Nit.

Post #362,025 by mmoffitt 8/27/12 12:39:39 PM Reply	Nit. I wouldn't call a satellite a "world." Still, isn't it ironic that a "return to the moon" was projected to take longer (almost 11 years) than it took for the development of all the technology required to take us there the first time? I think we're ahead of the schedule spoken of in the movie "Idiocracy." In the movie's timeline, I think it's 2415 already. ;0(
Post #362,026 by drook 8/27/12 1:40:03 PM Reply	There's a difference Back then, they built systems as well as they could to support unbelievably capable specialists who actually controlled things. Today they're trying to build expert systems that can run themselves as long as the naked monkeys sitting in front of the TVs keep their hands off everything. Which actually sort of makes sense when you're talking about the unmanned vehicles they've been sending out for the last couple of decades. I wonder if there's anyone in the system who's still thinking in terms of expert experts. -- Drew
Post #362,030 by static 8/27/12 5:20:00 PM Reply	There's also no competition. Back then, the US seriously believed the USSR was eventually capable of putting a man on the moon. And desparately didn't want that to happen. Nowadays, the competition is mostly China. It's not a race for "first", either. Wade. Just Add Story http://justaddstory.wordpress.com/

Welcome to IWETHEY!