Re: ISS after completion

On Nov 14, 2:59 pm, BradGuth <bradg...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Nov 14, 11:46 am, American <samuelran...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:



On Nov 14, 2:38 pm, BradGuth <bradg...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Nov 14, 9:07 am, Harmon <harmon.ever...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

But then, if microgravity research requires a totally separate
vehicle, is there an advantage to having it attached to the ISS? And
if a space resort high inclination orbit is not suitable for Moon and
Mars expedition outfitting, is that also better achieved by using a
separate new vehicle?
Harmon

Are you folks actually that totally dumbfounded about using the
extreme microgravity/picogravity of our moon's L1?
--
Brad Guth

Jeez, Brad, can we first get a start-up launch industry
off the ground? I mean, it's like the moon has become
soooo secondary to being fundamentally interested in
the *possibilities*.

American

No we can't "get a start-up launch industry off the ground", all
because of our puppet government and of it's Zion corrupted NASA is at
the very root of our problems that are about to go WWIII postal on us.

The taking of our moon's L1 by China or India well in of itself take
on the full control of whatever future Earth/moon related space depot/
gateway matters to whatever to/from off-world travels and the mining
of our moon.

You folks are simply 100+% snookered and/or dumbfounded past the point
of no return, and your clearly brown-nosed denial of being in denial
is simply further proof positive that I'm right.

BTW, since our moon's L1 is taboo/nondisclosure rated, why don't you
want to relocate ISS to Venus L2?
--
Brad Guth

I HAD thought of that. It's just that wars and rumors of wars are
supposed to bring about the perception of the end times prophecies
coming to pass, and who'd rather wait for that to happen? (Not me).
Remember, Brad, there are many, many people who do not have any
involvement whatsoever with the war machine, yet we have become
afflicted by "collateral spending" so much so that the future of
private enterprise is at stake.

This was and still is a nation that was founded upon the unalienable
rights of its citizens to pursue life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness, according to the Declaration of Independence, and NOT the
Constitution. There's a difference here. Benjamin Franklin wrote, "The
Constitution only gives people the right to pursue happiness. You have
to catch it yourself".

So the question for all Americans for the next election is "Are we in
the process of deciding when the U.S. hurts itself more - is it
through our own reprobate system of economics, or is it the fact
that we have become so much like ancient Sparta, that we will
eventually succumb to the temptations of power and might, and be
forever indebted to the one world government?

(If it's the one world government, then we already know who the victor
is, and it's NOT the great Satan, understand?)

American

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: ISS after completion
    ... vehicle, is there an advantage to having it attached to the ISS? ... if a space resort high inclination orbit is not suitable for Moon and ... it's like the moon has become ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: ISS after completion
    ... is there an advantage to having it attached to the ISS? ... if a space resort high inclination orbit is not suitable for Moon and ... Brad Guth ... it's like the moon has become ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Terraforming the Moon
    ... that we should have been there and done that moon thing decades ago. ... for science as well as humanity. ... The task of relocating ISS to the moon, of which ISS is soon going to ... before doing Mars or Venus ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Improved lunar landing architecture
    ... >>> And the one thing that NASA won't grasp or do in a million years is to ... ISS was cut down from 7 to 3 people. ... > ban NASA spending on a Moon base, until they had finished the ISS. ... >>Lunar program. ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Building Real Spaceships
    ... on the moon and mars from which commercial activities will arise. ... without any additional use of propellant. ... but creates a nightmare of different vehicle ... I have suggested a 45,000 ton spacecraft which requires 63,000 tons at ...
    (rec.arts.sf.written)