OT ON TONIGHT -- Meteors: Fire in the Sky

Wanna see a good metaphor for what's happening to Republicans right
now? hehehe...

Catch the History Channel at 8 PM.

"Learning Richard" <learningrichard@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1128296661.735499.326740@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...[color=blue]
> Wanna see a good metaphor for what's happening to Republicans right
> now? hehehe...
>
> Catch the History Channel at 8 PM.
>[/color]
I thought "Chicken Little" wasn't out yet

Natalie

On Sun, 02 Oct 2005 16:44:21 -0700, Learning Richard wrote:
[color=blue]
> Wanna see a good metaphor for what's happening to Republicans right
> now? hehehe...
>
> Catch the History Channel at 8 PM.[/color]

Usually watch the History Channel all the time...

Except when The West Wing is on.

Learning Richard, 10/2/2005,7:44:21 PM, wrote:
[color=blue]
> Wanna see a good metaphor for what's happening to Republicans right
> now? hehehe...
>
> Catch the History Channel at 8 PM.[/color]

It looks more like a historical description of what has been happening
to the Democrats for years.

--
"The golf swing is like sex. You can't be thinking about the mechanics
of the act while you are performing." -- Dave Hill

On 03 Oct 2005 02:42:12 GMT, "badgolferman"
<REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
>Learning Richard, 10/2/2005,7:44:21 PM, wrote:
>[color=green]
>> Wanna see a good metaphor for what's happening to Republicans right
>> now? hehehe...
>>
>> Catch the History Channel at 8 PM.[/color]
>
>It looks more like a historical description of what has been happening
>to the Democrats for years.[/color]

and they keep it up.

fascinating program...thanks Richard.

--

Scott in Florida

Scott in Florida wrote:
[color=blue]
> On 03 Oct 2005 02:42:12 GMT, "badgolferman"
> <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>[color=green]
>>Learning Richard, 10/2/2005,7:44:21 PM, wrote:
>>
>>[color=darkred]
>>>Wanna see a good metaphor for what's happening to Republicans right
>>>now? hehehe...
>>>
>>>Catch the History Channel at 8 PM.
>>>[/color]
>>It looks more like a historical description of what has been happening
>>to the Democrats for years.
>>[/color]
>
> and they keep it up.
>
> fascinating program...thanks Richard.
>
>[/color]

I love the History and Discovery Channels. I learned the Hubble mirror
was off in space because of the zero gravity. They said the mirror was
designed and ground to such absolute tight specs that it flexed
differently in zero gravity. This was the engineering disasters show.

On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 19:56:34 -0400, ma_twain <ma_twain@yahoo.com>
wrote:
[color=blue]
>
>
>Scott in Florida wrote:
>[color=green]
>> On 03 Oct 2005 02:42:12 GMT, "badgolferman"
>> <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>[color=darkred]
>>>Learning Richard, 10/2/2005,7:44:21 PM, wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Wanna see a good metaphor for what's happening to Republicans right
>>>>now? hehehe...
>>>>
>>>>Catch the History Channel at 8 PM.
>>>>
>>>It looks more like a historical description of what has been happening
>>>to the Democrats for years.
>>>[/color]
>>
>> and they keep it up.
>>
>> fascinating program...thanks Richard.
>>
>>[/color]
>
>I love the History and Discovery Channels. I learned the Hubble mirror
>was off in space because of the zero gravity. They said the mirror was
>designed and ground to such absolute tight specs that it flexed
>differently in zero gravity. This was the engineering disasters show.
>
>[/color]

I agree.

I thought they fu*ked up the Hubble by not actually testing all the
components on the ground prior to launch....and had to take a
corrective lens up on the Shuttle..

quote

The initial failure of the Hubble Space Telescope is an example of
problems caused by relying on computer simulations. In 1990, when the
orbiting telescope sent its first photographs back to Earth, the
images were unexpectedly fuzzy and out of focus. NASA determined that
the problem was the result of a human error made years before the
launch: the telescope's mirror had been ground into the wrong shape.
The mirror, tested prior to launch like the telescope's other separate
components, functioned properly on its own. However, the manufacturers
did not actually test the mirror in conjunction with the other
components. The manufacturers relied on computer simulations to
determine that the separate components would work together. The
simulation didn't take into account the possibility of a misshapen
mirror.

[url]http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3797/is_199810/ai_n8814801[/url]

The shuttle mission to fix the fu*k up was STS 58

EVA #4 performed on flight day seven by Thornton and Akers. High-Speed
Photometer, one of Hubble scientific instruments, removed and replaced
with Corrective Optics Space Telescope Axial Replacement (COSTAR)
unit. Task took less time to complete than expected. COSTAR designed
to redirect light to three of four remaining Hubble instruments to
compensate for flaw in primary mirror of telescope. Thornton and Akers
also installed co-processor to enhance memory and speed of Hubble
computer.

[url]http://www-pao.ksc.nasa.gov/kscpao/chron/sts-61.htm[/url]
--

Scott in Florida

On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 21:19:50 +0000, Scott in Florida spake:
[color=blue]
> On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 19:56:34 -0400, ma_twain <ma_twain@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>[color=green]
>>
>>Scott in Florida wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>>> On 03 Oct 2005 02:42:12 GMT, "badgolferman"
>>> <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Learning Richard, 10/2/2005,7:44:21 PM, wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Wanna see a good metaphor for what's happening to Republicans right
>>>>>now? hehehe...
>>>>>
>>>>>Catch the History Channel at 8 PM.
>>>>>
>>>>It looks more like a historical description of what has been happening
>>>>to the Democrats for years.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> and they keep it up.
>>>
>>> fascinating program...thanks Richard.
>>>
>>>
>>>[/color]
>>I love the History and Discovery Channels. I learned the Hubble mirror
>>was off in space because of the zero gravity. They said the mirror was
>>designed and ground to such absolute tight specs that it flexed
>>differently in zero gravity. This was the engineering disasters show.
>>
>>
>>[/color]
> I agree.
>
> I thought they fu*ked up the Hubble by not actually testing all the
> components on the ground prior to launch....and had to take a corrective
> lens up on the Shuttle..
>
> quote
>
> The initial failure of the Hubble Space Telescope is an example of
> problems caused by relying on computer simulations.[/color]

And problems caused by lifer government computer programmers.

In 1990, when the[color=blue]
> orbiting telescope sent its first photographs back to Earth, the images
> were unexpectedly fuzzy and out of focus. NASA determined that the
> problem was the result of a human error made years before the launch:
> the telescope's mirror had been ground into the wrong shape. The mirror,
> tested prior to launch like the telescope's other separate components,
> functioned properly on its own. However, the manufacturers did not
> actually test the mirror in conjunction with the other components. The
> manufacturers relied on computer simulations to determine that the
> separate components would work together. The simulation didn't take into
> account the possibility of a misshapen mirror.[/color]

Sounds like multivariate bullshit to me.

[color=blue]
> [url]http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3797/is_199810/ai_n8814801[/url]
>
> The shuttle mission to fix the fu*k up was STS 58
>
> EVA #4 performed on flight day seven by Thornton and Akers. High-Speed
> Photometer, one of Hubble scientific instruments, removed and replaced
> with Corrective Optics Space Telescope Axial Replacement (COSTAR) unit.
> Task took less time to complete than expected. COSTAR designed to
> redirect light to three of four remaining Hubble instruments to
> compensate for flaw in primary mirror of telescope. Thornton and Akers
> also installed co-processor to enhance memory and speed of Hubble
> computer.
>
> [url]http://www-pao.ksc.nasa.gov/kscpao/chron/sts-61.htm[/url][/color]

On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 21:19:50 -0400, Scott in Florida wrote:
[color=blue]
> On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 19:56:34 -0400, ma_twain <ma_twain@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>[color=green]
>>
>>
>>Scott in Florida wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>>> On 03 Oct 2005 02:42:12 GMT, "badgolferman"
>>> <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Learning Richard, 10/2/2005,7:44:21 PM, wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Wanna see a good metaphor for what's happening to Republicans right
>>>>>now? hehehe...
>>>>>
>>>>>Catch the History Channel at 8 PM.
>>>>>
>>>>It looks more like a historical description of what has been happening
>>>>to the Democrats for years.
>>>>
>>>
>>> and they keep it up.
>>>
>>> fascinating program...thanks Richard.
>>>
>>>[/color]
>>
>>I love the History and Discovery Channels. I learned the Hubble mirror
>>was off in space because of the zero gravity. They said the mirror was
>>designed and ground to such absolute tight specs that it flexed
>>differently in zero gravity. This was the engineering disasters show.
>>
>>[/color]
>
> I agree.
>
> I thought they fu*ked up the Hubble by not actually testing all the
> components on the ground prior to launch....and had to take a
> corrective lens up on the Shuttle..
>
> quote
>
> The initial failure of the Hubble Space Telescope is an example of
> problems caused by relying on computer simulations. In 1990, when the
> orbiting telescope sent its first photographs back to Earth, the
> images were unexpectedly fuzzy and out of focus. NASA determined that
> the problem was the result of a human error made years before the
> launch: the telescope's mirror had been ground into the wrong shape.
> The mirror, tested prior to launch like the telescope's other separate
> components, functioned properly on its own. However, the manufacturers
> did not actually test the mirror in conjunction with the other
> components. The manufacturers relied on computer simulations to
> determine that the separate components would work together. The
> simulation didn't take into account the possibility of a misshapen
> mirror.
>
> [url]http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3797/is_199810/ai_n8814801[/url]
>
> The shuttle mission to fix the fu*k up was STS 58
>
> EVA #4 performed on flight day seven by Thornton and Akers. High-Speed
> Photometer, one of Hubble scientific instruments, removed and replaced
> with Corrective Optics Space Telescope Axial Replacement (COSTAR)
> unit. Task took less time to complete than expected. COSTAR designed
> to redirect light to three of four remaining Hubble instruments to
> compensate for flaw in primary mirror of telescope. Thornton and Akers
> also installed co-processor to enhance memory and speed of Hubble
> computer.
>
> [url]http://www-pao.ksc.nasa.gov/kscpao/chron/sts-61.htm[/url][/color]


You worked for NASA. Do they just have some guy that sits at a desk all
day thinking up Acronyms? They sure do have a pile of em; but instaed of
coming up with stuff like PCMCIA, they actually sound cool, like COSTAR.

On Tue, 04 Oct 2005 02:16:44 GMT, Hachiroku <Trueno@ae86.gts> wrote:
[color=blue]
>On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 21:19:50 -0400, Scott in Florida wrote:
>[color=green]
>> On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 19:56:34 -0400, ma_twain <ma_twain@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>>>
>>>
>>>Scott in Florida wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 03 Oct 2005 02:42:12 GMT, "badgolferman"
>>>> <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Learning Richard, 10/2/2005,7:44:21 PM, wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Wanna see a good metaphor for what's happening to Republicans right
>>>>>>now? hehehe...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Catch the History Channel at 8 PM.
>>>>>>
>>>>>It looks more like a historical description of what has been happening
>>>>>to the Democrats for years.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> and they keep it up.
>>>>
>>>> fascinating program...thanks Richard.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>I love the History and Discovery Channels. I learned the Hubble mirror
>>>was off in space because of the zero gravity. They said the mirror was
>>>designed and ground to such absolute tight specs that it flexed
>>>differently in zero gravity. This was the engineering disasters show.
>>>
>>>[/color]
>>
>> I agree.
>>
>> I thought they fu*ked up the Hubble by not actually testing all the
>> components on the ground prior to launch....and had to take a
>> corrective lens up on the Shuttle..
>>
>> quote
>>
>> The initial failure of the Hubble Space Telescope is an example of
>> problems caused by relying on computer simulations. In 1990, when the
>> orbiting telescope sent its first photographs back to Earth, the
>> images were unexpectedly fuzzy and out of focus. NASA determined that
>> the problem was the result of a human error made years before the
>> launch: the telescope's mirror had been ground into the wrong shape.
>> The mirror, tested prior to launch like the telescope's other separate
>> components, functioned properly on its own. However, the manufacturers
>> did not actually test the mirror in conjunction with the other
>> components. The manufacturers relied on computer simulations to
>> determine that the separate components would work together. The
>> simulation didn't take into account the possibility of a misshapen
>> mirror.
>>
>> [url]http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3797/is_199810/ai_n8814801[/url]
>>
>> The shuttle mission to fix the fu*k up was STS 58
>>
>> EVA #4 performed on flight day seven by Thornton and Akers. High-Speed
>> Photometer, one of Hubble scientific instruments, removed and replaced
>> with Corrective Optics Space Telescope Axial Replacement (COSTAR)
>> unit. Task took less time to complete than expected. COSTAR designed
>> to redirect light to three of four remaining Hubble instruments to
>> compensate for flaw in primary mirror of telescope. Thornton and Akers
>> also installed co-processor to enhance memory and speed of Hubble
>> computer.
>>
>> [url]http://www-pao.ksc.nasa.gov/kscpao/chron/sts-61.htm[/url][/color]
>
>
>You worked for NASA. Do they just have some guy that sits at a desk all
>day thinking up Acronyms? They sure do have a pile of em; but instaed of
>coming up with stuff like PCMCIA, they actually sound cool, like COSTAR.[/color]

Hell yes....

....and it used to drive me crazy till I got a grip on most of em.

Then I drove others mad...LOL

It was very exciting when I worked for them. Now it has settled down
into a typical big government system.

--

Scott in Florida