You seem to act like you should know if our government has something...

Government relies heavily upon private industry to supply even its "exotic" technology. Most of us are in private industry.

try the SR-71 Blackbird. When was it built??

1964.

And how many of you knew about that?

Lockheed knew.

You act like there is no secret government.

No. We simply know better than to attribute random attributes assertively to something that cannot be characterized and then draw conclusions from those ad hoc assertions. We allow that government has secret aspects. But by definition we cannot know those aspects; therefore no reliable conclusion can be drawn. Just because we cannot know all aspects of government doesn't mean the particular things you say about government are true.

I think the best research would be to ask the men who where there working the crash.

That's good research only if there's independent evidence of a crash and independent evidence of their having "worked the crash". All you have are people who claim to have done this. They've architected their claims so as to make them plausibly difficult to confirm or refute. That is typical of hoaxsters.

I know Bad Astronomy is full of NASA believers...

Only when a belief in NASA equates to a belief in the defensible truth. I personally don't approve of NASA's current strategies and policies, but I know, for example, that Apollo really happened. I don't have to trust or distrust, believe or disbelieve NASA's claims implicitly. I simply evaluate all claims based on the evidence.

Bad astronomy is full of people who believe in the moon landing.

We believe there is an enormous amount of factual evidence supporting the moon landing. We don't believe in the moon landing just because someone says we should.

...and the government.

I have yet to meet a regular here who does not base his belief or disbelief in the government on reason and facts. This, of course, leads us to trust the government in some cases and to distrust them in other cases. You seem to want us implicitly to distrust the government, which is a local error of exactly the same magnitude as implicit trust.

So are we suppose to believe you because you work on rockets?

You can choose to believe or disbelieve me. But you cannot bluster me. You may be able to convince other people that I am lying, but you'll never be able to convince me that I'm lying.

John Lear has much more credentials than you do...

None of those credentials include rocket propulsion.

How bout David Adair? I think he has done a lot more In rocket science than you have?

You're wrong. David Adair knows very little about rocket propulsion. He has fooled quite a few gullible layman. But he makes very elementary mistakes in his statements, such as giving rocket fuel formulations that lack an oxidizer and claiming the shuttle SRMs burn end-to-end. (They burn radially outward.) In fact, it can be shown that Mr. Adair's "knowledge" of rocketry derives chiefly from popular television programs; he copies their errors, something a real rocket scientist would never do.

I definitely know far more than Mr. Adair about rocket propulsion.

should we buy his story anymore than we should buy yours?

You shouldn't buy any story merely on the supposed credibility of who tells it. Stories like these should be accepted or rejected on their evidentiary merits, not upon which noted person offers his opinion about them.

Bob you have to be a little more Open..

Open-mindedness does not mean accepting every idea that is proposed. To be open-minded simply requires us to test claims on their merits and not to base our evaluation on preconceptions. That is what is done here. Your claims rely heavily upon supposition and speculation and fail a test based on their merits. If we reject them because of insufficient merit, we are not closed-minded.

if your not you are Blind

Better blind, in some cases, than gullible.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

The Saturn V had a capability of putting 118 metric tons into LEO. The power units for certain submarines have masses of about 73 metric tons. However, that 73 metric tons is just for the core, pressure vessel, closure head and related structurals, control rods, control rod drive mechanisms, and assorted instrumentation. It does not include the piping, the generator(s), or the coolant, which, when added to the power unit mass, would probably be a total close to the Saturn V's limit for LEO mass. That's just for the electrical power generation unit.

So, as you wrote, we're looking at several Saturn V launches to get the spacecraft into orbit. Then begins the assembly process.

BTW, there's also the Kaku factor...


*not just Texas, Astronot, but also Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, and Tennessee. Probably Arkansas and North Carolina too, but don't have verified evidence at this time.

__________________
A person's name, or a mark representing it, as signed personally or by deputy, as in subscribing a letter or other document.

Sigh.

Banned. Locked.

__________________
Phil Plait
The Bad Astronomer
http://www.badastronomy.com
badastro@badastronomy.com