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 via email. Please see Recruiting Topic for additional information. Write newmarsmember[at_symbol]gmail.com.
  1. Index
  2. » Search
  3. » Posts by DonPanic

#326 Re: Not So Free Chat » Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous » 2005-05-01 03:21:30

LO

Which I'm not necessarily disputing, however this in no way proves or even implies that human activity is the sole or even primary cause of that change. We have this egocentric conception of how the world works, anything of consequence that happens is always about us. Only it isn't, climate changes, always has. Surely we are affecting it, how can 6 billion mammals going about the biological functions of life and burning things not have an impact, but to then assume that we, so far above all else in the world (wipe away the sarcasm) must be the direct and sole cause is silly. So laugh at this ordinary person questioning a few scientists, piss yourself if it feels better, but it proves nothing.

Not a scientist, knowing more than anybody that climate has always changed, would say that man activity is the sole cause for global warming, they just say that man has become a major factor for the planet changes.
If an ordinary person can gather and study all the datas, calculate how sea temperature can help or brake gas solution, slows or accelarates CO2 capture, evaluate feedbacks on biologic gaz cycle or such things, i'ts no more an ordinary person, it's a scientist...

And, DonPanic, you don't need to be doing research at Los Alamos or CERN to understand this simple limitation of the scientific method. You and your Euro-pals may not be able to comprehend it but I believe CC does.

Me and Europals !
Since when NOAA or Pentagon are among europal gangs ?   big_smile
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/glo … rming.html
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/internat … ...00.html
What I've read of yours on this forum shows you are much more ideologic than I am. The fact is that whoever disagrees with you is supposed to be a leftist, should be the Pentagon !

My opinion is we should work hard to minimize our impact on the ecosystem. For this reason, and for various other geopolitical reasons dear to all our hearts, we should push for alternative energy sources which impact far less on the world around us. We need renewable and benign energy sources and we need them now!

Fully agreement with this.

#327 Re: Not So Free Chat » Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous » 2005-04-30 03:12:12

LO

Sorry, but this side of Atlantic, we piss of laughter when ordinary people start giving lessons of scientific attitude to scientists.

*Come now, DonPanic.  You've made a collectivist statement.

<span style='font-size:17pt;line-height:100%'>? ? ?</span>

No one on your side of the Atlantic dares to "give lessons of scientific attitude to scientists" -- ?

We have plenty of them, too, we call them trolls too, when they do so, Xcept that, by chance, we don't have that whole bunches of stutborn creationnists.
But here as well as in USA, I guess, first things one learns before entering in any lab is to evaluate the uncertainty margins of the theories, of the tools, of the measures, of the calculations.
Much of the trolls critics are made by peoples which never stept in a lab and don't even know that scientists apply uncertainty laws.

Now, with what we know, we can say that the climate is highly probably changing, and consequenses will be probably catastrophic for mankind and many species.
Criticising this by what we don't know is opposing ignorance as an argument against knowledge. This is a trollish attitude.

I'm not a scientist.  Perhaps occasionally I make similar comments, or comments which might be construed that way.  I do feel some of my thinking is scientific and I'm not reluctant to express an opinion.

Sorry, but :
<span style='font-size:17pt;line-height:100%'>Science is based on facts, not on feelings or opinions !</span>

#328 Re: Not So Free Chat » Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous » 2005-04-29 14:13:23

LO

But if we really want to be intellectualy honest, really want to be scientific about this, we need to realise that the planet's climate is far more complex than a simple man spew filth, planet get warm mechanism.

Sorry, but this side of Atlantic, we piss of laughter when ordinary people start giving lessons of scientific attitude to scientists.

#329 Re: Not So Free Chat » Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous » 2005-04-29 04:13:04

LO

If your religious sentiments interfered with the carrying out your duties, you should have requested a discharge from the armed services.

No, the Army instructors just missed their lobotomisation work on the soldiers' brains. (if any brain left)  big_smile
As we say in France,
"why imbeciles are dressed with uniforms ?"
-Up to recognize them better...

#330 Re: Not So Free Chat » Critters - (Articles pertaining to animals) » 2005-04-29 04:09:14

LO

It's the American use of 'would have' instead of 'had' in this context. I've noticed it frequently on U.S. television shows and I've never been able to get used to it.

On french TV, lots of speakers have incorrect expressions.
Should be fined, as professionnal faults.

#331 Re: Not So Free Chat » A380 airbus - monster of the skies » 2005-04-28 18:43:40

LO

It's the crappy state of railroads in the US, not the robustness of the technology, which has prevented its implementation.
C'mon, DonPanic, you know France wants it. You could put a line right on the German border and moon the entire Rhineland in an hour on Armistice Day. ^_^

Amtrack should name a froggy to modernise US railroads...
networking goes well with our colbertian mentallity.
The problem that is our cheese stocks are not sufficient to buy US maglev technology right now  big_smile

#332 Re: Not So Free Chat » A380 airbus - monster of the skies » 2005-04-28 18:02:14

The A380 is a gamble like the 747 was it will need to have runways lengthened to be able to operate.

Wrong, where a 747 can land and take-off, a A-380 can do it too

What about metal fatique in time, for something so large?

Most of the A-380 structure is carbon composite, not metal

But are bigger planes really the way to go? More flights out of increasingly congested hub airports or smaller planes flying routes more in line with where people actually want to get to?

One A-380 can take the place of four or five planes waiting for landing on congested airports (can carry 550 up to 850 passengers)


If the A380 is European governments' attempt to crush Boeing and seize market share it might make sense. Otherwise, I don't see the demand for an even bigger behemoth aircraft being that high. If ten years down the line the A380 is a huge success I'll admit I was wrong, but at the moment I suspect that Boeing's 7E7 is going to fare better.

7E7 will have success for long range and non mass travels.
A-380 will have a cargo freighter version.

EADs and the EU is desperate to crush Boeing as it's a symbol of American technology. They are doing a pretty good job of buying market share, but that's all they are doing since they can sell airplanes at a loss with no concern where as Boeing has to turn a profit.

Thinking that EU or EADS want to crush Boeing is a paranoïac mistake. Many subcontractors in Europe work both for Airbus and Boeing. For instance, Ratier-Figeac builds landing components for Boeing as well as for Airbus. About 40% of the airplanes components for each aircraft builder come from the other side of Atlantic.
By European laws, Airbus has to pay back the money lended by governments and has to make profits.

#333 Re: Not So Free Chat » A380 airbus - monster of the skies » 2005-04-28 17:00:34

LO

Hey, DonPanic, you guys seem to take pride in superfast trains, you want to upgrade the TGV with some US technology and shock the world with long-distance maglev?

Seems that you've been overtaken by Germans in matter of maglev commercial devellopment
http://www.magnetbahn-bayern.de/ENGLISH … glish.html
http://english.people.com.cn/200301/01/ … 9377.shtml

*Saw that on television news last evening.  Sorry, couldn't help thinking, "Damn...that's a lot more people dead and injured when and if it ever crashes."
No thanks.  I'd prefer flying on a smaller plane.

In an aircrash, people get as dead in a small airplane as in a big one.  big_smile
Remember that one big airplane maintenance is cheaper than the maintenance for 5 small airplanes, so that risk should be higher travelling in a small one.
Can't imagine an air company neglecting the maintenance for a 200 millions dollars baby carrying 900 passengers, such an aircrash would be lethal for the company and maybe its insurers

#334 Re: Not So Free Chat » A380 airbus - monster of the skies » 2005-04-28 09:35:57

LO
A380 had its 3 and 1/2 hours maiden flight.
Better be a successful plane. 40% of the components value is US

#336 Re: Unmanned probes » ExoMars - ESA Mars rover » 2005-04-12 03:10:13

ESA to collaborate with NASA in sending another Mars Rover with life searching
http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Aurora/SEM1 … 0.html]aim

.png

SignD.gif

#337 Re: Not So Free Chat » Greece Joins ESA » 2005-04-11 12:48:24

LO

Russia looks at the expanding EU and sees only a potentially powerful problem.
One of the biggest issues that where in the Ukraines problematic election was that the progressive party that eventually won wants to join the EU. The fact that the other side resorted to vote rigging and the actual poisoning of the opposing leader with Dioxin shows the tensions that where there.

It did not help that Putin and Russia actually hailed the original elections and Yanukovich as victors even with the vote rigging shown. It was suggested should the Ukraine actually have gone to civil war over the result (which had been a real possibility) that Russia would have provided military support.

Anyway it makes sense for Russia to be involved with ESA it gets money for rockets and benefits from what ESA is doing. ESA of course gets a rocket system that can reasonably easily be upgraded to the Manned version and it benefits from the Russian experience and technology. But do they trust each other  ???

The US manoeuvres in the former USSR republics surrounding Afghanistan push Russia towards Europe.
The russian trust in America is at lowest, because of the US desire to miltarise space, and to get a antimissile shield, not seen as an antiterrorist policy. ???
Today, a contract between ESA and Russia has been signed.

#338 Re: Not So Free Chat » Greece Joins ESA » 2005-04-11 06:01:59

LO

A lot of the problem is EU's rejection of Russia joining Europe as a member-state.

I bet Russia will join Europe before Turkey... if European public opinion rejection of Islam increases.
Hermes is buried, as a technologically obsolete concept.

#339 Re: Not So Free Chat » Greece Joins ESA » 2005-04-11 02:25:36

LO

Why won't/hasn't Russia joined the ESA?

Because Russia wants to deal with ESA as an equal, matter of national pride, as you suggest.
Russian space industry needs money, half the Soyuz production is bought by ESA, to be launched from Kourou.
Nasa isn't much moved by Euro-China-India-Russia space cooperation, all added is a small percentage of US space industry and the main of that quatuor, ESA, cooperates with Nasa in many space science programs.

#340 Re: Not So Free Chat » Tsunami in Asia » 2005-03-28 15:57:20

LO
French "Institut de Physique du Globe" searchers told that if a tsunami wave should happen from this late earthquake, it would be 1/30 as powerfull as the one that made over 300000 victims.

#341 Re: Not So Free Chat » Corporal Punishment on Mars - Should it be Permitted or Not? » 2005-03-28 15:46:54

Never let it be said that DonPanic and I have no points of agreement, for here one stands.

LO
whatever the disagreement points are, we never forget the US boys fallen when liberating Europe from the Nazis

#342 Re: Not So Free Chat » Corporal Punishment on Mars - Should it be Permitted or Not? » 2005-03-28 15:19:47

LO

A while back we had a case of a bunch of US Navy guys raping a young girl (16) while in port. Considering the UN classifies rape as a war crime, Soldiers on a Pass are not just vermin who perpetrate rape, they are by logical process of law, War criminals.

These men a just vermin, there is no war crime if there is no war. They should be punished by the Navy court they dishonored the uniform and chased from the army, then punished by a criminal court of the country they commited their crime in.

#343 Re: Not So Free Chat » Corporal Punishment on Mars - Should it be Permitted or Not? » 2005-03-26 19:15:26

Hi John Creighton

I said "ordinary rapists" by opposition to "pedophilic rapists", not to say that raping was some ordinary behaviour, but quite frequent.

Do remark that I was talking only about men's reactions about women's rape.

Maybe because I know some lethal close combat and Vo Viet tricks or that having played rugby, my duty as the last defensor was to stop any attacker, whatever his weight and speed were, then, as a man, I admit I've never thought of the possibility to be raped. One at one, I dont fear other men, my abdominal muscles are still 1 and a half inches thick, so plexus and belly are not quite vulerable.  In the district I live, there are no gangs, so I never thought of the possibility of facing many attackers.

I told before I know a girl which had been raped and it took years for her to recover some happiness to live, still this is not all "erased" from her mind.


.

#344 Re: New Mars Articles » Greenhouses for Mars Greenhouses for Mars » 2005-03-26 18:20:24

LO

DonPanic,
I don't want to throw a cog into the wheel of progress, but everything I've seen written on low g plant experiments has been a total disaster.
At 1/3 g   hormone, reproduction structures, transpiration, cell wall irregularities, water retention and water loss are just some of the problems that show up on even short term studies.
Also bacteria show some of the same problems at 1/3 g.

What's the average time for "short term" studies ?
I haven't a real good idea about the way 1/3 g is obtained constantly on earths labs.
I'm quite sure bacterias can adapt quite fast

#345 Re: New Mars Articles » Greenhouses for Mars Greenhouses for Mars » 2005-03-26 03:16:31

LO
Mars colonies cannot rely on food importations !
That means a permanent political stability from importation countries on Earth.
Too much of a bet.
Should an administration cut on Space programs for any reason, such as war, revolution or political chaos, environmental catastrophe,
space colonies would starve.
Therefore its absolutely vital to martian and any extra Earth settlement to rely 100% on self food production, whatever happens on Earth.
That's all !

#346 Re: New Mars Articles » Greenhouses for Mars Greenhouses for Mars » 2005-03-26 01:41:43

LO

If gravity is going to be a problem for food production on Mars, then Food is going to remain the import commodity. (...)
Yes food will definatly be brought in.

Added to inflatable greenhouses, water pipe bioreactors are in study.
Fish and shrimps, aquatic animals and flora adapt well to low gravity, orientation for these animals being given by water flow.
In the primary bioreactors cyanobacterias and phytoplancton colonies are grown up,
they feed on colons biological rejections and extract oxygen out of Mars and colon's CO2.
The over population of cyanobacterias is sent to secondary bioreactors where they serve a food for shrimps.
Part of the shrimps are sent in other bioreactors where they serve as food for carnivorous fishes, grown up toghether with comestible alguaes.

Mars food supply doesn't need to be imported

Communicated by DonPanic, Director of the FSAC, Froggy Space AgroBiz Corporation Inc Research Labs big_smile

#347 Re: New Mars Articles » Greenhouses for Mars Greenhouses for Mars » 2005-03-25 14:12:11

LO
Haha, we have some conceptual and design advance in my studies for inflatable greenhouses,
where earthlike pressure is part of the system  big_smile

Works for every planet with no or low pressure atmosphere.
For Mars, chains of compressors are needed to catch and bring atmosphere to about 1 bar.
Advantages are low weight, reduced transportation volume,
little efforts to settle. cool

Communicated by DonPanic, Director of the FSAC, Froggy Space AgroBiz Corporation Inc Research Labs big_smile

#348 Re: Not So Free Chat » Corporal Punishment on Mars - Should it be Permitted or Not? » 2005-03-25 12:05:06

LO
Can't imagine 1 billion rapists locked toghether,
too bad  roll


What's the Moon's guilt to deserve such a mistreatment ? ???

#349 Re: Not So Free Chat » Corporal Punishment on Mars - Should it be Permitted or Not? » 2005-03-25 06:04:06

LO

[but (old American saying) "you can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make the horse drink."(...)
If a family member is sick, you call the doctor.  The doctor can prescribe medicine.  But no one can force the patient to take the medicine.  If the patient refuses the medicine...what then?

Be by consent or by force, you leave him no choice !


About SKs as Ted Bundy, Jeffrey Dahmer, or our Landru :
How many of them, are they in such a large number that they cannot be kept in observation, as special studies specimens ?
In France such cases happen minus than 2 or 3 per decade,
I guess its the same in USA reported to the population rate

About the "ordinary" rapists, they seem to rise a particular and strange emotionnal overreaction among men, though rape is a very common crime, such common that domestic rapes, husbands raping their unconsenting wifes, have not been considered as crimes until very recent times.

Looks like men overreact a similar way the arab brothers overreact when their sisters' virginity is endangered, or broken.

If capital punishment was the average sentence for a rape whatever the circumstances are, I fear that earth male population would shrink by 10% or more. ???

#350 Re: Not So Free Chat » Corporal Punishment on Mars - Should it be Permitted or Not? » 2005-03-24 17:45:53

LO

Again, I think some people are simply rotten, vicious predators.  They see someone weaker than they, or vulnerable, and they attack.

I believe that a lot of people, deep down in their heart, do not or cannot believe this, and that mental blindness is at the root of much judicial stupidity.

I perfectly admit that !

Now,
1) is a woman or a man nasty by nature, born nasty,
or does she/he become nasty ?
2) are they always nasty, or by crisis, or by circumstances ?

You say someone is enraged, OK, that's a fact I don't deny
where is the mental blindness in asking "why" ?
where is the blindness to investigate ?

When there is a problem, do you personnaly always avoid the problem, or do you try to solve the problem ?
If a member of your family is sick, do you let him die,
or do you call the doctor ?

  1. Index
  2. » Search
  3. » Posts by DonPanic

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB