Plan 3 From Outer Space: The Bush Budget Switch
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/nasa-04c.html There is a lot to like in President Bush's new space initiative. Most of the technical and programmatic changes to the current hopeless NASA plan are steps that various critics have been suggesting for some time: early phase-out of Shuttle, dumping the decaying corpse of the Space Station onto the shoulders of the International Partners, scrapping the winged Orbital Space Plane in favor of a ballistic Apollo Mark II vehicle with Moon-return and Mars-return capability. But hidden in the President's speech and the supporting documents is clear evidence that the funding plan for the New Space Order underwent major surgery, probably in the last 2 days before the speech. There are artifacts of three different plans for obtaining the billions of dollars needed over the next five years to develop the Crew(ed) Exploration Vehicle: The first plan, leaked to the news media several days ago, was for a ~%5 annual increase in the NASA budget each year for the period FY05-FY09. Given a current budget of $15.4B, this works out to ~$12B of new money over the remainder of the decade. This is about in the middle of the cost range estimated for the old OSP program by independent analysts. For the post-2009 era, senior officials spoke of massive savings from the termination of Shuttle and Station -- and also making hard choices between manned and unmanned programs in the future. A second funding plan appears as one of the talking points in the White House press release: # From the current 2004 level of $15.4 billion, the President's proposal will increase NASA's budget by an average of 5 percent per year over the next three years, and at approximately 1 percent or less per year for the two years after those. This implies a major reduction in new money from the leaked plan of continous %5 increases. Yet a third funding plan is given in the President's actual speech: NASA's current five-year budget is $86 billion. Most of the funding we need for the new endeavors will come from reallocating $11 billion within that budget. We need some new resources, however. I will call upon Congress to increase NASA's budget by roughly a billion dollars, spread out over the next five years. This dramatically different funding plan is confirmed in two more bullets in the press release: # The funding added for exploration will total $12 billion over the next five years. Most of this added funding for new exploration will come from reallocation of $11 billion that is currently within the five-year total NASA budget of $86 billion. # In the Fiscal Year (FY) 2005 budget, the President will request an additional $1 billion to NASA's existing five-year plan, or an average of $200 million per year. So in only four days, the amount of new money the Bush Administration plans to spend on its Crewed Exploration Initiative has dropped by $11B, and this missing money is now to be obtained from existing NASA programs at the rate of ~$2B/yr. Someday we may learn of the last-minute political logrolling that produced this astonishing change (and the staff bungling that left two wildly contradictory bullets on the same page of a White House press release). But right now let's look at the possible impact of Plan 3 on NASA. The first question to ask is: Will this massive redistribution of funds come from other elements of the manned program, or from the rest of NASA? There is essentially no possibility of squeezing this kind of money out of the existing manned programs. There can't be any significant scale back in Shuttle or Station in the FY05-09 time frame, because we will still be assembling the Station. Possibly there will be some small reduction in the Shuttle flight rate from the former 5/yr. But as NASA never tires of mentioning, cutting back the flight rate of Shuttle doesn't save a lot because the marching army of support people have to be kept on salary anyway. Implementing the CAIB reccomendations will increase cost and staffing levels, not reduce them. Maybe they can save some money by letting VAB and the rest of LC-39 decay away, but not very much. So there is really no alternative to cutting over $2B/yr out of the non-manned-space half of NASA's budget. That's a ~%35 cut if you assume it is equally distributed over the five years 2005-2009!! If it is ramped in like most big budget cuts, the final cut by 2009 would be much larger. Goodbye aeronautical research, goodbye Webb Space Telescope, goodbye planetary probes to boring places like asteroids. Do we really want to trade all this in for Apollo Mark II? A lot of people will say no. Even a lot of Space Cadets will say no. We lost ten years of solar system exploration to pay for the Shuttle and it left a bloody wound that still drips. A lot of influential people will fight this proposal to the last round, and then fix bayonets and keep on fighting until it is defeated. I could go on for pages with minute analysis of the Bush space plan,
Re: Announcing brin-l-books
On 15 Jan 2004, at 6:29 am, Doug Pensinger wrote: On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 22:40:22 +, William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Following several months of development by me and lots of testing by the members of the Wednesday chat brin-l-books is probably ready for you all to try :) http://books.scattersoft.com An interactive web site where you can view and vote on books. The initial lists are compiled from lists of award winning books, books mentioned on list, and recommendations from the testers on the Wednesday chat. Good stuff, William, thanks for putting that together. How do we make suggestions? You can send suggestions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ Our products just aren't engineered for security. - Brian Valentine, senior vice president in charge of Microsoft's Windows development team. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The GOP Problem With Women
At 10:21 PM 1/14/2004 -0600 Dan Minette wrote: At 06:54 PM 1/14/2004 -0800 Nick Arnett wrote: That makes sense. To what extent do you regard conservatives, as a generalization, as male-dominated? In all honesty none. I can say with a clear conscience that I have never ever made that connection in my mind before. You really aren't familiar with Evangelicals, then. I don't know how many of them told me that women need to obey their husbands. Oh come on of course I am familiar with Evangelicals.I just don't think Evangelical as my first, second, or even third thought when I think conservative. When I think of conservatives, I think of the Carmen - who was the President of College Republicans at my university - a school where there are two guys for every girl. When I think of conservatives, I think of the writers at _The National Review_, who prominently employ writers like Kate O'Beirne, Kathryn Lopez, and Florence King. When I think of conservatives, I think of people who support lower taxes, less government spending, cutting government regulation, and ending abortion. I don't think of those who say that wives need to obey their husbands, (and that husbands need to serve their wives.) JDG ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity. - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Double Standards on Regional Bigotry
At 11:40 PM 1/14/2004 -0600 Dan Minette wrote: Because Republicans favor tax and spending policies that favor focusing wealth in the entrepreneur class because they are the ones that give jobs to the rest of us. That's funny, because I seem to recall George H. W. Bush raising taxes on the rich.I also don't remember Richard Nixon as being a big tax cutter nor a person who was much interested in cutting spending on the poor. As for the idea that Reagan and George W. Bush favored focusing wealth in the entrepreneur class, I don't think that I'm going to even dignify such a ridiculous statement with further comment. and if you believe that the recessions of '82, '91, and '01 were all the Republicans' fault. No, their policies just exaperated the recessions and weakened the recoveries. It is pretty bold of you Dan to claimun the George W. Bush has just exasperated and weaked the recovery of the *mildest* recession since WWII, if not ever.Indeed, it kind of makes wonder who we are speaking of when we talk of those who won't be convinced by data. Of course, I forgot, that I am an economist, and since economics isn't a science I won't be convinced by data. Of course, I should also point out that you have a long history of playing fast-and-loose with economic data on this List, doing things like ascribing economic data from Carter's Presidency to Ronald Reagan. At any rate, in examining economic data since 1982, you should surely be prepared to make adjustments for the fact that all three recessions happened to land during Republican Presidencies - which you have conceded were not the Republicans' fault.Most everyone would concede that recessions, almost by definition, have a greater impact on those at the bottom of the income bracket than at the top, as these people have less assets to insulate themselves from economic hard time.Moreover, I am sure that blacks benefitted greatly during the bubble years of the 1990's, when the US labor market overheated and produced unsustainable levels of employment. JDG ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity. - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: how CAPPS II works
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Kevin Tarr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 04:19 PM 1/14/2004, you wrote: This is the scariest thing ever. Get ready to be extorted! You want to fly, you have to pay $250 for your Cendant security records so that you can find out why your rating comes up yellow or red. Then once you find out you will have to pay thousands and thousands of dollars to clear the false record. Then once you have the yearly cross check from another data provider will plop that false record right back in your file. - even though the false record was oringinaly introduced by the company you cleared it from - You think not? Have you ever had erronious data on your credit report? Yes I did. It took one phone call to clear it. I still have nightmares over that burden. My experience was quite different. It took a lawyer's involvment, cost me a bundle, (I had to wait untill after Uni becouse I coudln't afford the law service), and even after it was fixed, it would come back time and time again. It has been 4 years now without any issues, but of course it has now been over 7 years since -that other J Coffey- filed for chapter 11. The private credit ratings are compleatly bogus. It's like legal extortion. Just imagin having the same kind of problem with flight security. If you can't afford to fix it, you will just have to drive, or take a boat. How long will it be before they start having road blocks and forcing you to have papers just to drive from one city to another? I don't mind telling you that I am scared. Every day our societly is starting to look more and more like that of 1970s CCCP. I'm a concervative. That means I believe in the ideals this country was founded on. Where have those ideal's gone? ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Some brin-l-books stats
So far 17 users have cast 819 votes. Here is the first 'top ten' of SF titles (only including those which received 3 or more votes).[1] Foundation and Empire Isaac Asimov =1 HyperionDan Simmons =1 The Left Hand of Darkness Ursula KLe Guin =1 A Fire upon the DeepVernor Vinge 2 Foundation Isaac Asimov =3 RingworldLarry Niven =3 Second Foundation Isaac Asimov =3 The Fall of HyperionDan Simmons =3 Blood Music Greg Bear=4 The Citadel of the Autarch GeneWolfe =4 The Claw of the Conciliator GeneWolfe =4 The Shadow of the Torturer GeneWolfe =4 The Sword of the Lictor GeneWolfe =4 The Demolished Man Alfred Bester =5 The Man in the High Castle Philip KDick =5 A Deepness in the Sky Vernor Vinge 6 A Scanner DarklyPhilip KDick =7 DiasporaGreg Egan =7 Schismatrix Bruce Sterling=7 The Moon Is a Harsh MistressRobert AHeinlein=7 Gateway FrederikPohl =8 Startide Rising David Brin =8 To Your Scattered Bodies Go Philip Jose Farmer =8 Lord of Light Roger Zelazny =9 Neuromancer William Gibson =9 Snow Crash NealStephenson =9 The Reality Dysfunction Peter F Hamilton=9 The Robots of Dawn Isaac Asimov =9 The Shockwave Rider JohnBrunner =9 Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?Philip KDick10 The number one fantasy title was The Lord of the Rings. [1] Unless I screwed up the SQL :) -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ It is our belief, however, that serious professional users will run out of things they can do with UNIX. - Ken Olsen, President of DEC, 1984. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Davidbrin.com blocked by WebSense
At 02:11 PM 1/11/04, Lalith Vipulananthan wrote: Bryon wrote: That's happened to me a few times recently as well. Just today I got one from Tricia Blankenship. I got one from Tricia Blankenship as well. Lal GSV Spam Hell I just got one (the same ad for p enlargement which I get at least a dozen times a day) allegedly from Cecelia Peck. I know a woman named Cecelia Peck. A couple of years ago, she was the person in charge of scheduling all the classrooms, making sure all the necessary equipment (AV, etc.) was in the rooms where it was needed etc., with some title like administrative coordinator or something like that. Somehow I don't see her being reduced to spamming . . . -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Easterbrook on Bush's NASA plan
When I first read Bush's proposal, one of the first things that struck me was that it seems to be far too little new money, and far too little time, to accomplish the goals he set out in his proposed time frame. Nasa's new fast and cheap development philosphy probably won't be acceptable for manned spacecraft. This blog entry by Gregg Easterbrook puts out some numbers that seem to support the same conclusion. http://tnr.com/easterbrook.mhtml?pid=1198 EXPLORING THE CREW EXPLORATION VEHICLE: NASA wants hundreds of billions of dollars, and the best name the agency can come up with for its new spaceship is the Crew Exploration Vehicle? How inspiring! The name doesn't even make sense. Will the task of the vehicle be to explore the crew? Just the cost numbers for the Crew Exploration Vehicle alone--forget all the probes, colonies, and other stuff--make Bush's announcement yesterday an all-time monument to budgetary low-balling. He declared that for the next five years, $12 billion will be devoted to the Moon-Mars initiative. That, the president said, is enough to fund new the Moon probes and development of the ill-named Crew Exploration Vehicle. This figure is utterly ridiculous, a mere fraction of what will be entailed in anything beyond some paper spacecraft--engineers' lingo for studies and Power Point presentations of hardware that never gets built. Boeing expects to spend around $7.5 billion merely to develop the new 7E7 jetliner, which will stay within the atmosphere and use very well-understood engineering. The development cost of the Crew Exploration Vehicle will be several times greater. The timetable is also a low-ball. Bush declared that the Crew Exploration Vehicle would be tested in 2008, just four years from now. There's no way on Earth, as it were, this could happen without a cost-no-object crash program to rival Apollo. The Air Force's new F22 fighter has been in development for 13 years; an entire new spaceship can be developed in four years? The Crew Exploration Vehicle concept is hazy; NASA has given no specifics. But if, as Bush declared, it will be capable both of flying back and forth to the space station and of flying to the Moon, we're talking quite a machine. If one single spacecraft that can carry enough fuel to travel to the Moon and back, and be anything than another ultra-cramped spam-in-a-can like Apollo, the part that reaches orbit would need to be enormous--larger than the space shuttle. That means the Crew Exploration Vehicle will cost vast sums, at least dozens of billions of dollars, to develop. Alternatively, a smarter approach might be to construct one spaceship that always stays in space, looping back and forth between Earth and Moon; people, supplies, and fuel would be launched to meet the ship in Earth-orbit, but the ship itself would never come down. (This was a Werner von Braun idea.) That would mean design, engineering, and construction of a type of flying machine that has never existed before. Development of the space shuttle cost between $50 billion and $100 billion in current dollars, depending on whose estimate you believe. The idea that something more challenging, the first-ever true spaceship, can be developed for $12 billion is bunkum. And what's going to put this Crew Exploration Vehicle into orbit? No rocket that exists in the world today is capable of lifting the Apollo capsule and Moon lander of the late 1960s. Unless the Moon-bound twenty-first-century Crew Exploration Vehicle is going to be significantly smaller than the Apollo of a generation ago--carrying just one person and no supplies--a new, very large rocket will be required. Apollo flew atop the Saturn V, which NASA retired almost 30 years ago. Many architecture studies for Mars flight, including Mars Institute studies that are said to have influenced the Bush announcement, assume NASA will develop a heavy lifter rocket substantially more powerful than the Saturn V. A rocket far more powerful than the Saturn V will be a necessity if the Crew Exploration Vehicle is to be both capable of Moon flight and of carrying more than one person. Such a rocket is possible on a technical basis, but vast expenditure would be entailed. Development of the Saturn V was the single greatest line item for the first Moon program--the Saturn V cost about $40 billion, in current dollars, to develop. A similar outlay would be entailed to develop a new super-rocket. That's $40 billion or more spent before the first dime is invested in the Crew Exploration Vehicle that sits on top. So far all money numbers announced for the Bush plan seem complete nonsense, if not outright dishonesty. We shouldn't expect George W. Bush himself to know that $12 billion is not enough to develop a spaceship. We should expect the people around Bush, and at the top of NASA, to know this. And apparently they are either astonishingly ill-informed and naïve, or are handing out
Re: Shrub + IGC Imposes Islamic Laws in Iraq - Mass Demonstrations against Islamization
From: Damon Agretto [EMAIL PROTECTED] No mention of this on Al-jazeera. If anyone would report on it they would (they're very good at upplaying stories of dissent and de-emphasizing other less negative stories...)... From Brad Delong: http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/movable_type/2004_archives/27.html Which also mentions this FT article?: http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullSto ryc=StoryFTcid=1073281040335 On Tuesday hundreds of women demonstrated against the move, chanting: No to sectarianism, no to discrimination between men and women in our new Iraq. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
News you won't See in the Corporate Media
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=storyu=/afp/20040113/wl_mideast_a fp/iraq_us_women_law_040113202530 At the demonstration in Ferdus Square women stood behind banners that read: No to discrimination between men and women in the new Iraq, and We reject decision 137 (of the Governing Council) which undermines the Iraqi family and society. - - http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com/2004_01_01_riverbendblog_archive.html# 107418574968764277 Shari'a and Family Law... On Wednesday our darling Iraqi Puppet Council decided that secular Iraqi family law would no longer be secular- it is now going to be according to Islamic Shari'a. Shari'a is Islamic law, whether from the Quran or quotes of the Prophet or interpretations of modern Islamic law by clerics and people who have dedicated their lives to studying Islam. The news has barely been covered by Western or even Arab media and Iraqi media certainly aren't covering it. It is too much to ask of Al-Iraqiya to debate or cover a topic like this one- it would obviously conflict with the Egyptian soap operas and songs. This latest decision is going to be catastrophic for females- we're going backwards. ... I'll give an example of what this will mean. One infamous practice brought to Iraq by Iranian clerics was the 'zawaj muta'a', which when translated by the clerics means 'temporary marriage'. The actual translation is 'pleasure marriage'- which is exactly what it is. It works like this: a consenting man and woman go to a cleric who approves of temporary marriage and they agree upon a period of time during which the marriage will last. The man pays the woman a 'mahar' or dowry and during the duration of the marriage (which can be anything from an hour, to a week, a month, etc.) the man has full marital rights. Basically, it's a form of prostitution that often results in illegitimate children and a spread of STDs. Sunni clerics consider it a sin and many Shi'a clerics also frown upon it but there are the ones who will tell you it's 'halal' and Shari'a, etc. The same people who approve it or practice it would, of course, rather see their daughters or sisters dead before they allow *them* to practice it- but that's beyond the point. Anyway, secular Iraqi family law considers it a form of prostitution and doesn't consider a 'pleasure marriage' a legitimate marriage. In other words, the woman wouldn't have any legal rights and if she finds herself pregnant- the child, legally, wouldn't have a father. ... By Iraqi civil law, parents are required to send their children to complete at least primary school. According to Shari'a, a father can make his son or daughter quit school and either work or remain at home. So what happens when and if he decides to do that? Does Shari'a apply or does civil law apply? ... Women are outraged this is going to open new doors for repression in the most advanced country on women's rights in the Arab world! Men are also against this (although they certainly have the upper-hand in the situation) because it's going to mean more confusion and conflict all around. ... I usually ignore the emails I receive telling me to 'embrace' my new-found freedom and be happy that the circumstances of all Iraqi women are going to 'improve drastically' from what we had before. They quote Bush (which in itself speaks volumes) saying things about how repressed the Iraqi women were and how, now, they are going to be able to live free lives. The people who write those emails often lob Iraq together with Saudi Arabia, Iran and Afghanistan and I shake my head at their ignorance but think to myself, Well, they really need to believe their country has the best of intentions- I won't burst their bubble. But I'm telling everyone now- if I get any more emails about how free and liberated the Iraqi women are *now* thanks to America, they can expect a very nasty answer. I can't imagine that I'm going to be attacked for telling the truth. Why would I be attacked for telling the truth? Paul O'Neill, 60 Minutes ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Double Standards on Regional Bigotry
- Original Message - From: Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 11:55 PM Subject: Re: Double Standards on Regional Bigotry --- Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not saying that Bush is a racist. He probably isn't. I'd put money on a straight up bet against him being an old fashioned Texas racist. But, Trent saying that things would have been better if Strom had won instead of Harry wasn't an accident. The only problem is that he got caught with the wrong people hearing it. Dan M. Sure - but the Republican Party removed him from power, very much to its credit. Jesse Himeytown Jackson is doing okay, by contrast. Al Tawana Brawley Sharpton is kowtowed to by Democrats every day. And, as I've already mentioned, Robert White N- Byrd is one of the leaders of the Democratic Party. The modern record of the Democratic Party is every bit as bad, despite the disgraceful heritage of Nixon's southern strategy. I'll freely admit that the Democrats do not criticize unelected black leaders enough. In particular, I think the deference paid to Sharpton this year is disgraceful. And, Byrd did indeed join the KKK in the 40s. But, I don't remember a recent Democratic presidential candidate having focus groups to find the way to run ads that would trigger white nervousness about criminal blacks. Crime itself wasn't enough, just any old murder wouldn't do. It was the old black man raping white woman that got the good numbers in the focus group. I see no indication that Republicans are abandoning Nixon's Southern strategy. It doesn't make sense. From an economic standpoint, lower middle class whites belong in the Democratic camp. Republicans can get them by appealing to their nervousness about pushy minorities. Its not really about things like drugs or premarital sex, because that group is roughly as active as any other in those activities. There are other indications too, like opposition to bus service to the Woodlands because it would increase crime. Who seriously thinks that criminals will ride the bus from the city, rob a house blind, and take the bus home with their stolen goods? Its a code word for something else. Democrats are naturally handicapped in going for the racist vote because blacks are accurately seen as part of the Democratic coalition. Thus, it is a ripe field for the Republicans. I'm not saying that Republicans are inherently more immoral than Democrats, just that they are much better positioned to play the race card with whites. Given the fact that a subtly played race card can be the difference between victory and defeat, its hard to imagine the majority of politicians refraining from playing it for ethical reasons. So, my argument is not that Democrats don't play it as well or often as Republicans because they often can't, not because they won't on principal. You can also see the racist vote in Texas, where, in key districts, a moderate black candidate did significantly worse than a very liberal white candidate. Neither had special name recognition, but voters knew who was white and who was black. Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Double Standards on Regional Bigotry
--- Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I see no indication that Republicans are abandoning Nixon's Southern strategy. It doesn't make sense. From an economic standpoint, lower middle class whites belong in the Democratic camp. Republicans can get them by appealing to their nervousness about pushy minorities. See Dan, this is where we disagree, because you're an old Marxist at heart :-) While I don't happen to agree with your economic standpoint, for now I'll accept it as a debating point. So what? There Are More Important Things Than Economics. Always have been, always will be. Right now, of course, that issue is national security. Lower middle class whites are smart enough to realize that when someone is trying to kill them, it's probably a good idea to defend yourself - something that distinguishes them from a fair amount of the Democratic Party, apparently. During the Cold War and after they voted Republican in large part because of national defense issues. Social issues are at least as important. It's true that behaviors that, in an earlier time, might have been called indicators of social deviance are no less likely to happen in that group. They are, however, more likely to be condemned by large members of that group. Again, social values trend Republican. More important than any of those is secularism, in my opinion. The Democratic Party has a remarkable ability to have leaders who are fairly secular (Mondale, Dukakis) or actively disdain religion (Dean, if he wins the nomination). Americans are, on the whole, quite religious. Lower middle class whites are _really_ religious. Bill Clinton, who spoke the language of faith well, was able to neutralize much of the traditional Republican advantage on this issue, do fairly well among lower middle class whites and, not by coincidence, win the election. Other Democrats have been unable or unwilling to do this, and paid the appropriate penalty for that. The Southern Strategy was certainly based on race at one point. But racism is something that's evenly distributed among the parties and the states. Actually, if you redid the empirics given the rise of anti-semitism on the left, I'd bet it's _more_, not less, common among Democrats. But I haven't seen numbers which postdate 1995 or so on that topic, so that's uninformed speculation and not worth much. If the southern strategy was a raced-based appeal _today_, it wouldn't be Southern. It would work every bit as well in the North and the West. But it doesn't, because it's not about race any more. It's about culture - and culture is always more important than economics. = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freedom is not free http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the Signing Bonus Sweepstakes http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Double Standards on Regional Bigotry
From: John D. Giorgis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Of course, I forgot, that I am an economist, and since economics isn't a science I won't be convinced by data. Supply-side economics is like the economists version of young-earth creationism. Keynesian Economic theories WORK, plain and simple. Voodoo reganomic theories do not. Plain and simple. There is more wisdom and insight in 1 Brad Delong Post than any fifty of the best JDG posts. But Brin-Lers already knew that. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Easterbrook on Bush's NASA plan
At 04:08 PM 1/15/04, Bryon Daly wrote: When I first read Bush's proposal, one of the first things that struck me was that it seems to be far too little new money, and far too little time, It took only 8 years from JFK's speech until Apollo 11, and JFK's speech happened less than four years after the very first ever object was launched into Earth orbit. to accomplish the goals he set out in his proposed time frame. Nasa's new fast and cheap development philosphy probably won't be acceptable for manned spacecraft. This blog entry by Gregg Easterbrook puts out some numbers that seem to support the same conclusion. http://tnr.com/easterbrook.mhtml?pid=1198 EXPLORING THE CREW EXPLORATION VEHICLE: NASA wants hundreds of billions of dollars, and the best name the agency can come up with for its new spaceship is the Crew Exploration Vehicle? How inspiring! Less inspiring than, frex, Lunar Module? The name doesn't even make sense. Who cares? Will the task of the vehicle be to explore the crew? No. Its task will be to LAND HUMAN BEINGS ON MARS . _That's_ what's inspiring about it. So far all money numbers announced for the Bush plan seem complete nonsense, if not outright dishonesty. We shouldn't expect George W. Bush himself to know that $12 billion is not enough to develop a spaceship. We should expect the people around Bush, and at the top of NASA, to know this. And apparently they are either astonishingly ill-informed and naïve, or are handing out phony numbers for political purposes, to get the foot in the door for far larger sums later. Obviously it is only a start. The converse of No bucks = No Buck Rogers is also true. Open your mind, man. And your heart. As somebody on That Other List is fond of using as a .sig quote: It's time for the human race to enter the solar system. -- Governor George W. Bush -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Double Standards on Regional Bigotry
At 05:22 PM 1/15/04, The Fool wrote: There is more wisdom and insight in 1 Brad Delong Post than any fifty of the best JDG posts. But Brin-Lers already knew that. Ad hominem. Ad nauseum. -- Ronn! :) The contents of this message © 2004 by the author. All rights reserved. Any reproduction, reproduction, or transmission of the contents of this message in any form by any means whatsoever is strictly prohibited. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Double Standards on Regional Bigotry
From: Ronn!Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED] At 05:22 PM 1/15/04, The Fool wrote: There is more wisdom and insight in 1 Brad Delong Post than any fifty of the best JDG posts. But Brin-Lers already knew that. Ad hominem. Ad nauseum. Hyperbole. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Easterbrook on Bush's NASA plan
On Thursday 2004-01-15 15:08, Bryon Daly wrote: So far all money numbers announced for the Bush plan seem complete nonsense, if not outright dishonesty. We shouldn't expect George W. Bush himself to know that $12 billion is not enough to develop a spaceship. We should expect the people around Bush, and at the top of NASA, to know this. And apparently they are either astonishingly ill-informed and naïve, or are handing out phony numbers for political purposes, to get the foot in the door for far larger sums later. Yeah, the budget compared with the goal make NO SENSE. It makes so little sense that I am drawn to conspiracy theories. Corona hidden in NASA psuedo-program for space biology. (Space biologists have careers stalled for national security -- albeit really critical national security.) Modeling fusion for nuclear bombs marketed as research with high energy lasers and magnets on fusion power. Glomar Explorer mines Soviet sub, but the world is told it is vacuuming manganese nodules. Absurdly low price tag of $12G for space vehicle-moon base-manned mars expidition hides what? -- I have a hunch that strategic planners at Shrub Co have a defense initiative that needs a B-I-G reliable booster. Once they get their lifter, will the rest of the project get forgotten? ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Martian Emotion (was Easterbrook on Bush's NASA plan)
On Thursday 2004-01-15 16:28, Ronn!Blankenship wrote: spaceship is the Crew Exploration Vehicle? How inspiring! Less inspiring than, frex, Lunar Module? The name doesn't even make sense. Who cares? Will the task of the vehicle be to explore the crew? No. Its task will be to LAND HUMAN BEINGS ON MARS . _That's_ what's inspiring about it. Who cares if its inspiring? Look I was raised to be a liberal. I feel that we should fund medicaide and take care of poor sick folk. (Heck, I am poor with chronic illnesses and would *benefit* from socialized medicine.) I feel that we should fund primary and secondary education till public schools can flush money down toilets. I feel that we should provide adequate housing for everyone. I feel ... well you get the picture. I THINK all of this would be bad public policy. When the administration announces grand plans for manned space programs i FEEL proud, excited, and--yes--even inspired. And that feeling immediately makes me suspicious. Is this fiscally responsible? Is it rational? I think, no, I *KNOW* that basing public policy on emotion IS irresponsible -- unpatriotic. In brute, lowest common denominatior terms what is in this gold-plated fools' errand for me? When Isabella sent Columbus to look for a route to the Indies she wasn't investing in exploration. Exploration was a nice side effect. Isabella's primary motivation was making a LOT OF MONEY! If we build a big new booster what will be the tangible return on investment? What about the crew vehicle? The moon colony? How the @#$% do you plan to get tangible ROI from a manned mission to Mars? If you do get ROI will it make sense in terms of opportunity cost. We have underfunded schools, biomedical research, and ageing population and military obligations we need to see to, remember. Money or national security only please. I believe that as a citizen I have a *responsibility* to resist temptation and make decisisons as a pure Philistine. As a citizen I dont care a whit about pure science, the human quest, or feel-good programs. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Easterbrook on Bush's NASA plan
- Original Message - From: Trent Shipley [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2004 6:05 PM Subject: Re: Easterbrook on Bush's NASA plan On Thursday 2004-01-15 15:08, Bryon Daly wrote: So far all money numbers announced for the Bush plan seem complete nonsense, if not outright dishonesty. We shouldn't expect George W. Bush himself to know that $12 billion is not enough to develop a spaceship. We should expect the people around Bush, and at the top of NASA, to know this. And apparently they are either astonishingly ill-informed and naïve, or are handing out phony numbers for political purposes, to get the foot in the door for far larger sums later. Yeah, the budget compared with the goal make NO SENSE. It makes so little sense that I am drawn to conspiracy theories. Corona hidden in NASA psuedo-program for space biology. (Space biologists have careers stalled for national security -- albeit really critical national security.) Modeling fusion for nuclear bombs marketed as research with high energy lasers and magnets on fusion power. Glomar Explorer mines Soviet sub, but the world is told it is vacuuming manganese nodules. Absurdly low price tag of $12G for space vehicle-moon base-manned mars expidition hides what? -- I have a hunch that strategic planners at Shrub Co have a defense initiative that needs a B-I-G reliable booster. Once they get their lifter, will the rest of the project get forgotten? I've been following this story since it leaked last week. What I've been hearing is that not only will this end up an international effort, but the initial lifters are going to be (I think) Ariane 5s and Protons. I think we will likely have to wait a few weeks before more details shake out. But as things stand, any *new* crewed vehicles won't be *new* technology, just modifications of older designs so the costs *should* be reducible. And if the propulsion units are assembled in orbit or at L1 (as some rumors have it) there could be further cost reductions. I'm not claiming that there are not aspects of this plan that strain credulity, but I am saying that we haven't seen a blueprint yet. Just a rough sketch on a napkin, if you will. xponent Mars, bringer Of Budgets Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Tg Territories
Trent Shipley wrote: I come up with 10 major Terragen colonies. The problem is that Galactics wouldn't count Mars or Venus as proper leaseholds, so I get 8 leases. You mean: Earth (homeworld), Mars, Venus (crap) [what about the Moon?], and the 8 colonies: Deemi, Dezni, Horst, Omnivarium, Calafia, Atlast, and NuDawn? Oops, I counted _seven_, you missed Garth. IIRC, there is a reference to the early explorations to Alpha Centauri and Tau Ceti, where the Ash was found. Tau Ceti should be NuDawn, for it makes a great Asimov-pun, but there is no colony around any of Alpha Centauri's stars. Maybe there's room to place one A planet around each one of the pair :-) Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
the Right-Wing solution to illegal immigration: Forced Sterilization
Before opening the borders, seal up the wombs! http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=36616 What is the dirty little secret that the Bush administration doesn't tell you about its proposed temporary guest-worker program? These workers will come here in the prime of life and, while they are in our country as temporary workers, they will have babies, who immediately become U.S. citizens. These workers may be poor, but they are not stupid! Can U.S. citizens be deported? Of course not! The Bush administration says this plan would create a system that is fairer, more consistent and more compassionate. What compassionate country would deport the parents of underage U.S. citizens? Let's get real here. That will never happen! Therefore, the only way to assure the American people that this temporary status truly is temporary is to seal up the wombs sterilize those who apply for guest-worker status. Or else change the law that grants citizenship to anyone who is born here regardless of the status of his or her parents. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Martian Emotion (was Easterbrook on Bush's NASA plan)
- Original Message - From: Trent Shipley [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2004 6:32 PM Subject: Martian Emotion (was Easterbrook on Bush's NASA plan) In brute, lowest common denominatior terms what is in this gold-plated fools' errand for me? When Isabella sent Columbus to look for a route to the Indies she wasn't investing in exploration. Exploration was a nice side effect. Isabella's primary motivation was making a LOT OF MONEY! If we build a big new booster what will be the tangible return on investment? What about the crew vehicle? The moon colony? How the @#$% do you plan to get tangible ROI from a manned mission to Mars? A mission to a nickle-iron asteroid that would mean an eventual return for investment just aint sexy. I can think of one other listmember who, like me, might pop a boner at the thought of asteroid mining, but I doubt anyone else here would get excited, or in any other way emotional at the thought. No matter how good an idea it might be, very few people would be interested as compared to a Mars mission. If you do get ROI will it make sense in terms of opportunity cost. We have underfunded schools, biomedical research, and ageing population and military obligations we need to see to, remember. Money or national security only please. I believe that as a citizen I have a *responsibility* to resist temptation and make decisisons as a pure Philistine. As a citizen I dont care a whit about pure science, the human quest, or feel-good programs. You wanna live forever cowboy? G xponent Raiders Of The Lost Carbonaceous Chondrite Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Easterbrook on Bush's NASA plan
From: Ronn!Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED] At 04:08 PM 1/15/04, Bryon Daly wrote: When I first read Bush's proposal, one of the first things that struck me was that it seems to be far too little new money, and far too little time, It took only 8 years from JFK's speech until Apollo 11, and JFK's speech happened less than four years after the very first ever object was launched into Earth orbit. Yes, but I believe that to have been a crash program, with lots of money and resources brought to bear on it, with the singular goal in mind. (Am I wrong on that?) I've often heard use of an Apollo-type program to describe an intense, high-focus program to achieve some goal. Can reappropriating just 1/7 or so of NASA's budget allow for this sort of intense program? From some of the analysis I've seen, it looks as if NASA will still be spending part of its energies and a fair bit of its budget on the shuttle and space station, plus probably still trying to maintain at least some portion of its unmanned robotic exploration efforts. One big oopsie for me: Rereading Bush's speech, I realize his target for a return to the moon is 2015-2020. I had misremembered his testing date for the CEV (2008) as the targeted moon landing date, so it's a far more reasonable 11-16 year timeframe that the short 4-6 year time frame I was thinking. Even so, though, is that enough time (and is the budget sufficient) to develop both a heavy lifting Saturn V replacement, the CEV, and the moon probes? How long did the shuttle take to launch, from day 1 until its first true first space mission? I'm afraid our big project track record since the Apollo days isn't so encouraging. (ie: F-22) All that said, I do really like the idea of a return to manned exploration of space, a Moon base and Mars landings. I was pretty disappointed the last time I remember a president (was it Bush?) sorta mentioned a manned Mars mission, there seemed to be a resounding No! from some of the science community. So really, my concern here is in how realistic the proposal is. I'd prefer a realistic appraisal up front of the time and costs involved over one that earns a reputation as behind schedule and over budget. (Not to say that I think that will be the case, but Easterbrook's numbers cause me some concern. Particularly the Saturn V cost $40b in today's dollars Can we do it plus the CEV today for under $12b when Boeing spends $7.5b designing a new airliner?) Easterbrook was a bit snarky with some of the stuff you quote below, which I won't defend, but I'll add some comments. The name doesn't even make sense. Who cares? I think Manned Exploration Vehicle would make more sense, but Easterbrook's just nitpicking here. Will the task of the vehicle be to explore the crew? No. Its task will be to LAND HUMAN BEINGS ON MARS . _That's_ what's inspiring about it. I agree. So far all money numbers announced for the Bush plan seem complete nonsense, if not outright dishonesty. We shouldn't expect George W. Bush himself to know that $12 billion is not enough to develop a spaceship. We should expect the people around Bush, and at the top of NASA, to know this. And apparently they are either astonishingly ill-informed and naïve, or are handing out phony numbers for political purposes, to get the foot in the door for far larger sums later. Obviously it is only a start. The converse of No bucks = No Buck Rogers is also true. Open your mind, man. And your heart. What would the converse of No bucks = No Buck Rogers be? -bryon _ High-speed usersbe more efficient online with the new MSN Premium Internet Software. http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-uspage=byoa/premST=1 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
A Girl with an X-ray vision
http://english.pravda.ru/science/19/94/377/11797_phenomenon.html Moscow's medical workers discovered a magnificent gift of a sixteen-year-old girl Natalya Demkina from Saransk. The girl possesses dual vision. She is capable of discerning a person's internal organs without using X-ray or ultrasound. Natasha has already disproved several medical diagnoses and has not made any mistakes. A series of medical experiments conducted in one of the clinics provide substantial and undeniable proofs of the girls' unique abilities. Growing up, my daughter was just an ordinary child, states Natasha's mother Tatyana Vladimirovna. Perhaps, she just a bit more mature than other kids her age. Natasha started to talk when she was only 6 months old. At 1, she could already recite Pushkin and Nekrasov by heart. By 3, Natasha mastered the alphabet and learned to operate a snowmobile, continues her mother. Since early childhood, Natasha has been resistant to cold temperatures. She practically walked around naked till winter. She once walked barefoot in the snow after sauna [Rus. banya] Overall, she was just a normal kid. Never was she able to see through humans! The Demkins family remains puzzled as to the origin of their daughters gift. Perhaps, Natashas latest surgery has triggered such vision improvement. Natashas appendix has been removed. However, by the time she was scheduled to be sent home from the hospital, she could hardly move. Ultrasound revealed that doctors forgot to remove sanitary cotton tampons from the girls intestines. Natasha was once again hospitalized and operated for the second time. In a month after that incident, the teenager was able to surprise her mother with her unique quality. I see a crimped tube similar to our vacuum cleaner inside of you. I also see two beans and a tomato that resembles a bulls' heart, states the girl. Back then, she was not aware of medical terminology and could not provide a proper name for a heart, a liver, a kidney, or intestines. She simply compared what she saw to fruits and vegetables. Medical workers of children's hospital N1 decided to conduct several experiments in order to gain some insight into the girls gift. Natasha was shown a woman with a whole bunch of illnesses. The girl managed to list every single one of them. Further ultrasound examination simply proved her final diagnosis. Natasha is capable of distinguishing even the tiniest pathology on a molecular level in the deepest corners of a human body, which are usually left undetected by regular ultrasound. It's like having double vision. I can switch from one to the other in no time if I need to know a person's health problem, says the teenager. I see an entire human organism. It is difficult to explain how I determine specific illnesses. There are certain impulses that I feel from the damaged organs. The secondary vision works only in daytime and is asleep at night. Natasha began her studies at a multi-disciplined academy at the Moscow's State University of Ogarev in order to learn more about organism's phenomenal qualities. There she specializes in medicine. Being able to use medical terminology, I will be able to state the final diagnosis more accurately. I have to know and understand what I see. This will definitely ease my work with people who come for consultations, states Natasha. In the meantime, the amount of people willing to attend the girls' consultations increases day after day. News about her wonderful gift has quickly spread around their district. Today, the Demkins family accepts about twenty phone calls a day with cries for help. We even have people standing in line right before our door, says Natasha. I cannot turn them down. I do not accept any monetary rewards either. That is why I am often exhausted by the end of the day. Some people do not even thank me. Doctors themselves often pay visits to the girl. Several times Natasha disproved their final diagnoses. There was once a lady who had been diagnosed with cancer. I looked at her and did not notice anything like it, just a small cyst. The woman however stated that she had just been diagnosed with cancer. Secondary examination however revealed that Natasha had been right. I would like to get into Moscows medical academy of Sechenov. However, I do not think that I will be able to pay for my studies- 70,000 rubles annually. Not even my gift can help me in these matters, says Natasha. Natasha is right. Despite a number of experiments and thorough medical examinations, the girl's gift still needs to be backed up by scientific evidences and facts. Today, the girl hopes that scientists will notice her and conduct all the necessary experiments. I have nothing to hide, says Natasha. Let them experiment with me. Perhaps, they will be able to explain the nature of my secondary vision. Then I guess I will have a chance to study at the most prestigious medical school. xponent X Factor Maru rob
Bush's New Space Plan Excites Russia
http://www.space.com/news/russia_bush_040115.html U.S. President George W. Bush's new plan to send men to the moon, Mars and beyond excited Russian space officials and designers, who voiced quick hopes Thursday for winning a lucrative share in the U.S. program and boosting the sagging status of Russia's space program. NASA has already sent its proposals concerning cooperation in moon and Mars missions to the Russian Aerospace Agency, said deputy chief Nikolai Moiseyev, according to the ITAR-Tass news agency. Moiseyev did not give details of the U.S. proposals, but said that Russia has plentiful know-how to share. Bush's plan could be a chance for the beleaguered Russian space program to get much-needed cash and to revive its prestige. The Soviet Union sent the first satellite and first human into orbit, but the Russian space program fell on hard times after the 1991 Soviet collapse. The program gained new prominence when, after the suspension of the U.S. space shuttle program following the Columbia disaster, Russian Soyuz craft became the only way to send astronauts to and from the International Space Station. But severe funding problems persist. Despite the money shortage, its scientists have done a lot of new research on the future interplanetary missions, said space agency spokesman Vyacheslav Mikhailichenko. Even though our space engineers lacked money to build new hardware, they have done a lot of prospective design work, Mikhailichenko told The Associated Press. We have preserved and developed our scientific potential. Like other Russian space officials, Mikhailichenko held out hope that the United States will tap Russian know-how while building future spacecraft. It would be unfeasible to do such work alone, he said. Mikhailichenko said Russia's giant Energiya booster rocket, with a payload of about 100 metric tons (110 tons), could be useful for moon and interplanetary missions. The Energiya program has been dormant in recent years due to the money crunch and the lack of suitable mission. Mikhailichenko said Energiya launching facilities have been preserved at Baikonur, Russia's launching base for manned space flights. Meanwhile, Russian space designers said they could quickly develop spacecraft for both moon and Mars missions if they have money. Roald Kremnev, a deputy head of NPO Lavochkin company which built the Soviet Lunokhod rover that traipsed across the moon in 1970, said it could build its successor in mere two or three years for just 600 million rubles (US$21 million), ITAR-Tass reported. Kremnev said that his company could make spacecraft capable of flying automatic missions to the moon, including robots capable of building temporary housing on the Moon. Another space designer, Leonid Gorshkov of the RKK Energiya company that builds Soyuz and Progress spacecraft, says it has designed a spacecraft which can carry a crew to Mars as early as 2014 for US$15 billion. Gorshkov told ITAR-Tass that the 70-metric ton (77-ton) spacecraft modeled on the Russian Zvezda module for the ISS could be assembled in orbit from components delivered by Proton booster rockets. Increased involvement with NASA could divert Russia from working with China's advancing manned space program. Russia has sold space technology to China and trained two Chinese air force pilots at the Star City cosmonaut training center outside Moscow. Meanwhile, Russian space officials have remained unperturbed about the U.S. plans to shift the emphasis from the space station to moon and interplanetary missions and retire its shuttle fleet at around 2010. Mikhail Sinelshchikov, the head of Russia's manned space program, told the Interfax news agency that the United States had pledged to fulfill all its obligations under the 16-nation project. The program and plans are still valid, the commitments are the same for the international partners, Sinelshchikov said. Turning to future Mars missions, Russian designers are already thinking about the make-up of the crew. Gorshkov said that it would likely consist of four to six cosmonauts, but was hesitant about including women. On the one hand, she may become an element of psychological imbalance on the male crew. On the other hand, women respond to emergencies better, Gorshkov told the ITAR-Tass. xponent Like I Said Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
ESA Officials Applaud Bush Exploration Plan
http://www.space.com/news/esa_bush_040115.html European government space authorities applauded U.S. President George W. Bush's space exploration announcement, saying the Bush plan is a badly needed roadmap for how manned space flight proceeds after the international space station. A long-scheduled press briefing Jan. 15 by the European Space Agency (ESA) to announce the agency's 2004 budget and program priorities was all but hijacked by a discussion of what the Bush announcement means for Europe. ESA Director-General Jean-Jacques Dordain had to remind the packed meeting that ESA's annual January briefing was not timed to follow the Bushs Jan. 14 speech declaration at NASA headquarters.on Jan. 14. The president has lots of power, but not the power to determine when the calendar year begins, Dordain said, adding that the Bush-ordered redirection of NASA is grand and good news for the space sector and thus for ESA too. Dordain said ESA had been briefed by NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe on several occasions in the past several weeks, most recently on Jan. 14 before the Bush speech. He said that like NASA and the other partners in the international space station, ESA has been examining possible new ambitions that would come after the station. A series of studies of moon and Mars robotic efforts under ESA's small Aurora program had recently led to a recommendation that the moon should be ESA's next objective. The agency's manned space directorate, which also handles Europe's space station investment, recently produced a study called: The Moon: the 8th Continent, that proposes robotic and, later, manned lunar missions. Dordain said it was only natural that the United States, as the world's biggest investor in space exploration and the world's richest nation, set the timetable for lunar and, later on, Mars exploration. Europe, he said, whose space budgets total less than one-third of NASA's, is not in a position to lead such a project. Jorg E. Feustel-Buechl, ESA's space station director, will add Aurora and related space exploration efforts to his office's responsibilities starting in April. In an interview, Feustel-Buechl said that while questions remain on the management of the international space station after NASA's planned 2010 retirement of the space shuttle, early indications are that NASA does not intend to leave its partners in the lurch in the still-unfinished orbital complex. In a chart NASA produced to accompany Bush's remarks, the agency makes clear it intends to continue financing the station until 2016, well beyond the shuttle-retirement date. A separate budget line on space station transportation is also funded beyond the shuttle's retirement. Feustel-Buechl said one question that will need to be resolved by the space station partners is how station crew transfers and cargo supplies will be conducted between the time the shuttle is taken out of service and the planned 2014 arrival of NASA's new Crew Exploration Vehicle. xponent International Cosmicon Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Does this pass the smell test?
In a message dated 1/13/2004 11:17:20 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: have seen no specific allegations of The White House failing to fully cooperate with the Plame inquiry. Tom, vengence doesn't suit you. But they sure did not jump to investigate the leak when Novak's column appeared in July ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Does this pass the smell test?
In a message dated 1/13/2004 11:17:20 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: have seen no specific allegations of The White House failing to fully cooperate with the Plame inquiry. Tom, vengence doesn't suit you. But they sure did not jump to investigate the leak when Novak's column appeared in July ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: A Girl with an X-ray vision
Bah! I would much rather have 8 inch steel alloy claws that pop out of my hands and rapid healing. Damon, now THAT would be cool... :P = Damon Agretto [EMAIL PROTECTED] Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum. http://www.geocities.com/garrand.geo/index.html Now Building: __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the Signing Bonus Sweepstakes http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Double Standards on Regional Bigotry
In a message dated 1/15/2004 12:40:01 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I guess that they are relevant if you really truly believe that Al Gore invented the Internet, Actually, do you really believe he claimed that? I do believe that he was part of the inspiration for Love Story For those who are interested in Gore's claims read Al Franken's book. He points out that the things Gore said he did he did. People distorted his remarks and then ridiculed him for them. He was one of the first politician's to see the potential for and to support the internet. The Love Story claim is complicated. Segal has said that Gore (and Tommy Lee Jones) were the roll models for his hero. He said that a Tennessee newspaper reporter that Tipper was the model for the girl. He repeated this. Segal later said this was not true. But Gore never claimed that Segal said it. The quote from Gore is quite clear and specific about this. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Double Standards on Regional Bigotry
In a message dated 1/15/2004 12:40:01 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I guess that they are relevant if you really truly believe that Al Gore invented the Internet, Actually, do you really believe he claimed that? I do believe that he was part of the inspiration for Love Story For those who are interested in Gore's claims read Al Franken's book. He points out that the things Gore said he did he did. People distorted his remarks and then ridiculed him for them. He was one of the first politician's to see the potential for and to support the internet. The Love Story claim is complicated. Segal has said that Gore (and Tommy Lee Jones) were the roll models for his hero. He said that a Tennessee newspaper reporter that Tipper was the model for the girl. He repeated this. Segal later said this was not true. But Gore never claimed that Segal said it. The quote from Gore is quite clear and specific about this. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Odds of getting to the Moon and Mars
Want the Odds? Put your money where your mouth is.. Bookies offer heavy odds against Mars landing Thu Jan 15, 9:55 AM ET LONDON (Reuters) - If U.S. President George W. Bush (news - web sites) is serious about sending a man to Mars, he can put his money where his mouth is and win a fortune. Bookmakers William Hill said on Thursday they were offering 50/1 odds against a man walking on Mars by December 31, 2030. Bush announced plans on Wednesday to send humans back to the moon as early as 2015 and eventually to Mars. The bookies are also sceptical that humans will soon return to the moon -- they are taking bets at 10/1 against anyone reaching the moon before December 31, 2015. But the oddsmakers have underestimated space exploration before, to their cost. In 1969, when Neil Armstrong became the first man on the moon, Hill's paid out 10,000 pounds to punter David Threlfall, who had bet 10 pounds at odds of 1000/1 in the early 1960s that nobody would reach the moon before the end of the decade. Nerd From Hell ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Double Standards on Regional Bigotry
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In a message dated 1/15/2004 12:40:01 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I guess that they are relevant if you really truly believe that Al Gore invented the Internet, Actually, do you really believe he claimed that? I do believe that he was part of the inspiration for Love Story For those who are interested in Gore's claims read Al Franken's book. He points out that the things Gore said he did he did. People distorted his remarks and then ridiculed him for them. He was one of the first politician's to see the potential for and to support the internet. The Love Story claim is complicated. Segal has said that Gore (and Tommy Lee Jones) were the roll models for his hero. He said that a Tennessee newspaper reporter that Tipper was the model for the girl. He repeated this. Segal later said this was not true. But Gore never claimed that Segal said it. The quote from Gore is quite clear and specific about this. --- If you are going to properly debunk the 'Al gore invented the Internet' Myth, you need to use Seth Finklestines exhaustive debunking here: http://sethf.com/gore/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Tg Territories
On Thursday 2004-01-15 12:51, Alberto Monteiro wrote: Trent Shipley wrote: I come up with 10 major Terragen colonies. The problem is that Galactics wouldn't count Mars or Venus as proper leaseholds, so I get 8 leases. You mean: Earth (homeworld), Mars, Venus (crap) [what about the Moon?], and the 8 colonies: Deemi, Dezni, Horst, Omnivarium, Calafia, Atlast, and NuDawn? Oops, I counted _seven_, you missed Garth. [Yes, the Moon counts as a major colony. But I didn't count it here. First we can surmise that a lot of races will colonize convenient moons, per Buyer on Jijo. Second, it is NOT terraformable so not applicable to this discussion.] So a total of 9 respectable leasholds Homeworld 1. Earth Class-C+ 2. Calafia Class-B 3. Deemi 4. Dezni 5. Garth 6. Horst 7. Omnivarium Class-T(C-) 8. NuDawn Class-T(B) 9. Atlast IIRC, there is a reference to the early explorations to Alpha Centauri and Tau Ceti, where the Ash was found. Tau Ceti should be NuDawn, for it makes a great Asimov-pun, but there is no colony around any of Alpha Centauri's stars. Maybe there's room to place one A planet around each one of the pair :-) Ok. Two problems. First, to my way of thinking a Class-A leased planet needs to have some life (probably algal mat stage) and be terraformable. Would you believe that such a planet would exist in the Alpha Centuri system? Second, how does putting a Terragen Class-A colony in Alpha Centuri help us get a 10th B or C lease? (Also, please explain Azimov joke.) Revised fan-fic follows. Various Terragen Confederation Territories by GIM Leasehold Type Terragens have 10 colonies and their homeworld lease on Earth. By Galactic standards Mars and Venus do not count as proper leaseholds so Humans have only 8 B or C grade leases, and of these three are only temporary leases. --- Class A-: Mars: Venus: Galactics regard the Human efforts to terraform Mars and Venus as folly. Few Galactics would put more than a military outpost on a desert planet like Mars or a greenhouse planet like Venus. --- Class A (terraforming candidate with some life present): Humans have no Class A leases. --- Class B (ecological remediation): Deemi: Before Contact Humans had established a few small outposts on Deemi and an orbital way-station. Early Human explorers thought Deemi was too far gone to make a good colony. Nevertheless, the GIM issued Humanity a Class T lease on Deemi. This has since been converted to a Class B lease along with the obligation to provide a refuge for Uplift transportees. Dezni: A planet where mulc spiders are found. The presence of mulc spiders is testimony to how recently Dezni was returned to fallow. That it is already candidate for ecological remediation indicates how badly its former tenants treated the world. Otherwise, Dezni is in many ways a typical B grade planet. It is the Terragen's second most recently awarded leasehold. The small, young colony has been raided since the start the Streaker War, but the neither the colony nor the planet are worth much as either hostage or prizes in their own right. Garth: Heavily damaged in the Buralli Holocaust, Garth is a poster child for the Institute of Migration's ecological remediation program. It also exemplifies why most races are reluctant to take on the responsibility of a Class-B leasehold. More than 50,000 years after the initial disaster Garth's ecology is still in free-fall. Three island continents have been reduced to ecosystems based on lichen-like organisms and a handful of nearly microscopic insectoids. Other land masses have kept more genetic diversity. From a Terragen perspective the planet is even less promising since ocean chemistry precludes Neo-Dolphin colonization. Nevertheless, Garth was a moderately important Human colony prior to the Gubru invasion, and promises to be even more important in the aftermath. Horst: Horst was badly damaged in the Fututhoon aggression 50 million years ago and has not recovered on its own. It is currently in an ice age, but is otherwise pretty typical for a B grade planet. [NB this conforms to GURPS Uplift 2nd ed, and not current A4P narrative for Horst.] Omnivarium: Planet of song-birds, that will mimic any sound the settlers make. Omnivarium is ecologically robust for a B grade world. It has a strong agricultural sector and active exploitation of a local asteroid belt. After Calafia, it is the largest extra-Solar Human colony. This Human colony can probably defend itself in the present crisis. --- Class C: Calafia: Calafia is Earth's only C Class leasehold. It is unofficially regarded as a garden world, but with less than an ideal amount of dry land. The lack of dry land was no obstacle for the Terragens. It was expected that the Terragens would eventually petition to make Calafia the Neo-Dolphin homeworld. However, Calafia was invaded by
Re: Double Standards on Regional Bigotry
At 05:22 PM 1/15/2004 -0600 The Fool wrote: From: John D. Giorgis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Of course, I forgot, that I am an economist, and since economics isn't a science I won't be convinced by data. Supply-side economics is like the economists version of young-earth creationism. Keynesian Economic theories WORK, plain and simple. Yes, they work so long as you ignore the 1970's from your dataset. There is more wisdom and insight in 1 Brad Delong Post than any fifty of the best JDG posts. But Brin-Lers already knew that. I am grateful and honored to be a deemed worthy of being comparable to a nationally-recognized PhD economist. Wow. Thank you. JDG - Maybe I really do need to start blogging. ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity. - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Martian Emotion (was Easterbrook on Bush's NASA plan)
Snip _That's_ what's inspiring about it. Who cares if its inspiring? Look I was raised to be a liberal. I feel that we should fund medicaide and take care of poor sick folk. (Heck, I am poor with chronic illnesses and would *benefit* from socialized medicine.) I feel that we should fund primary and secondary education till public schools can flush money down toilets. I feel that we should provide adequate housing for everyone. I feel ... well you get the picture. I THINK all of this would be bad public policy. When the administration announces grand plans for manned space programs i FEEL proud, excited, and--yes--even inspired. And that feeling immediately makes me suspicious. Is this fiscally responsible? Is it rational? I think, no, I *KNOW* that basing public policy on emotion IS irresponsible -- unpatriotic. Whoa there... Isn't socialized medicine, funding for public education, housing programs, etc, etc, mostly emotional public policy? FEED THE STARVING CHILDREN! BUILD SCHOOLS NOT BOMBS! HOUSE THE HOMELESS! HEALTHCARE FOR ALL! BUY AMERICAN! ABORTION IS MURDER! I don't see many bumper stickers out there saying NASA RULES! or SUPPORT YOUR LOCAL ASTRONAUT . Don't the liberals spend most of their time trying to convince the conservatives that these emotional-based policies are financially sound - Education builds wealth, equality in healthcare for all costs less, Housing for the poor gets people out of poverty, Etc, Etc... You turned the table around here and said that Space research provides no tangible ROI? Now I feel immediately suspicious! In brute, lowest common denominatior terms what is in this gold-plated fools' errand for me? When Isabella sent Columbus to look for a route to the Indies she wasn't investing in exploration. Exploration was a nice side effect. Isabella's primary motivation was making a LOT OF MONEY! If we build a big new booster what will be the tangible return on investment? Thousands of dollars for every per pound we lift into space... This is very tangible. The intangible parts are the side benefits that occur when the technology leaks out into the private sector. I find it hard to think we are on the negative side of the equation here. Afterall, we have Tang because of Apollo... ;-) What about the crew vehicle? The moon colony? How the @#$% do you plan to get tangible ROI from a manned mission to Mars? If you do get ROI will it make sense in terms of opportunity cost. We have underfunded schools, biomedical research, and ageing population and military obligations we need to see to, remember. Money or national security only please. I believe that as a citizen I have a *responsibility* to resist temptation and make decisisons as a pure Philistine. That's not very nice. Are you saying anyone who supports space travel is, as the definition states, philistine-like? From dictionary.com Phil*is*tine 1. A member of an Aegean people who settled ancient Philistia around the 12th century B.C. 2a. A smug, ignorant, especially middle-class person who is regarded as being indifferent or antagonistic to artistic and cultural values. 2b .One who lacks knowledge in a specific area. As a citizen I dont care a whit about pure science, the human quest, or feel-good programs. Hey... Your thing is public charity to help the poor and downtrodden, my thing may be the space program. I think your claim on how government money should be spent is as important as my claim. In fact, our republic supports this position. But for you to say I have no claim, based upon my philistine tendencies, is wrong, judgemental, and overly rightous. Now before you start bombing me with reasons I should feel the way you do, don't. I have my reasons for supporting the space program, as emotional as they may be, and you have your reasons for supporting your interests. I may even feel the same way you do about the many social programs... That's not my point. John McGinnis said this: We are in a prisoner's dilemma: we would all be better off with a smaller government, but it would be irrational for any group to surrender the money or regulatory advantages it gets from the state without a guarantee that all other groups will, too. I'll give up on the space program when you give up the social programs Philistine From Hell ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: J.D. Goes Hard on Conservatives
At 10:25 PM 1/12/2004 -0500 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Very interesting John, seriously. Thoughtful. Does your dad disagree with you on these topics? I don't want to assign viewpoints to my Dad without him hear to defend himself, but I would say that he probably agrees with me on somewhere around 40% of the above positions so its probably a decent mix.I don't know how relevant that is though. JDG ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity. - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Lies, Deception and Secretiveness (was The GOP Problem With Women)
John wrote: JDG - And did I mention that apparently I support lying to and deceiving the American public too? I'm sorry that you took my comments personally. I do not believe that you support the dishonest policies of the Bush administration; I know that you do not believe that they are being dishonest. In other words we have a difference of opinion. I vehemently disagree with yours in this case, but I respect it all the same. Let me ask a related question though, to you and the list at large. Doesn't the opaque nature of the Bush presidency, described by some as more secretive than Nixon's, bother you at all? http://ncronline.org/NCR_Online/archives2/2004a/010904/010904a.php -- Doug ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Tg Territories
Trent Shipley wrote: You mean: Earth (homeworld), Mars, Venus (crap) [what about the Moon?], and the 8 colonies: Deemi, Dezni, Horst, Omnivarium, Calafia, Atlast, and NuDawn? Oops, I counted _seven_, you missed Garth. [Yes, the Moon counts as a major colony. But I didn't count it here. First we can surmise that a lot of races will colonize convenient moons, per Buyer on Jijo. Second, it is NOT terraformable so not applicable to this discussion.] So a total of 9 respectable leasholds Ok Homeworld 1. Earth Class-C+ 2. Calafia Class-B 3. Deemi 4. Dezni 5. Garth 6. Horst 7. Omnivarium Class-T(C-) 8. NuDawn Class-T(B) 9. Atlast We still miss one. First, to my way of thinking a Class-A leased planet needs to have some life (probably algal mat stage) and be terraformable. Would you believe that such a planet would exist in the Alpha Centuri system? Why not? The early explorations _did_ find ashes, which might be an indication that life could still exist on those planets. Second, how does putting a Terragen Class-A colony in Alpha Centuri help us get a 10th B or C lease? Alpha Centauri would be the 2nd lease. IIRC, at the time of Sundiver Earth had 3 colonies. (Also, please explain Azimov joke.) Asimov placed the first Spacer world around Tau Ceti, and named it Aurora, that means Dawn, and sometimes New Dawn. So, (Uplift Universe)'s first colonists to Tau Ceti's planet would name it New Dawn, in honour of Asimov. [and Mudaun is not Gal7, it's a corruption of New Dawn] Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Double Standards on Regional Bigotry
On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 17:40:18 -0600, Ronn!Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 05:22 PM 1/15/04, The Fool wrote: There is more wisdom and insight in 1 Brad Delong Post than any fifty of the best JDG posts. But Brin-Lers already knew that. Ad hominem. Ad nauseum. I agree, let's try to keep it civil. The argument, not the individual, s'il vous plait. -- Doug ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Martian Emotion (was Easterbrook on Bush's NASA plan)
On Thursday 2004-01-15 20:19, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Snip _That's_ what's inspiring about it. Who cares if its inspiring? Look I was raised to be a liberal. I feel that we should fund medicaide and take care of poor sick folk. (Heck, I am poor with chronic illnesses and would *benefit* from socialized medicine.) I feel that we should fund primary and secondary education till public schools can flush money down toilets. I feel that we should provide adequate housing for everyone. I feel ... well you get the picture. I THINK all of this would be bad public policy. I'll give up on the space program when you give up the social programs Philistine From Hell Um. I thought I was pretty clear. I HAVE given up on the social programs. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Tg Territories
On Thursday 2004-01-15 20:58, Alberto Monteiro wrote: So a total of 9 respectable leasholds Ok *** We still miss one. First, to my way of thinking a Class-A leased planet needs to have some life (probably algal mat stage) and be terraformable. Would you believe that such a planet would exist in the Alpha Centuri system? Why not? The early explorations _did_ find ashes, which might be an indication that life could still exist on those planets. Second, how does putting a Terragen Class-A colony in Alpha Centuri help us get a 10th B or C lease? Alpha Centauri would be the 2nd lease. IIRC, at the time of Sundiver Earth had 3 colonies. Good. So you do not care that the Alpha Centuri colony is Class-A, or are you proposing that is it Class-B? Please tell me more about the Alpha Centuri colony -- or at least more about our current knowledge on the Alpha Centuri system. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Double Standards on Regional Bigotry
John wrote: Of course, I forgot, that I am an economist, and since economics isn't a science I won't be convinced by data. Of course, I should also point out that you have a long history of playing fast-and-loose with economic data on this List, doing things like ascribing economic data from Carter's Presidency to Ronald Reagan. I'm biased, but I would guess that even an unbiased person would be convinced by Dan's data before they were convinced by your rhetoric. I'll also state for the record that, while we all make mistakes, Dan's data is usually pretty solid, and I can remember a few instances when he was mistaken and owned up to it. I don't think fast-and-loose describes his use of facts at all. -- Doug ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Tg Territories
Trent Shipley wrote: We still miss one. Alpha Centauri would be the 2nd lease. IIRC, at the time of Sundiver Earth had 3 colonies. Good. So you do not care that the Alpha Centuri colony is Class-A, or are you proposing that is it Class-B? It could be anything. Probably a world in _far_ worse shape than any other, but not a dead world like Mars or Venus. Please tell me more about the Alpha Centuri colony -- or at least more about our current knowledge on the Alpha Centuri system. A double-star system, where one is Sunlike, the other smaller than the Sun, but both could have Earth-like planets in the ecologically viable zone. Proxima, the third star, is so far away and so small that it doesn't count. Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Martian Emotion (was Easterbrook on Bush's NASA plan)
Robert Seeberger wrote: A mission to a nickle-iron asteroid that would mean an eventual return for investment just aint sexy. I can think of one other listmember who, like me, might pop a boner at the thought of asteroid mining, but I doubt anyone else here would get excited, or in any other way emotional at the thought. No matter how good an idea it might be, very few people would be interested as compared to a Mars mission. I dunno about popping a boner, but I really like the idea, anyway. Anyone feel they were heavily influenced by Asimov's short story The Martian Way? Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Easterbrook on Bush's NASA plan
Bryon Daly wrote: I think Manned Exploration Vehicle would make more sense, but Easterbrook's just nitpicking here. Crewed would be better than Crew. Except Crewed sounds exactly like Crude. Using Manned is an open invitation for accusations of sexism, unfortunately. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The GOP Problem With Women
John D. Giorgis wrote: At 10:21 PM 1/14/2004 -0600 Dan Minette wrote: At 06:54 PM 1/14/2004 -0800 Nick Arnett wrote: That makes sense. To what extent do you regard conservatives, as a generalization, as male-dominated? In all honesty none. I can say with a clear conscience that I have never ever made that connection in my mind before. You really aren't familiar with Evangelicals, then. I don't know how many of them told me that women need to obey their husbands. Oh come on of course I am familiar with Evangelicals.I just don't think Evangelical as my first, second, or even third thought when I think conservative. When I think of conservatives, I think of the Carmen - who was the President of College Republicans at my university - a school where there are two guys for every girl. When I think of conservatives, I think of the writers at _The National Review_, who prominently employ writers like Kate O'Beirne, Kathryn Lopez, and Florence King. When I think of conservatives, I think of people who support lower taxes, less government spending, cutting government regulation, and ending abortion. I don't think of those who say that wives need to obey their husbands, (and that husbands need to serve their wives.) There are regional differences, and you haven't lived in a region of the country where there are a lot of evangelicals and those evangelicals are strongly identified with conservatives. On the next-to-the-last paragraph I quote above, remove the abortion part of it, and you're describing what I think of as a libertarian. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Martian Emotion (was Easterbrook on Bush's NASA plan)
- Original Message - From: Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2004 10:41 PM Subject: Re: Martian Emotion (was Easterbrook on Bush's NASA plan) Robert Seeberger wrote: A mission to a nickle-iron asteroid that would mean an eventual return for investment just aint sexy. I can think of one other listmember who, like me, might pop a boner at the thought of asteroid mining, but I doubt anyone else here would get excited, or in any other way emotional at the thought. No matter how good an idea it might be, very few people would be interested as compared to a Mars mission. I dunno about popping a boner, but I really like the idea, anyway. Anyone feel they were heavily influenced by Asimov's short story The Martian Way? For me, I think it was an essay by Niven or Pournelle I read way back in the 70s. I can't remember the name of it, but I've heard the same sentiments and similar numbers quoted over the years by others. I suppose I've never gotten over my excitement for space shots that I've had since I was 3 or 4 when the first Mercury missions were launched. xponent Rock 'N' Roll Too Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Tg Territories
On Thursday 2004-01-15 21:22, Alberto Monteiro wrote: Trent Shipley wrote: We still miss one. Alpha Centauri would be the 2nd lease. IIRC, at the time of Sundiver Earth had 3 colonies. Good. So you do not care that the Alpha Centuri colony is Class-A, or are you proposing that is it Class-B? It could be anything. Probably a world in _far_ worse shape than any other, but not a dead world like Mars or Venus. Please tell me more about the Alpha Centuri colony -- or at least more about our current knowledge on the Alpha Centuri system. A double-star system, where one is Sunlike, the other smaller than the Sun, but both could have Earth-like planets in the ecologically viable zone. Proxima, the third star, is so far away and so small that it doesn't count. Alberto Monteiro It's going around the Sun-like star. What is the star's name? What is the other part of the double star? Is it close enough to influence climate on our new colony? It's your baby. Give it a name -- Portuguese maybe (or nonsense derived from Portuguese). And pick a secondary leasehold type, I won't do it for you. (I figure anything around Alpha Centuri was colonized during the Beauracray and is currently a Class-T lease.) Bear in mind that I think A-Class leases don't really count against the Galactic average of 10.6 leasholds per race. Of course any type of lease would let us square the idea that Terragens should have 10 leases. A- : Not considered a good terraforming candidate by Galactics. Eg. Mars or anything worse. A: Terraforming candidate. A+: Easy terraforming project. (Usually a down-graded B grade planet thanks to political pressure on the GIM. Terragens couldn't swing that.) B-: Needs LOTS of bio-remediation. Powerful clans get these leased on A-Class terms. B: Bio-remediation project. B+: Easy bio-remediation project. Powerful races try to get these leased on Class-C terms. C-: Unpleasant C grade planet. Often an upgraded B-grade planet. C: Desirable, ecologically diverse and stable homeworld. C+: Exceptional candidate for colonization. A garden world. (Don't pick this. We are told Calafia was Earth's first lease on a garden world.) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Hoon Leases and Colonies (Was Notes on Uplift)
Everything I'm trying to do by way of numbers, is to make Alvin filthy rich whether or not he really wants to be so. William Taylor Why? ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
