Re: Juno yes, Moonrise no
- From: "Mike Combs" <mikecombs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2005 14:12:34 -0500
"Sander Vesik" <sander@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1118252420.856910@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> That might be so - definite and believable numbers are so far,however not
> really around.
If one choses to view the definite numbers from the NASA-Ames Summer Studies
as unbelievable, I suppose.
--
Regards,
Mike Combs
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Member of the National Non-sequitur Society. We may not make
much sense, but we do like pizza.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Juno yes, Moonrise no
- From: Sander Vesik
- Re: Juno yes, Moonrise no
- References:
- Juno yes, Moonrise no
- From: Allen Thomson
- Re: Juno yes, Moonrise no
- From: Joe Strout
- Re: Juno yes, Moonrise no
- From: Pat Flannery
- Re: Juno yes, Moonrise no
- From: Joe Strout
- Re: Juno yes, Moonrise no
- From: Pat Flannery
- Re: Juno yes, Moonrise no
- From: Jake McGuire
- Re: Juno yes, Moonrise no
- From: Scott Lowther
- Re: Juno yes, Moonrise no
- From: Pat Flannery
- Re: Juno yes, Moonrise no
- From: Mike Combs
- Re: Juno yes, Moonrise no
- From: Sander Vesik
- Juno yes, Moonrise no
- Prev by Date: Re: Juno yes, Moonrise no
- Next by Date: Re: SpaceX & NASA's Space Act Agreement
- Previous by thread: Re: Juno yes, Moonrise no
- Next by thread: Re: Juno yes, Moonrise no
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|