Quote:
Originally Posted by cosmicdave
...
|
You may deem the poor TV quality versions acceptable, but I do not.
Acceptable for what pupose?
In England we have the original Magna Carta...
Irrelevant. The Magna C[h]arta does not require a special machine to read it.
What expense and effort?
The data in question can only be read with a special machine, only a few of which were ever built. One of the first things done with this machine is to use it as the objective of an optical scan-conversion process to render it in a more accessible form. This accessible form has been widely reproduced.
The big problem is that your now trying to make excuses for NASA.
No, the big problem is that you (in your infinite wisdom) are trying to tell NASA what it should have done, and to cry "fraud" based on no stronger basis that your personal opinion. You're begging the question flagrantly.
You seem utterly impervious to examples of other similar things that didn't go the way you say they should, and to rationales for why things have been done a certain way.
It's simply you making up arbitrary requirements, solely so that you can have yet another stick with which to beat the U.S. government over the head because they fail to measure up to your personal standards. You can't even tell us what's so absolutely crucial about that data. You simply harp on the notion that it would be neat to have.
What event is bigger than man walking on another planet?
You continue to beg questions. You have the burden to prove that your expectations for the handling of this material are objectively reasonable. So far you can't or won't do it.