| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#122
July 2nd 04, 04:40 PM
|
|||
|
|||
(Len Over 21) wrote in message ...
In article , (William) writes: (Len Over 21) wrote in message ... In article , (Steve Robeson K4CAP) writes: Subject: BPL - UPLC -Repeat the lie three times and claim it for truth From: (Len Over 21) Date: 6/26/2004 1:52 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: Nursie work in aerospace? Or just spaced out? Nursie looney? [looney rhyme w/Clooney, ER hero...] Nursie disconnect dots, tell tales of coincidence of time nursie got first car? Nursie not happy? Nurise automotive expert? Nursie are radio god, superior to all inferiors (those not in hum radio)? Nursie be maverick gremlin? Have a pint'o at happy hour? Need trip Vegas to tell all about radio? Must be. Nursie know all, hate many. Not good. Vein ready for pop. Vroom, vroom. Shush, nursie, shush. Nursie not have mind neutralized, go into parasitic oscillation, not good for final. Final at any time, vein ready to pop. Temper fry... The following post was published by an allegedly college educated "professional" engineer. One who claims to have worked "in the aerospace industry". No wonder NASA is down two shuttles. Nursie have new personality! Weiner von Brawn. Nursie big name aerospace, be purchasing agent at set-top box maker less than half year. Very important. Knows all about electronic engineering. Good job, Weiner! He bwame shuttle disaster on you. He delerious. Blame-tossing never-did-any-space-work nursie would have had a total orgasm with early spaceflight days. So many go boom. Nursie laff and laff at NASA folks, all dummies. Nursie feel very smart when laffing at others. That pump up Weiner von Brawn. Nursie know all about BPL, OFDM, technical stuff on method of moments. Very schmardt. No sign of Comments on docket 04-37 from nursie. Nursie have depression too? Docket 04-37 on the BPL NPRM now has 1,554 Comment on ECFS. Many are multi-page filings (ARRL has 5 attachments, ARINC has 3). Docket 03-104 on the BPL NOI is now at 6,108. That's over 7500 filings on BPL alone. Nursie and Jimmie wanna talk about space and economy, be big gurus on What To Do. No talk about BPL. BPL gonna be death of noise floor on HF if approved. Not matter. Nursie and Jimmie live virtual lives on HF in here, be big shots with high words on non-amateur subjects. Not understand. This not private chat room for national politics, science, economics, or space flight. Must figure that their extra class will work right on through all QRM. Class will tell. Class dismissed. Nursie got lots hate, angers, repeat lines often. Obsession by nursie. Nursie can't do field day, must be on-line to hate, hate, hate "enemy." Bad nursie, bad. Tsk. He hate Dr. Soos. He no like Horton Who. He no like Whoville. Million and million of kid in America grow up with Dr. Soos. But noooo. He no like. While not expecting to, I did get a chance to see the actual, working Whoville vehicles made for the movie. Peterson Auto Museum in L.A., just off Sunset Blvd close to La Brea. Four floors of cars. Most interesting "Cars of the Stars" exhibit. Three-four years ago. Of course, not mentioning hum raddio will turn on the mean diss and curse side, nursie and jimmie lecturing on newsgrope subjects...while they go merrily on with politics, economics, science, and spaceflight. :-) He no like The Who. Who no like Who? Who? Him, dat who. Wonder what he think Jimmie Who? Amazing wonder that the anglophile didn't mention "Dr. Who," a so-called Sci-Fi series from the UK. Very tongue-in-cheek in places but not science. Just fun. Jimmie no like? Nursie not speak of BPL. BPL not aerospace where he Dock-torr. (physics pun) He wan turn me in to Da Athorities! He say he make call and cause trouble. Like make threts. He forget dey close all insane psyllums and people hap no place cept under bridge or stinky shelter. He mean man and he forget histerry. Hate people. Obsessive-compulsive psychosis manifesting itself in rage and sociopathy. [Psych 101 at El Camino for undergraduate required engineering major credits in California of 1959] Nursie gonna mention my wife on that, say I "cut-and-paste" from her books. Wife only had MSci in Education then, would get MSci in Social Work later, work for state of Illinois. Wife's old school books destroyed by water damage while in storage in Washington years ago. Nursie MUST diss wife if I write something. Nursie fruitcake, all nuts with hate. Nursie hate, hate, hate. Nursie angry. All posts must kill all enemies. Destroy enemies. Way of hero hostile action ham. He yell and yell alla time. He have sigh Kologee problem. He speshally hate someone say that. Sorry. Compulsive-obsessive psychosis syndrome known a long time. Nursie need all kinds certificates and licenses to show proof of that but still nutso to anybody else. Not good PR for ham radio. Temper fry... Dip him in tempura batter. He almost done. Don't think will work. Butter turn rancid on dipping. Bad taste. Have bad taste of nursie in here. Not good. Ptui. This not amateur radio subject. No problem. Only other hum raddio talk is all about field day. Field day nice outing in park, fun. Not emergency training if scheduled years in advance. Real emergencies not scheduled. Len The idiot keeps trying to engage me. Apparently he doesn't know what persona non grata is. |
|
#123
July 2nd 04, 09:52 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article ,
(William) writes: (Len Over 21) wrote in message ... In article , (William) writes: (Len Over 21) wrote in message ... In article , (Steve Robeson K4CAP) writes: Subject: BPL - UPLC -Repeat the lie three times and claim it for truth From: (Len Over 21) Date: 6/26/2004 1:52 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: Nursie work in aerospace? Or just spaced out? Nursie looney? [looney rhyme w/Clooney, ER hero...] Nursie disconnect dots, tell tales of coincidence of time nursie got first car? Nursie not happy? Nurise automotive expert? Nursie are radio god, superior to all inferiors (those not in hum radio)? Nursie be maverick gremlin? Have a pint'o at happy hour? Need trip Vegas to tell all about radio? Must be. Nursie know all, hate many. Not good. Vein ready for pop. Vroom, vroom. Shush, nursie, shush. Nursie not have mind neutralized, go into parasitic oscillation, not good for final. Final at any time, vein ready to pop. Temper fry... The following post was published by an allegedly college educated "professional" engineer. One who claims to have worked "in the aerospace industry". No wonder NASA is down two shuttles. Nursie have new personality! Weiner von Brawn. Nursie big name aerospace, be purchasing agent at set-top box maker less than half year. Very important. Knows all about electronic engineering. Good job, Weiner! He bwame shuttle disaster on you. He delerious. Blame-tossing never-did-any-space-work nursie would have had a total orgasm with early spaceflight days. So many go boom. Nursie laff and laff at NASA folks, all dummies. Nursie feel very smart when laffing at others. That pump up Weiner von Brawn. Nursie know all about BPL, OFDM, technical stuff on method of moments. Very schmardt. No sign of Comments on docket 04-37 from nursie. Nursie have depression too? Docket 04-37 on the BPL NPRM now has 1,554 Comment on ECFS. Many are multi-page filings (ARRL has 5 attachments, ARINC has 3). Docket 03-104 on the BPL NOI is now at 6,108. That's over 7500 filings on BPL alone. Nursie and Jimmie wanna talk about space and economy, be big gurus on What To Do. No talk about BPL. BPL gonna be death of noise floor on HF if approved. Not matter. Nursie and Jimmie live virtual lives on HF in here, be big shots with high words on non-amateur subjects. Not understand. This not private chat room for national politics, science, economics, or space flight. Must figure that their extra class will work right on through all QRM. Class will tell. Class dismissed. Nursie got lots hate, angers, repeat lines often. Obsession by nursie. Nursie can't do field day, must be on-line to hate, hate, hate "enemy." Bad nursie, bad. Tsk. He hate Dr. Soos. He no like Horton Who. He no like Whoville. Million and million of kid in America grow up with Dr. Soos. But noooo. He no like. While not expecting to, I did get a chance to see the actual, working Whoville vehicles made for the movie. Peterson Auto Museum in L.A., just off Sunset Blvd close to La Brea. Four floors of cars. Most interesting "Cars of the Stars" exhibit. Three-four years ago. Of course, not mentioning hum raddio will turn on the mean diss and curse side, nursie and jimmie lecturing on newsgrope subjects...while they go merrily on with politics, economics, science, and spaceflight. :-) He no like The Who. Who no like Who? Who? Him, dat who. Wonder what he think Jimmie Who? Amazing wonder that the anglophile didn't mention "Dr. Who," a so-called Sci-Fi series from the UK. Very tongue-in-cheek in places but not science. Just fun. Jimmie no like? Nursie not speak of BPL. BPL not aerospace where he Dock-torr. (physics pun) He wan turn me in to Da Athorities! He say he make call and cause trouble. Like make threts. He forget dey close all insane psyllums and people hap no place cept under bridge or stinky shelter. He mean man and he forget histerry. Hate people. Obsessive-compulsive psychosis manifesting itself in rage and sociopathy. [Psych 101 at El Camino for undergraduate required engineering major credits in California of 1959] Nursie gonna mention my wife on that, say I "cut-and-paste" from her books. Wife only had MSci in Education then, would get MSci in Social Work later, work for state of Illinois. Wife's old school books destroyed by water damage while in storage in Washington years ago. Nursie MUST diss wife if I write something. Nursie fruitcake, all nuts with hate. Nursie hate, hate, hate. Nursie angry. All posts must kill all enemies. Destroy enemies. Way of hero hostile action ham. He yell and yell alla time. He have sigh Kologee problem. He speshally hate someone say that. Sorry. Compulsive-obsessive psychosis syndrome known a long time. Nursie need all kinds certificates and licenses to show proof of that but still nutso to anybody else. Not good PR for ham radio. Temper fry... Dip him in tempura batter. He almost done. Don't think will work. Butter turn rancid on dipping. Bad taste. Have bad taste of nursie in here. Not good. Ptui. This not amateur radio subject. No problem. Only other hum raddio talk is all about field day. Field day nice outing in park, fun. Not emergency training if scheduled years in advance. Real emergencies not scheduled. Len The idiot keeps trying to engage me. Apparently he doesn't know what persona non grata is. |
|
#124
July 2nd 04, 11:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article ,
(William) writes: (Len Over 21) wrote in message ... In article , (William) writes: (Len Over 21) wrote in message ... In article , (Steve Robeson K4CAP) writes: Subject: BPL - UPLC -Repeat the lie three times and claim it for truth From: (Len Over 21) Date: 6/26/2004 1:52 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: Nursie work in aerospace? Or just spaced out? Nursie looney? [looney rhyme w/Clooney, ER hero...] Nursie disconnect dots, tell tales of coincidence of time nursie got first car? Nursie not happy? Nurise automotive expert? Nursie are radio god, superior to all inferiors (those not in hum radio)? Nursie be maverick gremlin? Have a pint'o at happy hour? Need trip Vegas to tell all about radio? Must be. Nursie know all, hate many. Not good. Vein ready for pop. Vroom, vroom. Shush, nursie, shush. Nursie not have mind neutralized, go into parasitic oscillation, not good for final. Final at any time, vein ready to pop. Temper fry... The following post was published by an allegedly college educated "professional" engineer. One who claims to have worked "in the aerospace industry". No wonder NASA is down two shuttles. Nursie have new personality! Weiner von Brawn. Nursie big name aerospace, be purchasing agent at set-top box maker less than half year. Very important. Knows all about electronic engineering. Good job, Weiner! He bwame shuttle disaster on you. He delerious. Blame-tossing never-did-any-space-work nursie would have had a total orgasm with early spaceflight days. So many go boom. Nursie laff and laff at NASA folks, all dummies. Nursie feel very smart when laffing at others. That pump up Weiner von Brawn. Nursie know all about BPL, OFDM, technical stuff on method of moments. Very schmardt. No sign of Comments on docket 04-37 from nursie. Nursie have depression too? Docket 04-37 on the BPL NPRM now has 1,554 Comment on ECFS. Many are multi-page filings (ARRL has 5 attachments, ARINC has 3). Docket 03-104 on the BPL NOI is now at 6,108. That's over 7500 filings on BPL alone. Nursie and Jimmie wanna talk about space and economy, be big gurus on What To Do. No talk about BPL. BPL gonna be death of noise floor on HF if approved. Not matter. Nursie and Jimmie live virtual lives on HF in here, be big shots with high words on non-amateur subjects. Not understand. This not private chat room for national politics, science, economics, or space flight. Must figure that their extra class will work right on through all QRM. Class will tell. Class dismissed. Nursie got lots hate, angers, repeat lines often. Obsession by nursie. Nursie can't do field day, must be on-line to hate, hate, hate "enemy." Bad nursie, bad. Tsk. He hate Dr. Soos. He no like Horton Who. He no like Whoville. Million and million of kid in America grow up with Dr. Soos. But noooo. He no like. While not expecting to, I did get a chance to see the actual, working Whoville vehicles made for the movie. Peterson Auto Museum in L.A., just off Sunset Blvd close to La Brea. Four floors of cars. Most interesting "Cars of the Stars" exhibit. Three-four years ago. Of course, not mentioning hum raddio will turn on the mean diss and curse side, nursie and jimmie lecturing on newsgrope subjects...while they go merrily on with politics, economics, science, and spaceflight. :-) He no like The Who. Who no like Who? Who? Him, dat who. Wonder what he think Jimmie Who? Amazing wonder that the anglophile didn't mention "Dr. Who," a so-called Sci-Fi series from the UK. Very tongue-in-cheek in places but not science. Just fun. Jimmie no like? Nursie not speak of BPL. BPL not aerospace where he Dock-torr. (physics pun) He wan turn me in to Da Athorities! He say he make call and cause trouble. Like make threts. He forget dey close all insane psyllums and people hap no place cept under bridge or stinky shelter. He mean man and he forget histerry. Hate people. Obsessive-compulsive psychosis manifesting itself in rage and sociopathy. [Psych 101 at El Camino for undergraduate required engineering major credits in California of 1959] Nursie gonna mention my wife on that, say I "cut-and-paste" from her books. Wife only had MSci in Education then, would get MSci in Social Work later, work for state of Illinois. Wife's old school books destroyed by water damage while in storage in Washington years ago. Nursie MUST diss wife if I write something. Nursie fruitcake, all nuts with hate. Nursie hate, hate, hate. Nursie angry. All posts must kill all enemies. Destroy enemies. Way of hero hostile action ham. He yell and yell alla time. He have sigh Kologee problem. He speshally hate someone say that. Sorry. Compulsive-obsessive psychosis syndrome known a long time. Nursie need all kinds certificates and licenses to show proof of that but still nutso to anybody else. Not good PR for ham radio. Temper fry... Dip him in tempura batter. He almost done. Don't think will work. Butter turn rancid on dipping. Bad taste. Have bad taste of nursie in here. Not good. Ptui. This not amateur radio subject. No problem. Only other hum raddio talk is all about field day. Field day nice outing in park, fun. Not emergency training if scheduled years in advance. Real emergencies not scheduled. Len The idiot keeps trying to engage me. Apparently he doesn't know what persona non grata is. :-) If it wasn't written up in QST it doesn't exist. QST over-emphasizes the ham involvement of MARS and under-emphasizes the fact that the U.S. Army started it in 1925 and now all three major military service branches are involved in that Military Affiliate Radio System as a self-standing radio system which MIGHT, but hardly ever does for a fact, serve the long-existing regular military communications facilities. [did QST every write up anything on the Grecial Firebolt exercises? I don't think so but then I don't read enough ham-only "technical" material] Now, in this thread, there's much "learned" palaver on the wrongs and wrongs of U.S. spaceflight efforts between the two participants who haven't gotten much beyond the Popular Science write-ups. The Cassini-Huygens probes are considered another outstanding success but the critics are highly critical. [maybe because ham radio isn't essential to such efforts?] Meanwhile, BPL is the spectre on the ham horizon but nobody seems very concerned. Either they can't think beyond their personal fantasies or they think that "CW will get through?" Some folks in here are so into the personal attack mode that all they can do is carp and bark and toss snit at Cart Stevenson for a mild rebuke against UPLC, a group that was arrogantly snitting on amateur radio. |
|
#125
July 3rd 04, 03:14 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Steve Robeson K4CAP wrote:
Subject: BPL - UPLC -Repeat the lie three times and claim it for truth From: PAMNO (N2EY) Date: 7/1/2004 6:32 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: In article , Mike Coslo writes: N2EY wrote: Ahh, but can you say the same for Tang flavored Teflon? There was anembarrassing moment when a '60s era astronaut swore he'd never drink the stuff ever again because of its GI tract effects on him. Trouble was he forgot he was on VOX... I couldn't blame him...I thought (think) the stuff sucks. Couldn't build more Saturns, as the tooling is gone, as well as the supply path. So we'd have to rebuild the tooling and supply systems in order to build the rockets. Which could take longer than it did the first time. I'd certainly hope that engineering skills and contruction methodology hadn't REGRESSED in the last four decades! =) Who's running this thing, anyway? Ex-Army radio clerks ? The problem isn't regression, the problem is that there are parts on the engine that simply aren't made any more. One small example is that when I was on tour down at the cape, we could look inside one of the monsters. I don't even know if lacing cable is made any more. That's just one thing, There are a lot of other parts that just aren't made any more. So while we could in principle make the things again, and the engineering drawings exist, it just ain't that simple. More the pity. The Saturn's were beautiful, muscular brutes, all the more impressive that they were made around 40 years ago. We haven't matched them yet. Quick Q. THe fuel and oxidizer combo on the Saturns was a bit different from the typical. What was it? As enormous as Saturn Vs were, they were just adequate for the job. That's a good thing. If you get even one pound more of thrust MORE than what you "need", then that's ALL you Well, that leaves the field wide open. Some would have us believe that we would be better to spend the money feeding the world's poor. Of course, then you end up with a lot of fat poor people that will continue eating your food until you run out, then you can starve along with 'em! 8^) Or the money could be spent teaching the world's poor how not to be poor. The old "give a man a fish" thing. That ain't a happening thng. Let us take the world's population and divide it into the gross global product. You are correct, Steve, it isn't going to happen. You know what I was so "impressed" with while overseas doing the things Lennie says I didn't do...?!?! There were American "missionaries" trying to impose thier religion and moral values on people supposedly too poor to eat or even buy a Bible...(you see thier kids on "Feed The Children" commercials... BUT...They always seemed to have money to buy AK47's and ammunition. Go figure... Praise the ammunition and pass the Lord? 8^) Today there is no such need or competition. Just wait 5 years. More like 20 The last years of the Soviet system were examples of what happens to a society wherein competion and individual initiative are stripped from people. The Russians found out the hard way. The Chinese learned, but they also learned how to keep people repressed and doing what they want them to do. Allowing people to accumulate wealth while suppressing their political freedoms is an interesting trick. BTW, China has just surpassed the US as an investment target. While we still have people that rail on about an Ex president. Point is, get the priorities straight, folks. That is the take away I get from the SpaceShipOne effort. By comparison, the Rutan effort is almost easy. I would not say "easy". And the SS1 effort has decades of experience and data behind it. X-15 did not. Exactly. And "composites"...And computing power 1000 fold greater than what Apollo had... So if they can do it for less money, and private money at that, why should we spend billions of tax dollars on it? "SpaceShip" 1 barely went suborbital. It will take a LOT more investment capital before we see any of Burt's stuff on orbit! Ahh, now we are getting close to what I think you are trying to say. As much as I enjoy the martian rovers, and as excited as I get about their discoveries, and in general, all the wonderful things that we get from the unmanned side of space exploration, if the basic purpose isn't to put people somewhere - I don't support it. Why not? The machines can do things humans cannot. The cost is less. The machines can stay for a long time and don;t have to come back. The machines can't fix them selves enroute or on-site. The machines are fascinating. But they are a big so-what in the big picture. I feel excited when the rovers do their thing and make discoveries, or when Cassini went into orbit as planned, and started sending back imagery. But So What? I am willing to bet that the Brit's "Beagle 2" mission burnt up on entering the Martian atmosphere. Maybe had it been a manned mission, the 1/10th of a degree attitude adjustment necessary to PREVENT it could have been made. AND, as we see from Hubble, they aren't taking care of the toys we are giving them now. Because the money isn't there. The Hubble deserves to live out it's full lifetime. At the end of it's useful life, it should be visited by a shuttle, packed up, and returned to earth to take an honored place in the Smithsonian Air and Space museum. Getting to see THAT would give me goosebumps and get me all excited. And what's more, it helps cement my support for all of this. The people at NASA should be concerned that ubergeeks like me don't support them at this time. It could also serve as a testbed for the effects of space on the hardware - all of it. How many meteorite holes, how much radiation damage, etc? Simulation is fine but imagine being able to study, in detail, something that spent years in space. How many other massive spaceborne telescopes have we had on orbit? These things also serve as testbeds. We tend to think of the space program as being "old" since were in our 3rd generation with it. It's not. It's still well within "infancy" I think we are so confused between our fantasy perception of space travel (ie: Star Trek et al, Babylon 5, etc) and the reality (barely crawling at this point) that we have these grossly overinflated ideas of how these systems OUGHT to "last" or "work". Once upon a time, we built the thing. It was important enough to take the risks and send it into space. Even though it was known that the optics were defective. But they were able to compensate for that. It got there - it had problems. We considered it important enough to go back into space and repair it. That was a technological triumph by the way. It turned that ugly duckling into a a beautiful swan of optical imaging. They *knew* the lense wasn't right. Why it was launched is a classic case of "not my job". That lesson is a valuable one. We felt it was important enough to send servicing missions to. Now "we" don't any more. At one time, we were going to retrieve it, but now it is too "dangerous" to even do a maintenance run on it. Answer: Robots. How does man learn to do these things in space if we send machines to try and do it? And how do we "teach" a machine to do something if we ourselves don't already know how it should be done? Robots my rosy red! I Wanna go there! The people that think all we should do is send robots into space really really miss the point. It ain't about the robots, or about the science. If it isn't people, it isn't interesting, and it won't get support. More important, most car accidents are caused or exacerbated by human error. People not wearing seat belts, driving too fast, driving while impaired, etc. By comparison, the shuttle failures were caused by equipment troubles that the crew could do nothing about. Oh? They were engineering errors if we patently accept the investigation's reports. The errors were due to a failure of the people making the decisons. Thiokol said "go" after being coerced by NASA people to let Challenger fly. Coerced by men...not robots. Boom. And check out what became of the engineer that didn't want the thing to fly, the what happened to the person that applied the pressure to launch. Proof that the squeaky wheel gets the ax! There had been issues raised over the foam on the external tank being able to come loose, but again cooler heads didn't get a chance to prevail. One "suggestion" that had been laid out years ago was that a "once-over" EVA be done to the Shuttle prior to re-entry in order to make sure no external damage was done. It was suggested that thios would place the crew at too much risk. The idea of a small "ROV" be built for the same purpose was made.. "Too much time and money". I'll bet a bunch of MIT kids could have designed the thing as a class project for less than a mil...Compare that against the loss we suffered. Actually, I don't think there is a way to solve those problems. The ones on earth? I disagree! Me too. I was once told that there are not really any "problems"...Just solutions awaiting implementation! So exactly how do we cure hunger, disease, poverty, and the fact that there is a significant number of people that don't think any of the above are a problem? I'm old enough to remember when the phrase "reaching for the moon" meant someone was trying to do that which could not be done. Yet it was done. Yep. I believe we will one day find outr how to go light speed or better. It's just a matter of time, money and effort. Agreed. There was a time when it was seriously argued that some men had to be enslaved, either literally or economically, because nobody would voluntarily do those jobs. That problem was solved. Yep..We just look the other way at the border once in a while! =) There was a time when it was seriously argued that women could not be allowed to vote because it would cause all kinds of problems. Turned out not to be a problem. That's a matter of opinion. Several political pundits have said that a lot of the "vote" that went to Bill Clinton did so because some segment of women voters thought he was more handsome than President Bush, and thought that his rhetoric on women's "issues" was "sweet". There was a time when it was considered impossible to teach most children to read and write because their work was 'needed' in the farms, mills and factories. Obviously it's still true. A very large part of our imports from India and Pakistan are made by kids. If we're not their, and it isn't humans there, maybe it's just time to sit down and watch the history channel. We might see a story about us there some day. What's all the rush? Space has been there for a lot longer than we have, and will be there long after we are gone. We can take our time and do it in a planned way, or rush headlong and wastefully, and accomplish little. Yes...it will still be there...but I for one am very disappointed that after four decades of manned space travel, we still haven't done a darned thing to REALLY start exploring "space"...! I'm in a rush, and that is enough for me. - Mike KB3EIA - |
|
#126
July 3rd 04, 03:39 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
N2EY wrote:
In article , (Steve Robeson K4CAP) writes: Subject: BPL - UPLC -Repeat the lie three times and claim it for truth From: PAMNO (N2EY) Date: 7/1/2004 6:32 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: In article , Mike Coslo writes: N2EY wrote: I couldn't blame him...I thought (think) the stuff sucks. It has one use, in my book: If a dishwasher gets stains from hard water, just fill the soap dispenser with Tang and run it with no dishes inside. Couldn't build more Saturns, as the tooling is gone, as well as the supply path. So we'd have to rebuild the tooling and supply systems in order to build the rockets. Which could take longer than it did the first time. I'd certainly hope that engineering skills and contruction methodology hadn't REGRESSED in the last four decades! =) Who's running this thing, anyway? Ex-Army radio clerks ? It's not about regression; it's about not keeping facilities that aren't being used. As enormous as Saturn Vs were, they were just adequate for the job. That's a good thing. If you get even one pound more of thrust MORE than what you "need", then that's ALL you all you what? Well, that leaves the field wide open. Some would have us believe that we would be better to spend the money feeding the world's poor. Of course, then you end up with a lot of fat poor people that will continue eating your food until you run out, then you can starve along with 'em! 8^) Or the money could be spent teaching the world's poor how not to be poor. The old "give a man a fish" thing. That ain't a happening thng. You know what I was so "impressed" with while overseas doing the things Lennie says I didn't do...?!?! There were American "missionaries" trying to impose thier religion and moral values on people supposedly too poor to eat or even buy a Bible...(you see thier kids on "Feed The Children" commercials... BUT...They always seemed to have money to buy AK47's and ammunition. Go figure... Those people don't want help. There are plenty of other people who do. Today there is no such need or competition. Just wait 5 years. More like 20 The last years of the Soviet system were examples of what happens to a society wherein competion and individual initiative are stripped from people. Nope. It's about rewards. The basic flaw in any collectivist system is that people are expected to work hard and take risks but are not rewarded for successfully doing so. The old saying "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" is true but incomplete. Here's the complete version: "In a society where rewards are distributed by the rule 'From each according to his ability, to each according to his need', the end result will be very little ability and an enormous amount of need." The Russians found out the hard way. The Chinese learned, but they also learned how to keep people repressed and doing what they want them to do. It is interesting to note that when many Chinese speak of "freedom" and "democracy", what those words mean to them are economic freedom and a free market system. That is the take away I get from the SpaceShipOne effort. By comparison, the Rutan effort is almost easy. I would not say "easy". And the SS1 effort has decades of experience and data behind it. X-15 did not. Exactly. And "composites"...And computing power 1000 fold greater than what Apollo had... More like a million fold... So if they can do it for less money, and private money at that, why should we spend billions of tax dollars on it? "SpaceShip" 1 barely went suborbital. That's as high as X-15 ever went. It will take a LOT more investment capital before we see any of Burt's stuff on orbit! How much more? Not as much as some may think. The engines work, the ship works, if in need of some design mods. A good deal more "oomph" is needed to get something into orbit, as well as a likely ship redesign. But it'll happen. Ahh, now we are getting close to what I think you are trying to say. As much as I enjoy the martian rovers, and as excited as I get about their discoveries, and in general, all the wonderful things that we get from the unmanned side of space exploration, if the basic purpose isn't to put people somewhere - I don't support it. Why not? The machines can do things humans cannot. The cost is less. The machines can stay for a long time and don;t have to come back. The machines can't fix them selves enroute or on-site. So you build more reliable machines. Learning how to do that is an earthbound benefit of a space program! Many human ills cannot be self-repaired, either. Look at Cassini-Huygens - more than 7 years in space and performing perfectly. An example of "old time NASA technology", definitely not "faster better, cheaper" One key to reliability is simplicity. A manned probe needs additional layers of complexity because it has to include life support and systems to return home. Yep, that's true you know what I'm gonna say next................. So what? I am willing to bet that the Brit's "Beagle 2" mission burnt up on entering the Martian atmosphere. Why? What data supports that? Maybe had it been a manned mission, the 1/10th of a degree attitude adjustment necessary to PREVENT it could have been made. Doubtful. The machines are faster and more accurate at such tasks than humans. But the humans can see something askew that teh computer may not. I suspect that a human on board that one doomed Mars lander might have seen that one set of instructions was in metric, and the other was not. I work with computers every day. They really aren't that smart. They will execute disastarous commands at accuracies far to several insignificant digits AND, as we see from Hubble, they aren't taking care of the toys we are giving them now. Because the money isn't there. The Hubble deserves to live out it's full lifetime. At the end of it's useful life, it should be visited by a shuttle, packed up, and returned to earth to take an honored place in the Smithsonian Air and Space museum. Getting to see THAT would give me goosebumps and get me all excited. And what's more, it helps cement my support for all of this. The people at NASA should be concerned that ubergeeks like me don't support them at this time. It could also serve as a testbed for the effects of space on the hardware - all of it. How many meteorite holes, how much radiation damage, etc? Simulation is fine but imagine being able to study, in detail, something that spent years in space. How many other massive spaceborne telescopes have we had on orbit? There are some smaller ones but none like Hubble. ahem.... These things also serve as testbeds. We tend to think of the space program as being "old" since were in our 3rd generation with it. It's not. It's still well within "infancy" That's why I say that if it's useful life is over, go get it, bring it back to earth and study it. See what failed and figure out why. I think we are so confused between our fantasy perception of space travel (ie: Star Trek et al, Babylon 5, etc) and the reality (barely crawling at this point) that we have these grossly overinflated ideas of how these systems OUGHT to "last" or "work". I'm not confused at all. Some folks, however, think that because humans went from Kitty Hawk to supersonic flight in less than half a century, and from there to the Sea of Tranquility in another quarter century, that such progres would continue on a linear path. It doesn't. And waht we are embarking on now is not doing anything like that AT ALL. We are going to become the Portugal of space, because we are too darn precious. Once upon a time, we built the thing. It was important enough to take the risks and send it into space. Even though it was known that the optics were defective. But they were able to compensate for that. Why not do it right the first time? It got there - it had problems. We considered it important enough to go back into space and repair it. That was a technological triumph by the way. It turned that ugly duckling into a a beautiful swan of optical imaging. They *knew* the lense wasn't right. Why it was launched is a classic case of "not my job". That lesson is a valuable one. We felt it was important enough to send servicing missions to. Now "we" don't any more. At one time, we were going to retrieve it, but now it is too "dangerous" to even do a maintenance run on it. Answer: Robots. How does man learn to do these things in space if we send machines to try and do it? Why should humans take unreasonable risks to do what can be done by machines? Boring.... It's related to whay I still play ice hockey at 50 years old, while most of the people I know think I'm nuts for doing it. Too many people are so afraid of dying that their lives are diminished by the effort to stay safe. They refuse to take risks. "It's too dangerous", "I have to buy a 6000 pound SUV because if I run into someone, *I'll win*" Aren't you afraid of breaking something?" It's too dangeraous to send people to space". It's too dangerous to do anything". "Yada Yada Yada." And how do we "teach" a machine to do something if we ourselves don't already know how it should be done? It's done all the time. Look at the newest fly-by-wire military aircraft like the joint services fighter. Its aerodynamically characteristics are such that a human pilot cannot fly it directly - takes too many corrections in too little time. But a computer can fly it directly. The human pilot tells the computer what he/she wants the plane to do and the computer figures out how to move the control surfaces to make that happen. More important, most car accidents are caused or exacerbated by human error. People not wearing seat belts, driving too fast, driving while impaired, etc. By comparison, the shuttle failures were caused by equipment troubles that the crew could do nothing about. Oh? Yep. Could the Columbia crew have gone EVA and fixed the busted shuttle tiles with what was onboard that last mission? They were engineering errors if we patently accept the investigation's reports. The errors were due to a failure of the people making the decisons. In the case of Challenger, yes. Thiokol said "go" after being coerced by NASA people to let Challenger fly. Coerced by men...not robots. Yep. Men from Reagan;s White House.... Boom. There had been issues raised over the foam on the external tank being able to come loose, but again cooler heads didn't get a chance to prevail. One "suggestion" that had been laid out years ago was that a "once-over" EVA be done to the Shuttle prior to re-entry in order to make sure no external damage was done. It was suggested that thios would place the crew at too much risk. There's also the fact that a lot of flaws could not be fixed. If the Columbia crew had lnown there was a problem with foam damage, could they have fixed it? The idea of a small "ROV" be built for the same purpose was made.. "Too much time and money". I'll bet a bunch of MIT kids could have designed the thing as a class project for less than a mil... Designed, maybe. Built, tested and certified for manned space flight? No. Compare that against the loss we suffered. Exactly. The humans made a wrong decision. Even though they were professionals, they messed up. But part of the problem is the basic design of the STS itself. The people-carrying orbiter sits alongside the fuel tank and SRBs, not atop the rocket as was done in Apollo and its predecessors. There's no "escape tower", as was done in those earlier systems. And the reentry heat shield is exposed to the elements from long before the flight to the very end, where in previous systems (particularly Apollo) it was protected by other modules until reentry. (Of course there's a downside - once assembled to the SM, the Apollo CM heatshield could not be inspected.) Actually, I don't think there is a way to solve those problems. The ones on earth? I disagree! Me too. I was once told that there are not really any "problems"...Just solutions awaiting implementation! Standard HR BS. The facts a Some problems have no solution. ("What is the exact value of pi expressed as the ratio of two integers?). Some problems have a theoretical solution but it cannot be found in practice (Traveling salesman problem) Some problems have realizable solutions. I'm old enough to remember when the phrase "reaching for the moon" meant someone was trying to do that which could not be done. Yet it was done. Yep. I believe we will one day find outr how to go light speed or better. It's just a matter of time, money and effort. No, it isn't. At this point we do not know if such travel is possible. It may be that there are as-yet-undiscovered principles of physics that would make such travel possible. It also may be that the very nature of the universe makes such travel by humans completely impossible. As it stands right now, our knowledge of physics says it cannot be done. Not a matter of better rockets or materials - it's the very nature of the universe that is the limit. Of course that knowledge could change! But at the present time, human travel at or beyond the speed of light is *not* a matter of money or effort; it's a matter of physical reality. Basic relativity physics, IOW. And as Hans says so well: "Reality does not care what you believe" There was a time when it was seriously argued that some men had to be enslaved, either literally or economically, because nobody would voluntarily do those jobs. That problem was solved. Yep..We just look the other way at the border once in a while! =) By saying that, even humorosly, you're saying you believe some people have to be enslaved economically. There was a time when it was seriously argued that women could not be allowed to vote because it would cause all kinds of problems. Turned out not to be a problem. That's a matter of opinion. Several political pundits have said that a lot of the "vote" that went to Bill Clinton did so because some segment of women voters thought he was more handsome than President Bush, and thought that his rhetoric on women's "issues" was "sweet". And who are these "pundits"? What is their data? Most of all, even if their claim is true, how is it any different from: Men who won't vote for a black person? Men who won't vote for a Roman Catholic? Or a Jew? Men who won't vote for a person from a certain place or region? Men who won't vote for someone because they "feel" he "cannot be trusted"? There was a time when it was considered impossible to teach most children to read and write because their work was 'needed' in the farms, mills and factories. Obviously it's still true. No, it isn't. A very large part of our imports from India and Pakistan are made by kids. That may be - but we don't have to import those things. There was a time when the USA was, for all intents and purposes, self-sufficient in all or at least most necessary industries. That could be true again if we wanted it to be. If we're not their, and it isn't humans there, maybe it's just time to sit down and watch the history channel. We might see a story about us there some day. What's all the rush? Space has been there for a lot longer than we have, and will be there long after we are gone. We can take our time and do it in a planned way, or rush headlong and wastefully, and accomplish little. Yes...it will still be there...but I for one am very disappointed that after four decades of manned space travel, we still haven't done a darned thing to REALLY start exploring "space"...! We haven't? I say we have! It seems some people are confused between their fantasy perception of space travel (ie: Star Trek et al, Babylon 5, etc) and the reality to the point that they have grossly overinflated ideas of how these systems ought work. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
|
#127
July 3rd 04, 12:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Subject: BPL - UPLC -Repeat the lie three times and claim it for truth
From: PAMNO (N2EY) Date: 7/2/2004 5:40 AM Central Standard Time Message-id: In article , (Steve Robeson K4CAP) writes: If you get even one pound more of thrust MORE than what you "need", then that's ALL you all you what? Oooooops! "need"! Sorry. Steve, K4YZ |
|
#128
July 3rd 04, 01:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Subject: BPL - UPLC -Repeat the lie three times and claim it for truth
From: PAMNO (N2EY) Date: 7/2/2004 5:40 AM Central Standard Time Message-id: In article , (Steve Robeson K4CAP) writes: Exactly. And "composites"...And computing power 1000 fold greater than what Apollo had... More like a million fold... So if they can do it for less money, and private money at that, why should we spend billions of tax dollars on it? "SpaceShip" 1 barely went suborbital. That's as high as X-15 ever went. But other than to use it to demonstrate the VERY basic theories of rudimentary manuevering in a near-vacuum, what did it do? What can a sub-orbital ship hope to offer that aircraft operating at lower altitudes don't alread offfer? The machines can't fix them selves enroute or on-site. So you build more reliable machines. Learning how to do that is an earthbound benefit of a space program! And if you're not "thre" to witness the failure and know what failed, how do you fix it? I am reminded of pilots returning and trying to relate thier perceptions of problems, and how to fix them. The communications gear was a no-brainer. AFCS (Automatic Flight COntrol System) in the CH53 was very dynamic, even for the antiquated systems in the older A models...Nothing substituted for getting on the bird and experiencing the abnormal behaviour first had. Many human ills cannot be self-repaired, either. Any your point is...?!?! Look at Cassini-Huygens - more than 7 years in space and performing perfectly. Uh huh...Against how many that never left the pad, or failed enroute? Those "robot" I am willing to bet that the Brit's "Beagle 2" mission burnt up on entering the Martian atmosphere. Why? What data supports that? "................................................. .." (sound of signal from probe after "re-entry") Maybe had it been a manned mission, the 1/10th of a degree attitude adjustment necessary to PREVENT it could have been made. Doubtful. The machines are faster and more accurate at such tasks than humans. Not always. Know why I carry my stethoscope at all times in the ER despite a plethora of "non-invasive diagnostic devices"...?!?! Because those "machines" are NOT always faster and more accurate than a human. Nor do those machines have the ability to "filter out" the audible ectopics that the human brain has. How many other massive spaceborne telescopes have we had on orbit? There are some smaller ones but none like Hubble. I reiterate the adjective "massive"...! ! ! ! ! I'm not confused at all. Some folks, however, think that because humans went from Kitty Hawk to supersonic flight in less than half a century, and from there to the Sea of Tranquility in another quarter century, that such progres would continue on a linear path. It doesn't. Not linear, but certainly with a certain degree of advancement. I for one don't see it happening. The Cassini mission is great, but what new technology or methodolgy are we using? Once upon a time, we built the thing. It was important enough to take the risks and send it into space. Even though it was known that the optics were defective. But they were able to compensate for that. Why not do it right the first time? How does anyone know what's "right" the first time until somenthing HAS been tried, and either found to work "as advertised", or return to the drawing board? How does man learn to do these things in space if we send machines to try and do it? Why should humans take unreasonable risks to do what can be done by machines? What's "unreasonable"...?!?! I MIGHT contract hepatitis or HIV in my profession, despite "religious" use of PPE and "Universal Precautions"... So...Considering that, do Nurses and Physicians just thrown up their arms and say "unreasonable risk" and quit? I'd hope not. And I'd hope we'd move manned space flight forward from LEO. And how do we "teach" a machine to do something if we ourselves don't already know how it should be done? It's done all the time. Look at the newest fly-by-wire military aircraft like the joint services fighter. Its aerodynamically characteristics are such that a human pilot cannot fly it directly - takes too many corrections in too little time. But a computer can fly it directly. Uh huh. And how does the computer "know" what's an "unusual attitude" and correct it? How does the computer know the difference between that same "unusual attitude" as a result of loss-of-control (needs to be corrected) or a desired input (the pilot deems it necessary to be in that "unusual attitude")...?!?! The human pilot tells the computer what he/she wants the plane to do and the computer figures out how to move the control surfaces to make that happen. Uh huh. And what if the computer refuses to let the pilot do it? And how does that computer "know" what to do? My point in the last couple of paragraphs is that persons who KNOW how to fly teach (program, in this case) the computer what it meeds ot know. No machine to date, and to the best of my knowledge, has taken it upon itself to "learn" somehting it wasn't programmed with. (Shades of "COLOSSUS: The Forbin Project") More important, most car accidents are caused or exacerbated by human error. People not wearing seat belts, driving too fast, driving while impaired, etc. By comparison, the shuttle failures were caused by equipment troubles that the crew could do nothing about. Oh? Yep. Could the Columbia crew have gone EVA and fixed the busted shuttle tiles with what was onboard that last mission? No, they couldn't. But we could have put emergency stores on an unmanned flight to send to them, or they may have been able to "lifeboat" at ISS. Those scenarios have been the subject of public discussion before. "Human Risk" and cost are the only two reasons they've not done it in the past. It cost us dearly with Columbia. Imagine if we had just put one MMP on board each shuttle for one 30-60 minute pre-reentry EVA for Columbia (obviously it wasn't an issue with They were engineering errors if we patently accept the investigation's reports. The errors were due to a failure of the people making the decisons. In the case of Challenger, yes. Thiokol said "go" after being coerced by NASA people to let Challenger fly. Coerced by men...not robots. Yep. Men from Reagan;s White House.... Nope...Men from NASA. It was suggested that thios would place the crew at too much risk. There's also the fact that a lot of flaws could not be fixed. If the Columbia crew had lnown there was a problem with foam damage, could they have fixed it? Probably not. But in the long run they more than likely might have survived the mission. Again, we could have put extra stores on an unmanned loft or got them to ISS until another shuttle could get to them... The idea of a small "ROV" be built for the same purpose was made.. "Too much time and money". I'll bet a bunch of MIT kids could have designed the thing as a class project for less than a mil... Designed, maybe. Built, tested and certified for manned space flight? No. Why? They couldn't put a package together that NASA could adopt and incorporate? From where are current NASA "rocket scientists" gleaned anyway? Compare that against the loss we suffered. Exactly. The humans made a wrong decision. Even though they were professionals, they messed up. Oooops. And any one of them or all of them could have stepped off a curb into on-coming traffic. I was once told that there are not really any "problems"...Just solutions awaiting implementation! Standard HR BS. Jiiiiiiimmmmmmmmmm........ The facts a Some problems have no solution. ("What is the exact value of pi expressed as the ratio of two integers?). And in what PRACTICAL applications of formulas using "pi" have we NOT been able to incorporate it to effective use? Some problems have a theoretical solution but it cannot be found in practice (Traveling salesman problem) Where to find a clean bed, cheap meal and female company? NO PROBLEM! Some problems have realizable solutions. Time and effort. That's all it takes. Many problems are great and no EASY solution is at hand. (ie: curing the cold, cancer, HIV, getting Lennie and Brain to act like adults...etc etc etc) I believe we'll find cures. I believe man will travel at "warp speeds". Not today...Not even tomorrow...but one day... I'm old enough to remember when the phrase "reaching for the moon" meant someone was trying to do that which could not be done. Yet it was done. Yep. I believe we will one day find outr how to go light speed or better. It's just a matter of time, money and effort. No, it isn't. At this point we do not know if such travel is possible...(SNIP TO...) As it stands right now, our knowledge of physics says it cannot be done. Fifty years ago our knowledge of physics said that the sound barrier was a tuffy... Ten years before that our knowledge of physics suggested the detonation of a nuclear device would cause the whole world to explode at once. Even after the Wright Brothers submitted evidence that they had "flown", reputable scientists of the age were saying manned flight, and certainly PRACTICAL manned flight would never happen. Not a matter of better rockets or materials - it's the very nature of the universe that is the limit. Of course that knowledge could change! But at the present time, human travel at or beyond the speed of light is *not* a matter of money or effort; it's a matter of physical reality. Basic relativity physics, IOW. And as Hans says so well: "Reality does not care what you believe" So far, I'd say that the human imagination, when properly interfaced with human ingenuity and dedication, has done a pretty good job of making things "happen". I'd sure like to google-up these comments 50 years from now and see just how far we progressed, and then either see if they exceeded expectation, or if not, why not. There was a time when it was seriously argued that some men had to be enslaved, either literally or economically, because nobody would voluntarily do those jobs. That problem was solved. Yep..We just look the other way at the border once in a while! =) By saying that, even humorosly, you're saying you believe some people have to be enslaved economically. They don't HAVE to, Jim. Most of those people coming across the border certainly see it as a step up... Would you KNOWINGLY put your self at risk to do what THEY do to get here if you thought you were going to be enslaved? Those people are desperate and determined to make a better life for themselves and thier families. If they peceived themselves as being "enslaved", they'd not voluntarily submit them selves to it by the hundreds-of-thousands every year. There was a time when it was seriously argued that women could not be allowed to vote because it would cause all kinds of problems. Turned out not to be a problem. That's a matter of opinion. Several political pundits have said that a lot of the "vote" that went to Bill Clinton did so because some segment of women voters thought he was more handsome than President Bush, and thought that his rhetoric on women's "issues" was "sweet". And who are these "pundits"? Take your pick. Wanna start at the top with ABC's anchors and work your way down to UPN? It was the regular topic of the news "magazines" back in 92, 96 and 2000. What is their data? Who knows? Who cares? There were women willing to be on-camera and acknowledge that they voted, in part, based upon looks and perception of Clinton as "pro-woman". Too bad they didn't know "pro-woman" just meant he wasn't gay. Most of all, even if their claim is true, how is it any different from: Men who won't vote for a black person? Men who won't vote for a Roman Catholic? Or a Jew? Men who won't vote for a person from a certain place or region? Men who won't vote for someone because they "feel" he "cannot be trusted"? None at all. Too bad that there isn't a test to determine voter competency, huh...?!?! There was a time when it was considered impossible to teach most children to read and write because their work was 'needed' in the farms, mills and factories. Obviously it's still true. No, it isn't. Sure it is. Not as much in the United States, anymore, but certainly in a great many OTHER nations of the world. A very large part of our imports from India and Pakistan are made by kids. That may be - but we don't have to import those things. You're right...we don't "have" to... But we do... Yes...it will still be there...but I for one am very disappointed that after four decades of manned space travel, we still haven't done a darned thing to REALLY start exploring "space"...! We haven't? I say we have! To the degree we we COULD be exploring it? I say no. We COULD have been walking on Mars this past summer during the Earth/Mars approach. It would have been the ideal time, we had more than enough time to plan for it, and we had the inertia to get there. 73 Steve, K4YZ |
|
#129
July 3rd 04, 02:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Subject: BPL - UPLC -Repeat the lie three times and claim it for truth
From: Mike Coslo Date: 7/2/2004 8:14 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: Steve Robeson K4CAP wrote: Subject: BPL - UPLC -Repeat the lie three times and claim it for truth From: PAMNO (N2EY) Date: 7/1/2004 6:32 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: In article , Mike Coslo writes: N2EY wrote: Ahh, but can you say the same for Tang flavored Teflon? There was anembarrassing moment when a '60s era astronaut swore he'd never drink the stuff ever again because of its GI tract effects on him. Trouble was he forgot he was on VOX... I couldn't blame him...I thought (think) the stuff sucks. Couldn't build more Saturns, as the tooling is gone, as well as the supply path. So we'd have to rebuild the tooling and supply systems in order to build the rockets. Which could take longer than it did the first time. I'd certainly hope that engineering skills and contruction methodology hadn't REGRESSED in the last four decades! =) Who's running this thing, anyway? Ex-Army radio clerks ? The problem isn't regression, the problem is that there are parts on the engine that simply aren't made any more. One small example is that when I was on tour down at the cape, we could look inside one of the monsters. I don't even know if lacing cable is made any more. That's just one thing, There are a lot of other parts that just aren't made any more. So while we could in principle make the things again, and the engineering drawings exist, it just ain't that simple. More the pity. The Saturn's were beautiful, muscular brutes, all the more impressive that they were made around 40 years ago. We haven't matched them yet. Quick Q. THe fuel and oxidizer combo on the Saturns was a bit different from the typical. What was it? Hmmmmm....I am not sure what you're getting at, Mike....The F1-s on the 1st stage burned kero and LOX. The subsequent stages were liquid hydrogen and LOX, as I recall.... There were American "missionaries" trying to impose thier religion and moral values on people supposedly too poor to eat or even buy a Bible...(you see thier kids on "Feed The Children" commercials... BUT...They always seemed to have money to buy AK47's and ammunition. Go figure... Praise the ammunition and pass the Lord? 8^) Exactly. Lot's of hungry little brown people toting Mr. Kalishnakov's pride and joy. The Russians found out the hard way. The Chinese learned, but they also learned how to keep people repressed and doing what they want them to do. Allowing people to accumulate wealth while suppressing their political freedoms is an interesting trick. Sure is...I guess if they are fat, dumb and up-to-thier necks in cheap, pirated US goods, theya re content to leave well enough alone ! ! ! BTW, China has just surpassed the US as an investment target. While we still have people that rail on about an Ex president. Point is, get the priorities straight, folks. You're asking a nation full of people who not only elected, but RE-elected a known liar and womanizer to "..get the priorities straight..", Mike..?!?! You're an even bigger optomist than I, my Friend! =) And how do we "teach" a machine to do something if we ourselves don't already know how it should be done? Robots my rosy red! I Wanna go there! ta-DAAAAAAAAH! HUMAN SPIRIT OF EXPLORATION! ! ! ! ! ! I was once told that there are not really any "problems"...Just solutions awaiting implementation! So exactly how do we cure hunger, disease, poverty, and the fact that there is a significant number of people that don't think any of the above are a problem? It's not that it's NOT a problem for me, Mike...but rather that it's not bad enough for those people to take the tools given them and dig their way out. The "answer", in too many of these places is to shoot whoever they perceive as being responsible for them being that way. Then the guy who got shot seeks revenge...Then the other guys wants to get back at him for having dared to retaliate for what was "clearly" a valid attack in the first place.... Etc Etc Etc............... I'm in a rush, and that is enough for me. That's one of the few "benefits" of working the late shift...My "time off" is during hours that I usually don't get disturbed! 73 Steve, K4YZ |
|
#130
July 3rd 04, 02:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Subject: BPL - UPLC -Repeat the lie three times and claim it for truth
From: (William) Date: 7/2/2004 9:40 AM Central Standard Time Message-id: (Len Over 21) wrote in message ... This not amateur radio subject. No problem. Only other hum raddio talk is all about field day. Field day nice outing in park, fun. Not emergency training if scheduled years in advance. Real emergencies not scheduled. Real emergencies are not scheduled. Emergency training is. To date, you are not a part of it at any level, scheduled or otherwise. The idiot keeps trying to engage me. Apparently he doesn't know what persona non grata is. Am I an "idiot" for trying to "engage" you, or are you an idiot for trying to LOOK like YOU are ignoring me all-the-while addressing my comments in the third person? There were 24 messages in the filter today. Only three directly addressed real radio issues. The rest were back-and-forth banter between you and Lennie IRT Yours Truly. None of the messages addressing radio issues were authored by you, Brain. There IS an idiot here, Brian, but it's NOT me. Try again. Steve, K4YZ |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Linear Mode
