French Republican Mars Calendar

Tom Kalbfus · 2014-02-04 08:11:07

Terraformer wrote:

Actually, I was talking about the American Secession - when the United States of America seceded. Not the Confederate Secession.
My point being, would the war have gone anywhere near as long if, not only had the British needed to haul supplied across the Atlantic, but the American forces been able to spot any British ship whilst router and destroy it? If not, why would any of the states of Terra be able to hold a colony on another planet, when the colonists don't need them and don't gain much benefit from being connected to them? Of course, a trade blockade could possibly work, but then the newly independent colonies of New America could just turn to Russia, or China, or India, or any of many other countries to supply essential goods, at this point being limited to computer components and a few other high tech goods...

Would the American colonies have turned to Spain for their protection? The Russians are essentially equivalent to the Spaniards when it comes to space colonization, their respect for human rights and freedoms leaves something to be desired. I don't think there were a lot of American Colonists who wanted the Spaniards to take over their colonies

RobertDyck · 2014-02-04 09:56:01

Tom Kalbfus wrote:

Actually the first move for American Independence was when they British started treating us like colonials to be exploited. ... The secret to keeping colonies on Mars is patriotism...

Actually, Britain treated them as colonials all along. And at that time, British upper class thought of itself as a "caste", that they were better and lower income people in Britain itself were there to be exploited. The lords and ladies of Britain treated servants as if they're slaves. The problem happened when citizens in the colonies forgot this, they had been separated enough generations that the difference between "those of gentle birth" vs "unwashed masses" did not exist in North America, and those borne here didn't understand. Many successful professionals and businessmen expected to be treated as full citizens. But the British thought of the colonies as lower income, servants. After all, the majority of immigrants who went from Britain were welfare recipients and unemployed manual labourers and children from peasant farmers who wouldn't inherit the family farm. The British upper class looked down their noses at peasant farmers, so think how they thought of the children who didn't even have a patch of land to farm. The British government considered the 16 colonies in North America to be an investment that generates financial return. Yes, positive return on investment. When the cost of policing the colonies got expensive, they chose to impose a tax to pay for local police. That's how they saw it. American history emphasises the Pilgrims who landed a Plymouth Rock, a religious group who where all upper-middle-class professionals. But that's not what the British thought. Many families in the colonies expected to be treated as "people of gentle birth", but the lords and ladies saw that distinction as only for those who were borne into it. They thought of it as a caste, that it didn't matter how successful you were, that you would never be able to rise to their level. To them, a peasant was a peasant, and their children would remain peasants; forever. Was this right? Obviously not. But that was British culture at the time.

If you think this is bad, then ask how America treats Hispanic people today. Are they all illegal immigrants? If an immigrant got work, how could he/she gain citizenship? How many years of hard work before he/she could become legal? If your answer is "not ever", that are you any different than the British lords?

Tom Kalbfus · 2014-02-04 10:41:41

The British regarded George Washington as a commoner, despite the fact that he had the standard of living of an English Baron with his slaves replacing all the peasants on his plantation, and George Washington resented the discrimination. Snobbery proved costly for the British.

As for Hispanics, they have the same rights as other American citizens if they are in fact American citizens, if they are not then they are either legal aliens or illegal aliens, and an illegal alien has no right to be in the United States because he is illegal. The black slaves brought in from Africa was another form of immigrant smuggling, the slave owners themselves took it upon themselves to bring foreigners into their country without their neighbors or the government's consent. The government chose to look the other way, the slaves were not naturalized, and in that sense they were brought in to the United States or the colonies without official permission, they were just kidnapped and dragged over here. The consequences for the neighbors of the slave owners was dire, at some point in the future they faced the possibility of a slave revolt and future racial strife brought about by slave owners bringing their slaves to work in the country. The consequences for us with the importation of illegal aliens is we have our country turned into a foreign third world country when the foreign third world illegal aliens outnumber us and gain rights as citizens, then they vote in unreliable third world politicians grasping for power and making themselves dictator like they did in the original home countries of many of these illegal immigrants.

Now you understand I don't want the United States becoming "Mexico" or "Argentina" with the importation of many of these nationals. I don't want someone like Evita Peron running my country or Daniel Ortega or Fidel Castro or Hugo Chavez for that matter. The people fleeing these countries fled them for a reason, and instead of fixing that reason they come here and their is potential that they might vote in such a way as to make the United States just as bad as the country they left. After all people get the government they deserve if they vote for it.

RobertDyck · 2014-02-04 12:45:05

Weird spin on slavery. Realize Europe used to have slavery as well. A military dictator would lead his army to conquer a neighbouring city state, steal anything that wasn't destroyed in the raid, and enslave the survivors. This went on for millennia. Ancient Rome did it. Slavery was becoming treated as wrong at the time America was founded, but some countries still did it. Some African countries did; African military dictators would capture citizens of a rival then sell them as slaves. Plantation owners bought those slaves. As far as Africans were concerned, it was no different than ancient Rome capturing villagers from Greece or Turkey and using them as slaves. But plantation owners saw their skin colour was different, so concocted this excuse that they were somehow different.

Treating slavery as illegal immigration? Really. The slaves would disagree. They were captured by an invading army, brought across the ocean in chains, packed like sardines, not allowed out of the wooden shelf even to shit. Modern historians did an analysis of the diet many slaves were fed. It was deficient in nutrients, and didn't even have enough calories for the work they were required to do. They had to sneak out into the forest and harvest additional food just to survive. If they tried to escape, they were tied to a tree or post and whipped. Those were the lucky ones, others were killed. No trial, the slave owner could do whatever he wanted.

As for immigrants overrunning your country: who do you thing Americans are? The original settlers came many thousands of years ago. They're called aboriginal people. Christopher Columbus expected the world was smaller, he expected to find India where the Caribbean is, so he used the word Indian for North American aboriginal peoples. Those people today would take exception to those whose ancestors came from Europe. Remember the plaque on the Statue of Liberty?

Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset hates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lighting, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore,
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

That poem does not say "send me your rich", does not say "send me your highest educated doctors". It says "give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses". Today those "poor huddled masses" are migrant workers, doing manual labour below minimum wage. The simple solution is to give them citizenship. They would then be entitled to minimum wage, and would have to pay taxes like everyone else. At one time the English settlers thought Irish were a curse, didn't want any of their culture. We could go through every ethnic group, but the latest immigrants are the same as always. After all, how many people you know speak Siouan-Catawban, Algic, Keresan, Muskogean, etc? source

Last edited by RobertDyck (2014-02-27 16:19:04)

Tom Kalbfus · 2014-02-04 13:52:38

Slaves were involuntary illegal immigrants, the people who were smuggling them were the ones at fault, just to make that clear, but aside from the slaves themselves the second victims of slavery were those who lived near the slaveholders that didn't own slaves. People minding their own business and their rich neighbor bought some slaves, how do you think that would make you feel? What if the slaves revolt and what if the revolt doesn't stay at the plantation but spills out into the neighborhood with blacks taking revenge against whatever whites they see. Would that thought make you feel safe? You didn't own slaves, but you could potentially suffer because your neighbors did.

As for immigrants overrunning your country: who do you thing Americans are? The original settlers came many thousands of years ago. They're called aboriginal people. Christopher Columbus expected the world was smaller, he expected to find India where the Caribbean is, so he used the word Indian for North American aboriginal peoples. Those people today would take exception to those whose ancestors came from Europe. Remember the plaque on the Statue of Liberty?

The original settlers came from Europe, not counting the Indians, who's ancestors came mostly from Eurasia. Europe and Asia are two ends of the same continent, so really the Indians ancestors came from the same continent as the European settlers did, just from a different end of it that's all. Plus there is evidence that some of the Indian's ancestors crossed the Atlantic from Ice Age Europe.

That poem does not say "send me your rich", does not say "send me your highest educated doctors". It says "give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses". Today those "poor huddled masses" are migrant workers, doing manual labour below minimum wage.

And what happens when you bring in an underclass, much like the Russian Peasants? Your have a Russian Style Revolution with Class Warfare, not an American Revolution, and we don't want anyone storming the Bastile or waging a Rein of Terror after another French Style Revolution in America, I don't want that, and I don't want anybody who looks like a peasant wanting to overthrow the ruling class coming to America, they'll impose socialist and make us poor like other countries in Latin America. Its not their cheap labor I'm worrying about its their vote and who they would vote for? Castro, Chavez, Peron. I don't like people like that running my country. I like to keep the left out of my country so they can ruin the rest of the World and not my country. Do you know how many despots and dictators France had between their overthrowing their King and establish a stable Democratic Republic, We should appreciate the fact that we went from being part of a colonial Empire to a stable Republic, with the exception of the Civil War. I don't want all the dictators and demigogs that peasant revolutions typicallly lead to.

RobertDyck · 2014-02-04 15:24:30

I am saying Americans are descendents of the poor. All of you. Well, most. Anyone who can trace their family ancestry to some rich nobleman from Europe is someone I would call a rich spoiled brat. Self-made men are the only ones I consider respectable. They all come from poor or peasant origins. So get over it. They are who you are.

And again, if you want to make a distinction of us vs them, then aboriginal aka indigenous aka North American Indians would claim that all white people are the unwanted immigrants.

By the way, my family background is all white. On my mother's side: Scottish, English, Irish, Welsh; let's call that British. My grandparents on my father's side were Mennonite: my family name is "Dyck", pronounced "Dick", but spelled with a "y", it's a Canadian thing. Several centuries ago it derived from "Van Dyke", a good Dutch name which means "one who lives near the dyke". Lots of dykes in Holland. But my family history starts in Prussia, land that is today part of modern Germany. They moved to Poland, then after a few generations moved to southern Russia; but that land today is part of Ukraine. Tsarina Catharine the Second, aka Catharine the Great, had her army kick out the Kazakhs who were raiding nearby villages. She wanted someone peaceful to occupy the land so the Kazakhs wouldn't come back to terrorize locals. Mennonites were peaceful farmers. She promised they could retain their language, their religion, teach school in their own language, and would never have to serve in the military. Mennonites take the ten commandments literally. The first commandment is "Thou shalt not kill". It doesn't say "unless you really really don't like the guy", it says "Thou shalt not kill", period. So they do not believe in capital punishment, and will not kill in war. They're conscientious objectors. But following Catharine the Great was Tzar Nicholas the Third; he set about a program to "Russify" ethnic groups. He demanded that teach school in Russian, all government services in Russian, and even tried to draft them into the military. So my great grandparents moved to Canada. Entire towns sold everything they couldn't carry and moved to Manitoba and Saskatchewan. After so many moved, Tsar Nicholas let them serve as forest rangers instead, putting out forest fires. He then drafted the Russian forest rangers. He got his soldiers anyway, but Mennonites didn't have to kill anyone. So my ancestors on my father's side left under the last Tsar, they weren't there for communism. But add that up: Scottish, English, Irish, Welsh, Dutch, Prussian, German, Polish, Russian, Ukrainian. Is that enough? I call myself a typical Canadian mongrel. No aboriginal, but I do volunteer every Friday at the Aboriginal Centre. Occasionally I've gotten an ear-full.

Another argument against prejudice. Scientists have been studying the human genome. They found Europeans and Asians have 1-4% Neanderthal DNA. Sub-Saharan Africans have no Neanderthal DNA at all, they're 100% homo sapien. Polynesian and Melanesian (New Guinea and Melanesia) and Australian Aborigine DNA has Neanderthal and up to 6% of a third hominid: Denisovan. The latest research has shown European DNA for the brain including speech centres are 100% homo sapien; however DNA for hair and skin is up to 70% Neanderthal. That means only black people are pure. The very thing that makes us look white is Neanderthal. Black people could have great fun with that.

Last edited by RobertDyck (2014-02-04 15:32:48)

Terraformer · 2014-02-04 15:46:27

Careful there, claiming that sub-saharan Africans are 100% original Homo sapien - you're probably going to be proven wrong by the discovery of a previously unknown lineage which everyone is descended from. But all that is quite silly anyway; if paleontologists dug up the skeletons of a population of Austalian Aborigines, a group of Han Chinese, and some English people, all in three separate areas, and it was in a world where everyone was a sub-saharan African, they'd probably classify them as three separate branches of humanity.

RobertDyck · 2014-02-04 17:51:43

Yea, all hominids originated from some common ancestor. Current scientific belief is australopithecines came from east Africa. Before the mid-Africa mountain range rose, an ape similar to chimpanzee lived in the tropical rain forest. Then the mountain range rose, separating them. Those west of the mountains became chimpanzee, but east became dry. The trees died, leaving savannah. The apes had to adapt. Legs quickly evolved to those like modern human. They actually found one skeleton with intermediary legs. Apes are optimized to climb trees, but humans are optimized to walk long distance on the ground. The first australopithecus had the same brain size as a chimp; the brain evolved later. They suspect australopithecus stole kills from big cats. Jaguars store kills in trees to keep them away from other predators. But australopithecus evolved from chimpanzee-like apes; they were able to climb trees easily. So they became scavengers. By the way, chimpanzees hunt small monkeys, they're not vegetarian. Jaguars don't like their meal stolen, some australopithecus skills have tooth marks from a large cat. So australopithecus had to learn to out-smart the large cats they stole from. That pushed evolution toward intelligence. Even today the human digestive system prefers "aged" meat, not fresh. We evolved from scavengers. Australopithecus probably learned to hunt big game by watching the big cats they stole from; eventually were able to hunt themselves. But that's getting even farther from the point.

Anthropologists did find one hominid skeleton mid-way between Asia, Europe, and the Middle East. They did a facial reconstruction from the skull. It has features of white, black, and Asian. The scientist who found it believes it's one of the group out of Africa that became European and Asian, the common ancestor.

Meanwhile a Chinese scientist studied their genetics. Mao Zedong believed all Chinese evolved from a hominid that lived in China a million years ago. They did find a hominid skeleton that old. But the modern Chinese scientist found the genetics are not at all the same. In fact there's no DNA from that old hominid in modern Chinese people. Their ancestors came out of Africa about the same time as Europeans. But there is also evidence the ancestors of Asian people lived in Siberia during the ice age. Now that will change you! Imaging living in that much cold. Inuit (formerly known as Eskimo) make a parka from Caribou fur, the warmest fur in the world. And it isn't worn loose like a cape or coat, it's worn close to the body. No buttons or opening, it was pulled on like a T-shirt or sweater. Fur pants, boots, mits, and the parka has an integrated hood: only the face is exposed. These ancient people in Siberia were the first to invent that. Here in Winnipeg it can get down to -40°C in winter; only at night, only the coldest night of the year, and only a particularly cold winter. The last time it got that cold was January 2005, but it does. That's damn cold! Exposed skin freezes in less than 2 minutes. Now imagine living in Siberia during the ice age. No wonder they evolved: flat faces with broad cheek bones, small flat noses, and eye lids with fat. It's to keep the face from freezing.

I'm trying to say we're all the same. All one big species. Don't discriminate against Hispanics. And to finally get back to Mars, don't discriminate against Russians. They have a lovely big rocket that would cost less to restore than finishing development of SLS. We could use SLS, but Energia is also an option.

Last edited by RobertDyck (2014-02-04 22:24:45)

Tom Kalbfus · 2014-02-04 20:59:52

RobertDyck wrote:

I am saying Americans are descendents of the poor. All of you. Well, most. Anyone who can trace their family ancestry to some rich nobleman from Europe is someone I would call a rich spoiled brat. Self-made men are the only ones I consider respectable. They all come from poor or peasant origins. So get over it. They are who you are.
And again, if you want to make a distinction of us vs them, then aboriginal aka indigenous aka North American Indians would claim that all white people are the unwanted immigrants.
By the way, my family background is all white. On my mother's side: Scottish, English, Irish, Welsh; let's call that British. My grandparents on my father's side were Mennonite: my family name is "Dyck", pronounced "Dick", but spelled with a "y", it's a Canadian thing. Several centuries ago it derived from "Van Dyke", a good Dutch name which means "one who lives near the dyke". Lots of dykes in Holland. But my family history starts in Prussia, land that is today part of modern Germany. They moved to Poland, then after a few generations moved to southern Russia; but that land today is part of Ukraine. Tsarina Catharine the Second, aka Catharine the Great, had her army kick out the Kazakhs who were raiding nearby villages. She wanted someone peaceful to occupy the land so the Kazakhs wouldn't come back to terrorize locals. Mennonites were peaceful farmers. She promised they could retain their language, their religion, teach school in their own language, and would never have to serve in the military. Mennonites take the ten commandments literally. The first commandment is "Thou shalt not kill". It doesn't say "unless you really really don't like the guy", it says "Thou shalt not kill", period. So they do not believe in capital punishment, and will not kill in war. They're conscientious objectors. But following Catharine the Great was Tzar Nicholas the Third; he set about a program to "Russify" ethnic groups. He demanded that teach school in Russian, all government services in Russian, and even tried to draft them into the military. So my great grandparents moved to Canada. Entire towns sold everything they couldn't carry and moved to Manitoba and Saskatchewan. After so many moved, Tsar Nicholas let them serve as forest rangers instead, putting out forest fires. He then drafted the Russian forest rangers. He got his soldiers anyway, but Mennonites didn't have to kill anyone. So my ancestors on my father's side left under the last Tsar, they weren't there for communism. But add that up: Scottish, English, Irish, Welsh, Dutch, Prussian, German, Polish, Russian, Ukrainian. Is that enough? I call myself a typical Canadian mongrel. No aboriginal, but I do volunteer every Friday at the Aboriginal Centre. Occasionally I've gotten an ear-full.
Another argument against prejudice. Scientists have been studying the human genome. They found Europeans and Asians have 1-4% Neanderthal DNA. Sub-Saharan Africans have no Neanderthal DNA at all, they're 100% homo sapien. Polynesian and Melanesian (New Guinea and Melanesia) and Australian Aborigine DNA has Neanderthal and up to 6% of a third hominid: Denisovan. The latest research has shown European DNA for the brain including speech centres are 100% homo sapien; however DNA for hair and skin is up to 70% Neanderthal. That means only black people are pure. The very thing that makes us look white is Neanderthal. Black people could have great fun with that.

I think Neanderthals we're less social, more of the rugged individual sort, and from the looks of their bone structure, they were very rugged indeed! I think white Europeans are probably the youngest race, a recent article indicate that light skin was recent feature that came after agriculture, blue eyes is an older feature. So Europeans prior to 7000 BC could have had blue eyes and dark skin. I think black Africans are probably the oldest modern human race. Asians are probably in the middle. My guess is Ice Age Europeans, probably looked quite a bit like Native Americans.

On a terraformed Mars, light skin would probably be an advantage since very little of the Sun's UV rays would manage to penetrate an ozone layer that is three times as thick as Earth's, and at the distance Mars is from the Sun.

Tom Kalbfus · 2014-02-04 21:41:46

RobertDyck wrote:

Yea, all hominids originated from some common ancestor. Current scientific belief is australopithecines came from east Africa. Before the mid-Africa mountain range rose, an ape similar to chimpanzee lived in the tropical rain forest. Then the mountain range rose, separating them. Those west of the mountains became chimpanzee, but east became dry. The trees died, leaving savannah. The apes had to adapt. Legs quickly evolved to those like modern human. They actually found one skeleton with intermediary legs. Apes are optimized to climb trees, but humans are optimized to walk long distance on the ground. The first australopithecus had the same brain size as a chimp; the brain evolved later. They suspect australopithecus stole kills from big cats. Jaguars store kills in trees to keep them away from other predators. But australopithecus evolved from chimpanzee-like apes; they were able to climb trees easily. So they became scavengers. By the way, chimpanzees hunt small monkeys, they're not vegetarian. Jaguars don't like their meal stolen, some australopithecus skills have tooth marks from a large cat. So australopithecus had to learn to out-smart the large cats they stole from. That pushed evolution toward intelligence. Even today the human digestive system prefers "aged" meat, not fresh. We evolved from scavengers. Australopithecus probably learned to hunt big game by watching the big cats they stole from; eventually were able to hunt themselves. But that's getting even farther from the point.
Anthropologists did find one hominid skeleton mid-way between Asia, Europe, and the Middle East. They did a facial reconstruction from the skill. It has features of white, black, and Asian. The scientist who found it believes it's one of the group out of Africa that became European and Asian, the common ancestor.
Meanwhile a Chinese scientist studied their genetics. Mao Zedong believed all Chinese evolved from a hominid that lived in China a million years ago. They did find a hominid skeleton that old. But the modern Chinese scientist found the genetics are not at all the same. In fact there's no DNA from that old hominid in modern Chinese people. Their ancestors came out of Africa about the same time as Europeans. But there is also evidence the ancestors of Asian people lived in Siberia during the ice age. Now that will change you! Imaging living in that much cold. Inuit (formerly known as Eskimo) make a parka from Caribou fur, the warmest fur in the world. And it isn't worn loose like a cape or coat, it's worn close to the body. No buttons or opening, it was pulled on like a T-shirt or sweater. Fur pants, boots, mits, and the parka has an integrated hood: only the face is exposed. These ancient people in Siberia were the first to invent that. Here in Winnipeg it can get down to -40°C in winter; only at night, only the coldest night of the year, and only a particularly cold winter. The last time it got that cold was January 2005, but it does. That's damn cold! Exposed skin freezes in less than 2 minutes. Now imagine living in Siberia during the ice age. No wonder they evolved: flat faces with broad cheek bones, small flat noses, and eye lids with fat. It's to keep the face from freezing.
I'm trying to say we're all the same. All one big species. Don't discriminate against Hispanics. And to finally get back to Mars, don't discriminate against Russians. They have a lovely big rocket that would cost less to restore than finishing development of SLS. We could use SLS, but Energia is also an option.

Oh I don't discriminate against Hispanics that are culturally assimilated American citizens, I mean the ones that don't have the problems that made their countries of origin into Third World basket cases, and I don't have problems with Russians that are the same. Basically by assimilated, I'm probably talking about a second or third generation Hispanic that speaks English with an American accent and who may or may not speak Spanish, they generally don't live in ghettos or barrios in the city, they have jobs, have a high school education with some college, and these guys and girls have normal jobs just like you and I. What I don't want are poorly educated illiterate peasants that come from lawless Latin American countries that are often ruled by corrupt governments with plenty of gangs and people susceptible to Marxist ideology, because once the Marxists get control, they take over every aspect of life and that's the end of America as we know it. I look at them south of the border, and from their politics, I get the feeling that they don't like us very much, so why would I want them coming here if they don't like us? They can have their own Hugo Chavezes in their own country and they can call us "Imperialist American Pigs" in their own countries, I don't need them doing that right here in my own country in my face! Anti-Americanism has its consequences. In Russia, Anti-American Politics has proved very popular as well, I can't forget the wars in the Balkans with the Serbs raping and killing Bosnian Muslims, Kosovars, and Crotations and with the US under Clinton trying to stop them, and the Russians supporting these barbarian Serbs, calling rapist heroes and the like, if I thought we could do things like the International Space Station with them then, I've been disabused of that notion by their behavior in the Balkans with regards to their Serb allies. Why should I act as if that never happened, and that they Russians are in fact civilized? I had previously thought that the bad old Russia died with Communism, but it had not! At least during the Cold War the Russians had an ideological reason not to get along with us, now they don't, but they still act as antagonists, whatever we try to do in the world that's humanitarian, they try to oppose, simply because we're doing it? So maybe Canadians think they can get along with the Russians where Americans can't, because we're the big superpower they must oppose, but surely they must realize that bad feelings projected towards us will be reciprocated back towards them. If Canada partners with Russia, they will try to get you to choose sides against us! That is the main problem I have against Russia, they seem to be put on this Earth to be our enemies, I don't want to be enemies, but apparently they do, and there is no reasoning with them. Its kind of sad, because I have some Russian ancestry myself!

The Russians weren't our enemies prior to World War I, Tsar Alexander even rooted for Lincoln during the Civil War, but I guess were weren't the superpower they had to had oppose back then, now that they chosen us to be their enemies, there is no getting along with them, its kind of like we're their surrogate Germany. After Germany fell during World War II, they needed a new enemy and they chose us! Pretty stupid don't you think? Apparently they still have a psychological need to have us as their enemy. Does any of this make sense to you? I don't think I could be friends with anyone who seeks the destruction of my country, perhaps as a Canadian you really can't understand the position I'm in.

Last edited by Tom Kalbfus (2014-02-04 21:50:50)

RobertDyck · 2014-02-04 22:51:37

Tom Kalbfus wrote:

The Russians weren't our enemies ... now that they chosen us to be their enemies... Apparently they still have a psychological need to have us as their enemy.

They do not want their face rubbed in the dirt. Stop treating them as the loser. Stop emphasizing that you won the Cold War. That's what they rail against. Treat them with respect, they'll respond. Treat them as equals, they'll treat you the same. It's called diplomacy.

Bottom line: stop trying to win. Trying to win means making the other person lose. They don't want to lose. They will not accept losing any more than you would. So find a way that no one loses. No winners means no losers. If no one loses, that makes every one win.

Last edited by RobertDyck (2014-02-04 22:52:01)

RobertDyck · 2014-02-04 23:37:17

Tom Kalbfus wrote:

What I don't want are poorly educated illiterate peasants that come from lawless Latin American countries that are often ruled by corrupt governments

That's what it is to be American. Again I quote:

Lady Liberty aka Mother of Exiles wrote:

Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore,
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me

Tom Kalbfus wrote:

they can call us "Imperialist American Pigs"

Your government is trying to control the world. Other governments won't like that. And you do encourage those who don't like life in their country to come to America. Those other countries won't like that. Treat it as a compliment. You are the good guy, your country is where those plagued by bullies can seek refuge.

Tom Kalbfus wrote:

Why should I act as if... Russians are in fact civilized? ...they seem to be put on this Earth to be our enemies ... Does any of this make sense to you?

Stop trying to win. Stop trying to be the bully. Stop trying to dominate. Treat them as equals, and they will treat you the same. Don't try to convert them to American culture, or the American system of government. Let them be Russian. Different but equal. They will accept that.

Tom Kalbfus · 2014-02-05 09:12:18

Who was doing the bullying in the Balkan wars of the late 20th century, who ran the rape camps, the death squads? It wasn't us! I don't think we got a single thing out of this war, it didn't improve our relations with either the Russians or the Muslim World! You ever hear the expression, "Damned if you do, damned if you don't?" Maybe we should have just let the Serbs have their fun raping Bosnian girls and slitting their throats? Is that what you advocate? Well in any case, in spite of being an America, I think that sort of thing is wrong and people who call rapists their national heroes are Barbarians! This was conduct unbecoming of a European state. I also recall the Russians giving weapons to the Syrian government so they can slaughter their own people! I don't think much of the Syrian people, I've seen too much, but I don't think the Russians ought to be participating in the carnage, they got nuclear weapons for Godsake, if they wanted them dead, they could arrange it, they don't need to participate in stupid proxy wars. So I guess you feel that I'm not supposed to give a damn about what happens in the world, but I sure don't want to do space missions with people who think the Serb rapists in the Balkan wars were heroes! If they want to establish barbarian colonies on the surface of Mars and worship the God Aries, they can do it by themselves!

Also what if you do a space mission with them and they commit more atrocities? And you have to depend on then not to shove you out the airlock? By the way, were you around during the Bosnian wars of the late 20th century, and what did you think of those?

Tom Kalbfus · 2014-02-05 09:29:40

RobertDyck wrote:

Tom Kalbfus wrote:
The Russians weren't our enemies ... now that they chosen us to be their enemies... Apparently they still have a psychological need to have us as their enemy.
They do not want their face rubbed in the dirt. Stop treating them as the loser. Stop emphasizing that you won the Cold War. That's what they rail against. Treat them with respect, they'll respond. Treat them as equals, they'll treat you the same. It's called diplomacy.
Bottom line: stop trying to win. Trying to win means making the other person lose. They don't want to lose. They will not accept losing any more than you would. So find a way that no one loses. No winners means no losers. If no one loses, that makes every one win.

I seem to recall the Russians protesting in the streets of Moscow in 1991, during the Soviet Coup, I don't recall any US troops there, the Russians got fed up with their Soviet government and got rid of it, the United States had no part in that other than not letting the Soviets win the Cold War from 1921 to 1991,and conquer the World. Besides, we did rub the German's nose in it after we forced many German citizens to take a tour of their own Death Camps in in Germany such as Dachau. After all, what were we supposed to do, not mention the Holocaust and pretend it never happened? The Russian also let all those Soviet Republics go, that was their decision, not ours, and under Putin, they wanted them back, but they didn't want to go back. Sorry, if they become independent countries, we treat them as independent European countries. If the Russians don't like the Ukraine joining NATO and the European Union, too bad, it isn't any of their business! Besides, it was the Russians that chose to be our enemies, and who made NATO necessary, it was created to prevent the Russians from conquering the World. So either those republics are part of the Russian Empire or they are not, they can't have it both ways.

I'm done.

Last edited by Tom Kalbfus (2014-02-05 12:56:45)

Void · 2014-02-06 06:55:26

This just in:

http://phys.org/news/2014-02-western-eu … tml#ajTabs

Tom Kalbfus · 2014-02-06 11:46:33

Not surprising, if people can go one way, they can go the other.

Tom Kalbfus · 2014-02-27 16:04:16

Terraformer wrote:

Don't redefine the second. We've settled on that as the SI unit for time. You might as well propose defining a "Martian meter", or a "Martian kilogram".
Interesting thing about the days of the week, really. It seems our time system goes from the Middle East in a northwest direction... the rest of the world doesn't get a look in.

Why not? for instance I find the foot to be a more convenient unit of measure than the meter. How about we define the Martian Meter as 1 billionth of a Martian light second? Now if we define the Martian second as 1/60th of a Mars Minute, a Mars minute as 1/60th of a Mars Hour, and a Mars Hour as 1/24 of a Mars Solar Day or Sol, then we'd have a Unit of Measure that is slightly shorter than a standard English foot, and 1,000,000,000 of those is the distance light travels in one Martian light second, which is slightly longer than the standard light second.
How long is a Mars second?
1.027491 of an Earth second.
How long does light travel in a second?
299,792,458 meters.
How long does light travel in a Mars second?
308034052.462878 meters.
What is one billionth of that?
0.308034052462878 of a meter or 30.8 centimeters is a standard Martian metric meter or "foot".
How is that for a unit of linear measure?

Terraformer · 2014-02-28 06:30:03

But, *why*? What is the point of wasting energy just because you want to be 'different', rendering yourself unintelligible in the process? It would be like changing your spelling just because you want to make it clear you're not "English"...

Tom Kalbfus · 2014-03-03 07:02:53

NASA already uses Martian seconds for its Rover program, its rovers operate during the day, and NASA has already divided up the Martian Sol into 24 Martian hours, divided each Martian hour into 60 Martian minutes and divided each Martian Minute into 60 Martian seconds. Now as you said the standard second is a metric unit and goes into the mks system (meters, kilograms, seconds). We can develop a parallel metric system which deals specifically with Mars. A Mars second is a little longer than the Earth-based metric second, so why not also make Martian kilograms and Martian meters? As I recall the original meter was originally defined as one ten thousandth of the distance from the North Pole to the Equator, I got a better definition for the Martian meter, how about one billionth of a Martian Light Second, that is the distance light travels in one Martian second, from this we get the Martian meter which is 30.8 centimeters in length, about the size of an English standard foot more or less. Now a kilogram was defined as the mass of one liter of water and a liter was defined as 10 centimeters cubed, or a milliliter was a cubic centimeter and 1000 milliliters makes a liter. So a Martian centimeter is one one hundreth of a foot approximately, if one takes 10 Martian centimeters and cubes it, one could call that a Martian liter, now fill that Martian liter with water and that would be defined as a Martian Kilogram, which is one ninth of the standard kilogram, or about one quarter of a pound, so if you have the mass of 200 pounds, your mass in Martian units would be about 800 Martian kilograms. We could go on and redefine every metric Unit with its Martian equivalent.

(Oh by the way, I was right about Russia.)

Last edited by Tom Kalbfus (2014-03-03 11:51:27)

Mars_B4_Moon · 2023-02-16 20:52:03

Time had a folklore and religion element to it

yet now the faith is hijacked?

Vladimir Putin’s Cathedral—in Paris
https://www.wsj.com/articles/vladimir-p … x-492d190b

in the shadow of the Eiffel Tower, sits a visually inapposite onion-domed Russian Orthodox church.

Martian Custom and Time Keeping without Politics

https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=2760&p=69

QUOTE

Standard Month in Mars Business Calendar
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Last edited by Mars_B4_Moon (2023-02-16 20:54:16)

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#76 2014-02-04 08:11:07

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#77 2014-02-04 09:56:01

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#78 2014-02-04 10:41:41

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#79 2014-02-04 12:45:05

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#80 2014-02-04 13:52:38

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#81 2014-02-04 15:24:30

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#82 2014-02-04 15:46:27

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#83 2014-02-04 17:51:43

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#84 2014-02-04 20:59:52

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#85 2014-02-04 21:41:46

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#86 2014-02-04 22:51:37

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#87 2014-02-04 23:37:17

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#88 2014-02-05 09:12:18

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#89 2014-02-05 09:29:40

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#90 2014-02-06 06:55:26

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#91 2014-02-06 11:46:33

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#92 2014-02-27 16:04:16

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#93 2014-02-28 06:30:03

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#94 2014-03-03 07:02:53

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#95 2023-02-16 20:52:03

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

Board footer