flat assembler
Message board for the users of flat assembler.

Index > Heap > NASA had bomb the moon.

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
Author
Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
kohlrak



Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Posts: 1421
Location: Uncle Sam's Pad
kohlrak
Borsuc wrote:
I'd say a missile impact is quite a military maneuver.


I wouldn't say that, it's still NASA. However, i wouldn't put it past them to spend lots of money just to show off to Iran to poke fun at them.
Post 10 Oct 2009, 21:23
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger Reply with quote
Azu



Joined: 16 Dec 2008
Posts: 1160
Azu
Bombs falls under "weapons of any kind".

_________________
Post 10 Oct 2009, 21:25
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger ICQ Number Reply with quote
Borsuc



Joined: 29 Dec 2005
Posts: 2466
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Borsuc
kohlrak wrote:
I wouldn't say that, it's still NASA.
But they're both government agencies.

_________________
Previously known as The_Grey_Beast
Post 10 Oct 2009, 22:30
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
kohlrak



Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Posts: 1421
Location: Uncle Sam's Pad
kohlrak
So if Acorn supports child prostitution, is that the US government's official position?
Post 10 Oct 2009, 23:05
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger Reply with quote
Azu



Joined: 16 Dec 2008
Posts: 1160
Azu
If they are a part of the US government (like NASA is), then yes.

_________________
Post 10 Oct 2009, 23:09
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger ICQ Number Reply with quote
windwakr



Joined: 30 Jun 2004
Posts: 827
Location: Michigan, USA
windwakr
Looks like they have found water:
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LCROSS/main/prelim_water_results.html

Excerpt:
Quote:

The argument that the moon is a dry, desolate place no longer holds water.

Secrets the moon has been holding, for perhaps billions of years, are now being revealed to the delight of scientists and space enthusiasts alike.

NASA today opened a new chapter in our understanding of the moon. Preliminary data from the Lunar CRater Observation and Sensing Satellite, or LCROSS, indicates that the mission successfully uncovered water during the Oct. 9, 2009 impacts into the permanently shadowed region of Cabeus cater near the moon’s south pole.

_________________
----> * <---- My star, won HERE
Post 13 Nov 2009, 20:53
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Borsuc



Joined: 29 Dec 2005
Posts: 2466
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Borsuc
Notice they didn't say how much -- which they would if it was a significant amount for more media attention.
Post 13 Nov 2009, 23:46
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Azu



Joined: 16 Dec 2008
Posts: 1160
Azu
Borsuc wrote:
Notice they didn't say how much -- which they would if it was a significant amount for more media attention.
Maybe they don't know how much?

The impression I got was it took them a long time just to figure out whether there was water or not, so it will be even harder to quantify how much.

_________________
Post 13 Nov 2009, 23:59
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger ICQ Number Reply with quote
LocoDelAssembly
Your code has a bug


Joined: 06 May 2005
Posts: 4633
Location: Argentina
LocoDelAssembly
As they said in the link they don't know the distribution nor the density of the water because more data processing is required, but yet the local media (Argentina) said "NASA discovered large amounts of water in the Moon".

You see, they don't need to get attention, the media will alter the information as necessary to make it sufficiently important for massive interest.
Post 14 Nov 2009, 01:17
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 17260
Location: In your JS exploiting you and your system
revolution
To a person dying of thirst, 1 litre is a large amount of water. To a person drowning in the Pacific Ocean, 1 litre is insignificant. The word "large" conveys no meaning, you have to compare it to something else before it makes any sense.

And, yes, I understand that the media people are experts at obfuscating issues to sell more papers.
Post 14 Nov 2009, 01:42
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Azu



Joined: 16 Dec 2008
Posts: 1160
Azu
revolution wrote:
To a person dying of thirst, 1 litre is a large amount of water. To a person drowning in the Pacific Ocean, 1 litre is insignificant. The word "large" conveys no meaning, you have to compare it to something else before it makes any sense.

And, yes, I understand that the media people are experts at obfuscating issues to sell more papers.
When no context is given, phrases like "large" mean the generally accepted definition of a large amount by most people in average situations.

And most people wouldn't consider a litre as being a "large" amount of water for a mass of land the size of the moon under normal circumstances.

_________________
Post 14 Nov 2009, 01:58
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger ICQ Number Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 17260
Location: In your JS exploiting you and your system
revolution
Azu wrote:
And most people wouldn't consider a litre as being a "large" amount of water for a mass of land the size of the moon under normal circumstances.
But there is no basis for judging "normal circumstances" on the Moon's surface. We still have no way of judging what "large" means in any meaningful way. "Large" enough to give a dying man a drink? "Large" enough to drown in? "Large" enough to make building Moon bases possible? "Large" enough for what?
Post 14 Nov 2009, 02:10
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Azu



Joined: 16 Dec 2008
Posts: 1160
Azu
revolution wrote:
But there is no basis for judging "normal circumstances" on the Moon's surface. We still have no way of judging what "large" means in any meaningful way. "Large" enough to give a dying man a drink? "Large" enough to drown in? "Large" enough to make building Moon bases possible? "Large" enough for what?
Large enough to make a big cup of tea!

_________________
Post 14 Nov 2009, 02:13
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger ICQ Number Reply with quote
Raedwulf



Joined: 13 Jul 2005
Posts: 375
Location: United Kingdom
Raedwulf
No, two!
Post 21 Nov 2009, 16:43
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:
Post new topic Reply to topic

Jump to:  
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9

< Last Thread | Next Thread >
Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Copyright © 1999-2020, Tomasz Grysztar.

Powered by rwasa.