Guth
Reunite Gondwanaland (Mary Shafer)
> The NASA Watch site has really changed. It used to be an insightful,
> and somewhat biting glimpse into space policy. It was quite unique in
> doing this, but has now gone somewhat off the rail. There are several
> other excellent sites that serve the purpose that NASA Watch used to
> serve, and they are forums that actually allow and encourage civil
> discourse, rather than just applause. "Yay, Scott!", "Go for it,
> Scott!" I really think those folks made their point in dozens of posts
> that NASA Watch welcomed, but it may take a hundred such posts for
> Keith to see that.
OK, I was a field center engineer who never got downsized, which may
affect my view, but I always thought NASA Watch was nothing but a pack
of HQ weenies who got pushed out (long after the field centers had
taken much deeper hits on complement) and were crying to the world
about how badly they'd been treated.
I always wondered why all of a sudden it was so terrible that NASA had
let people go, when none of those folks had said a word when it was
people at field centers, not themselves at HQ. It was like they
thought they were gods of NASA and shouldn't be expected to be treated
like the rest of the folks. It's not as if most of them ever did that
much to fulfill the NASA mission of doing aerospace research and
exploration. I mean, they were all staff, not line and yes, line
needs staff for support, but staff work isn't the goal of the agency,
line is, despite what NASA Watch said. (Yes, I was line, and yes, I
relied heavily on staff for support, and yes, they did a great job of
it, but they were still staff.)
Mary "Not everyone at HQ was like that, of course."
--
Mary Shafer Retired aerospace research engineer
We didn't just do weird stuff at Dryden, we wrote reports about it.
reunite....@gmail.com or mil...@qnet.com
Visit my blog at http://thedigitalknitter.blogspot.com/
OM
Shafer)" <reunite....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>OK, I was a field center engineer who never got downsized, which may
>affect my view, but I always thought NASA Watch was nothing but a pack
>of HQ weenies who got pushed out (long after the field centers had
>taken much deeper hits on complement) and were crying to the world
>about how badly they'd been treated.
...And based on everything else we've seen in the decade or so since
NW went from being a decent "insider" news source to "The Wrath of
Cowing", your observations are clearly not incorrect. About the only
thing that needs to be clarified is whether the rumors are true in
that Cowing was terminated due to poor job performance as opposed to
simple downsizing. Several of my OMBlog regulars have made comments
about this rumor in the past, and IIRC it was floated around .policy
quite a while back, much to Cowing's chagrin.
Bottom Line: What do Guth, Maxson, Chumpko, McCall and the rest of the
trolling trash have in common with Keith Cowing? They all have
unrequited dates with a 2x4 upside the head!
OM
--
]=====================================[
] OMBlog - http://www.io.com/~o_m/omworld [
] Let's face it: Sometimes you *need* [
] an obnoxious opinion in your day! [
]=====================================[
Pat Flannery
OM wrote:
> On Sun, 25 May 2008 22:54:26 -0700, "Reunite Gondwanaland (Mary
> Shafer)" <reunite....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> OK, I was a field center engineer who never got downsized, which may
>> affect my view, but I always thought NASA Watch was nothing but a pack
>> of HQ weenies who got pushed out (long after the field centers had
>> taken much deeper hits on complement) and were crying to the world
>> about how badly they'd been treated.
>>
>
> ...And based on everything else we've seen in the decade or so since
> NW went from being a decent "insider" news source to "The Wrath of
> Cowing", your observations are clearly not incorrect. About the only
> thing that needs to be clarified is whether the rumors are true in
> that Cowing was terminated due to poor job performance as opposed to
> simple downsizing.
>
He's going to send that Yeti after you...and that Yeti is going to _kill
you_ as you try to to hop away from it.
Might as well have a Wookie on your ass after losing a holographic chess
game against it.
BTW, I've been developing new theories about Yetis recently.
Several years ago, a British explorer tried to observe one by leaving
buckets of warm Irish Stout out on the Himalayan mountainsides,
realizing that the poor, cold, creature would inevitably be drawn to it
by its innate strengthening virtue and excellent scent.
Alas, the idea failed.
Some would say that this was due to the fact that there _are no_ Yetis;
but I see another explanation.
I think that as hairy and huge as they are, Yetis have a distinct sense
of pride.
Imagine walking into a Irish pub as an American tourist and having the
publican offer you a _bucket_ of stout while the other patrons of the
pub attempted to photograph you as some oddity of nature.
No doubt you (if not I- who would accept the bucket with enthusiasm and
then gimbal and gambol around the pub for tourists to photograph as they
pleased while emitting growls and strange ape-like hooting sounds) would
be insulted by such a situation.
I think that the key to successful Yeti observation is the presentation
of such stout; certainly it must be presented in a pint glass, and not a
bucket, while also accompanied by a cheese platter.
Pat
Rand Simberg
Gondwanaland (Mary Shafer)" <reunite....@gmail.com> made the
phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that:
Actually, it was one guy, at Reston, not HQ.
kT
> Bottom Line: What do Guth, Maxson, Chumpko, McCall and the rest of the
> trolling trash have in common with Keith Cowing? They all have
> unrequited dates with a 2x4 upside the head!
Bottom Line : Robert Mosley III is a violent fascist, who hates the
constitution of the United States of America, hates freedom of speech
and freedom of expression, and spends his hours trolling the usenet
for trolls with whom to libel, slander and make threats of violence
against.
Robert Mosley III hates America and Americans for their freedoms.
Robert Mosley III is far worse than the usenet trolls he hates.
Scott Hedrick
> Might as well have a Wookie on your ass after losing a holographic chess
> game against it.
"Bring it on, Fuzzball! Got my canister of Nair right here!"
> BTW, I've been developing new theories about Yetis recently.
> Several years ago, a British explorer tried to observe one by leaving
> buckets of warm Irish Stout out on the Himalayan mountainsides, realizing
> that the poor, cold, creature would inevitably be drawn to it by its
> innate strengthening virtue and excellent scent.
> Alas, the idea failed.
That's because the Sherpas were sneaking it when he stopped to piss.
> Imagine walking into a Irish pub as an American tourist and having the
> publican offer you a _bucket_ of stout while the other patrons of the pub
> attempted to photograph you as some oddity of nature.
Free beer? Hell, I'd *pose* for 'em- as long as it wasn't Guiness, which
would more properly go into something that ran on diesel.
Eric Chomko
> "Pat Flannery" <flan...@daktel.com> wrote in message
No, free beer tomorrow.
Eric Chomko
wrote:
> On Sun, 25 May 2008 22:54:26 -0700, in a place far, far away, "Reunite
Depends on which HQ when talking about Reston.