atinymonkey

I don't like his name. Rhymes with pant's you see. Seriously, Kranz has a vested interest in glamming up his 'Adventures in the world of NASA', the fact's are played loose and fast. He's entertaining enough but elastic with the finer details. At a basic level, he want's to sell his book and for people to idolise him. He doesn’t give a stuff who came up with which idea, so long as it makes a good anecdote. Kranz’s view of events cannot overrule NASA’s credibility, he’s just one man delving into his own memory. He’d not a team of internal researches pawing through records and testimonials to create a legacy of NASA’s work. My link to NASA archive material should not be ignore in such a blasé way. My opinion is not representative of any of my former employers recollections of events, and neither is Kranz’s recollections of something that happened 30 years previously. NASA is a bit more capable than your saying they are, they invented the moon car you know.

Yes, I'm disputing Gene Kranz opinion. He wrote a book to make money, his memory is not perfect. Follow the true works if you like, call it gospel and preach the word to the masses. My substanciating evidence link is to NASA, in case anyone was wondering. You know, NASA, the people who did the stuff Crazy Kranz is dribbeling on about in his book.

Even if it were theoretically possible, the energy used would be huge, for very little mometum gained. Like trying to move a car down the road by chucking ming vases at it.

So in summary, God was killed by a handgrenade. Which explains a lot really.

I like the idea that a simple change in the water table could devastate life. It’s plausible, but to my mind doesn’t really have any use other than as an abstract concept. Something to bear in mind if we start affecting the sea level in some way, I suppose.

Can someone clarify what is meant by 'asians'? Is it meant to signify entire the populous of the Asia continent? I'm not sure there has been an IQ test administered to the asian races recently. I suspect that the difference in IQ from a globally administered IQ test would not be much different continent to continent, despite what we blithely believe about intelligence. Bear in mind IQ is only indicative of relative intelligence, not a score out of 200.

Your disputing that Ed Pavelka has an opinon? Well this will be an interesting discussion then. I've found a link to his words:- http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/history/oral_histories/PavelkaEL/ELP_5-9-01.pdf (copy & paste into url) He fails utterly to mention John Llewelyn, unlike Gene Kranz who's book your referencing (Failure is Not an Option: Mission Control from Mercury to Apollo 13 and Beyond) the evil baby eating lier.

Well, two quick reasons why the whole prison rape thing can't easily be backed up are:- 1) The FBI doesn’t count man on man as rape, which make the US statistics very very low for all male prisons. 2) I was under the distinct impression that the whole prison lovin' was an urban myth preserved by then media for entertainment, prisons for deterrents to would be criminals and the prisoner themselves to sell 'protection' to the other inmates. I'd be interested to see any reports that indicated homosexual tendencies increased expedientially the more time you spent in an all male environment. It’s not as if you can catch ‘the gay’ by sharing a toothbrush, you know. Or perhaps you can, I mean I not studying medicine so what do I know?

Oh. Langtidshukommelsen = Psychopharmacology, like I'd pick that one up with my childlike norwegian. It's not as if my 'Learn Norwegian' application even attempted to cover that.

:giggle: Seriously, don't you want the satisfaction of earning your own merits?

Tobacco is far from a super happy fun thing to smoke. It may not cause overdoses, but don't be fooled. Tobacco goes for the long protracted death.

Well, that's what Ed Pavelka says and he drew the thing. Your trusting Gene Kranz who, as we all know, eats babies.

I thought of onion. 666? Maybe carrot is the vegetable of the beast?

He's just trying to put you off...........

You have to send Sayonara³ over 200 PM's asking to be a Mod.

It was just a drawing Gene Kranz came up with and Ed Pavelka sketched. Victor Vector was his nemesis.

£62.00 now. I wish it was closer to payday.

Quiet island getaway. Super low price, no reserve. http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2979756619&category=1467

The description is in your signature, you muppet.

When I was in junior school we had mandatory IQ tests and the results were expressed in % rather than the number (as in your in the top 20%, top 10% of the country etc). Interestingly they never explained that it was an IQ test, I only found out 8 years later when I was told by accident (when they were going through university applications at school). The government only carried it the tests on 5 years of students, and then ceased. Hence my suspicion of both the UK governments tracking of intelligence and that stupid Mensa thing.

Philip, or pilip without the h.

Hmmm. That sounds an awful lot like an argument to control the availability of cigarettes, to protect society from it’s own inherent weaknesses. Surely this is a homogeneous discussion? Where is the differentiation? BTW, met any crack heads recently? Are they happy go lucky guys with a mischievous glint in their eye and a skip in their step?

It might be opportune to point out that what I said was 'Nicotine is not more physically addictive than heroin'. I don't dispute that it's harder to quit, hence it's classification as 'more addictive'. If we weren't such lazy monkeys, we wouldn't pick up a cigarette when we got mild cravings. We might also do more exercise, clean our rooms more often, cut down on fatty foods etc as well. But we don't, and the habit is harder to break.

Idealist 9 Rationalist 9 Traditionalist 7 Hedonist 5 Your temperament type is undetermined. How about an ideal rationalist?

It helps to present a more balanced view with substantiated evidence. Your using an awful lot of statistics, which are misrepresented so very easily. What I assume you think is a revolutionary viewpoint is common to most people of your age, I've had the same discussion myself on many occasions and argued your viewpoint and against it. Obviously, from the comments your getting back most of your peers don't see you as Che Guevara, despite how hard your trying. The discussion would just me more interesting after the course. The argument as it's stands is repetative, and not a little bloodyminded. Nicotine is not more physically addictive than heroin, it's just smokers have a lower chance of quitting than heroin addicts. That's because people can't really be arsed to stop smoking, but heroin users have methadone and the severe health risks to help give them momentum. Smokers don't have cold sweats, diarrhea, vomiting et al when quitting they just get a little short tempered and grouchy. I think the comparison is meant to be made to cocaine, and not heroin. But you can't hold up smoking as some kind of example of a legitimate drug that poses health risks, and say drugs should be allowed because smoking is just as harmful. Smoking is slowly being banned in the US and UK, because of it's harmful effects. Do you see the link? It's nice and simple