Canada's new Toyota plant

Here I thought you had me figured out.... besides, you have to incant it's
name three times by the light of the full moon, right???


"SVTKate" > wrote in message
nk.net...
>
> "Jim Warman" > wrote in message
> news:Xe2Ae.104732$HI.40802@edtnps84...
> : hurc... is that you???
> :
> speak not it's name lest you call it upon you
>
> dumbass jim!
>
> LOL
>
>
>

"Michael Johnson, PE" > wrote

: I don't see it as being wasted, necessarily. Much of what is learned
: developing the ISS will be applicable to sending a mission to Mars,
: which seems the next logical step in space exploration with the possible
: exception of a permanent moon base. Developing the technology to reach
: Mars, and return, will take time... a long time IMO. I think it will
: take another 25-30 years before it is remotely considered feasible.

I am still having trouble understanding WHY we need to go to Mars.

Seems like a huge waste of money to me.
HUGE waste of money.

Like this last little $300 million foofah... lets shoot a rocket at an
asteroid.
$300 freaking MILLION dollars, good thing this country isn't in debt, or
that might be considered a waste of money.

I grew up knowing that if you can't pay your bills, you can't buy new toys
either.
Why our government cannot understand that is beyond me.

Kate

You have to be naked when you do it, and I get to film it.

*snikker*



"Jim Warman" > wrote in message
news:S4oAe.115694$9A2.107104@edtnps89...
: Here I thought you had me figured out.... besides, you have to incant it's
: name three times by the light of the full moon, right???
:
:
: "SVTKate" > wrote in message
: nk.net...
: >
: > "Jim Warman" > wrote in message
: > news:Xe2Ae.104732$HI.40802@edtnps84...
: > : hurc... is that you???
: > :
: > speak not it's name lest you call it upon you
: >
: > dumbass jim!
: >
: > LOL
: >
: >
: >
:
:

SVTKate wrote:
> "Michael Johnson, PE" > wrote
>
> : I don't see it as being wasted, necessarily. Much of what is learned
> : developing the ISS will be applicable to sending a mission to Mars,
> : which seems the next logical step in space exploration with the possible
> : exception of a permanent moon base. Developing the technology to reach
> : Mars, and return, will take time... a long time IMO. I think it will
> : take another 25-30 years before it is remotely considered feasible.
>
> I am still having trouble understanding WHY we need to go to Mars.
>
> Seems like a huge waste of money to me.
> HUGE waste of money.
>
> Like this last little $300 million foofah... lets shoot a rocket at an
> asteroid.
> $300 freaking MILLION dollars, good thing this country isn't in debt, or
> that might be considered a waste of money.
>
> I grew up knowing that if you can't pay your bills, you can't buy new toys
> either.
> Why our government cannot understand that is beyond me.

IMO, there is a real good reason for doing it and it really has nothing
to do with reaching Mars or any other planet. Sooner or later, an
asteroid is going to be heading toward our planet. If it is big enough
it would destroy life as we know it and likely exterminate mankind.
Even a smaller impact could kill billions of people. All this space
exploration will enable us to better detect and, if necessary, maybe
deflect any body that is on a collision course with earth. Granted the
odds are slim for a collision but it has happened in the past and it
will happen in the future. It is not a matter of if but when. Plus,
there are usually some very good spin-off technologies coming from space
programs that seem to be very useful in everyday life. Just look at the
things we take for granted today that were derived from the 1960's space
programs.

Plus if the government didn't spend it on space programs they would
probably spend on something even more useless.

On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 01:39:03 -0400, "Michael Johnson, PE"
> wrote:

>RichA wrote:
>> On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 00:06:24 -0400, "Michael Johnson, PE"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>
>>>David Schierholz wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sat, 09 Jul 2005 23:28:09 -0400, pawn > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Most stupid thing I've ever read. You understand NASA operates out of
>>>>>Hunstville, right?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Ok- Probably not the group that cares about such things, but-
>>>>
>>>>You are citing as an example of intelligence and work ethic an
>>>>organization that put a man on the moon in 1969 and hasn't put one
>>>>farther than low earth orbit since?
>>>
>>>This isn't due to lack of intelligence or work ethic. Its due to lack
>>>of funding.
>>
>>
>> It's due to politics. $160b has gone into that USELESS ISS and that
>> is the reason for the lack of money. A make-work project for out of
>> work Russian nuclear scientists.
>> Thankfully, the admin and NASA are now making noises that the ISS is
>> being back-burnered. I hope it's left to disintigrate, what a waste.
>
>I don't see it as being wasted, necessarily. Much of what is learned
>developing the ISS will be applicable to sending a mission to Mars,
>which seems the next logical step in space exploration with the possible
>exception of a permanent moon base. Developing the technology to reach
>Mars, and return, will take time... a long time IMO. I think it will
>take another 25-30 years before it is remotely considered feasible.

Can anyone point me to a document that shows ANY science of value
being done on the ISS? It's a white elephant in space. For what it
cost, they could have put up the successor to the Hubble, built 5 new
shuttles, and launched countless PRODUCTIVE interplanetary probes and
funded larger ground-based telescopes.
-Rich

RichA wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 01:39:03 -0400, "Michael Johnson, PE"
> > wrote:
>
>
>>RichA wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 00:06:24 -0400, "Michael Johnson, PE"
> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>David Schierholz wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>On Sat, 09 Jul 2005 23:28:09 -0400, pawn > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Most stupid thing I've ever read. You understand NASA operates out of
>>>>>>Hunstville, right?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Ok- Probably not the group that cares about such things, but-
>>>>>
>>>>>You are citing as an example of intelligence and work ethic an
>>>>>organization that put a man on the moon in 1969 and hasn't put one
>>>>>farther than low earth orbit since?
>>>>
>>>>This isn't due to lack of intelligence or work ethic. Its due to lack
>>>>of funding.
>>>
>>>
>>>It's due to politics. $160b has gone into that USELESS ISS and that
>>>is the reason for the lack of money. A make-work project for out of
>>>work Russian nuclear scientists.
>>>Thankfully, the admin and NASA are now making noises that the ISS is
>>>being back-burnered. I hope it's left to disintigrate, what a waste.
>>
>>I don't see it as being wasted, necessarily. Much of what is learned
>>developing the ISS will be applicable to sending a mission to Mars,
>>which seems the next logical step in space exploration with the possible
>>exception of a permanent moon base. Developing the technology to reach
>>Mars, and return, will take time... a long time IMO. I think it will
>>take another 25-30 years before it is remotely considered feasible.
>
>
> Can anyone point me to a document that shows ANY science of value
> being done on the ISS? It's a white elephant in space. For what it
> cost, they could have put up the successor to the Hubble, built 5 new
> shuttles, and launched countless PRODUCTIVE interplanetary probes and
> funded larger ground-based telescopes.

I don't necessarily see the science being done on the station as the
benefit. It is being able to hone the technology that allows humans to
live long-term in space and a weightless environment. Also, I bet much
of the "science" done there is classified and may be only be useful to,
or used by, the military.

As a follow up to my reply to Kate, I think we should target a large
asteroid and see how we can affect its long term trajectory through
various means. Developing that capability might prove useful one day!

"Michael Johnson, PE" > wrote
:
: As a follow up to my reply to Kate, I think we should target a large
: asteroid and see how we can affect its long term trajectory through
: various means. Developing that capability might prove useful one day!

Well, I suppose it might prove useful someday, kind of like the set of
taillights I took off of my car MAY be useful someday, not likely, but
possible.
In the meantime... I still think...

Ok, here's the rub.
Only as an example, but a real problem.

Recently in this state they have cut the Tenncare rolls significantly. Loads
of people who are really sick (yes and I am sure some that are taking
advantage) have had their medical benefits eliminated.

I see it this way, $300million would do allot to help people. People who
really need it right ehre and now. People who cannot help themselves.

Kind of the same way I see big fancy churches with the wide screens and
Dolby sound.
The money spent could be used to do some real good....

I know it's a soap box, I just have this terribly practical side.


Kate

SVTKate wrote:
> "Michael Johnson, PE" > wrote
> :
> : As a follow up to my reply to Kate, I think we should target a large
> : asteroid and see how we can affect its long term trajectory through
> : various means. Developing that capability might prove useful one day!
>
> Well, I suppose it might prove useful someday, kind of like the set of
> taillights I took off of my car MAY be useful someday, not likely, but
> possible.
> In the meantime... I still think...
>
> Ok, here's the rub.
> Only as an example, but a real problem.
>
> Recently in this state they have cut the Tenncare rolls significantly. Loads
> of people who are really sick (yes and I am sure some that are taking
> advantage) have had their medical benefits eliminated.
>
> I see it this way, $300million would do allot to help people. People who
> really need it right ehre and now. People who cannot help themselves.
>
> Kind of the same way I see big fancy churches with the wide screens and
> Dolby sound.
> The money spent could be used to do some real good....
>
> I know it's a soap box, I just have this terribly practical side.

The waste bother me too. I also think that while the possibility is
remote we should have a plan for dealing with a rogue comet/asteroid.
It would take that much money. Besides if we are ever hit it would make
the suffer you just described look like mankind had a common cold,
relatively speaking. The real shame is that we, and other nations, have
to spend so much on defense and military related areas. If we would all
just play nice with each other think of the greater good we could
accomplish.

"Michael Johnson, PE" > wrote in
:

> SVTKate wrote:
>> "Michael Johnson, PE" > wrote
>>
>> : I don't see it as being wasted, necessarily. Much of what is
>> : learned developing the ISS will be applicable to sending a
>> : mission to Mars, which seems the next logical step in space
>> : exploration with the possible exception of a permanent moon base.
>> : Developing the technology to reach Mars, and return, will take
>> : time... a long time IMO. I think it will take another 25-30
>> : years before it is remotely considered feasible.
>>
>> I am still having trouble understanding WHY we need to go to Mars.
>>
>> Seems like a huge waste of money to me.
>> HUGE waste of money.
>>
>> Like this last little $300 million foofah... lets shoot a rocket at
>> an asteroid.
>> $300 freaking MILLION dollars, good thing this country isn't in
>> debt, or that might be considered a waste of money.
>>
>> I grew up knowing that if you can't pay your bills, you can't buy
>> new toys either.
>> Why our government cannot understand that is beyond me.

Dubya's the one who doesn't get it.

> IMO, there is a real good reason for doing it and it really has
> nothing to do with reaching Mars or any other planet. Sooner or
> later, an asteroid is going to be heading toward our planet. If it
> is big enough it would destroy life as we know it and likely
> exterminate mankind. Even a smaller impact could kill billions of
> people. All this space exploration will enable us to better detect
> and, if necessary, maybe deflect any body that is on a collision
> course with earth. Granted the odds are slim for a collision but it
> has happened in the past and it will happen in the future. It is
> not a matter of if but when. Plus, there are usually some very good
> spin-off technologies coming from space programs that seem to be
> very useful in everyday life. Just look at the things we take for
> granted today that were derived from the 1960's space programs.

I think it's more like we can learn the origins of where we came from
by studying other planets and the universe. This, in turn, can help
us develop better things in our time, i.e., cures for diseases etc.

> Plus if the government didn't spend it on space programs they would
> probably spend on something even more useless.

They're already doing that. Look at the money (and lives) being spent
in Iraq.

"Michael Johnson, PE" > wrote in
:

> SVTKate wrote:
>> "Michael Johnson, PE" > wrote
>> :
>> : As a follow up to my reply to Kate, I think we should target a
>> : large asteroid and see how we can affect its long term trajectory
>> : through various means. Developing that capability might prove
>> : useful one day!
>>
>> Well, I suppose it might prove useful someday, kind of like the set
>> of taillights I took off of my car MAY be useful someday, not
>> likely, but possible.
>> In the meantime... I still think...
>>
>> Ok, here's the rub.
>> Only as an example, but a real problem.
>>
>> Recently in this state they have cut the Tenncare rolls
>> significantly. Loads of people who are really sick (yes and I am
>> sure some that are taking advantage) have had their medical
>> benefits eliminated.
>>
>> I see it this way, $300million would do allot to help people.
>> People who really need it right ehre and now. People who cannot
>> help themselves.
>>
>> Kind of the same way I see big fancy churches with the wide screens
>> and Dolby sound.
>> The money spent could be used to do some real good....
>>
>> I know it's a soap box, I just have this terribly practical side.
>
> The waste bother me too. I also think that while the possibility is
> remote we should have a plan for dealing with a rogue
> comet/asteroid. It would take that much money. Besides if we are
> ever hit it would make the suffer you just described look like
> mankind had a common cold, relatively speaking. The real shame is
> that we, and other nations, have to spend so much on defense and
> military related areas. If we would all just play nice with each
> other think of the greater good we could accomplish.

You want waste? One word: Iraq. Both lives and money are being
thrown away.