Re: What to do about milspace/govspace

On 1 Oct, 16:51, simberg.interglo...@xxxxxxxxx (Rand Simberg) wrote:
On Mon, 01 Oct 2007 08:37:38 -0700, in a place far, far away, Ian
Parker <ianpark...@xxxxxxxxx> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:

On 1 Oct, 14:42, Fred J. McCall <fmcc...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I'd suggest you need to find out what is actually involved in what
you're talking about.

I don't think it would be easy, at least not in the short term. What
is the alternative?

I'd also suggest that the Pentagon doesn't "press for acceleration" of
civilian projects just as potential 'science experiments'.

There is a clear tie up.

It is only clear to paranoid loons.

The alternative is to jeapodise a billion dollar spacecraft with a
missiles costing a few millions. Not an advantageoous rate of
exchange.

Well I can see that the advantage is clearly with China. China is
training vast numbers of engineers, far more than the US is. About 50%
of the US population still believe the world was created in the last
10K years.

You in particular seem to be far more interested in ad hominem
denigration rather than a rational solution. You have just had a total
disaster in Iraq. You will have a similar total disaster in Iran if
you are not careful and your technological base is being gradually
eroded.

It would not surprise me in the least if the Chinese were first with
nanosatellites. As I said they are training vastly more engineers and
unless they are deployed extremly inefficiently they are bound to
overhaul the US in a finite time. These are just the facts of
arithmetic. Ad hominem denigration will only hasten the day.


- Ian Parker

.

Loading