New Mars Forums

Official discussion forum of The Mars Society and MarsNews.com

You are not logged in.

Announcement

Announcement: This forum is accepting new registrations by emailing newmarsmember * gmail.com become a registered member. Read the Recruiting expertise for NewMars Forum topic in Meta New Mars for other information for this process.

#1 Re: Not So Free Chat » Your nation's flag » 2004-02-01 19:19:06

The French are an inherently prideful people; as Cindy noted, they will go out of their way to humiliate Americans in public situations; a great number are all too terribly petty in their anti-American distaste.

WEll I think you exagerate a little bit but it's true. There is an antiamericanism in France. It's more directed to american behavior or politic than to american people though.
About the french behavior with tourists, that was a recognized problem and during the  Clinton's administration, the french authorities asked the french hostelling profession to be nice with tourists ! For example, do not give them your worst wine just to laugh at them when they congratulate you for its delicious taste, we know it's funny but...
Recently, just after the Iraq war, free hostels nights were offered to american tourist specifically. This show the french are aware of their bad reputation.
Paris is also, is still, a sexual-fun destination, so french know that some tourists are not necessarily like the typical prude american tourist.  If you go in a bar in paris where some 'american customers' are used to go, but you do not belong to that kind of tourism, the french guys there are no way to know if you are a gentle nice gentleman looking for the next cathedral to visit, or if you are his 'usual american customer' looking for more fun.


Qui peut dire...

?tes-vous fran?ais, monsieur?

#2 Re: Not So Free Chat » Your nation's flag » 2004-02-01 10:22:10

And two of the most infamous and terrible dictators, Napoleon and Hitler, came respectively from the twain European giants.

Napoleon = Hitler ? hmmm, it's like comparing Bush with saddam Hussein, yes, Napoleon was an invader, but he didn't organize the destruction of a particular ethnic group. He was just a warmonger, not a genocidal maniac.

Aye, of course the two are very different, but they are still the two most infamous dictators of modern Europe.
Both of them were pretty horrible, in two rather divergent ways:  Hitler had an ideology which drove him and others to do really dreadful things to others, out of hatred and malice.  Napoleon was nihilistic, and he and his followers through away life in such a careless and thoughtless manner, all for the most selfish of the Emperor's interests.  It's antipathy versus apathy; both are extremely bad.

He knew he had a powerful army and he decided to use it, what's new ?
Sometimes with the only reason that these invaded nations were a threat for the new french empire or used as a base by the english attackers.

There was certainly the need to secure its borders, but I don't see the need for conquering nearly all of continental Europe on a whim.  That's like the US invading Canada and annexing it just to make sure more terrorists don't enter our country, killing hundreds of thousands, if not millions of Canadians and Americans in the process.  It just doesn't fly.

Remember that the young french republic, which had some genocidal blood on her hands, had been attacked before by a COALITION of foreign kingdoms. Napoleon's first war were just part of the defense of the republic, he was just a general of the republican army at that time.

After several victories and growth of his ego, he probably thought that long term success could be acquired by invasion of other countries. Mistake for him and his followers. Who doesn't make mistake.

Well, Hitler sure did, because that was exactly his same strategy.  And both also failed when they entered Russia; that country is a death trap for tyrants.

I think I am tired to try to defend or correct false statements made about the french in general. It's part of an ambient general propaganda in the US. Better let it go, I can't stop it.

Don't say that as if anti-French sentiment is something new in the United States (a sentiment in which I do not share, but understand).  The French are an inherently prideful people; as Cindy noted, they will go out of their way to humiliate Americans in public situations; a great number are all too terribly petty in their anti-American distaste.
But who can blame them; France for two hundred years was the center of the cultural world.  It remained so after World War I; however, after half of it surrendered to Nazi Germany, and the other half became its puppet, a great deal of international fondness for the Gallic land and its society diminished.  Indeed, the major political and cultural countries of the world were all horribly destroyed or plundered or war-torn -- except America.  That's the number one reason the United States became so powerful; we were never invaded.  We have not tasted citizen per citizen the blood and dirt that covered all of Europe, nor felt the fire which we ourselves lit in Japan.  And so the United States contributed incredible sums of money to replenishing the infrastructure of these nations, and all of it had an American flavor; within a decade, America was the undisputed cultural center of the planet, with diminished Britain and France far from their former imperial states.

So who can blame the French for hating us so much?  They had power over the whole world; and they lost it all.  In truth, it is only because of themselves that they lost it so profoundly; but like some sort of fashionable bully, all the trends now come from New York instead of Paris, and we rub their French faces in it every time we teach World War II's history, each time the dwindling veterans pilgrimage to Normandy to pay homage to their fallen comrades, each time we salute our flag and the republic for which it stands.

After all, french gave false passports to Iraqis officials to escape, they sold missile to the Iraqi army no later than 2 years ago, this has been found by valliant polish soldiers. The french gave the Iraqis replacement pieces for their weapons of mass destructions, which are hidden, somewhere, it's just that Iraq is big, the size of California. We all know that.

Aye, very true, and very terrifying.  It makes me want to cry... because I do love the people so much, but that the government would be so duplicitous to the world is just heartbreaking.

Have you seen that picture of Chirac handshaking Saddam with a big smile ?

Uch, yes... truly frightening:

chiracsaddam.Par.0001.ImageFile.jpg

(For what it's worth, I realize you're being rhetorically sarcastic in the above; but conveniently, your sarcasm happens to be precisely true.)

Edited by Moderator during Post Repair 2022/03/01

#3 Re: Not So Free Chat » Your nation's flag » 2004-02-01 01:00:48

Indeed, as others have noted, Europe is a very different place.  In America, our closest neighbors and we have hardly been warlike with one another.  Other than a very brief and decisive war with Mexico in the middle of the 19th century, we haven't been at war with the few countries that surround us.
In Europe, however, some of these countries have been at one another's throats as recently as fifteen years ago.  More wars -- influential and pointlessly trivial alike -- have occurred between France and Germany, in whatever form these nations took, than anywhere else in the Western World.  The blood of the dead soaks the ground for over a millenium and a half.  And two of the most infamous and terrible dictators, Napoleon and Hitler, came respectively from the twain European giants.

It is an indescribable miracle that these two countries in the modern day get along politically, even to form an alliance against the rest of Europe.  And the price is national pride, at least in Germany's case.  The teutonic nation is forever branded with a scarlet A, for Adolf.  The French tend to harp on the Germans any chance they get, and ostrocize anything remotely resembling a sense of national pride.

*About 4 years ago I made the acquaintance of a woman named Katja, from Germany (she is married to an American).  She went home to visit, and mentioned her father rising one morning, going outdoors, enjoying the beautiful day -- and beginning to sing old patriotic (? or semi-patriotic) German songs.  Katja said her mother jumped up, ran outdoors and shut him up.  I was like, "Huh?  What was wrong with that?"  (maybe her dad was a rotten singer, haha).  Katja said it's guilt stemming from World Wars I & II, and singing songs like that is severely frowned upon.  That was stunning to me (I take it they were NOT Nazi or Nazi-era songs, just old songs).

That's a perfect example, and totally true; you will get arrested if you sing the German national anthem (which is about "Einigkeit und Recht und Freiheit", Unity and Justice and Freedom).  Germany is like the uncool kid who just wants to fit in, and will do anything to change his outward appearance, even sacrifice his own dignity to be a part of the crowd.

And they deeply, deeply hate the French for this.  They mask it on the fa?ade of it, but talking with almost any German for a few hours, it becomes painfully clear how wounded the Germans all feel.  But despite how tremendous their anger, all their willpower is gone.  They'll never start another war, and have entirely resigned themselves to self-loathing for the rest of their days.

But to say that all European nations would find our patriotism strange is quite untrue.  Look at France.  They have military parades on Christmas.  They have a "National Day" celebrating 'their victory over the Germans in World War I', rather ironically.
These are not a people with a very good sense of historical memory.  Immutable facts such as the intrinsic and certainly heroic rescue of their self-fragmented nation by thousands of American lives laid down at their shores and in their vinyards seems to escape their recollection as they deface the graves of those very men just because they disagree with the politics of those men's decendents.  Anything that hints of French inferiority to anything is anathema, or untrue.  (These are vast generalizations, but one can find them easily in the pages of Le Figaro or Le Monde, and quite openly expressed.)
Contrast this supremely nationalistic attitude (more severe than the American one by far) with that of Germany's, which remembers everything wrong it ever did and feels as if it constantly has to apologize for if every moment of every day, while secretly harboring profoundest angst and loathing.

I'm very glad I live here.  I think, if any Western country may, the United States has justification in its nationalism.  Systematically saving both hemispheres of the world (which I remark candidly and without exaggeration) is quite a feat.  Moreover, America hasn't ever tried to conquer the world.  I think Finnland and Canada are the only other Western countries that can say the same.  That's a pretty good record.
No wonder we salute the flag; the flag which represented the very first true sense of Freedom in the entire world's history to exist on a national level, which thusly spread to all the globe's corners like a wondrous disease; the flag which was raised in the name of Liberty for any man who lived, no matter what color his skin was; the flag that led the liberation of a continent and saved an entire race of people from extermination; the flag that briefly stood above the fallen flag of the murderous Baathist regime of Iraq, before surrendering itself to the true people's Iraqi flag.
These sanguine, argent stripes and silver, cerulean stars have been a lot of places in the world: Japan, Malaysia, Australia, Italy, China, Vietnam, France, Korea, Britain, Spain, Germany, the Philipines, Austria, and even on the Moon.  And, indeed, they have in all these places represented "peace, for all Mankind."

That is what I salute.  And so does any other American, wittingly or not.  It is an emblem of the right to live, happily and in liberty.  Any notion, European or otherwise, that an American hailing such liberal, abstract idealism as Freedom and Happiness is in any way indicative of "totalitarianism" or "imperialism" is so oxymoronic, it isn't even laughable.  For all the terror, for all the destruction, for all the horrible, horrible death that Europeans have in their history caused the world over, that Europeans would insult the United States because we pride ourselves in not ever being a part of those truly imperial massacres, just comes off as petty jealousy.

But despite what general attidues exist in their psyches, I love them all.  I really, really do; Europe is so wondrous and beautiful, and I love how they delightfully get along now, and that they (though some of them rarely) act in the name of peace and liberty, just as their radical philosophers once taught us.  Horray for Europeans! say I.  I wouldn't be learning French, Italian, German, Finnish, Spanish, Gaelic, Latin, and Greek if I didn't adore them just a li'l.  I accept their misguided blunders as quaint, just as I'm sure they accept my flag-saluting as very endearing.  And if not endearing, then they have the right to think whatever they want to think.  But that doesn't mean I don't have the right to laugh at them right back.

#4 Re: Human missions » Mars Society Responds to Bush Initiative » 2004-01-31 22:44:11

*I've just re-read the article.  Here are some thoughts and questions which came into my mind:

"Thus the choice on whether or not to really start..."

I ASK MYSELF:  A modifier already?  "...really start..."  Is that supposed to comfort me?

"...a Moon or Mars human exploration program, and what its pace or objectives should be, is effectively being placed in the hands of the 2009 administration."

I ASK MYSELF:  Does this mean President Bush wants to procrastinate?  Seeking to avoid personal responsibility for actually -- or "really" -- initiating his initiative?  If so, isn't that laughable?

"The merit of this decision is debatable."

I ASK MYSELF:  Well, since there's a big sell-out going on, who am I to question or desist?

I ASK MYSELF:  By the way, is it soon going to be the MoonMars Society?

I ASK MYSELF:  What about all that talk (I recall it quite well, I joined heartily in the speculation) of going back to the moon being likely only due to China's plans (militaristic in scope)?

I ASK MYSELF:  What about the stated fact that the moon has little to no water?  I thought others here also regarded that as one of THE major drawbacks (to the point of "so what's the point again?")? 

I ASK MYSELF:  Are the upcoming planned technological developments *dependent* upon the moon somehow...or could we manage their development just fine in LEO at less expense?

I ASK MYSELF:  What about the development of space elevators on Earth...are they a back-burner issue now (I don't recall seeing them mentioned in the article, and just rescanned it)?  If so, for how long? 

---
::sigh::  I can see the handwriting on the wall. 

Shaun writes:  "...as others have pointed out, better a vague humans-to-Mars timetable than none at all. Rather than say we want Mars Direct and only Mars Direct and we want it now, our best bet is to go along with what's on the table and do what we can, within that framework, to get the result we want."

That is logical and has merit...but this is a catch-22 situation, in my opinion.  If we push too hard, we could hurt ourselves.  If we back down too much, we may be stuck at the moon for many decades. 
---

As for the statement at the Mars Society article:

Bush Speech Opens Door
The Future is Up to Us

I ASK MYSELF:  Is the future up "to us"?  Or is it up to bureaucrats?  Do we further our goals (or *purported* goals, excuse me) by compromising with politicians?  If so, to what degree?

Good Christ, Cindy.  I admire you in a lot of ways -- in countless ways -- but you are really, really paranoid about some things.

In particular Bush.  He is without a doubt the most polarizing politician living, who elicits such divergent quantities of both loathing and adoration; and I grant certainly that you can either love him or hate him, and rarely is there an inbetween.  But heavens, put it to rest; he is not Satan.  He is not out to conspiritize against the whole world and bend it to some personal will.  To harp on it so endlessly is without reason.

It's something the Right would do, not the rational liberal.


Zubrin is having a debate on thursday..  Should be a good one..  too bad it doesn't seem to be televised..

Wow, that's amazing, Jabe.  What a coincidence! for I myself on this same Thursday am going to do a Zubrin-esque presentation on Mars and our future there, to a bunch of kindly senior citizens.


Hopefully they'll post a transcript...

I e-mailed an ardent plea for them to post the transcript.  Maybe they'll have it on file afterwards and let us know.
We'll see.

#5 Re: Human missions » Bush's vision : at least a start? - is it a step in the right direction? » 2004-01-15 22:29:05

Or some penny pinching Democrat will cancel it altogether for more handouts?

What ever happened to the JFKs in the Democrats; almost all of the 9 dwarfs running now think it is a bad idea....

*Chuckles quietly.* Very good point.

#6 Re: Space Policy » Bush Sets Wrong Goal? » 2004-01-15 01:01:20

No no no, there are many subtle clues that lead me to believe that Zubrin, whether directly or indirectly, has gotten through to Bush. 

The Crew Exploration Vehicle is the first one, a Mars Direct type of spacecraft that lands both on the Moon and Mars, as well as having the ability to do light or heavy ferry work.  That's right out of the pages of The Case for Mars.

In Zubrin's [http://www.marssociety.org/news/2003/1029.asp]speech to the Senate last Haloween, he stressed "intellectual capital", how the Apollo program inspired so many young people in the cities to become scientists, doctors, computer programmers, inventors who brought and continue to bring such great revenues into our country and the world at large.  Bush said almost exactly the same thing, if you listened to his speech.

Finishing the ISS is purely political.  I also think Bush talked about the weightlessness and zero-g problems (which aren't really problems in Mars Direct) just to placate the ISS people in NASA and not make them feel totally useless, for at least a couple years.  But in the end, I'm sure we'll just slap a few bumber stickers on 'er and get the hell outta there.

So, this makes be think that either McCain or other Senators relayed Zubrin's ideas, perhaps even the transcript of his testimony, to the White House.  Doublecheck [http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases … 114-3.html]the transcript, and compare his speech with Zubrin's (linked above).

Also, one of the most promising things in Bush's speech is a "committee" of experts in the field,  "public and private".  This could easily mean Zubrin; and if he gets his foot in the door, our portal to Mars will finally be open.

Have faith, everyone.  It's a lot more fun than pouting.

#7 Re: Human missions » Send Astronauts One Way - A Planned Suicide Mission » 2004-01-15 00:47:45

*Since the topic has swerved a bit, I'm going to chime in:  Rob and realmacaw believe in life after death...and likely other folks here as well. 

Fine, to each their own. 

I used to believe it, because of childhood religious conditioning.  In my 20s I favored the concept of reincarnation, then later realized that was simply a (subconscious, but well intended) "changing of hands."

I've not seen ghosts, although I've had a few experiences in life which might be considered "paranormal."  When I was a child, I could tell people what was in wrapped packages (gifts, etc.) when they were placed into my hands.  What was that?  I have no idea.

IMO "believe" is a strong word; it implies total acceptance.  So I can't say I believe in life after death.  It's possible...but I've not yet found a basis for such a belief (personally speaking).

I'm living my life as though this is the one and only -- as full and rich and filled with wonderment and discovery as possible.  Because I know for sure I have *this* life, and I've seen no guarantees of any extensions.

Back to our regular programming...

--Cindy

Well said, Cindy.

#8 Re: Human missions » Russia can send Man to Mars by 2014:official - at one-tenth the NASA budget » 2004-01-14 15:05:54

Good god, they'd have to strap me into that tin can against my will.  I get the feeling a lot of poor Cosmonauts are going to die.

On the other hand, if NASA would COOPERATE with them instead of competing, it seems we'd get to Mars a lot faster and a lot less expensively.

Was that the case for the ISS?

The reason Russia's long strides are so excellent is because it, along with the Chinese' goals, will bring about a new space race, and a challange I'm betting Bush won't be able to refuse.  The President is being quiet about it, but all his allusions indicate a fully functional vehicle capable of going to Mars by 2008, with lots of years for testing (hence the 2015 date).  But once we have the hardware, we might be able to get there in two years time.

Everyone hope.

#9 Re: Human missions » Bush Speech - money shuffle at NASA? » 2004-01-14 14:52:02

Second, the United States will begin developing a new manned exploration vehicle to explore beyond our orbit to other worlds -- the first of its kind since the Apollo Command Module.  The new spacecraft, the Crew Exploration Vehicle, will be developed and tested by 2008 and will conduct its first manned mission no later than 2014.  The Crew Exploration Vehicle will also be capable of transporting astronauts and scientists to the International Space Station after the Shuttle is retired.

At first I was greatly disappointed, but maybe Zubrin got through to him after all.  That sounds like Mars Direct.

Still, I hope Congress insists on Zubrin communicating directly with Bush.  That's all that needs to happen.

#10 Re: Human missions » How to kill Mars Direct - DEAD! DEAD! DEAD! » 2004-01-13 16:49:16

Cancel plant and cell growth research?

Isn't that how we are supposed to feed astronauts far away from Earth? And convert CO2 into breathable oxygen?

Not in the near future.  Any Mars Direct plan, for instance, simply uses standard, reliable meathods of regeneration and recycling.

What does 'non-human biology' comprise of?

Usually of putting a bunch of little mice into a little satelite to study their little responses to zero-g (or "little-g", as goes the political correctness of the day), and then ultimately cutting off their little heads with little guillotines to study the effects of that in zero-g too.

Dr. Zubrin told us about that one at the dinner we had prior to his presentation a year ago.

#11 Re: Human missions » Send Astronauts One Way - A Planned Suicide Mission » 2004-01-13 01:23:34

Perhaps Norwegian Oil Well workers are best.  They seem very robust.  They are used of extreme cold and darkness.  Their people used to be pirates!

Yarr!!

They eat a lot of fish and a very good diet, which should be good for their heart and health.  The only problem is most Norwegians (and other Scandinavian people) have bad eyesight.

Russians are used of hard hellish cold conditions but they don't live long (due to alcohlism, poverty, lack of good health care, etc.).  But they too would have the right attitude.

Well, as long as we're promoting racial stereotypes, let me advocate my own Italian blood. *Cracks his nuckles cerimoniously.*

Firstly, nearly every famous explorer, from Columbus to Vespucci, Verranzzano to Cabot, was extremely Italian.  Therefore it is only fitting that the new explorers be imported from the motherland and trained for Martian expeditions this instant.

Secondly, Italians are incredibly passionate, dedicated as the ceaseless lovers they are in every venture they undertake.  They are, however, also quite fickle and unfaithful, and are more likely to steer the ship to Luna or Venus or some other celestial beauty to hear her siren call.

And unfortunately, Italians get quite lonely after being away from their beauteous homeland after too long, for not even the striking Martian scape is adequate to charm them from their Italia bellissima.  We're also notorious at making horribly bad jokes.

And as for me Irish side; your standard Hibernian is rather used to discomfort and cramptness and livin' on naught but pototatos as long as he can choke 'em down.  As tragedy on the Martian surface is a must, no other but a humble Irishman could do better to mourn the crew once [http://www.leoslyrics.com/listlyrics.ph … m6gJ9nQ%3D]everybody's died.  And as far as cold and dark goes, nowhere's more inhospitable than emerald ?ire.

And now that we've all (at least I've) made fools of ourselves for actually suggesting that Armageddon had the right idea for enlisting incompitent oil riggers at the very last second to save the world, we may possibly realize that racial chauvinism and overblown stereotypes are a terrible, terrible thing.

Now then, lads, let's all go and drink and drink and drink and drink and then we'll drink some more! we'll dance, and sing, and fight until the early morning light! [http://www.leoslyrics.com/listlyrics.ph … m6gJ9nQ%3D]then we'll throw up, pass out, wake up, and then go drinkin' once again!

#12 Re: Human missions » Send Astronauts One Way - A Planned Suicide Mission » 2004-01-13 00:47:43

As grizzly as it may sound, a human life has a price.  And that price is far, far less than the cost to bring humans back from Mars.

I don't mean to seem unkind, Brian, and I along with the rest of us welcome you cordially to these forums, but that is the most inhuman, cynically monstrous thing I've ever heard.  Human life is most definitely priceless, and the wonders and virtues of remarkable Mankind are as limitless as my monotonous droning could be on the subject, but that is beside the point.  The point is that, to go to a New World, coming back is necessary.

This is simply about dollars.I'd prefer we bring the Astronauts back.  But at what cost?  If it delays the mission 20 years or 50 years is that delay worth it for 6 lives?  Also, all the billions of dolars spent bringing astronauts back we will have to pay.

Let's see... three billion per Mars mission, divided by three hundred million American citizens equals ... ten dollars.  God help us that we can't all pitch in a few bucks to save the lives of the very first Martian pioneers.

Sacrifices have been made all through history.  Is sending men to Mars worth 6 lives?

It is worth risking six human lives, but not cold-bloodedly predetermining their deaths, for heaven's sakes.  What would be the point of going there if we can't come back? everyone would ask.  Suicide is already horribly inhuman in war, with Kamikazes and unforgivably, unspeakably treacherous terrorist attacks; you seriously think this is going to inspire a generation to go to Mars?

What a stain it for ever would be on our interplanetary record: human beings the suicidalists.  Alien races would call us the Lemmings of the Galaxy.

#13 Re: Human missions » How to kill Mars Direct - DEAD! DEAD! DEAD! » 2004-01-11 13:36:33

Indeed, Rxke.  We're so close to getting to Mars; and a lot of the brief phrases that Zubrin used reminded me very much of the rumors of Bush's announcement.  It may be that the two presidents already have met one another.  If so, then Bush has a plan like Mars Direct, and we will be there in less than a decade.  If not, Bush and Zubrin need to meet, at once, so that our future may be given its salutary life's breath.

I recommend everyone who reads this send a quick e-mail to the President (president@whitehouse.gov) commending his proposals and urging him to meet with Dr. Robert Zubrin, sine mora! (without delay)

#14 Re: Human missions » How to kill Mars Direct - DEAD! DEAD! DEAD! » 2004-01-11 12:06:44

Did you guys know about this?

http://www.marssociety.org/news/2003/1029.asp

This is incredible.  I've e-mailed both McCain and Bush, telling them to get Zubrin to the President.  That's all it'll take.

#15 Re: Human missions » How to kill Mars Direct - DEAD! DEAD! DEAD! » 2004-01-11 00:20:17

I'll believe it when I see it.  And I'm quite certain Pres. Bush HAS heard of Mars Direct or similar plan.

You'd be surprised how horridly few people have any idea what Mars Direct is or who Robert Zubrin and the Mars Society are.  I've personally called multiple senators and congressmen affiliated with the space program and who are advocates of exploration of other worlds, and they didn't have any idea about Mars Direct or anything but the 90-Day-Report until I did my best to inform them.
Do you know why?  Because they're connected with NASA, the corrupt, factionalized institution it's become, the agency which abhors Zubrin and his ideas.  And you think the Commander in Chief would be better informed than the dedicated officials I contacted?  I only pray that a little good comes from the effort I exerted.

Will the game playing and greed never end?

Direct that to the previous adminstration, who systematically destroyed the space program into the burning wreck that Columbia became, the shattered fragments of Polar Lander strewn across the Martian surface, the flakes of Deep Space 2 longsince vaporized in the atmosphere of the Red Planet.  The Clinton Adminstration, and most especially Al Gore, are to blame for our inexcusable stagnation with the godawful International Space Station.  I refer you to Entering Space for more details.
But that's not to say that debilitation of space-based efforts is partisan, oh not at all, for 'twas Nixon, the wretch, who ended our missions to the Moon to begin with.  Conservative, liberal, Democrat, Republican; the whole history of space since Sputnik has been brutalized by both.

And just as Kennedy initiated our first steps into the unknown, so Bush shall continue our uniquely American tradition of braving the final fronteer, and with skill and excellence.  Ignorance is the enemy, dear Cindy; greed is not a factor.  It was ignorance which ended the Moon landings; it was ignorance which brought about the 90-Day-Ungodly-Report prophesying a mission cost twenty times more than it had to be, despite the "best and brightest" supposedly behind it; it was ignorance which cut funding in the nineties from the space program, and it was that very ignorance which led to the loss of millions of dollars worth of artfully produced hardware, and the very loss of six human lives.  Ignorance is the foe which we are here to combat, to educate ourselves via these inimitable fora, so that we might educate the world.

Ad Martem sic nunc imus,
et nos non hic sistimus,
nam homines hic sumus,
ad astra sic ibimus.

#16 Re: Human missions » Bush to send Americans to Moon, to Mars! - as good as official ?!? » 2004-01-09 07:11:24

BBC Story!

You're darn right it's official!  Yay! who was it that predicted this?  Josh maybe?  Well thank heaven, we are coming!

The moon is an misfortune; I hope Zubrin will be able to get in contact with Bush and show him the way we need to go.

This is the best news ever!

#17 Re: Not So Free Chat » Combover » 2003-12-24 04:49:02

Oh yah, and trim it nice and short, like Patrick Stewart:

smiling2.jpg

That's certainly the most professional.  My father already looks a lot like Patrick Stewart; but his hair is all scraggly and weird and ugly looking, not unlike Zubrin on his bad days, minus the comb over.

Yes, when I met him, he looked just as you describe, Josh, but worse.  Still, it was an incredible presentation he gave.

Nice avatar by the way, Mad Grad.  Be ware the power of the Sampo!

Merry Christmas, everyone!

#18 Re: Mars Society International » Zubrin's Vile Ideology - Should He Still Be MS Leader? » 2003-12-08 23:14:56

Your comments are wholly refreshing, well-reasoned, and justified, Jadeheart.  Well put; I hope to read more from you (if I ever get the time).  (You might want to consider capitilizations though, by the way, for easier reading.)

#19 Re: Not So Free Chat » International Moon Base - The Hawaii Declaration » 2003-12-08 23:08:42

If the French build it, it just makes it that much easier to invade!

Come on, who can pass it up?  big_smile

*Laughs outloud!*  Certainly not the English or Germans!


Actually, I think it's fine that Europe gets the Moon; the place absolutely sucks.  It sure looks pretty from Earth, but boy is it a crappy place to do anything.  Let them keep it; let America pioneer Mars.  I don't mind letting the rest of the world nibble futilely on the lunar leftovers thirty years after we've been done with them.

Ad Marte!

#20 Re: Science, Technology, and Astronomy » Why does Earth have so much water? - Do you know? » 2003-12-08 22:57:44

Earth appears to have much more water than any other planet because it is the only planet with the correct temperature for liquid water.

Thank you, yes.  Earth actually should, proportionally, be almost totally covered in water (Europa, for instance, has more water than the Earth, even though her mass is only 5/7 that of Luna).  But, as noted, the Moon was formed when a Mars-sized protoplanet collided with the Earth, blasting off much of the water into space (leaving us continents), the denser ejecta shaping into Luna (and doesn't she look beautiful tonight! especially her light upon the new-fallen snow in the American Northeast).

#21 Re: Unmanned probes » Europa » 2003-11-08 00:02:35

No, that wouldn't work, I'm afraid, to come from the "far" side of Europa, as it's not Jupiter itself that's emitting any radiation (Jupiter is just a bunch of helium and other gasses; there isn't anything Jupiter directly does other than make a tremendous magnetic field).  However, due to Jupiter's emmense gravitational field, it has collected solar radiation over the course of aeons.  Earth has done the same; the Van Allen belt is a perfect terrestrial example.  The Earth doesn't actually emit any radiation, but it can collect it from the sun through the millenia.  However, sustainedly staying in the Van Allen belt or Jupiter's main radiation belt (which envelops the orbit of Europa) is very dangerous for almost anything.  The built up stores of charged particles just love to burn you from the inside out, kind of like a microwave oven.

#22 Re: Not So Free Chat » Free Speech ZONE? » 2003-11-07 23:27:57

...quiet, civilized, dignified protestors...

*Arches an incredulous eyebrow.*...umm, quiet?  Dignified?  I can't recall the last protest (especially anything remotely resembling a "fight-the-machine protest") that was quiet (as noise must be made to fight the system), civilized (as it is inherently anti-civilization in favor of nature), or dignified.  Not to be unfavorably annoying, but the very idea of something like this, dear Cindy, even brings a person who merely partially agrees with these protestors to be quite vocal about it with others, as you yourself have been.  These issues are not quiet; pretending those who challenge this authority (Socratically a very good thing) would ever be content to hold signs without physical motion nor verbal uproar, or even for a moment trusting them to be cordial and respectful while a speech is in progress, is impossibly foolish.

Think of all the horribly violent protests that went on up until the recommencement of the war last Spring through its primary conclusion, in this country alone.  Until all the terrorist activity that began after the major portion of the fighting, more people had died or gotten injured during the protests worldwide than the coalition forces' casualties in Iraq.  Remember those two protestors who were pushed off a the Golden Gate bridge by the sheer volume of them and fell to their deaths?  or the pedestrians who were trampled in New York in the last protest before the war?

There is nothing quiet, civilized, or dignified about such protesting.  Don't have any illusions about the nature of these sorts of activities any more than you would about the current administration.

Indeed, and I'm glad to see no one has yet invoked any of the presidential challengers as emblems of potential progress.  No matter how bad Bush gets, it seems (and he is quite unbearable anymore), his opponents can't find someone with even the slightest modicum of intelligence or speech (excepting possibly Lieberman) to run against the incumbant "tyrant", as Dean practically called him the other day.  They're all idiots.  None of them know anything.  I absolutely hate this anymore; short of Colin Powell running for president, we're screwed either way until 2008 or later.

And by then, NASA will be dead, China will have landed on the Moon, and more people will have killed one another out of fear and hatred on our own soil than the terrorists could ever have performed themselves short of the temporary use of a jet airliner.

Sic imperium decidit, more e timore pro ferre.

#23 Re: Science, Technology, and Astronomy » New Discoveries *2* - ...Extraplanetary, deep space, CONTINUED » 2003-10-30 10:18:16

Not to be secret, friend, but just to practice writing in a foreign language.  Up 'til now, I've done Italian and she French.  Now, as I did say, yes, we can practice French.

Then I said, so, dear Cindy, I am studying French; now we can comminicate in the language, when we desire, eh?

And then, If you would, please correct me when I don't speak correctly.

Forums are about learning from one another, aye?  Might as well learn anything we desire if it's possible.

#24 Re: Science, Technology, and Astronomy » New Discoveries *2* - ...Extraplanetary, deep space, CONTINUED » 2003-10-29 22:12:39

Tr?s interessant... tr?s beau...

Alors, ch?re Cindy, j'?tudie le fran?ais; donc nous pousons comminquer en le langage, quand nous d?sirons, oui?

S'il vous pla?t, me corrige quand je ne parle pas correctement.

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB