Why Colonize Space? Because We Are Dealing In Absolutes
G. L. Bradford
returns, increasing returns (the frontiers and resources of the solar system
and beyond that a possibly unlimited Universe) over diminishing returns (the
ever growing, ever increasing weight of, totalitarian tyrannies of
unworkable imposed resource "conservation" and "efficiency" (and the even
more -- proven -- unworkable totalitarian tyrannies of "POPULATION
CONTROLS!" a.k.a., "POPULATION MANAGEMENT!")). State controls over all human
activity, even 'thought'. Human activity management. Power corrupts, and
absolute power corrupts absolutely (tyranny corrupts, and absolute tyranny
corrupts absolutely).
What is "conserved" today, there will still be less of tomorrow, and even
less the day after, needing ever more "conservation." That is TYRANNY
absolute. Efficiencies imposed today will still require more and greater
efficiencies being imposed tomorrow, and even more and even greater
efficiencies being imposed the day after. That is TYRANNY absolute. And
there will be selective waivers regarding conservation and efficiency.
Waivers for the "more equal" than the "equal." Waivers for the so-called
"needy" at the [increased] expense of all the rest. Waivers for any and all
"chosen" of the 'powers that be' of the state at the [increased] expense of
all the rest. The ever [increasing] expense over an ever increasing time of
imposed conservation and -- so-called -- efficiencies. Power corrupts.
Tyranny corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Absolute tyranny
corrupts absolutely.
Crimes and wars are going to increase orders of magnitude in numbers and
intensities. Every household on Earth is going to be at war eventually,
within and without. Every community. Every nation. Every bureaucracy as
well. A naked singularity of one world shrunken in all times between all its
parts, especially a naked singularity of "One World" and "One World [ism],"
is an absolute tyranny -- an absolute power of tyranny -- in being just to
start with, never mind that world being enclosed within an total
authoritarian Iron Curtain to keep in all so-called weapons of mass
destruction whatsoever "for the good of all mankind."
The pen-ultimate "weapon of mass destruction" is life. The ultimate weapon
of mass destruction is intelligent life. Intelligence correlates to the vast
total variation of all of the rest of life put together...all variation
merged into just one single species of it equal to the entire pyramid -- the
spawning from this merger of all into one, intelligence. There is no more an
implosively / explosively volatile combustible in existence anywhere even
when simply tyrannized for too long, much less total authoritarianly
tyrannized for way too long. "For the good of all mankind" is not nearly
enough excuse to keep any peace whatsoever upon one world and one world
only, much less an artificial "One World" (tied to an artificial "One
Worldism") growing by leaps and bounds in restrictions and constrictions
imprisoned, thus enslaved, within a state made artificial Iron Curtain.
Tyranny spawns tyrannies within it like a supervirus. Iron Curtain spawns
innumerable iron curtains within itself like an impossibly impenetrable
labyrinthian maze of barriers being in being to doing anything whatsoever
positive. It spawns inertial Hell.
GLB
G. L. Bradford
Jim Davis
> Why colonize space? Because we are dealing in absolutes. We
> are dealing in returns, increasing returns (the frontiers and
> resources of the solar system and beyond that a possibly
> unlimited Universe) over diminishing returns (the ever
> growing, ever increasing weight of, totalitarian tyrannies of
> unworkable imposed resource "conservation" and "efficiency"
> (and the even more -- proven -- unworkable totalitarian
> tyrannies of "POPULATION CONTROLS!" a.k.a., "POPULATION
> MANAGEMENT!")). State controls over all human activity, even
> 'thought'. Human activity management. Power corrupts, and
> absolute power corrupts absolutely (tyranny corrupts, and
> absolute tyranny corrupts absolutely).
Brad, apparently all this handwringing hasn't persuaded *you* to
colonize space. Apparently living in a world with "diminishing
returns" and 'unworkable imposed resource "conservation" and
"efficiency"' and "human activity management" is more to your
liking than living in space.
Why the hypocrisy in this matter, Brad?
Jim Davis
Christopher
Your full of shit.
--
Christopher
Jim Davis
> He *advocates* space colonization, Jim.
Indeed. With all the passion - and all the consistency - of a
televangelist with a Rolex watch, Armani suit, and BMW urging the
faithful to send in those checks.
> That's more than most and a step in the right direction.
Sure. Nothing will convince people to pull up stakes and head to L5
more than hysteria and hypocrisy.
> There are a lot of *silent* space colonization advocates out
> there.
By "out there" you of course refer to earth, right?
Jim Davis
Monte Davis
>Human beings are just not that smart.
Does Jim have to pay you to provide these luscious examples of how
space fans shoot themselves in the foot as advoicates, or do you do it
for free?
Nog
Why? Just to get the fuck of the planet before the Muslims fuck it all up.
Brad Guth
>is all up front in two to three decades
Why not focus upon utilizing the best and nearest do-everything of a
station-keeping sweet-spot in town; that location being the extremely
nearby LL-1 which seems like a perfectly good and relatively safe spot
for your "Stanford Torus", whereas volume, shape and mass are of
anything you'd care to make them, and in addition to clean solar energy
you'd also have unlimited terajoules worth of tether dipole energy to
burn.
We're talking of residing this sucker at 58,000 and some odd km away
from the moon (possibly 60,000 km), and all the rest of the package
becomes a done deal. Upon average, that's parked roughly 318,000 km
from the surface of Earth.
As little as one joule of energy could launch your personal pod or
unlimited tonnage towards the moon or towards Earth. Isn't that the
best ever Isp efficiency or what?
How about establishing a 256 megatonne Torus unit that'll provide 1e9
m3 of safe abode for starters?
There's no question that life upon or even the prospects of getting
such life safely to/from Mars in the first place is going to be
extremely spendy and downright risky business, as well as decades down
the road that'll take us past if not directly through WW-III, that's of
a nasty terrestrial road that's rather quickly running itself out of
viable fossil fuels, as well as getting itself submerged and/or washed
away due to global warming that's somewhat like having poked at mother
nature with a sharp and badly polluted stick long enough that she's
going postal on us.
I'll argue that the mutual gravity-well that's so nearby and so nicely
remaining as interactively situated between us and our moon is by far
the most efficient location for us to transfer whatever tonnage into,
and it's also going to remain by far the most energy efficient location
for having to station-keep whatever until the lunar side of the tether
element is anchored into that dark and nasty deck of our moon, at which
time the station-keeping energy demand becomes almost nonexistent if
not representing an energy gain. I don't think it gets any better than
that.
My question is;
Are you and of those you've associated with interested in the R&D
that's LL-1, for the benefit of your Stanford Torus or not?
If so, I have a few thousand questions to ask, plus a few good ideas to
share.
-
Brad Guth
Jim Davis
>> Indeed. With all the passion - and all the consistency - of a
>> televangelist with a Rolex watch, Armani suit, and BMW urging
>> the faithful to send in those checks.
>
> I don't ever recall the General asking for money, Jim.
I didn't claim he did. I merely note that he exhorts others to do
what he is unwilling to do and excoriates those that are unwilling
to do what he is unwilling to do.
He can't have it both ways. He claims that earth is a tyranny and
people should leave while at the same time claiming *he* can't
leave *because* earth is a tyranny. He can't make up his mind
whether conditions on earth are the reason to leave or the excuse
to stay.
>>> That's more than most and a step in the right direction.
>>
>> Sure. Nothing will convince people to pull up stakes and head
>> to L5 more than hysteria and hypocrisy.
>
> I think he was referring to the need to colonize space.
Mr. Bradford doesn't seem to feel any need to colonize space. He
seems happy right where he is.
> Last time I checked, Earth was in space, Jim.
Most find the earth/space distinction a useful one, Thomas. Perhaps
if you think on it for awhile you might be able to grasp how useful
it is like everyone else.
> The reasons the
> general elucidates are still valid even if we were only to apply
> them to the spaceship Earth.
Perhaps you can persuade the general to explain why the reasons he
elucidates are not valid enough for him?
> However, both you and I and the
> general know that will never happen by itself, without actual
> experience in colonizing space.
The general doesn't seem to be interested in actual experience.
He's made up his mind that colonization is the answer to all
earth's ills. He can barely contain his contempt for those that
made tha same choice he did - remain on earth.
> Human beings are just not that smart.
Some aren't particularly consistent with their premises, either.
Jim Davis
Brad Guth
I see that the usual incest cloned mindset of this anti-think-tank of a
Usenet from hell are telling the rest of us village idiots lies about
you. Apparently they think that you really don't know anything about
physics, or much less squat about life, and as such they're taking the
fullest collective butt-kicking advantage of how supposedly dumb and
dumber you are.
Isn't it so amazing when these all-knowing rusemasters are being so
damn born-again proud of themselves and so much more so of their pagan
brown-noses that they can't even see that their own sky is falling, as
well as not having noticed that their good ship LOLLIPOP has been
sinking within their own cesspool mainstream of infomercial-science and
conditional physics crapolla.
Is it just myself, or are you aware of what I'm thinking is seriously
dead wrong with this picture?
-
Brad Guth
Rand Simberg
<jimd...@earthlink.net> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such
a way as to indicate that:
>Thomas Lee Elifritz wrote:
>
>>> Indeed. With all the passion - and all the consistency - of a
>>> televangelist with a Rolex watch, Armani suit, and BMW urging
>>> the faithful to send in those checks.
>>
>> I don't ever recall the General asking for money, Jim.
>
>I didn't claim he did. I merely note that he exhorts others to do
>what he is unwilling to do and excoriates those that are unwilling
>to do what he is unwilling to do.
Not to appear on the side of the lunatic Elifritz, but how would you
expect him to colonize space by himself?
Jim Davis
> Not to appear on the side of the lunatic Elifritz, but how would
> you expect him to colonize space by himself?
I have no idea; he never goes into such details. Presumably the same
way he expects everyone else to heed his advice.
Jim Davis
bombardmentforce
http://spacebombardment.blogspot.com/2006/03/im-to-rich-for-my-planet.html
The Russians will fly your around the moon nine times for Shorenstein's
money, what would they charge for a base and a few chow runs?
Jim Davis
> Paradise on Earth will only come about with space
> colonization. Please tell me you are not that stupid that you
> can't see that as a given.
A possibility; not a given.
> Why else are you posting here?
Because I've had a lifelong interest in the subject but not to the
point of religious dogma which has to be accepted on faith, or as
you put it "as a given".
> Right, and when the system fails you, and you find yourself out
> in the wilderness crawling around on your hands and knees trying
> to find something to eat, then you will find the distinction
> less distinct.
<chuckle>
Let me see if I understand you: we should move to *space* because
we'll have trouble finding something to eat on "earth"?
> I've been there before Jim. Hurricane Floyd, for instance. 1999.
Yes, I remember. A scene repeated many times over the years. A
natural or manmade disaster strikes and the lucky survivors vow to
start a new life on the moon where life holds fewer surprises.
> Perhaps he has never been as desperate as I in the wilderness.
What is space if not a wilderness, indeed the worst wilderness
imaginable?
> You should try it, it's a real eye opener. Character building.
> It makes you appreciate what we really have, and how easy it
> would be to lose it in an instant. I'm not talking ecotourism.
You're not talking about space either.
> It's a no brainer. However, a wide awake mind is
> required.
Your wide awake mind has apparently decided that the horrors of the
Bahamas are preferable to the bliss of space.
> Nobody has made any choices. This is something that all mankind
> must choose together.
Translation: I'm not colonizing space until someone else does the
heavy lifting for me.
> It's all for one and one for all, the
> individualist paradigm completely breaks down in the wilderness,
> as you shall soon see someday for yourself.
I see you have a more realistic concept of what space colonies will
be like than Mr. Bradford. This is the seamier side of space
colonies the advocates don't discuss much.
> I've been out there
> many times myself, and I'll soon be out there again, it's
> something that you have to reaffirm often, otherwise, it's so
> easy to forget that the wilderness exists at all.
I've heard the Bahamas can be a real hell hole. You're to be
commended for not taking the path of least resistance by moving to
Antarctica or the Rub' al-Khali to avoid those hurricanes. Many of
your fellow Bahamians don't have your grit. Housing Bahamian
refugees is a serious problem in Florida and I understand the
Bahamian government had a hard time controlling rioters in Nassau
demanding to be allowed to emmigrate to L5.
> It's not a matter of consistency, it's a matter of life or
> death.
I'm afraid living in space will hold few attractions to those
consumed by matters of life and death.
Jim Davis
Rand Simberg
>> I've been out there
>> many times myself, and I'll soon be out there again, it's
>> something that you have to reaffirm often, otherwise, it's so
>> easy to forget that the wilderness exists at all.
>
>I've heard the Bahamas can be a real hell hole. You're to be
>commended for not taking the path of least resistance by moving to
>Antarctica or the Rub' al-Khali to avoid those hurricanes. Many of
>your fellow Bahamians don't have your grit. Housing Bahamian
>refugees is a serious problem in Florida and I understand the
>Bahamian government had a hard time controlling rioters in Nassau
>demanding to be allowed to emmigrate to L5.
Jim, you've gone from being tart to cruel.
Rand Simberg
simberg.i...@org.trash (Rand Simberg) made the phosphor on my
monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that:
>On 31 Mar 2006 05:32:18 +0200, in a place far, far away, Jim Davis
><jimd...@earthlink.net> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such
>a way as to indicate that:
>
>
>>> I've been out there
>>> many times myself, and I'll soon be out there again, it's
>>> something that you have to reaffirm often, otherwise, it's so
>>> easy to forget that the wilderness exists at all.
>>
>>I've heard the Bahamas can be a real hell hole. You're to be
>>commended for not taking the path of least resistance by moving to
>>Antarctica or the Rub' al-Khali to avoid those hurricanes. Many of
>>your fellow Bahamians don't have your grit. Housing Bahamian
>>refugees is a serious problem in Florida and I understand the
>>Bahamian government had a hard time controlling rioters in Nassau
>>demanding to be allowed to emmigrate to L5.
>
>Jim, you've gone from being tart to cruel.
Not that that's a *bad* thing, considering the target.
Jim Davis
> Let's see, we have the Earth, a two dimensional sphere, with a
> primary productivity depth measured in meters, inhabited by 6.5
> billion idiots. And, in contrast : the cosmos.
Inhabited by no one.
> I observe Earth and the cosmos. That pretty much makes it a
> given.
Well, beliefs based on faith aren't always wrong.
> No, we usually vow to build a better spaceship. Never been
> there, eh?
<smile>
I've built as many spaceships as you have.
> Sure I am, Earth is in space. It must be so nice to live such a
> sheltered life. Are you absolutely sure your spaceship is
> secure?
Certainty is your curse, not mine. As for earth, it has the not
inconsiderable advantage of actually existing unlike for instance:
http://www.lifeform.org/designs/ssto.gif
> It's not always horrible. It goes from being a paradise to being
> a hellish nightmare on a moments notice. Never been there, eh?
Oh, yes. Unfortunately, a submarine is not a paradise at the best
of times. On the other hand it probably resembles a spaceship more
than a Bahamian island.
> No, the reality is that we are all on the same spaceship.
A reality so irksome it has led you to accept space colonization on
faith alone.
> Perhaps because they are not walking the walk and living the
> life, as I am.
We can all say that about the other.
> I practice what I preach,
You're posting this from orbit then?
> to the extent that
> individualism permits me.
Oh, pardon me. I didn't the excuse was already prepared.
> Thus I am intimately aware of the
> failures of individualism.
Are you certain the failures are not your own, Thomas?
> When Nassau gets hit by a C5 then you'll see it. Hugo 1989 VI.
>
> Ever seen an American tourist demanding to emigrate? It's pretty
> ugly.
But not relevant to the subject of space colonization.
> I'm upgrading to category 5 capabilities as fast as I possibly
> can.
I am relieved to hear you have not taken complete leave of your
senses, Thomas. For a moment there I was afraid you were going to
try and live in space. I glad to hear that when crunch time comes
you abandon your fantasies and confront the real world head on.
>> I'm afraid living in space will hold few attractions to those
>> consumed by matters of life and death.
>
> But it will ultimately determine life or death of civilization.
Your faith is strong and only wavers when a C5 is in prospect, but
that's understandable. The clergy of the Bahamas no doubt also take
shelter instead of relying on prayer to protect them. Your
evangelical credentials are secure.
> Don't worry, the 2006 Atlantic Hurricane season will soon be
> upon US.
I am heartened by your decision to postpone your space colonization
efforts to prepare, Thomas. Very sensible.
> I suggest you get your spaceship in order, secure the hatches,
> batten it down, zip it up. Shake, rattle and roll inside of a
> concrete box.
That's good advice. Space colonization is a dangerous distraction
from real world problems as you've explained above. Mr. Bradford
might disagree, though.
Jim Davis
John Savard
wrote, in part:
>Why the hypocrisy in this matter, Brad?
Even if he were to sprout wings, they wouldn't let him fly to outer
space.
Some good ideas can only be suggested to those with the power and wealth
to undertake them; they aren't suitable for implementation with common
household objects and supplies.
John Savard
http://www.quadibloc.com/index.html
_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 140,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account
ianpa...@gmail.com
G. L. Bradford
complainers complaining about seeming out of control rising prices, I have
to smile a pitying smile. Their earnings haven't kept up in any way. Many of
them now, their debt load is already so great that even any penny's worth in
general costs and prices is a massive earthquake as far they are concerned.
We have no space frontier, thus we have no resources, no reserves of
increasing returns to match diminishing returns, much less increase over
them. Earnings are not ever going to keep up even to this increased
difference, not anymore. Two generations now have lived with their
collective heads in the sand, laughing at all the warnings like Louis XV,
"After us the deluge!" Well now the third generation is coming up against
it. The time of "the deluge" is in growing acceleration; is coming up fast
now.
The difference between real costs of energy production, other production,
goods and services is beginning to accelerate just as I've predicted many
times. The real costs and prices of production, goods and services are
spiraling up all across the entire world, not just in these United States.
Real income world wide, not just in these United States, cannot possibly
keep pace to hold any ground whatsoever against the growing difference. And
the civilized world's borrowing against following generations' economic well
being is now reaching saturation -- drowning -- point. For long it helped to
hide real incomes' growing loss in ground, but that fog is lifting pretty
damn fast now.
Many years ago vast growths in public and private sectors debts began
replacing the then existing vast growths in inflation of money throughout
the world. Few realized that both in turn were hiding exactly the same
worldclass physics problem, there no longer being any increasing returns
anywhere on Earth whatsoever to over-power the diminishing returns physics
of "Earth first" (Earth standalone).
Once upon a time not all that long ago in the highly industrialized,
hi-tech world it took only one member of a family working all out to support
the family. Then, progressively it rose to two going all out to do the job.
Children gradually became an unaffordable, unwanted, burden to the two.
Science and technology were hailed to be the future that was going to
replace ever enlarging numbers of children, thus ever enlarging population,
in the natural order of things. Most of the smarter of those stupid
ignaramuses are now very quietly hiding in deeper and ever deeper holes
wherever they can find holes to hide in, hoping no one will remember them.
Science and technology utterly failed to produce as replacements for
enlarging numbers of children, thus ever enlarging population. The third
world kept up its production of children because it simply couldn't do
otherwise. Now, because it did, it is well on its way to conquering the
first world by simply out breeding it, breeding it out existence, just like
with the rest of the two million year history of Man and the four and a half
billion year history of life on Earth. Just like natural life...just like
weeds versus our perfect lawns....just like God and Nature -- so to speak --
versus the fanatical religion we made of science and technology.
The thinking (if it can be called that): "Space Age" science and
technology would make the impossible Utopia possible without any need
whatsoever to realize any reality of Space Age. The space frontier would be
just too hard, too raw, too alien and harsh, to go after "at this time," at
this time, at this time, at this time, at this time.... Sci-Tech One World
Utopia would be so effortless, so much faster, so much better, and so much
cheaper in every way. It would need far less thinking; far less effort; far
less fertility; far less vigor; far less vitality. Far less "thinking"
because if anyone did any real thinking about World Utopia (Heaven on
Earth), they would gradually come to mentally discover and realize the
where, when, how and why of world-class Dystopian Hell. But there will of
course always be those that benefit from Hell; have a vested interest in
Hell, a vested interest in [ruling] it as Milton long ago knew (a vested
interest in absolute power (absolute tyranny). To far too many humans there
is no greater drug-like surge than having absolute power and empire over an
absolutely captive world -- or over some locale in an overall absolutely
captive world. Absolute power can be rolled down hill. It can be delegated
remotely subordinately to local lesser mortals wanting it, thirsting for it,
willing to do anything whatsoever, believe anything whatsoever, to have it
and use it over others.....NO MATTER WHAT THE COST, PERIOD, END OF STORY
("After us the deluge!").
I said that an overall Iron Curtain automatically breeds innumerable
invisible -- but no less real -- [impenetrable] iron curtains within its
fold. It's Relativity's "inertial frame" taken to the ultimate of inertial
Hell ("The activities of non-governmental entities....(essentially
throughout the universe)...shall require authorization and continuing
supervision by the appropriate Party to the Treaty." -- The Outer Space
Treaty of 1967). Jim Davis, you are one of the world's most ignorant, most
stupid, people when you say no one is stopping anyone from easily gaining
the means to leave this world. "Totalitarianism" in its simplest definition
means "everything is prohibited but that which is specifically permitted by
the state." Exactly like what the sentence from the Outer Space Treaty of
1967 SAYS and MEANS (Thus Totalitarianism, the totalitarian state, Total
Quality Organization and Management, is the [definitively] declared state --
by the governments of the world, including the United States government --
of all the universe starting just beyond the surface of the Earth and going
out in every direction whatsoever of the universe outside). Nazis, Fascists,
Communists, all totalitarians rule through the words, "Your papers, please."
Everyone without exception has to thread through absolute needle-hole
bureaucracies at every turn, in every single activity (absolute inertial
Hell). And God help you if you've ever been "politically incorrect" in any
way whatsoever.
"Vigilance is the price of Liberty." There can be no "Vigilance" in
ignorance, stupidity, or revisionism.... Therefore there can be no "Liberty"
either in these things so obviously a part of you and your obvious
indoctrination rather than education. So obviously a part of far, far too
many like you today as well.
"When I go to the local gasoline stations and stores and see all the
complainers complaining about seeming out of control rising prices, I have
to smile a pitying smile...." It takes an infinite, unlimited, Frontier
Universe to even have such a thing as increasing returns over diminishing
returns. It takes going for it. Never letting up in going for it. It takes
passing tests, each test harder than the last. Each frontier greater but
tougher than the last, there being no worth whatsoever to faster, easier,
safer, more secure, less vigorous, less vital, less fertile, cheapness.
Michel de Crevecouer in his essays, "Letters From An American Farmer,"
published London 1782, said one pertinent thing about most people from the
Old World stepping off the ship into the New World. That their minds began
immediately to enlarge to fit in with the vast enlargement inherent to their
new environment, the American Frontier of that period. In today's terms,
they began immediately to evolve vaster capabilities to fit an environment
of and for vaster capability. They began to evolve spatially within
themselves to suit the new enlarged space they were now of a piece with.
They started breaking out of their old moulds in beginning to fit into now
bigger, far greater dimensioned new moulds. They began to realize greater,
vaster possibilities.
GLB
Jim Davis
> Some good ideas can only be suggested to those with the power
> and wealth to undertake them; they aren't suitable for
> implementation with common household objects and supplies.
If that excuse is good enough for Bradford why isn't it good enough
for everyone else? If interminable lectures on Carthage, Chinese
treasure fleets, England and Spain, and Will Durant are good enough
for everyone else why aren't they good enough for Bradford?
Jim Davis
Brad Guth
We'll lose big-time, thus end of most problems and the good news being
that we'll not have to worry about global warming or that of our
resident warlord(GW Bush) getting us into WW-III over the next batch of
those stealth WMD.
-
Brad Guth
Jim Davis
> When I go to the local gasoline stations and stores and see
> all the complainers complaining about seeming out of control
> rising prices, I have to smile a pitying smile. Their earnings
> haven't kept up in any way. Many of them now, their debt load
> is already so great that even any penny's worth in general
> costs and prices is a massive earthquake as far they are
> concerned.
<smile>
I'm sure they would have been *much* better off if they had only
listened to you and become space colonists.
Jim Davis
Brad Guth
I happen to agree that we should "colonize space", especially of nearby
space, and I also agree with your spin-mass being better off than
passive or near-zero resting mass when it comes down to shielding
potential. My CM/ISS uses 50t/m2 as the primary outer shield (as much
intended for fending off and/or surviving physical debris as well as
radiation), although there's really no limit as to this amount of a
mostly basalt composite shield mass/m2, nor is there hardly much extra
cost from the terrestrial standpoint. There's also a few spare
terajoules available for creating an artificial magnetosphere. Can we
talk LL-1?
-
Brad Guth
Jim Davis
> Last I heard there were four.
I was rounding to the nearest hundred million since we can't
estimate the population of earth any more accurately. The
population of the cosmos of course can be estimated *much* more
accurately.
> I observe the evidence. I believe I see evidence. I believe in
> evidence.
And then you say foolish things like "I observe Earth and the
cosmos. That pretty much makes it a given."
> I guess that makes me a faith based scientific observer.
You're half right.
>> I've built as many spaceships as you have.
>
> Have you?
Yes.
> I guessing that you've never mixed and poured a cubic
> yard of concrete in your life.
????
You're equating pouring concrete with building rockets? Do you
believe that your expertise in rocket design increases with the
amount of concrete you've poured? Do you also imagine that you've
built dams, skyscrapers, nuclear reactors, bridges, and factories?
Can anyone who's poured concrete claim to have built rockets?
And why just pouring concrete? Was this the closest activity in the
life of Thomas Elifritz that could be connected to building
rockets?
I'm afraid, Thomas, the cruel fact of the matter is, that if one
has poured concrete all one can claim is that...one's poured
concrete. Nothing more, nothing less.
Thomas, you quite take my breath away.
> Feel free to correct me if I'm
> wroing.
As it turns out you are wrong. Twice in my life I've had to mix and
pour concrete. I didn't enjoy it either time no doubt because,
lacking your capacity for self-delusion, I couldn't convince myself
that I was "really" building rockets.
Let me take a shot in the dark here. You're going to retort along
the lines of "well I've poured concrete every day for the last
thirty years so I know a lot more about rockets than you do",
right?
> Yes I know, not much existed in 1903 either. Or 1880. Time is
> like that.
Would you care to offer odds on 2010? 2020? :-)
> All of our homes look like spaceships out there. Even the
> shacks.
No doubt your windmills look like giants.
> No, it's the evidence of global mass extinction that I see.
>> But not relevant to the subject of space colonization.
>
> It sure as hell is. All of Humanities disasters have been
> relatively minor so far, we've been extremely lucky.
Still no relevance to space colonization.
> Astute advice from an individual that has in all probability
> never been confronted with a life threatening situation in all
> your life.
<smile>
"In all probability"? Just how did you come to that conclusion?
> Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
Consider yourself corrected.
> No it doesn't,
First he denies it...
> I've looked them in the eye several times. I've
> actually flown in on the planes going in to take the evacuees
> out.
...and then in the next clause he admits it! When the going gets
rough Thomas drops space colonization like a hot potato.
>> I am heartened by your decision to postpone your space
>> colonization efforts to prepare, Thomas. Very sensible.
>
> Actually, it's part of continuous space colonization training
> exercises.
<chuckle>
Is that the current euphemism for pouring concrete?
>> That's good advice. Space colonization is a dangerous
>> distraction from real world problems as you've explained above.
>
> Actually no, it's all part of the drill.
Sure. "Space colonization training exercises" has a much better
ring to it than "beachcombing".
>> Mr. Bradford
>> might disagree, though.
>
> Perhaps you should let the General make his own comments.
Advice we could both take. The general doesn't much like
discussion, though. Lengthy monologues from on high is more his
style.
I leave you with the last word. When the discussion slips to the
pouring of concrete it's time to bail out.
Jim Davis
KenStahl
Bhhhaaaawwwwawwwwwwawwawwwawawaaaa!!!
Change that corncob in your ass.
redneckj
"Jim Davis" <jimd...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:Xns9797C6CF1CF4Fji...@148.160.160.156...
> Thomas Lee Elifritz wrote:
>
> > I guessing that you've never mixed and poured a cubic
> > yard of concrete in your life.
>
> ????
>
> You're equating pouring concrete with building rockets? Do you
> believe that your expertise in rocket design increases with the
> amount of concrete you've poured? Do you also imagine that you've
> built dams, skyscrapers, nuclear reactors, bridges, and factories?
> Can anyone who's poured concrete claim to have built rockets?
>
> And why just pouring concrete? Was this the closest activity in the
> life of Thomas Elifritz that could be connected to building
> rockets?
>
> I'm afraid, Thomas, the cruel fact of the matter is, that if one
> has poured concrete all one can claim is that...one's poured
> concrete. Nothing more, nothing less.
>
True.
> Let me take a shot in the dark here. You're going to retort along
> the lines of "well I've poured concrete every day for the last
> thirty years so I know a lot more about rockets than you do",
> right?
>
29 years. John Hare
Alain Fournier
Jim Davis wrote:
> Thomas Lee Elifritz wrote:
>>I guessing that you've never mixed and poured a cubic
>>yard of concrete in your life.
>
>
> ????
>
> You're equating pouring concrete with building rockets? Do you
> believe that your expertise in rocket design increases with the
> amount of concrete you've poured? Do you also imagine that you've
> built dams, skyscrapers, nuclear reactors, bridges, and factories?
> Can anyone who's poured concrete claim to have built rockets?
>
> And why just pouring concrete? Was this the closest activity in the
> life of Thomas Elifritz that could be connected to building
> rockets?
>
> I'm afraid, Thomas, the cruel fact of the matter is, that if one
> has poured concrete all one can claim is that...one's poured
> concrete. Nothing more, nothing less.
In this case I would say that if one is a theoretician who has done
only abstract studies, one is better off than someone else who hasn't
done any abstract studies but has concrete experience.
Alain Fournier
Rand Simberg
<redn...@tampabay.rr.com> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:
>
>"Jim Davis" <jimd...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>news:Xns9797C6CF1CF4Fji...@148.160.160.156...
>> Thomas Lee Elifritz wrote:
>>
>> > I guessing that you've never mixed and poured a cubic
>> > yard of concrete in your life.
>>
>> ????
>>
>> You're equating pouring concrete with building rockets? Do you
>> believe that your expertise in rocket design increases with the
>> amount of concrete you've poured? Do you also imagine that you've
>> built dams, skyscrapers, nuclear reactors, bridges, and factories?
>> Can anyone who's poured concrete claim to have built rockets?
>>
>Yes.
I think he meant anyone, not any one. I suspect you may be the only
one. ;-)
ro...@telus.net
<alai...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>Jim Davis wrote:
>
>> Thomas Lee Elifritz wrote:
>
>>>I guessing that you've never mixed and poured a cubic
>>>yard of concrete in your life.
>>
>> I'm afraid, Thomas, the cruel fact of the matter is, that if one
>> has poured concrete all one can claim is that...one's poured
>> concrete. Nothing more, nothing less.
>
>In this case I would say that if one is a theoretician who has done
>only abstract studies, one is better off than someone else who hasn't
>done any abstract studies but has concrete experience.
<groan>
-- Roy L
redneckj
"Rand Simberg" <simberg.i...@org.trash> wrote in message
news:456e6a96....@news.giganews.com...
Jim has proved me wrong on both sides of the same arguement.(Atlas
vs X15). I couldn't resist the cheap shot.