Big Head Press Forum

Online Comics => Escape From Terra => Topic started by: Big.Swede on February 22, 2012, 12:56:06 pm

Title: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Big.Swede on February 22, 2012, 12:56:06 pm
Now iīm no lawyer. Got way to much conciense and love for my fellow man. ;)  But would not an abandoned ISS fall under some kind of salvage laws, much like an abandoned ship would? Or at least close enough that you can make a legal case about it?

I know i know, this is EfT, AnCap doesnīt care about those laws. But this takes place before the Mars colonization and Belter towns go up so the question remains. Would it be conicdered worth trying to play the salvage card and get it for free and legaly so, rather than go for an outright theft? Anyone got any experience with salvage rights laws or laws in general that can make a guess?
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: SandySandfort on February 22, 2012, 03:53:41 pm
Wait for it.

Now iīm no lawyer. Got way to much conciense and love for my fellow man. ;)  But would not an abandoned ISS fall under some kind of salvage laws, much like an abandoned ship would? Or at least close enough that you can make a legal case about it?

I know i know, this is EfT, AnCap doesnīt care about those laws. But this takes place before the Mars colonization and Belter towns go up so the question remains. Would it be conicdered worth trying to play the salvage card and get it for free and legaly so, rather than go for an outright theft? Anyone got any experience with salvage rights laws or laws in general that can make a guess?
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: dough560 on February 22, 2012, 04:26:02 pm
You would think salvage laws would apply, but it's not about law or the perception of law.  Every major political affiliation severely restricts Individual space access.

One legal argument:  The facility is under remote control.  Accordingly, it is not "abandoned".  Occupation is not needed to maintain ownership.  Therefore the facility is not subject to salvage law. (Political bodies also make special rules and procedures intended to secure their dominance in any issue.)

The true danger for governmental bodies is the philosophical differences emboldened by the pioneers who will open this frontier.  Pioneers will be highly motivated, self directed and goal orientated.  Eventually the pioneers will resent agencies and bureaucrats interfering in their lives.  Especially those who do not work within their environment, with it attendant risks.

Space by it's very nature, will free individuals from governmental control and domination.  The EFT storyline is the stuff of nightmares for government bureaucrats who think far enough ahead.

Already demonstrated within this story line:  Political bodies are willing to destroy a facility they no longer have any use for, rather than allow it to come under individual control.

      Political and Governmental bodies claim, "Individuals are incompetent to proceed without governmental control and guidance."

      Individual(s) in possession of the ISS who succeed without governmental "guidance and control" demonstrate the falseness of this position.

Individual success ultimately weakens governmental control.  Individuals succeeding without or in-spite of  the government increases individual desires for freedom and self-determination. The danger to governments of Individuals who ask,  "What do I get from the government, for my lack of freedom?"  " Why are there so many restrictions which limits or prohibits my ability to individually succeed."  (Especially with the example of the theft of the ISS,)  Can not be understated.

Another government viewpoint is a tactical one.  Pioneers would have the ability to tell the governments "No" and make it stick.  Rocks are cheap and it's all down hill.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: SandySandfort on February 22, 2012, 06:20:06 pm
Space by it's very nature, will free individuals from governmental control and domination.  The EFT storyline is the stuff of nightmares for government bureaucrats who think far enough ahead.

Their nightmare; my wet dream.  ;D
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: FredG on February 23, 2012, 03:00:20 am
I also would like to point out that in the current situation, Leon and Terry are planning to steal a spaceship and escape to Mars.  Who's going to make him stand trial?  If he's tried in absentia, what does he care?  He's on Mars (with a hot wife as well!)
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Killydd on February 23, 2012, 12:25:42 pm
The real reason that the ISS would be de-orbited rather than mothballed is that LEO isn't strictly speaking stable.  There is a slight bit of atmosphere that slows it and requires constant attention to keep it from falling.  Also, it turns out that the sunlight even has enough force to make the orbit more elliptical to where it will dip deeper into the atmosphere.  The effects are small, but over several years they will tend to crash something with that much surface area.  So they're left with letting it crash somewhere random, or controlling the descent so that (hopefully) it ends up somewhere with little traffic, like a restricted area somewhere in the south pacific.  Of course, your obvious answer, selling it to someone else, is mostly limited by the politics you describe:  governments can't believe that a corporation or individual would have the money and will to buy it and keep it running safely.  If such an offer was made, they might or might not believe it. 

Of course, in spite of my governmental tendencies, I do accept your argument that if private citizens can get past orbit without excessive government assistance, an ancap society might result, since that frontier would be much less hostile to it.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: dough560 on February 23, 2012, 01:32:41 pm
Yep, everything in orbit WILL come down.  Eventually.  Whether from atmospheric drag or solar wind.  You're looking at anywhere from a couple of decades of orbital life to a century or more before atmosphere termination.

Used properly the resulting elliptical orbit could be used to increase the ISS orbital attitude.  That's not what the government is planning in this instance, is it?

Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Apollo-Soyuz on February 23, 2012, 10:09:07 pm
Now iīm no lawyer. Got way to much conciense and love for my fellow man. ;)  But would not an abandoned ISS fall under some kind of salvage laws, much like an abandoned ship would? Or at least close enough that you can make a legal case about it?


We're talking about a government here, remember?

So remember, you can be arrested for breaking US law outside of US jurisdiction, (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/06/us-drug-policy-war-congress_n_998993.html) even if the the "crime" is not a crime in the country you are in.

Meanwhile, the US freely violates habeas corpus and a dozen other things the constitution specifically says it isn't allowed to do, but it's OK because they're not US citizens and they're not in sovereign US territory (http://www.theolympian.com/2011/07/29/1741872/some-guantanamo-detainees-should.html)  (just an area we lease in perpetually)

Heck, ask just ask  Manuel Noriega (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manuel_Noriega)

(Now if you are the right kind of dictator, the US will fly you out of your home country when things go tango uniform and let you live permanently in Hawaii)
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Andreas on February 24, 2012, 04:01:56 pm
States get funny with things that are outside their jurisdiction, and yet are not within the jurisdiction of other states.
That's not just a libertarian conspiracy theory, it's completely true. All states have a very hard time allowing stuff to become ungoverned... they believe it's a matter of principle.
Now, there's the Principality of Sealand (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Sealand) as a notable exception. But I'm very much afraid it's the only one... and even that one did NOT come about by way of a formal declaration of intent, in triplicate.
Possession is 9/10 of the law, so if you only have that last 10th, you're screwed.
Take possession, keep possession, then send in the paperwork.

The nations that created the ISS see it as their right and privilege to destroy it, if they see fit. They would never let it be "salvaged", and that's my completely serious, non-libertarian, non-paranoid opinion.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: spudit on February 24, 2012, 04:09:21 pm
Ha Ha,
Lazarus Long did it first!
But please do continue.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: EENalley on February 24, 2012, 04:51:17 pm
States get funny with things that are outside their jurisdiction, and yet are not within the jurisdiction of other states.
That's not just a libertarian conspiracy theory, it's completely true. All states have a very hard time allowing stuff to become ungoverned... they believe it's a matter of principle.
Now, there's the Principality of Sealand (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Sealand) as a notable exception. But I'm very much afraid it's the only one... and even that one did NOT come about by way of a formal declaration of intent, in triplicate.
Possession is 9/10 of the law, so if you only have that last 10th, you're screwed.
Take possession, keep possession, then send in the paperwork.

The nations that created the ISS see it as their right and privilege to destroy it, if they see fit. They would never let it be "salvaged", and that's my completely serious, non-libertarian, non-paranoid opinion.

You raise an interesting point about Sealand, however unless NASA has not scrapped the shuttles in the EFT universe, there really isn't anything the US, or any other nation could do to STOP someone from 'stealing' an abandoned ISS.  It takes months to make a shuttle ready for an ISS mission (or any mission for that matter) and I believe in OUR universe, they have all been rendered unusable.  The Russians could probably get a Soyuz ready faster, but 3 guys isn't exactly a dynamic entry team.  And let's not forget that one bullet not in a body ruins Everybody's day.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: dough560 on February 24, 2012, 07:21:26 pm
Proper Planning Prevents Piss Poor Performance (The 5P's).  Move fast, Hit hard, Don't stop until you accomplish your objective.  One is none, two is one, three is two, and four you're getting there.  Apply this rule for each person involved. 

This is a survival scenario.  Take your assets.  Leave nothing behind you care about.  Prepare for a one way trip.  Keep planning, preparations and execution on a need-to-know basis.  Whoever is left or stays behind will have hell to pay.  The government will be looking for a scapegoat.  Any remaining assets will be seized.  (If only to restrict your ability to mount a criminal defense or develop a follow-on support or expansion mission.  Never mind the governmental loss of face.)

Such a feat will spark the imagination of anyone who longs for freedom.  Government(s)....their nightmares.

For the government(s), troubles will just be starting.  The pioneers succeed and they have opened the door for others.  If the government(s) follow in-order to arrest the pioneers, they will also have opened the door for others.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Oneil on February 25, 2012, 03:37:13 am
As always, love the story and not about raining on the parade...

I just think those that are debating this have mistakenly assumed the only option would be to dispatch a armed team of men to regain control of the station.  In this scenario, the current owners already announced intent to DE-orbit and destroy the station, damaging it would be of little issue to them.

Any invasion of the station and attempt to retrofit it for boost from low earth orbit would give plenty of time to use a Anti-satellite weapon.  A modified US Navy SM-3 would have little problem hitting so large a target, and if that is not an option prep a F-15 with a ASM-135 ASAT.  Those are just the US weapons that are documented to have scored hits on satellites, other nations involved have similar weapons.  Biggest question that pops to mind for me is who would win the argument on getting to shoot at it first. 
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: mellyrn on February 25, 2012, 11:59:20 am
Quote
A modified US Navy SM-3 would have little problem hitting so large a target, and if that is not an option prep a F-15 with a ASM-135 ASAT.  Those are just the US weapons that are documented to have scored hits on satellites, other nations involved have similar weapons.  Biggest question that pops to mind for me is who would win the argument on getting to shoot at it first.

How fast can Leon get the Highball Express hooked up and get the ISS outta Dodge?  Will the ground-based shooters have time a) to realize that someone's stealing the freakin' station ("Sir, I can't see the ISS -- it's not where it's supposed to be . . . oh, wait, I've got it back . . . it's on some new trajectory, plotting now . . . uhhhm, it's accelerating -- ?  and, um, moving out?  Uh, sir, I think it's leaving orbit, leaving the wrong way, I mean."  "What are you, drunk on duty or something? That's impossible!  It's not like it has drive engines or anything!") and  b) agree on what to do about it?  Will it still be in range then?
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: dough560 on February 25, 2012, 06:49:25 pm
No one said anything about an armed invasion.  The objective is traveling a known course and would be empty prior to a de-orbit burn.

Mellyrn is correct.  Move fast and by the numbers.  Do the unexpected.  By the time the powers that be, believe the situation.  The chances of being out of dodge are pretty good.

Bureaucrats believe things will happen in accordance with their beliefs and perceptions.  When the unexpected happens, they do not make decisions, but buck it up the line for "clarification and instructions".

Example:  Colonel from Department of the Army and his aggressor team sneaked onto to a base to conduct a readiness exercise.  The local response team had three "approved" reactions to the situation.  The team responded a fourth (unapproved) way, resulting in the aggressors being out maneuvered and defeated in detail.  During the out brief, the Colonel was not concerned with how his aggressors were defeated, but the response team's non-compliance with standard procedure.  The sergeant in charge of the defenders caught serious grief until inviting the Colonel to contact a certain two star general concerning the sergeant's "attitude" with the admonition to tell the general that "Tiger" say's Hi.  Ringing silence ensued.  Eventually, the response team received a superior rating.

Bureaucrats seldom, if ever think out of the box.  Some of us live outside it.

Care to guess who the sergeant was?
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: SandySandfort on February 25, 2012, 08:30:45 pm
...
Care to guess who the sergeant was?

I assume congratulations are in order. Or should I just say, "Doh!"
Title: Highball Express
Post by: Apollo-Soyuz on February 25, 2012, 08:48:55 pm
BTW, if the shuttle was suppose to be a “space truck", am I to assume the "Highball Express" is suppose to be a fast "space train"?


(makes more sense than a "space cocktail" anyway)
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Oneil on February 26, 2012, 01:54:25 am
No one said anything about an armed invasion.  The objective is traveling a known course and would be empty prior to a de-orbit burn.

.......

No debate on the empty state to begin with.  However some had proposed a armed team be sent to retake the station, that wouldn't be necessary or as I pointed out the biggest threat to anyone stealing the empty station.

Being empty doesn't imply the only method available to monitor the station is watching it's orbital position for change.  Cycling any of the airlocks would light up a panel / set off alerts planet side.  And long before you reach an airlock, the Proximity Radar's used in docking would expose the approach of the plotters.   At that point their every action can be quickly viewed remotely via camera feed.

Still personally,   Having felt we all lost something with allowing first Skylab in 1979 then Mir in 2001 to re-enter and burn up, any storyline that has the ISS escaping a similar wasteful demise is entertaining.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Andreas on February 27, 2012, 12:47:21 am
You raise an interesting point about Sealand, however unless NASA has not scrapped the shuttles in the EFT universe, there really isn't anything the US, or any other nation could do to STOP someone from 'stealing' an abandoned ISS.  It takes months to make a shuttle ready for an ISS mission (or any mission for that matter) and I believe in OUR universe, they have all been rendered unusable.  The Russians could probably get a Soyuz ready faster, but 3 guys isn't exactly a dynamic entry team.  And let's not forget that one bullet not in a body ruins Everybody's day.

They wouldn't have to go inside: they'd just need to send up an astronaut with a Armbrust recoilless rifle; you can ruin everybody's day from the outside, too. Especially if you're NOT trying to preserve the station. The thing is, giving advance warning of a land-grab is a surefire way to fail. Look at how Argentina is talking about the Falklands again; presto, a new class of superdestroyer at their proverbial maritime doorstep, capable of shooting down their planes as they take off from their home bases! Get possession, then keep it. There's no other way. Oops, seems like this has already been handled.

Anyway, look at Leon go; he's leaving nothing to chance: They'll win/buy the contract to de-orbit the station, and then they have all the time in the world (well, at least barely enough) to prep it and de-orbit it... but in the opposite direction of what's expected. Up, up and away! :D Wheee!

Technically they're doing the job they're paid for... although it's highly doubtful if they'll receive any appreciation :D :P
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: mellyrn on February 27, 2012, 08:13:07 am
(page 899) "Over the next decade . . . "

Oooo, I am so in love!  How I admire long-range thinking!
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: dough560 on February 27, 2012, 04:00:53 pm
Love a practical demonstration of the 5P's in action.  Now to see how this play's out.

Three can keep a secret if two are dead.  It'll be interesting to see how the eventual security leak is handled.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: VonZorch on February 28, 2012, 10:57:36 am
No one said anything about an armed invasion.  The objective is traveling a known course and would be empty prior to a de-orbit burn.

.......

Cycling any of the airlocks would light up a panel / set off alerts planet side.  And long before you reach an airlock, the Proximity Radar's used in docking would expose the approach of the plotters.
Easily dealt with.  You make part of your de-orbit proposal using the station as a work base while installing the de-orbiting engines.  Now it's an expected event and causes no alarm.  Docking will not cause an alarm in any case as the easiest way to connect the de-orbiter is to use the main docking port.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: dough560 on February 28, 2012, 01:35:28 pm
VonZorch is correct.  If everything worked properly and according to plan, the Powers That Be would not have any idea what was up, until the ISS took off at the top of the elliptical orbit.

Plans are perfect until they meet reality.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Andreas on February 28, 2012, 02:04:55 pm
VonZorch is correct.  If everything worked properly and according to plan, the Powers That Be would not have any idea what was up, until the ISS took off at the top of the elliptical orbit.

Plans are perfect until they meet reality.
Well, that's moot now, since they'll be arriving at the ISS with a VIP pass!
Come to think of it, it's sort of an inverse trojan horse thing: where they arrive to destroy the "city", except they cram it full of people, and cart it off to "sea"... Leon has something in common with Odysseus, there, but I guess his less jaded personality is testament to some improvement of society, compared to the god-ridden hell-hole of dickhead cockfights that was Classical times  ;D
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: wdg3rd on February 28, 2012, 06:10:29 pm
Andreas, if you haven't checked it out already, I recommend "Odysseus the Rebel" complete elsewhere here on bigheadpress.com.  A great retelling of the Odyssey.  It features Odysseus as my favorite kind of atheist, one who knows the gods are there but doesn't like them or put up with any more of their crap than he has to, much like my own relationship with government.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Norman on February 28, 2012, 07:06:18 pm
So, is this the "Highball Express"  cute name to which Terry refers, or is this another cute name entirely?  I hope to find out tomorrow!
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Andreas on February 29, 2012, 12:19:49 am
Andreas, if you haven't checked it out already, I recommend "Odysseus the Rebel" complete elsewhere here on bigheadpress.com.  A great retelling of the Odyssey.  It features Odysseus as my favorite kind of atheist, one who knows the gods are there but doesn't like them or put up with any more of their crap than he has to, much like my own relationship with government.


Yeah, I read it just the other day... my sleep cycle really loves it when I read a webcomic in one sitting  ::)
I guess Atheist is all sorts of wrong for Odysseus as portrayed, since an atheist is one that believes there are no gods. Something I find to be a bit paradoxical.
I prefer axing the "belief" part entirely  ;D
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Norman on February 29, 2012, 12:33:54 am
An anagram engine?  An interesting concept....<searches for an anagram engine, finds one on Easypeasy.com, tests it with Iron Flames>

Is there "Life on Mars"?   Heh, there will be! ^_^

Also, I've heard of rust described as the flame of  iron, so there's another link to Mars...
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: myrkul999 on February 29, 2012, 02:03:45 am
This arc finally got me to register. :)

I'd like to point out one thing:
An escape burn and a de-orbit burn differ primarily in only one factor.

Vector.

Done right, the station will be well on it's way to Mars before the bureaucrats even realize the burn was pointed in the "wrong" direction. Packing up Troy and carting it off to sea, indeed.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: SandySandfort on February 29, 2012, 07:27:16 am
An anagram engine?  An interesting concept....<searches for an anagram engine, finds one on Easypeasy.com, tests it with Iron Flames>

Yup, I used the Internet Anagram Server (http://www.wordsmith.org/anagram/) for this arc. While not an anagram, the title of this story is also cutesy: GONE MISSING. (Get it?)

Is there "Life on Mars"?   Heh, there will be! ^_^

Also, I've heard of rust described as the flame of  iron, so there's another link to Mars...

That didn't occur to me. Serendipity!
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: paulr on February 29, 2012, 11:24:14 pm
IRON FLAMES?


LIFE ON MARS?


-Paul
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: spudit on March 01, 2012, 11:53:02 am
Last time NASA trashed a station, Skylab in the late 70's, the  did it because it was in the way of the next excuse for spending money, the shuttles. It's all about the money, corporate welfare of a sort. They pay to design, build and launch the thing and then to use it. It has no other value except to the few people there who really belong there. Something like the ISS has no value up there unless it has value here.

It really and truly sucks.

Will someone please figure out how to put a warp drive on a 747 so we can get the hell out of this place.

I wonder, were his folks somewhere near Perth when Skylab hit, were they traumatized, warped, and somehow driven to produce a child who would protect the world from such a thing?  
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Killydd on March 01, 2012, 12:50:58 pm
Last time NASA trashed a station, Skylab in the late 70's, the  did it because it was in the way of the next excuse for spending money, the shuttles. It's all about the money, corporate welfare of a sort. They pay to design, build and launch the thing and then to use it. It has no other value except to the few people there who really belong there. Something like the ISS has no value up there unless it has value here.

Unfortunately, the value of science being performed is hard to quantify. For example, even though the steam engine was invented at the end of the 17th century, it wasn't until the 19th century that it became broadly useful.  If nothing else, what we are continuing to learn about surviving in zero g will be what ultimately lets us send true colonists into space and other planets.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: dough560 on March 01, 2012, 02:16:54 pm
Good point.  We're just learning to crawl.  Long way to go, before we start walking.

What matters, is the effort and how we handle the failures.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Big.Swede on March 01, 2012, 04:39:19 pm
And this is why i say the biggest threat to human continued existence is the people saying space science/exploration/testing is a "waste".

The earth has a lot of rescources, true. But eventualy they _will_ run out. Or the sun decides to go red gigant. Or we get an unexpected visit from a large spacerock. Or some humans decide that if they canīt have the world then noone else can either and boom goes the neighbourhood. Or.... Or... Or... a hundred different things. Heck it can be a real life zombie apocalypse, doesnīt matter. Sooner or later we have to go out there. We, or our children.

Now, which is the best bet? Doing the basics and sciency stuff now while we have the means and the time to get something functional going. Or wait untill the last minute and strap some invitro fertalized eggs to an experimental copy of the old Saturn 5 boosters and hope some aliens find them drifting in space and are willing to revive a race stupid enough to snuff itself out by pure greed and ignorance.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Andreas on March 02, 2012, 05:48:55 pm
And this is why i say the biggest threat to human continued existence is the people saying space science/exploration/testing is a "waste".

The earth has a lot of rescources, true. But eventualy they _will_ run out. Or the sun decides to go red gigant. Or we get an unexpected visit from a large spacerock. Or some humans decide that if they canīt have the world then noone else can either and boom goes the neighbourhood. Or.... Or... Or... a hundred different things. Heck it can be a real life zombie apocalypse, doesnīt matter. Sooner or later we have to go out there. We, or our children.

Now, which is the best bet? Doing the basics and sciency stuff now while we have the means and the time to get something functional going. Or wait untill the last minute and strap some invitro fertalized eggs to an experimental copy of the old Saturn 5 boosters and hope some aliens find them drifting in space and are willing to revive a race stupid enough to snuff itself out by pure greed and ignorance.

Agreed; so, first step is getting a proper presence on the moon, same as we get a Mars orbital station going, and seed Venus with heliophilic bacteria from the deep sea sulfur vents... we may have to modify the latter a tiny bit, but they're already almost there: And sending what amounts to a bullet to Venus isn't going to cost us a lot.

The bacteria will do their stuff, bind the sulfur out of circulation, and reducing the green house effects down there on Venus... so that sometime in the future it will be that much closer to habitable.

What else? ;D
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: gunner on March 03, 2012, 08:27:52 pm
i want this plan to succeed, but part of my mind keeps remembering robert burns and murphy's law.
"gunner"
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Andreas on March 04, 2012, 07:17:55 am
i want this plan to succeed, but part of my mind keeps remembering robert burns and murphy's law.
"gunner"
Well... do you remember how this story arc started?  ::)
It removes at least some of the nail-biting tensions... although it will be interesting to see what complications do arise, and how they are solved
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: mellyrn on March 04, 2012, 08:34:19 am
Truth is stranger than fiction because fiction has to make sense.  Here's NASA having gone and lost computers with the ISS security codes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tW8vRFJ-qJw

If Sandy had tried to put that in this arc, we'd have chewed it up and spat it out with all the perfectly good and valid reasons why that could "never" happen -- though this loss-of-ISS-codes story means that those are only "perfectly good and valid reasons why that SHould never happen".

Or maybe the guy Leon is based on is a friend of Sandfort's, and he stole those laptops? ;-)

Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: gunner on March 05, 2012, 12:39:08 am
@ andreas
that will indeed be interesting, along with seeing how neanne's rescue party handles the security rent-a-cop goon squad. i've worked for a couple of big names in that field and i was not impressed with what i saw on the job.
"gunner"
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Andreas on March 05, 2012, 02:32:59 am
Truth is stranger than fiction because fiction has to make sense.  Here's NASA having gone and lost computers with the ISS security codes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tW8vRFJ-qJw

If Sandy had tried to put that in this arc, we'd have chewed it up and spat it out with all the perfectly good and valid reasons why that could "never" happen -- though this loss-of-ISS-codes story means that those are only "perfectly good and valid reasons why that SHould never happen".

Or maybe the guy Leon is based on is a friend of Sandfort's, and he stole those laptops? ;-)



If you haven't noticed the various branches of the US govt and it's affiliate pseudocorporate entities are under a series of attacks. Been going on for a couple of years, growing more together and effective all the time. It just took the authorities a while to realize that locking down the knowledge of it would only make matters worse.
Secrets will out.
I have to say, I'd rather they go via Wikileaks into the realm of non-secrets, than go via China into the realm of "governments only".
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Oneil on March 05, 2012, 04:16:24 am

If you haven't noticed the various branches of the US govt and it's affiliate pseudocorporate entities are under a series of attacks. Been going on for a couple of years, growing more together and effective all the time. It just took the authorities a while to realize that locking down the knowledge of it would only make matters worse.
Secrets will out.
I have to say, I'd rather they go via Wikileaks into the realm of non-secrets, than go via China into the realm of "governments only".

Really hate to burst any budding conspiracy thoughts about any one government being targeted with cyber attacks, as someone stated truth is stranger than fiction, they ALL are under attack. 

With it's roots in the 1970's Engineering Students Phone Phreaking using a Whistle from a box of Cap’n Crunch Cereal to make free long distance calls.  Now in 2012, Cyber attack or manipulations percentage wise are rarely the work of a smart kid trying to out smart an oppressive corporation, they are almost always criminal, and when it's not, it has a honest smell of espionage.     
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Andreas on March 05, 2012, 09:01:43 am

If you haven't noticed the various branches of the US govt and it's affiliate pseudocorporate entities are under a series of attacks. Been going on for a couple of years, growing more together and effective all the time. It just took the authorities a while to realize that locking down the knowledge of it would only make matters worse.
Secrets will out.
I have to say, I'd rather they go via Wikileaks into the realm of non-secrets, than go via China into the realm of "governments only".

Really hate to burst any budding conspiracy thoughts about any one government being targeted with cyber attacks, as someone stated truth is stranger than fiction, they ALL are under attack. 


Of course, but the US "affiliates" have the best loot!  ;D
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: UncleRice on March 11, 2012, 07:36:35 pm
Bureaucrat: Leon! The ISS is on the wrong course! It's headed out into space!

Leon: No, not at all, it directly on course. It will totally burn up completely on it's way to the mid-pacific. It's all according to plan.

Bureaucrat: But the radar...

Leon: (Waves hand) The station is on track and your labor has protected everyone from any harm from a derelict piece of space junk. You''ll probably be promoted.

Bureaucrat: (Thinks of his new pool, his new car, his new mistress, his pension) Right! Everything has gone according to plan!
Title: Biology of survival in space
Post by: customdesigned on March 20, 2012, 07:44:20 pm
The interesting part is that *some* people have no problem with extended (which currently means 215 days) stays in zero G.  Most people, on the other hand, get "idiopathic intercranial hypertension", which is a serious condition.  Resistance to zero G is apparently genetic.  So not everyone will be able to mine asteroids - unless medical science can come up with a cheap and effective treatment.

http://jewishworldreview.com/0312/space_colony_snag.php3
Title: Re: Biology of survival in space
Post by: macsnafu on March 21, 2012, 09:06:21 am
The interesting part is that *some* people have no problem with extended (which currently means 215 days) stays in zero G.  Most people, on the other hand, get "idiopathic intercranial hypertension", which is a serious condition.  Resistance to zero G is apparently genetic.  So not everyone will be able to mine asteroids - unless medical science can come up with a cheap and effective treatment.

http://jewishworldreview.com/0312/space_colony_snag.php3

That's disturbing, although I suppose it should really be no surprise.  Humans weren't made for zero g.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: dough560 on March 22, 2012, 04:53:30 pm
Not everyone has the same tolerances.  Some have no tolerance for extremes of heat or cold.  Altitude is another example.  What this does demonstrate is our species is adaptable.  For some, space will always be a bad idea.  For others, it'll be a homecoming.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: PT on March 29, 2012, 12:15:31 am
Strange crew. If I were organizing a colonizing expedition that would never return, and probably not be resupplied or increased for decades, I would think that after survival, the colony's main objective would be to have children. Lots of them. I'd take more than two women, and I certainly wouldn't take a couple of gay men.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: mellyrn on March 29, 2012, 02:44:18 am
Quote
I certainly wouldn't take a couple of gay men.

I certainly would.

I agree that I'd take more than two women, if I thought my initial crew was likely to be the ONLY source of new citizens ever -- not sure what the minimum would be for even decent genetic variation.  Still, if we can create a viable settlement at all, we will be such an inspiration that I'd expect there to be an outright race to follow us.  Maybe Tobi (how old is he, anyway?), or bureaucrats needing to save face ("we totally had a colony in the planning stage, look!" <rush job>) AND chase us down for back taxes (heh, or try to).

I'd take gay people in a colony ship because I've been home alone with three (only three!) little ones.  Honest to all the gods, having a slightly higher adult-to-child ratio than you'd get if everyone were reproductive, would seriously increase the survivability of those slightly-fewer children you'd have with gays included.  The point is NOT "number of children", the point is "number of children that survive to reproduce themselves."
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Andreas on March 29, 2012, 06:03:21 am
Quote
I certainly wouldn't take a couple of gay men.

I certainly would.

I agree that I'd take more than two women, if I thought my initial crew was likely to be the ONLY source of new citizens ever -- not sure what the minimum would be for even decent genetic variation.  Still, if we can create a viable settlement at all, we will be such an inspiration that I'd expect there to be an outright race to follow us.  Maybe Tobi (how old is he, anyway?), or bureaucrats needing to save face ("we totally had a colony in the planning stage, look!" <rush job>) AND chase us down for back taxes (heh, or try to).

I'd take gay people in a colony ship because I've been home alone with three (only three!) little ones.  Honest to all the gods, having a slightly higher adult-to-child ratio than you'd get if everyone were reproductive, would seriously increase the survivability of those slightly-fewer children you'd have with gays included.  The point is NOT "number of children", the point is "number of children that survive to reproduce themselves."

How many prefertilized embryos do you think you can pack? Granted, we don't know how to copy the womb in vitro yet, but "the oldfashioned way", while fun, isn't practical for a crew this size. Genetic variety begins to suffer with closed-circuit populations when they number in the thousands. A handful is risking prohibitive inbreeding inside just a handful of generations. Not to mention, lack of food. In theory you can have hydroponics up, but if you're growing your population by breeding (as opposed to importing people - with the resources they bring), you'll need to do some heavy duty materials production on-site.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Killydd on March 29, 2012, 12:49:04 pm
IIRC, the tipping point genetically is about a hundred people, although being able to screen for abnormalities might reduce that a good bit, and simply insuring a broad spectrum of genetic backgrounds can also lower it.  Having people related to eachother, like the families that are likely to go together, increases the number needed.  In this case, the intent is probably to set up a proof of concept first, then in a couple of years when the orbits line up again hope to attract some pioneering spirits.  He almost certainly has some press releases canned and filed to attract people even if the government tries to hide things that he sends after departure.

As far as the Boys from Brazil, they seem a prime choice just because of the ability to already have people on the station and familiar with it, apart from anything based on lifestyle.  Also, how many gay people here on Earth have had children for various reasons?  I'm sure that if necessary, they would contribute to diversity up there.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Azure Priest on April 04, 2012, 08:11:08 am
Well, the "space nut" is right. If you own a land in Texas, Arizona, or Georgia, or pretty much anywhere in the South East, don't leave your garden hose running, or the federal government could find a puddle and declare your home a "wetland," and you'll be lucky if you can even mow your lawn without having to go kowtowing to the EPA.

As proof, a cattle rancher in Oklahoma dug a well to water his cattle. Brine shrimp settled in that well, and NOWHERE ELSE on his land. Now he can't have a ranch at all because he might "harm an endangered species." Never mind that brine shrimp ARE NOT ENDANGERED. Further, California had a judicially mandated drought hit their most fertile farmland. Why? Because the water supply had some minnow that was supposedly a marker for "global warming."

Sadly the US government is packed with people beholden to radical "environmentalists" who hate business and just love throwing the monkey wrench into any big endeavor.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Killydd on April 04, 2012, 10:52:52 am
Unfortunately, said environmentalists have a point as well.  We are living through the second greatest mass extinction ever.  We are still seeing entire habitats falling apart because a couple of species were more sensitive to the pollutants being put out nearby, let alone intentional destruction.  You say "well, if the market isn't large enough for sustainable practices, just let the companies make the quick buck and get out of there" but that view is the cause of this backlash.  I guess one of the differences is that I still believe in some "natural commons," such as air, water, and light.  The reason that there is such a concern over wetlands is because it was common practice to drain a marsh, build on in because it was now fertile, arable land, or close to a natural water source, and damage the neighbor's property downstream. 
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Andreas on April 04, 2012, 01:50:00 pm
Do you remember that one time, millions of years ago, when almost all marine life died?
That could happen. It happened without human interference back, so it's not even that unlikely that we can speed that along, or tip the balance that last millionth of a percent that sets the ball rolling...

That would F all our SH up. As in http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHDdqubE7zQ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHDdqubE7zQ)
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: myrkul999 on April 04, 2012, 01:55:28 pm
Evolution is the result of environmental change. Survival of the fittest. Life will adapt.

Don't believe me? clicky. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peppered_moth_evolution)

I'm not particularly worried about the wildlife, at least at levels of pollution that won't harm humans, and of course, at levels that will, people will stop, for the same reason that they won't hurt the neighbor's property, if they don't have government protection and immunity.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Andreas on April 05, 2012, 05:49:49 am
Survival of the fittest does not ensure survival of humans. It also doesn't account for one-time events, it only actually counts for periods of environmental stability.
Also, a catastrophic cascade is a one-time event. Adapting to it is pointless.

And people won't know that they've triggered a catastrophic cascade until it's too late to do anything about it. That's the unfortunate fact of the matter.

Not that being worried will do a lot of good, since nowadays you have to have scientific proof of the harmfulness of something to get it stopped, and even then some nutbag on a corporate payroll will be happy to release research to name that proof "controversial".

Science cannot compete with mammon.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: mellyrn on April 05, 2012, 07:27:04 am
Quote
at levels of pollution that won't harm humans

Which would be what?  Company X produces new chemical x in the environment at 1/10,000th the amount that could possibly harm humans.  Company Y produces y at that same inconsequential level.  And so do 200,000 other companies with all their strange new stuffs, for a net dose of -- ? 

And do any of them do the unanticipated-drug(like)-interaction thing?

Hey, we're all lab rats here.


Quote
Do you remember that one time, millions of years ago, when almost all marine life died?

Oh, I say, I'm not that old -- !  :)
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Azure Priest on April 05, 2012, 08:28:36 am
Survival of the fittest does not ensure survival of humans. It also doesn't account for one-time events, it only actually counts for periods of environmental stability.
Also, a catastrophic cascade is a one-time event. Adapting to it is pointless.

And people won't know that they've triggered a catastrophic cascade until it's too late to do anything about it. That's the unfortunate fact of the matter.

Not that being worried will do a lot of good, since nowadays you have to have scientific proof of the harmfulness of something to get it stopped, and even then some nutbag on a corporate payroll will be happy to release research to name that proof "controversial".

Science cannot compete with mammon.


Until, of course, it's your home, that looks overgrown because the EPA forbids you from clearing the brush because you "might harm some kangaroo rat." Then there's a fire, goodbye home, and look at all those nice toasty, kangaroo rat corpses.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: myrkul999 on April 05, 2012, 12:20:47 pm
And people won't know that they've triggered a catastrophic cascade until it's too late to do anything about it. That's the unfortunate fact of the matter.

That right there is very true. As is the point that survival of the fittest will not ensure the survival of humanity.

Have you ever considered that maybe, if humanity is not the fittest, we should not survive? George Carlin (Rest his commie soul), made a fine point, which I will paraphrase here: The environmentalists are not afraid of destroying the environment. The Earth can and will find a new equilibrium. They are afraid of destroying humanity, or perhaps civilization. They're afraid of changing the status quo.

Quote
at levels of pollution that won't harm humans

Which would be what?  Company X produces new chemical x in the environment at 1/10,000th the amount that could possibly harm humans.  Company Y produces y at that same inconsequential level.  And so do 200,000 other companies with all their strange new stuffs, for a net dose of -- ? 

And do any of them do the unanticipated-drug(like)-interaction thing?

Well, unless they're all in the same city, there's not going to be a significant concentration anywhere, just a sort of low-level contamination everywhere. And what happens when the environment changes slowly like that? Adaptation.

Now, don't get me wrong, I think we should probably be careful about what we toss into our environment, I just want people to stop the misdirection, worrying about the purple-breasted slug or some BS, and say it like it really is.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Killydd on April 05, 2012, 01:03:23 pm
Indeed, the Earth will survive and Nature will survive, pretty much regardless of what we do to it.  If we all just packed up and left, in a thousand years it would be hard to tell we were here in most places.  However, while we're here, we are certainly changing things.  The assorted minor increases in environmental factors such as co2 and ch4 have caused notable property damage, in increased drought and storms in various parts of the world.  Even scarier are some tipping point scenarios where, for example, methane hydrate deposits under the Atlantic become warm enough to sublimate into the atmosphere and greatly accelerate global warming. 

And of course, every species that does become extinct or too rare to efficiently study is another potential lab experiment destroyed.  http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/en/paul_stamets_on_6_ways_mushrooms_can_save_the_world.html shows how much we can learn from nature, and use it.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Andreas on April 05, 2012, 03:24:15 pm
Quote
Have you ever considered that maybe, if humanity is not the fittest, we should not survive?
There's no moral rights attached to Survival of the Fittest, silly. ::)
It is not the case that the fittest "ought" to survive. Or that if we are less fit than something else, we ought to surrender and die. That's not the point.
The point is that the more fit will tend to multiply better. And taken into the generational game, that means gradual adaptation to a stable environment, for the species as a whole.


It's not about changing environments, and it's not about competition between species. It can address those, but that's just not its primary meaning - those take work.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: macsnafu on April 05, 2012, 04:54:03 pm
Indeed, the Earth will survive and Nature will survive, pretty much regardless of what we do to it.  If we all just packed up and left, in a thousand years it would be hard to tell we were here in most places.  However, while we're here, we are certainly changing things.  The assorted minor increases in environmental factors such as co2 and ch4 have caused notable property damage, in increased drought and storms in various parts of the world.  Even scarier are some tipping point scenarios where, for example, methane hydrate deposits under the Atlantic become warm enough to sublimate into the atmosphere and greatly accelerate global warming. 

And of course, every species that does become extinct or too rare to efficiently study is another potential lab experiment destroyed.  http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/en/paul_stamets_on_6_ways_mushrooms_can_save_the_world.html shows how much we can learn from nature, and use it.

No, the really scary part is how much we don't know about our environment and how it works.  And if scientists don't understand it, what makes anyone think that governments can pass legislation that will have beneficial effects on the environment? 
You might say we should engage in the precautionary principle, but if the issue is truly not understood, how do you know which side of it is "precautionary"?  Potential lab experiments are not enough to justify real wealth-destroying actions, because with more wealth, we have more options for taking action and responding to problems, but with less wealth, we have fewer options.

No, I think we'll just have to take our chances until we can understand the problems better--then we can make truly-informed decisions about how to deal with them, instead of just wild guesses and reactionary protection of the status quo in a dynamic, ever-changing world.

Ha!  That's funny to think that liberal environmentalists might actually be conservative on the environment!

Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: customdesigned on April 06, 2012, 10:09:39 am
Ha!  That's funny to think that liberal environmentalists might actually be conservative on the environment!
Not only that, they seem to not actually believe in Darwinism.  They regard every extinction as an irreplaceable loss - almost as if the species in question were a work of art, an "intelligent design" if you will.  Even more curious, when this is pointed out, they respond that extinctions as a result of human action are "not natural" - as if human will is somehow coming from outside of nature. 

But they are not closet Christians, because their view of humanity, while supernatural, is the opposite of traditional Christianity: humans are a blight and a pestilence upon the earth (as opposed to fallen rulers of the earth).  I would laugh, but when Al Gore talks about how we need to quickly reduce the human population from 5 billion to 2 billion, I get scared.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Killydd on April 06, 2012, 12:18:53 pm
It does take work to describe the reaction to a changing environment, but one of the better "solutions" to that is the idea that our intelligence evolved as a response to the rapidly changing environment of the last Ice Age. 

Macsnafu, I disagree with much of what you just said.  Although I do agree with amusement about us being conservatives.  If you have a machine that isn't working well, do you keep making random changes hoping that will make it work better, or do you stop messing with it, and try to understand it better before you try to fix it to your ideal?  If someone points out that the new fuel you've been using for it seems to make it degrade, to you keep using it, or do you change it back?  I'm certainly not advocating stagnation, but rather an assessment of the changes we make before we implement them, rather than saying "oops, didn't mean to break that."

While details may be only moderately understood, we can see with certainty some trends.  We know with certainty that taking carbon out of the ground and pumping it into the atmosphere will retain more heat, which causes more intense storms and droughts.  We know that pouring chemicals into rivers hurts our ability to fish and play in those rivers.   

I do agree that well-managed growth of wealth will increase our options, but we certainly need to keep a better eye on poorly-managed wealth schemes that actively destroy other options. 

As far as "irreplaceable loss" we have certainly seen how designs may be difficult to create, and so only exist in a few places, and our usage of them may be made much more difficult by not having a template that we have seen in action, whether a chemical agent or a large scale feature.  Our view of human actions being "outside of nature" is because, quite simply, they are the only controls we have on this experiment.  If you only have one experiment running, and can only get one, you first watch what happens without changing things as a control before you start testing your variables. 
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: myrkul999 on April 06, 2012, 03:44:56 pm
Quote
Have you ever considered that maybe, if humanity is not the fittest, we should not survive?
There's no moral rights attached to Survival of the Fittest, silly. ::)
It is not the case that the fittest "ought" to survive. Or that if we are less fit than something else, we ought to surrender and die. That's not the point.
The point is that the more fit will tend to multiply better. And taken into the generational game, that means gradual adaptation to a stable environment, for the species as a whole.


It's not about changing environments, and it's not about competition between species. It can address those, but that's just not its primary meaning - those take work.

Quite true. But when the "other side" brings in morality, I knock it down with morality. Those other species have no moral right to stick around, either. The only moral obligation we have to the environment is to not screw it up so badly that our fellow man (and presumably, one's own self) isn't injured. Which is why I support private ownership of all property, because if you dump poison on my land (or uphill from my land, such that it comes onto my land), I can make you stop, and if you dump poison on your land, you're just hurting yourself (if nothing else, on the value of the land). The same goes for air and water quality.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: mellyrn on April 06, 2012, 04:52:53 pm
Quote
We know that pouring chemicals into rivers hurts our ability to fish and play in those rivers.   

Yes, we do.

Quote
We know with certainty that taking carbon out of the ground and pumping it into the atmosphere will retain more heat, which causes more intense storms and droughts.

We do?

Venus is, of course, warmer than Earth.  It's closer to the sun.  67 million miles / 93 million miles means that (ultimately, thanks to the inverse square law) the irradiance received by Venus is 1.92 times that received by the Earth.

Thanks to the Stefan-Boltzmann law, this means that the surface temperature on Venus should be the fourth root of (93/67)^2, or 17% higher (in Kelvin) than Earth.

But the surface temperature of Venus is 735 degK, and Earth is 288 degK -- rather more than 17%!

Well, hey, Venus has an atmosphere that is 96% CO2.  Greenhouse effect?  (Even though greenhouses are hotter not because glass traps infrared but simply becaue glass prevents warmed air from expanding-and-cooling?)

Well, wait a minute -- surface pressure on Venus is something like 3 orders of magnitude greater than surface pressure on Earth.  Here on the surface of Earth, if it's 80 degF and I go up in a balloon to, say, 26,000' it's going to be a damned sight cooler -- because, as you know from high school physics, gases cool when they expand and heat up when compressed.  So the higher pressure on the surface of Venus MUST be a factor in its temperature, same as here on Earth.  So, if we go up in the Venus atmosphere to where it's isobaric with Earth surface pressures (about 49 miles up) -- i.e., remove pressure as a factor -- the average temperature there is (drumroll, please) 337 degK, which is, umm, 17% warmer than 288 degK. . . . just as if the CO2 didn't matter at all.

So, 'scuse me, I for one don't "know for certain" that carbon in the atmosphere retains any heat at all.  It doesn't on Venus, after all.

(You can go look at the Magellan data for this.  The point in Venus' atmosphere that is isobaric with Earth mean sea level is smack in the middle of the smooth, regular adiabatic-lapse-rate curve, and not in the outer-fringes-of-the-atmosphere wild range.)

What ticks me off is that while CO2 is nontoxic AND afaik climate-irrelevant, it gets all the attention, energy and money, while all the actual toxins you alluded to in your other part get (conveniently?) ignored.

At least agree that the influence of CO2 is controversial.  Cyanide from gold mining, or Corexit for oil spills, otoh, are quite unequivocally poisonous.

Quote
the last Ice Age

The "last" ice age was the Karoo, from ~350 to ~260 million years ago.  Perhaps you meant the last glaciation of the current ice age.  'Cos this age is, in the context of the whole history of the Earth, abnormally cold.  Sooner or later, whatever humans do, conditions will return to normal -- significantly warmer, with a forested Antarctica, kind of thing.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: dough560 on April 06, 2012, 05:51:57 pm
Global Warming, Climate Change or the end of the Ice Age?

Scientists caught falsifying data supporting Climate Change and suppressing data disproving it.  It was interesting watching national media suppress this news.  The primary scientists advancing the argument for Climate Change, caught with their hands in the cookie jar also maintained a data base proving climate Change a lie.  One way to keep the lies they told the public straight I suppose.

At this point, In-spite of reality, Climate Change is an opinion dependent on individual political spectrum.

I can't help but remember when I was growing up, the ongoing discussion about how the climate would change with the ice age ending.  When things settle out in another fifty or one hundred years, we'll have an idea what's really going on.

Pollution is another matter.  No one has a right to poison another person's property..  Not even with government permission.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Andreas on April 06, 2012, 05:57:49 pm
Hush now. The point is. And this is important.
Nobody cares if CC isn't the truth. Because CC is handy.
Handy for breaking a dependency on a commodity that will drain wealth out of our "western world", giving power to a series of countries we do not want to be too powerful.
So, until we've got all the cars weaned off oil, nobody will hear anything else.
It's easy enough to reactivate a coal power plant, but once the cars are off oil, they'll stay off.

And that's the point.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: mellyrn on April 06, 2012, 06:38:36 pm
Quote
And that's the point.

And it's a very good and important point and I heartily agree which is why I hate the AGW argument -- because when people catch on that they've been lied to, no matter for how noble a purpose, they tend to, how shall I say, overreact.  Baby with the bathwater, assume lots of other perfectly true stuff is also a lie, and so on. A better way to undercut one's own position, I at least can hardly imagine.


Quote
or the end of the Ice Age? (emphasis added)

Just to pick a nit, the shortest ice age in the geologic record lasted about 30 million years (others were 90 million, 220 million, and 400 million years long).  The current one is considered to have begun about 2.5 million years ago.  IF it's ending now, and this isn't just another interglacial, it's short by an order of magnitude at minimum and more like two orders.  I hope it is ending, 'cos while we could cope with granaries and wineries in Greenland, we don't have the technology to keep NYC from being scraped off the face of the continent.  I'm just sayin'.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: wdg3rd on April 06, 2012, 07:52:46 pm
we don't have the technology to keep NYC from being scraped off the face of the continent.  I'm just sayin'.

Aside from the fact that I currently reside less than ten miles from where the WTC used to be, I'm trying to see the downside of scraping the Five Boroughs down to the bedrock.

Admittedly, before that happened, glaciation would make my preferred home of New Hampshire very expensive to live in.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Oneil on April 07, 2012, 08:09:07 am
Not only that, they seem to not actually believe in Darwinism.  They regard every extinction as an irreplaceable loss - almost as if the species in question were a work of art, an "intelligent design" if you will.  Even more curious, when this is pointed out, they respond that extinctions as a result of human action are "not natural" - as if human will is somehow coming from outside of nature.  ...

I seriously doubt you could convince a room full of Biologists, Zoologists, and Ethologists that there is a whole lot of difference between humanity hunting a species to extinction, harvesting one to extinction with a net, or poisoning one to extinction intentionally or accidentally.  Further in doubt is convincing them any of these actions are a process of 'Natural Selection' and have ties to Darwinism.

The motivation for humans to exterminate a animal species can not be rationalized as a force of nature, as it is greed and overindulgence that motivates such outcomes.  What animal exhibits those two traits?   

I would laugh, but when Al Gore talks about how we need to quickly reduce the human population from 5 billion to 2 billion, I get scared.


I think we all do, politicians use War as a population control.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Apollo-Soyuz on April 07, 2012, 08:29:04 am
Handy for breaking a dependency on a commodity that will drain wealth out of our "western world", giving power to a series of countries we do not want to be too powerful.
So, until we've got all the cars weaned off oil, nobody will hear anything else.

Actually, the USA could get all the oil imports it needed from Mexico and Canada. We're a huge importer of crude precisely because we're also a huge exporter of refined petrochemicals.  We've also managed to frack our way into a crapload of inexpensive natural gas which will shortly be exported and will help with our trade imbalance. We even could supply our entire energy needs domestically, if we had to. We'd probably need to exploit the thorium fuel cycle and use that cheap stationary power to chemically convert coal and do stuff like use nuclear powered steam to extract petroleum from oil shale. People would buy plug in hybrids because they would get an immediate payback within the average car ownership length, rather than because of some sort of green-scam of government subsidy and keeping up with the Joneses.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: SandySandfort on April 07, 2012, 04:13:32 pm
The motivation for humans to exterminate a animal species can not be rationalized as a force of nature, as it is greed and overindulgence that motivates such outcomes.  What animal exhibits those two traits?  

All of them, as far as I am aware. Though perhaps you are using a non-standard definition of those words.

Mankind is a product, and  part, of nature. Deal with it.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: macsnafu on April 07, 2012, 10:41:25 pm
Handy for breaking a dependency on a commodity that will drain wealth out of our "western world", giving power to a series of countries we do not want to be too powerful.
So, until we've got all the cars weaned off oil, nobody will hear anything else.

Actually, the USA could get all the oil imports it needed from Mexico and Canada. We're a huge importer of crude precisely because we're also a huge exporter of refined petrochemicals.  We've also managed to frack our way into a crapload of inexpensive natural gas which will shortly be exported and will help with our trade imbalance. We even could supply our entire energy needs domestically, if we had to. We'd probably need to exploit the thorium fuel cycle and use that cheap stationary power to chemically convert coal and do stuff like use nuclear powered steam to extract petroleum from oil shale. People would buy plug in hybrids because they would get an immediate payback within the average car ownership length, rather than because of some sort of green-scam of government subsidy and keeping up with the Joneses.

You make some good points, but at the same time, I think it unlikely that we would limit our oil to Mexico and Canada exclusively, for the same reason people aren't rushing out to buy hybrids--it doesn't make economic sense. 

According to data from 2010 and 2011, the top three countries we import oil from are Canada, Saudi Arabia, and Mexico, with Canada's output clearly outranking any of the others.  http://205.254.135.24/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/company_level_imports/current/import.html
Nonetheless, while the next 12 countries we import oil from are smaller amounts, added up together equal how much we import from Canada and Mexico.  To rely exclusively on Canada and Mexico, we would have to more than double what we get from them.  Even if that's feasible, it's not cost-effective. 

Now, I'm not saying that we should be going to war over oil in the Middle East.  Far from it.  If anything, I think our politicians either underestimate the power of market forces, and/or their real goal is NOT the "free flow of oil", and as such, market forces cannot achieve their real goals.

Hugo Chavez can nationalize Venezuela's oil industry, but if he cripples the management of Venezuela's oil, or hampers their response to the market, Venezuela is easily bypassed, precisely because there are many other nations we can import oil from. 

Furthermore, I think we can safely say that international politics is part of the problem with oil production, and if we could governments out of the way, oil production would probably be greater, and the market price of oil would be even lower than it is now.  If we're really running out of oil, then all the more reason to not have government interference, as the market price will reflect the diminishing supply, and THEN it will finally make economic sense to push harder for alternative energy sources. 

As it stands now, the greatest demand for alternative energy comes from environmentalists and governments, and that's not likely to change anytime soon.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Rbsnedd on April 08, 2012, 02:28:10 am
What I don`t get is why California?
If I was a private launch contractor wanting to set up ops then Panama seems to me to be a much better option unless I only ever intend to launch Earth observation sats in to high polar orbits and nothing else!
Vandenberg AFB is a great place for missile tests and lanching spy sats but NASA mainly used Canaveral for a very good reason.
If you want to get to any other orbit it means that your launch vehicle is going to be flying over the rest of the US and while Nevada, Arizona or parts of Texas may not exactly be the most populated parts of the country there is a good chance that you are going to drop a lower stage of your rocket or something on somebody`s property and the lawyers will soon be knocking on your door!
With Panama on the other hand you could set up on the east coast with most of the Carribean and Atlantic to drop anything into and you also get an additional boost from the Earth`s rotation from being nearer the Equator.
Plus, in the story the government actually WANTS you there!
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: SandySandfort on April 08, 2012, 06:41:23 am
What I don`t get is why California?
...
With Panama on the other hand you could set up on the east coast with most of the Carribean and Atlantic to drop anything into...

Actually no. Check a map.

http://www.zonu.com/images/0X0/2009-09-17-314/America-Central-y-el-Caribe-1997.jpg

Only a tiny bit of the Caribbean would be in your downrange and the north (not east) coast (again, check the map) has very primitive infrastructure. The better location would be near Punta Mala in the province of Los Santos. The downrange flies over about 200 miles of the Gulf of Panama, then crosses largely uninhabited jungles in Panama and Colombia.

... and you also get an additional boost from the Earth`s rotation from being nearer the Equator.

Yup. At the latitude of Punta Mala (8.95ŠN), the earth's rotational speed is nearly 99% of that at the equator's 1040 miles per hour.

Plus, in the story the government actually WANTS you there!

Alas, the reality is somewhat less encouraging. A few years ago, I created an Astroturf movement favoring the private development of space in Panama. Here is the placeholder website:

http://onda-rb.org/english.html

I came up with a funding plan that would be zero cost for Panama and zero or minimal cost to the rocketeers. It would have created a huge income stream for all concerned. My fellow boosters and I got written up in the papers and magazines, we appeared on a a couple of radio programs, had some low-level meetings, but basically could not get the time of day from the Torrijos administration. We haven't even bothered to approach President Martinelli. Oh well, Panama's loss.

BTW, the US rocketeers were just as bad. Most were operating under a cold war mental set and an ignorant "Frito Bandito" caricature of Panama. The only legitimate concern they expressed to me was about ITAR and I think that could have been finessed with the State Department.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Apollo-Soyuz on April 08, 2012, 10:30:40 pm
You make some good points, but at the same time, I think it unlikely that we would limit our oil to Mexico and Canada exclusively, for the same reason people aren't rushing out to buy hybrids--it doesn't make economic sense. 
...
 To rely exclusively on Canada and Mexico, we would have to more than double what we get from them.  Even if that's feasible, it's not cost-effective. 

My point.  You miss it.

Let's say that we can't get any overseas  imports. Let's say the U-boats keep torpedoing the supertankers.

In this case, we're not importing crude, nor are we exporting Diesel to the European Union (Incidentally the reason why diesel costs more than unleaded nowadays, rather than less. When domestic diesel was not ultra-low sulfur fuel, it could not be sold overseas.)

In this case, we could still meet all of our domestic needs with resources on the North American Continent.

When you see numbers that seem to show that we need to import something like 60% of the oil we consume from overseas, this number ignores the truth of the matter that while we import a shitload of crude, we refine a lot of that crude and then export those finished fuels.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Killydd on April 09, 2012, 12:09:31 am
Perhaps "latest" Ice Age would be the best way to frame my intent there.  Although my recollection of the data is unusually warm and stable for an interglacial, but not off the charts.  If you want "normal" though you have to include ages when, for example, North Africa and the Great Plains were shallow seas. 

While I think that we disagree on the specifics of sustainable growth of wealth, It does appear to me that we both agree that not harming your neighbors is a part of that definition.  At least a part of the disagreement comes from the definition of neighbor though:  I include generations not yet born and also other species in that definition. 

Regarding Venus:  you are forgetting about the effect of albedo.  Venus has nearly double the albedo of Earth, causing much more of the incoming radiation to simply be reflected out to space without heating the planet.  If Earth had a similar albedo(as it has in the past) the temperature would be 40 or 50 degrees cooler.  Another piece of evidence for the warming effect of CO2 is the ice cores.  Atmospheric samples are preserved in the ice caps, and climate modeling indicates that CO2 must have a certain effect if our models are to match historical records, both ice and sediment cores. 



Agreed, California is an odd place to choose as a launch site.  The only benefit to it might be ease of transferring materials. 

Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: SandySandfort on April 09, 2012, 07:55:52 am
Agreed, California is an odd place to choose as a launch site.  The only benefit to it might be ease of transferring materials.  

It was never suggested that BALListic Solutions intended to use California as an orbital launch site. It was chosen as a convenient R&D site with limited, short-range launches.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: mellyrn on April 09, 2012, 08:14:42 am
Killydd -- I removed my reply to Talk Amongst Y'selves.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Oneil on April 10, 2012, 03:32:44 am
The motivation for humans to exterminate a animal species can not be rationalized as a force of nature, as it is greed and overindulgence that motivates such outcomes.  What animal exhibits those two traits?  

All of them, as far as I am aware. Though perhaps you are using a non-standard definition of those words.

Mankind is a product, and  part, of nature. Deal with it.

True Man has more than earned title of "Animal" for more reason than to not be categorized as Plant or Mineral.. 
Still, I will try one more pointed example before I return to subject.

Do Wolves kill every Bison within one hundred miles and leave their carcass's to rot just to profit from selling the hides?
Have Sharks walked into a Harp Seal colony and used a wooden club to bludgeon all the seal pups for fur?
Will Dolphins Lie and Cheat to round up every Bluefin Tuna in the Atlantic Ocean, seal them in cans or sell them off for sushi?

There are three kinds of men.
 The one that learns by reading.
  The few who learn by observation.
    The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.
                                                                         by Will Rogers


Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: customdesigned on April 10, 2012, 07:08:26 am
While not on the scale of humans, cats will capture prey and play with it when not hungry, just for the fun of pouncing on the terror stricken little animal.

Here is a conundrum, American settlers collected passenger pigeons for food.  Unlike the buffalo example, the carcasses were completely and efficiently used,  packed in barrels, and eaten during the winter.  Nevertheless, the species became extinct.   Tuna are completely and efficiently used also.  So I don't think "leaving the carcasses to rot" is the root of the problem.

In all the overuse scenarios, the problem is a shared resource.   When there is some way to divide up a resource into private parcels, for example as with lumber companies and forests, then abuse is naturally limited.  Remember in the '90s when Champion paper decided to clear-cut its forests, intending to undercut their competitors and buy out their land?  The competitors held on by the skin of their teeth until Champion ran out of trees.  Then they bought up Champion's timber (now a vast sea of stumps) for pennies on the dollar.  The destruction of one insane company was limited to its own holdings.   

With tuna, any fishing company can "clear cut" the collective resource.   If there was some enforceable way to divide up the tuna, the problem would be solved.   Dividing up the surface area of the ocean is one obvious method.  Fish migrate, but I suspect that natural selection will quickly result in tuna and other creatures preyed on by humans that avoid over-fished areas.   But the world is reluctant to stake off the ocean more than a few hundred miles from shore.  There is a sense of loss - just as there will be when space is roped off into quadrants.

No doubt, I'm missing something, but those are my thoughts.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: SandySandfort on April 10, 2012, 08:05:37 am
Do Wolves kill every Bison within one hundred miles and leave their carcass's to rot just to profit from selling the hides?
Have Sharks walked into a Harp Seal colony and used a wooden club to bludgeon all the seal pups for fur?
Will Dolphins Lie and Cheat to round up every Bluefin Tuna in the Atlantic Ocean, seal them in cans or sell them off for sushi?

Ah, I see. Your definitions of "greed" and "overindulgence" were just special pleading. You cherry-picked examples that only Man can commit. However, if you use realistic definitions, then there are plenty of acts that the rest of the animals can commit, that qualify as greed or overindulgence. If you really cannot think of any, let me know and I will give you plenty of examples. Just one for the fun of it, though.

Here in Panama, if I put out a pile of cooked rice for the birds, if more than one shows up, it will spend more time fighting other birds--of its own species--to prevent them from eating, then it does simply eating. There is always way more food than the birds can eat, yet rather than just share it, the they try to keep it all to themselves. Now look up the real definition of "greed." Get it? Animals are greedy. And given they chance, most will over-eat until they founder.

On the other hand, humans share and show compassion--even to other species. Other than in family units, you rarely, if ever, see that in the rest of the animal world.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Killydd on April 10, 2012, 11:20:28 am
There are a number of species, even of ants, that will devestate the local environment if given the chance.  Our only specialty is a wide range and use of tools to greatly increase the speed at which we can do it. 

While your suggestion of dividing the commons does have merit, there are some very real practical problems.  The first is that some animals, especially apex predators, have ranges of thousands of miles.  More if you consider how annual migrations have an effect, such as many whales needing to move from breeding grounds in the tropics to feeding grounds in the polar regions.  The other major problem is that overfishing in even a moderate area can cause problems such as toxic plankton blooms, which will then spread due to ocean currents into your neighbor's area, just as dumping any toxin on land will poison the area downstream. 

These can be taken care of if you, roughly speaking, place sustainable limits on how much can be removed, and actually enforce those limits.  Unfortunately, some people always seek out those loopholes that will let them get even a little more profit, regardless of indirect costs to their neighbors.  And in many cases the timescale needed to recover from the overharvesting that we have already done appears to be on the order of centuries.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: mellyrn on April 10, 2012, 11:46:30 am
I'm sure those slaughtered bison were greatly enjoyed by crows, vultures, flies, bacteria, fungi and, ultimately, the grass.  It's not like they went to waste, except from a purely anthropocentric point of view.

Lie and cheat?  An animal researcher told me of witnessing the following -- one lioness lounged up on a small hillock in clear view of a herd of wildebeests, another hid in a kind of ditch, while two more circled around through nearby woods and openly stalked the herd.  With a wary eye on the lounging lioness, the herd stampeded right past the one hiding in the ditch, who leaped out and caught dinner for the gang.  Trickery, yes, and what is lying but verbal trickery?

As for sharing & compassion, I'm not up for special pleading even on that score.  I'll go as far as "unusual" but not "rarely" and certainly not "if ever".  Sharing & compassion are necessary traits in a herd or pack animal, even for ones like tigers that form family units for a while, and it's not a great stretch to imagine them being occasionally "misplaced" onto other critters.  What humans do have, out of this enormous brain, is the possibility of a big picture, and a long-range view.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Oneil on April 10, 2012, 01:11:36 pm
True enough,  I did limit my questions intentionally 
The American Bison has taken since 1884 and a great deal of effort to recover to status of 'Near Threatened.'  Now the majority of these are genetic crossbreeds with domestic cattle.
Harp Seals, The White Coat trade has been boycotted so the pups are safe until they are weaned and harvesting limits have the species numbers up to "Least Concern" status.

Anyone know what The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (http://www.iucnredlist.org/about/red-list-overview) is?

So why is mankind still allowing fishing for Southern Bluefin Tuna, "Critically Endangered" (http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/21858/0) and Atlantic Bluefin Tuna, "Endangered" (http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/21860/0)

I am no activist, no conservationist, I am for a lack of better term a planner.

I plan on having enough to eat tomorrow, for me and the future generations.  It's not about how cute a seal looks or what symbolism the American Buffalo has.

I have eaten buffalo, it's better than beef to be honest.  I bet most of you like to eat Tuna as well.

My long drawn out point is, only mankind, Us, is stupid enough to kill off a sustainable source of food today just so we have enough money to buy a shiny new car, or vacation home we visit two times a year.

I am with Leon and Terry, let's get off this rock before they starve us all.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Andreas on April 11, 2012, 12:11:49 am
My stance is more simple: Don't fuck up complex systems that can bite you in the ass!
CO2 emissions are one thing, but to allow an entire species of animal be hunted into extinction is a MAJOR impact on the complex system that is the biological balance.

Also, personally I think there are enough people around to meet my needs. I don't have to defend my species' right to forage a little more, that's preposterous.
If I have to choose between adding more people or preventing the depletion of stocks of other species, I pick the latter.

I question the sanity of any that would choose otherwise.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: myrkul999 on April 11, 2012, 04:06:15 am
My stance is more simple: Don't frack up complex systems that can bite you in the ass!

I agree. But that sword cuts both ways. Should we hunt a species to extinction? No. Should we expend millions of dollars in a vain attempt to defend the status quo and prevent a species' extinction? I say no to that as well. Others may disagree, that's their prerogative.

The environment is a self-correcting system. It will bounce back from anything we do to it, up to and including wholesale nuclear bombardment. Unless we somehow manage to scour the land clean, drain the seas, and blow off the atmosphere, Life has a firm hold on this rock, and won't let go. The only question is, will we be around to see it? So, as I said: Don't muck things up so bad as to harm other humans. Anything less than that, the biosphere will adjust to with hardly a hiccup. In the grand scheme of things, Humans are not hardy creatures. Doses of radiation that can kill us nearly instantly, cockroaches shrug off like water. Temperatures that would sear the flesh from our bones, in acidic environments that would dissolve even those bones, extremophile bacteria not only survive, but thrive. I'm not worried about Gaea, she's one tough broad. I'm worried about us.
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: NeitherRuleNorBeRuled on April 11, 2012, 01:18:54 pm
I question the sanity of any that would choose otherwise.

I, for one, stand foursquare  in favor of bringing the Guinea Worm  to extinction!
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: myrkul999 on April 11, 2012, 01:29:41 pm
I question the sanity of any that would choose otherwise.

I, for one, stand foursquare in favor of bringing the Guinea Worm (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dracunculus_medinensis) to extinction!

Uh.... Yeah. I'm with you on that one, that is not biological diversity we need. That one can go. (Hyperlink to the Book of Knowledge added for your convenience)
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Andreas on April 11, 2012, 05:20:21 pm
I disagree!  >:(
I happen to have been granted the uncanny ability to sic the guinea worm on the entrails of anyone I wish.   ;D
That's how I got Khomeini, you know.   8)
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Oneil on April 12, 2012, 09:20:49 am
I disagree!  >:(
I happen to have been granted the uncanny ability to sic the guinea worm on the entrails of anyone I wish.   ;D
That's how I got Khomeini, you know.   8)

Not a member of the "Preserve Smallpox" (http://www.youngzine.com/article/preserve-smallpox-virus-un-decides) mindset, nor the "Save the Guinea Worm Foundation" (http://deadlysins.com/guineaworm/index.htm).
Title: Re: What goes up... (Stealing the ISS)
Post by: Oneil on April 12, 2012, 04:50:27 pm
Agreed, California is an odd place to choose as a launch site.  The only benefit to it might be ease of transferring materials. 


Arguably one reason the Maldives in the Indian Ocean nor the Line Islands in the Pacific Ocean have not been developed as a possible launch site.  Even with the use of the oceans, the logistics of distance and time is a powerful foe.

The other, regardless of downrange issues, everyone wants it in the back yard.  There the government can keep all the secrets safe and well protected, and once the fireworks of launch is over everyone else can go home eat Bar-b-Que and sip cold beer.