Shuttles and Jose
LePleau at aol.com
LePleau at aol.com
Wed Feb 5 13:54:27 MST 2003
[ converted from html ]
Jose writes: Please provide some *evidence* of your assertions.
DA writes: Dear Jose: You may do the search yourself. Since
you're a lay person, I assume, I will refer you to the
bourgeois press which, mostly in Europe, but also the
WSJ here had exposed the triviality of the
"scientific" experiments of the Shuttle and the
military pressure on its missions.
Cherie writes: Comrade DA, your refusal to provide specific sources, telling
Jose, "You may do the search yourself," says to me and everyone else on this
list that you are either incorrigibly lazy or, as Comrade Jose states, "You
are a windbag who doesn't know what you're talking about."
Jose writes: The main big shots being either active or
DA writes: Check the list of their board and the personnel in
charge of the most sensitive areas of operation, plus
the list of most astronauts, cosmonauts and pilots of
the many missions of the Shuttle and ask yourself,
what is the PRIMARY chain of command of these people?
Cherie writes: Comrade DA, you are merely speculating. Where is the evidence?
Jose writes: Then you will have to hand all the evidence you need
>to prove me wrong. All
>you actually need to do is find the relevant parts
>and actually READ it.
DA writes: As I followed the space programs for some years now,
for different reasons than those expressed in this
discussion, and I'm aware of the increasing rejection
by NASA of civilian-proposed experiments and missions
- including commercial ventures, and I'm in a position
to look a little deeper than the PR statements of
NASA. I would suggest you do the same. Your whole
argument seems to be based on the same methodology
used today in the UN by the US to "prove a point."
Cherie writes: Comrade DA, by your above statement you more than hint that
Comrade Jose hasn't done his homework. However, once again, you won't give us
your sources to disprove Jose's conclusions.
DA writes: You may start by looking at the reason why Ramon was
in the shuttle, which were his missions and to whom he
reported his findings. That will give you some clues.
Cherie writes: "Clues?" Suspicions, perhaps? Is that what you're saying? Or
are you trying to pass it off as real evidence? Clues or suspicions are not
equal to evidence. .
Jose writes: NASA's own "chain of command" -- its reporting
>structure -- is a matter of
>public record. It should be a piece of cake to go in
>there and show how
>military officers hold the key responsible positions
>in the organization.
DA writes: Being there, done that. Just explain why shuttles
have two, sometimes three channels of communications
and information lines and different centers to process
Cherie writes: Okay, *you* explain it to us.
DA writes: [...]ad hominem attack that has
nothing to do with the discussion, which only prove
how insecure you feel about your positions.
Cherie writes: Oops! You're projecting.
<snipped lots 'n' lots of nonsense>
Comrade DA, I really wish you would settle down and stop trying to mark
territory. Instead, if you took the time and energy you've been using in this
other endeavor to back up your arguments with hard facts I would be very
interested in what you have to say. This is an important topic. How involved
is the U.S. military in the space program, if more than just peripherally?
And more specifically, the shuttle part of the space program?
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
More information about the Marxism