1,422 Forum Posts by "JerkClock"
At 11/24/07 05:28 PM, yoshi77777 wrote:
Why are we talking about this here?
Because we want to.
At 11/24/07 04:57 PM, BIGmamaKATIE wrote:
yeah, i'm at garbage now because of what happened in rage's thread.. :'(
Lol yeah, but that's why you shouldn't just flag anything and everything you are told by others is abusive. I got my gold by spotting abusive reviews on my own, I never used that thread for it.
At 11/24/07 01:37 PM, RKThrilla wrote: hey i leveld DOWN yesturday with my whistle, just thought id tell you!
Lol, I once wanted the garbage whistle myself. To be honest, I think I like gold better.
At 11/24/07 04:28 PM, EKublai wrote:
stuff
Riiiiiight. So if you were told that you were going to be shredded to death in a meat grinder, you would be equally as scared as if you were told you were getting lethal injection. Sorry but that is bullshit.
At 11/24/07 04:10 PM, Euroc wrote:
While lethal injection is normally painless, the execution is not the punishment. The punishment comes by not being allowed to be alive anymore. Society has basically said that you do not deserve to live anymore. So it really doesn't matter how the sentence is executed (heh-heh)
Well actually it does. If given a choice between a quick painless death, and life in a hellish prison, quite a few would choose the former. And that's the problem. This is not necessarily the case when faced with the penalty of a much more horrifying, agonizing death.
At 11/21/07 01:51 PM, Elfer wrote: Using data from this site, it would appear that the death penalty is an ineffective deterrent at best, as the murder rate in states with no death penalty is actually significantly less than that in states with a death penalty at the 95% confidence interval.
This is probably because "lethal injection" is not a particularly painful way to die and is generally seen as a better fate than life in prison. I can garentee you a guillotine, electric chair, or death by 1000 cuts would send a different message to prospecting murderers.
At 11/19/07 11:09 PM, Wylo wrote:
147) 10.88 +0.03 8.24 HeRetiK Sgt. Major
148) 10.86 +0.03 6.79 ThePunisher52 EGSC +1
149) 10.85 -------- 6.78 Syme EGSC -1
150) 10.83 +0.01 6.77 Pieriku EGSC
Err, I've been having over 10.85 for over a week now. I'm now at 10.87.
At 11/23/07 05:11 PM, BIGmamaKATIE wrote:
one of the reasons i wanna be a lvl 60 XD
You can get in deep shit for pretending to be a mod though, funny as it may be.
At 11/23/07 10:00 PM, RedSkunk wrote: Why would another person's energy consumption influence yours?
Indeed, Tuquoque, while understandable, is not a valid argument. Although he may not be arguing that angle. I think what he's actually saying is that if Al Gore's concerns are valid, one would think that he would indeed be practicing what he preaches. And that would be an effective point.
At 11/23/07 04:35 PM, EndGameOmega wrote:
Stuff about civility
You're right, however it help if you didn't draw radical conclusions from what I say. Admittedly, I was wrong and I apologize.
Stuff about gamma rays
The problem is, gamma rays can do massive damage. Most of them go right through a person and do little damage if any, but when they don't go through you, it's pretty harmful.
As for being solid, why would the radiation shielding need to be solid?
Well it helps if it's going to block all the radiation it can.
stuff about water
Hmm, I did look this up and it seems that is true. However that's rather interesting as electric currents, a form of radiation, conduct very well through water. Of course, it is true that electric currents and cosmic radiation are not one and the same.
stuff about plastic
I looked this up also, and from what I gather, what you said is mostly correct, however it requires fusion with other materials and the mixture has to be pretty precise. So while it's true that plastic blocks radiation, the kind they would need is probably expensive.
stuff about meteors
While that's true, that's like saying that most earthquakes are so small that you couldn't even feel them if you stood right on top the epicenter. Because that's also true. It doesn't mean that California should neglect building codes that could prevent collapse in case of an earthquake though.
stuff about duct tape
LOL, I actually thought you were saying I was a paranoid schizophrenic who wears tin foil hats made with duct tape, nevermind.
stuff about precision
Not necessarily that precise no. There's no such thing as exct science, and I'm not saying there is.
stuff about air tight seals
I mean precise in that it has to be completely sealed off from the vacuum.
stuff about vacuum seals
It's not that hard with a small cannister, no. But making a vacuum sealed jar of peanuts isn't exactly the same as making an air-tight building.
radiation in general
I was referring to your comment about the things that can block all but 45-70 mrem a year.
Side question
Well the suits are made of special materials specifically made for blocking radiation(and other things). Whereas ordinary moonrock, water, and plastic, are just moonrock, water, and plastic. Not that they don't insulate, just that they don't do it as well as a radiation suit.
stuff about the moon's gravity
While it's true that this is due to the 0-g thing, having less gravity than earth's will still have a negative effect, especially over a long stay. Also, while exercising does reduce the effect, they say that even with rigorous exercise they lose roughly 30% muscle mass on trips lasting merely weeks. Prolonged stays on the moon could reasonably be assumed to have a major effect of some sort.
stuff about rotation
The problem with the cost of rotation is it involves all the fuel costs(which are high as fuck nowadays) and maintenance of the shuttles sent back and forth between the moon.
The problems are not unsolvable, your saying they are.
Not exactly. I'm saying that while they're solvable it's probably expensive and impractical.
I do.
The point, was simply that the moon has no protection from solar winds like the Earth does. I was right about that, the fact that I named the atmosphere instead of the magnetic field(which I had heard it was before, merely forgotten) is irrelevant because the context I was presenting was correct. The moon gets not solar wind protection and you agree.
stuff about cosmic rays
Well they're both a threat but regardless of which one is the bigger threat, the point remains the radiation threat is there.
minimal protection
But in a way that's kind of the point. I don't really think minimal protection is a good thing when we're talking about long stays in space.
http://www.unm.edu/~isnps/conferences/co nferences.html
That's a very interesting link. While it does support some of your points, note that they are projecting this can be done in 13 years, not right now. To be honest, that's kindof what I was thinking. That we can do this eventually, but not as of yet.
red neck hick miners
Well no I'm not saying that.
The vast, vast, vast majority of those that hit the moon are
True but again, the vast, vast majority of earthquakes that hit California are very small.
Or you could build it and push dirt on top of it.
It's more practical to build it in a dug up pit, then push dirt on it. You could do it the other way, but that's a lot harder.
more stuff about gamma rays
Still, because of the massive damage they can do to a person, it's reasonable to have high protection against it for long stays in space. I could see your point if it was 2 weeks or so.
stuff about essentials
Well, I meant basic survival needs. I suppose I should have been more clear, but indeed, moonrock is not a basic survival need.
It's really not that hard.
Not per se, but what my whole point, we have to build all our essentials on the moon from scratch and it would indeed be a lot of trouble and take a bit of work to set it all up. The troubles of making them air-tight and radiation resistant just make it worse.
Again no I'm not. The fundamental point I made was "Besides the point all you need to make a mining operation profitable is to make more then your taking.".
That doesn't means I was saying money was a basic human need though, cus I certainly wasn't.
For a good majority of the equipment, it is.
It's one factor yes, and it certainly helps, I'm not saying it doesn't. But it's only one factor.
moon base could potentially turn a profit
And I'm saying it could, just not right now. We just need to make sure we're fully prepared for it and not just jump in at the moment, that's all I'm saying.
NASA has more viable potential candidates then they know what to do with.
If you say so, but they still have to run all the tests and stuff before sending them.
spelling error
It was a joke dude. I wasn't being serious.
I haven't twisted any thing
Perhaps misunderstood then. But I certainly didn't say a person has to be crazy to simply wanna leave the planet.
I would suggest screen-capping the "rank#0" and "Hijacked" things. That counts as evidence that someone hacked it, and you want to get that evidence before it is removed.
At 11/23/07 12:39 PM, Elfer wrote: Stuff, stuff, and more stuff
Yeah I agree. Pollution doesn't cause global warming(in fact it actual has a mild cooling effect on the Earth) but the doesn't mean reducing it is necessarily bad either. Though I would caution only doing so where it's economically safe(ie. don't gut the corporations).
Heh, I anticipated I'd make this list for a long time. When I finally did, I didn't even notice. I'll probably make the top 50 before supreme commander though. I wonder how long I'll stay after I retire.
At 11/22/07 10:49 PM, RKThrilla wrote: oh yea i just turned scout!
lol only a million more levls till winged golden tank
Don't worry, you get pretty used to not having it long before you get there. Trust me on that one.
Go into a Flash entry, then click one of the numbered Pico icons. Should appear toward the left down the page.
At 11/22/07 09:22 PM, NickScott wrote:
It's not.
Another unsubstantiated and erroneous presupposition, laced with Ad Nauseum, as expected, from someone who lacks a logical argument
But you don't have the IQ to realize
This unsubstantiated presupposition is erroneous.
These types of users don't get into stuff like this, especially not a mod (Joe). And any user that happened to be on Wi/Ht at the time could've ruined it but no one posted saying it works in between 11/21 and 11/22 when it was fixed.
NG cool points lasted much longer than a day, and many mods, and many user were in on it, much more so than 11.
It's ridiculous to think that every person that posted in the thread just randomly agreed to "be in on" this ruse to fool... who, exactly?
Please, it's no more rediculus than assuming the whole cool points thing, which you yourself witnessed was fake, and, oh shit, it really was fake.
You'd have to take a video capture of the page redirecting when clicking a link, and even then, you could easily fake that, so there was nothing we COULD do if we even wanted to to "prove" to you that this happened.
While that's true, it's also true that because there's no actual evidence per se, you can't expect people to just believe it either.
You just need to grow up.
This unsubstantiated presupposition is erroneous.
At 11/22/07 07:30 PM, NickScott wrote:
you idiot,
This claim is unsubstantiated and erroneous.
Krinkels even posted for fuck's sake.
So? If it was a ruse that doesn't mean he wasn't part of it. How ironic that you lack the IQ to figure that out, yet call other people stupid.
At 11/22/07 06:34 PM, EndGameOmega wrote:
Hi I'm stupid
That won't block the gamma rays, and it would have to be perfectly solid(ie. no cracks)
I'm too stupid to know about the outgassing process
You can not use water to block solar radiation. Even if water were a good insulater(which it isn't), you'd still lose it all in the outgassing process.
I'm making this up as I go, so umm, plastic.
You'd need reinforcement to protect it from meteors too. It isn't like on earth where most of them burn up in the atmosphere.
These are the same people who think tin foil and duck tape are solutions for every thing.
This unsubstantiated claim is erroneous.
You don't need to be precise because I say so.
No I'm afraid that isn't the case. The spacesuits, ship, buildings, everything needs to be precise. What? You think you'll just fly right up there and slap together a moon colony? It doesn't work that way. For one, everything needs to be absolutely sealed off from the vacuum. "Good enough" sealing will get your crew killed.
Stuff about O2 that comes from me own ignorance.
See the thing you miss here is that the O2 trapped in the moon's soil isn't the problem. It's sealing off everything inside the buildings so that their internal atmosphere isn't destroyed by the vacuum. That is hard enough to do as it is, but you also have to do this while simultaneously blocking solar winds and protecting against huge meteors. You can't just slap something together and hope it works.
mrem stuff
You're talking about their space suits, the problem is they'd have to wear them 24/7. Even if they do though, they aren't going to be staying 5-9 years at a time. Being in space has other ill effects, such as muscular decline and stuff. So they'd still need a rotation.
stuff about algae
Okay but even assuming that is the case, there are still other problems with maintaining an atmosphere inside a building on a place that has no natural atmosphere.
magnetic field stuff.
K, fine, it's the "magnetic field" instead of the atmosphere, who gives a fuck? The point is you get zero protection from the solar winds on the moon.
stuff about radiation
Err no not really, we're talking about long stays, not short trips.
The most that people will do is sit in a control station and ether teleoperate the machinery or guide it.
two weeks
Well yeah, because of travel time to and away from the moon, but the point is it wasn't the same as spending years up there.
Clearly we do, other wise we could never have sent any one to the moon in the first place.
See, you're assuming that having enough blockage for short missions, is the same as having enough for long missions, and it is not.
Your right it doesn't, the estate is the start up cost of a small mining operation as quote from a paper in "Space Technology and Applications International Forum, STAIF 2004: 2nd Symposium on Space Colonization." Sorry, if you want the paper name you'll have give me till tomorrow as I don't have it in front of me.
Dude, some rogue news paper does not count as a valid source, give me a NASA quote amd I'll consider it valid. What you have is not.
I don't think we're going to send miners at all. As for rotation of the people stationed there, it would probably occur every year to year and a half.
And it would cost money to bring them in and out.
stuff about meteors
The meteors would not necessarily be small. The borying the base under moonsoil thing might work, but it isn't as easy as you might think. You have to dig a hole big enough to fit the base in, dig even deeper by a set amount(depending on how deep you want the base to be), build the base in it, then pile the moonsoil on it. All the while making sure there's an entrance/exit that's safe.
Stuff about gamma rays
Actually, there are both gamma and x-rays, copy and paste this to see for yourself:
http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:Gvw 6GcBCluEJ:www.eoearth.org/article/Solar_
radiation+%2B%22solar+radiation%22+%2B%2 2gamma%22&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us&clien t=firefox-a
you where insinuating the value of a moon rock is negligible,
Oh I where? Seriously dumb fuck, show where I said that. Oh that's right, I never did, you were just too stupid to comprehend what I said.
Basic human need like food could be easily supplied by green houses, just like I said.
Not as easy to build them as you insinuate.
No, I'm not.
Err, you rather are. And you're assuming that lower gravity = low maintenance. Well admittedly it's a factor, but not as much of one as you might think. A drill bit is just as worn in a zero gravity environent as a high gravity one because it's still impacting against a surface just as rapidly.
Of course, knowing you, you are going to take that example and assume that I am saying all space maintenance applies to drill bits or something(which I am not), but oh well.
potential candidates
Er no the reason so few get through is because surviving in space is difficult, even with good equipment. It's not like life on earth, you fuck up in space, you literally die(tearing your space suit open is one good example). Sure they may find the needed candidates, but it would take a while and cost a lot of money.
why do you think you'd have to be a crazy fuck to want to leave the plant
You'd have to be a crazy fuck to live inside a plant to begin with. As for leaving the planet, no I didn't say that, you are twisting my words. I'm saying you have to crazy to wanna leave struggle not to die of radiation, being exposed to a vacuum, making sure meteors don't crush your home, and maintaining the vegetation and food sources that your life eagerly depends upon. Didn't say you'd have to be crazy to wanna leave at all.
At 11/22/07 03:41 PM, liljim wrote:
1. This was an actual problem - there was a funky re-write going on for some pre-redesign stuff we'd been testing prior to the userpages even existing.
2. You make news posts from your account management, not your userpage, so that's irrelevant - he'd have been able to make the post during the redirect stuff.
Fair enough. Though I've seen quite a few ruses like this before(Cool points, the false lawsuit against SickDeathFiend, etc.).
At 11/22/07 01:28 PM, Dookiemaister wrote:
it did happen for fucks sake!
No it didn't, and you guy's ruse is failed. You had no proof, and the fact that krinkles made a news post during the supposed "down time" proves it.
just before you made the post, yoshi said it was fixed,
Yeah cus someone who's in on the ruse playing along with it certainly proves it was real, doesn't it? Right.
so stop trying to argue about something that you cant back up.
Argumentum Ad Ignorantium. It is you who makes the outrageous claim who is under obligation to prove it, not me who isn't stupid enough to fall for your shit to prove it wasn't real.
At 11/22/07 12:45 PM, SBB wrote: 'tis fixt.
If by "fixt" you mean, "Never happened in the first place" then yes.
At 11/22/07 01:03 AM, Dookiemaister wrote:
that's probably cuz you wherent here when it actually didnt work.
Yeah, sure, I've seen that excuse countless times.
At 11/22/07 12:57 AM, yoshi77777 wrote:
Well that's what I meant. To effect a flashes score more including spammy ones that try to pass through mass voting. Anyway getting off topic, again...
To filter them out, I'd have to blam them, and I'm neither blamming nor protecting once I reach supreme commander. So I don't understand your question.
You all fail. Screencap taken just now:
Nope, to get the +60% voting power so my votes effect a movie's score more.
At 11/22/07 12:43 AM, yoshi77777 wrote:
The whistle system is just an incentive. I'm saying people shouldn't be stat obsessed whores and flag here just until they get their precious little Deity whistle, then never flag again. Those people really piss me off. You do it for the good of NG.
Lol I'm doing that with Blam/Protect points, stopping right at 30000. Of course it's for voting power, not stat whoring.
At 11/21/07 03:33 PM, EndGameOmega wrote:
The three parts that would need to be self sustaining are oxygen, water, and food. These three things can be taken care of by creating to gardening systems. One set up for the porpoise of making oxygen, and filtering water, and a second for growing food stuffs. Both would likely be primarily hydroponics in nature (no soil).
Okay firstly, only quote what I said, not what you said before it.
Secondly, this still doesn't answer the question of how you're going to block all the solar radiation you'd need to in order to keep the plants living.
Anything else would likely come from earth, at lest initially and it wouldn't be all that much. All we would need to send once the base if up and running are spare parts, until they are able to build factories and the like.
Uh no. Astro science is way too precise for a moon base to be practically built with "spare parts." You need a calculated, well built base that can create and sustain its own atmosphere. It would take more than you think to do that. Spare parts would not be enough.
The protection doesn't have to be as good as our atmosphere; it just has to be good enough.
Do you even know what "good enough" is? We're not talking a round orbit over the earth here. We need the vegetation to survive a prolonged existence. "Good enough" would have to be pretty damn close to our atmosphere's protection.
Once they've got there base setup radiation would be much less of an issue.
No it wouldn't. Even assuming that the base has sufficient protection for prolonged stays, which is unlikely with our current technology, they still have to walk outside sometimes. Disposing of waste, getting into the ship, going to the mine(you know, to mine that He3).
Remember we did send people to the moon and they survived.
They survived for 3 fucking days dude. That's not the same as living there for months and years. And your argument about wether or not it's a shuttle is irrelevant. Shuttle or rocket, we do not have sufficient blockage of solar radiation, period. Whether or not it's a shuttle doesn't matter.
The base would be built in at lest two stages. The first would be done via sending a minimum support and habitat environment. When the people got there they would already have the minimum needed to survive. After this, construction would take place on building a better more permanent under ground facility. The cost estimate that I've seen show cost of between 10 Billon and 30 Billion USD, which is about 2 to 6 time more then most earth based mining operations cost.
For the record, it costs millions of dollars just to send someone in orbit, not to go to the moon and build the base.
So firstly, I'm going to have to ask where you got your "estimate" from. Secondly, it so obviously does not factor in the following:
-Maintenance
-Rotation of miners(You don't seriously think a bunch of miners are gonna go there for good, do you?)
-Safety measures(for one thing, meteor protection of the base will be a bitch with no atmosphere to burn those giant rocks up, less gravity helps, but it's not necessarily enough)
Blocking radiation isn't hard.
Yes it is. Much of the solar radiation is gamma, which is extremely difficult to block
Stuff that isn't moon rock?
Well what do you define as essential?
Note that this is what made you respond with the following moronic statement:
Do you know what the average composition is of a moon rock, and its worth? There are many valuable minerals on the moon just waiting to be exploited. As I said look He3, which is very, very hard to obtain on earth, is extremely plentiful on the moon. The average cost of a kilo of He3 is about 19k USD.
You're kidding me right? I'm talking about basic human need, and you respond by rambling about the monetary value of moon rock? You can't eat moonrock dumbass, I'm not talking about its value.
Seeing how the moon's escape velocity is significantly less then earth's, and the earth capture velocity is even lower then that, not much. Look at the titan II rocket system, it's capable to sending about 2700kg to the moon at a cost of about 3 million per rocket. That's about 1100 USD per kilo. If you take into account that you only need about an tenth the fuel to leave the moon and reach earth you could easily lift a kilo for 110 USD. When you consider the cost of He3 is about 19000USD per kilo, it suddenly looks quite appealing, There are of course other elements and minerals of value. Like gold, silver, yttrium, etc...
But again, you're neglecting maintenance, safety, and miner rotation costs.
You really have no idea how many people would gladly take those risks (which aren't as great as your insinuating them to be). Hell, why do you think so many people want to be astronauts in the first place?
Pretty sure NASA, setting up an expensive moonbase, will not get them there. You have to go through hell to be an astronaut, they're not going to take along crazy fucks who are desperate to leave the planet.
At 11/21/07 01:38 PM, Gunter45 wrote:
Plus, that's the effect of the Black Market. If anything, that's an argument FOR legalization, retards. You're saying that Black Market weed can be hazardous, even if that was largely true, legalization would solve that problem due to the fact that weed would be regulated.
Exactly. You know what's even sadder? The conservatives who talk anti-terror are the ones defending the war on drugs. Well since terrorism gets a lot of its money from selling drugs on the black market, as the conservatives themselves pointed out, why the fuck not gut terrorism by legalizing drugs? It makes no sense to me.
I swear to God, there is a lot of ill-informed bullshit going on in this thread. There is no reason why marijuana should be illegal if alcohol and tobacco are legal. Let's face it, we live in a FREE society. People are able to make decisions for themselves and if they want to smoke marijuana in their free time, then that's their choice, especially since it's MUCH safer than the current legal recreational drugs out there.
Agree.
The only opposition to legalization on this thread is from people who's facts come from so deep in their ass, they're finding gerbil skeletons.
Anyone who supports the war on drugs at all does so from either ignorance, stupidity, or love of tyranny.
At 11/21/07 02:54 AM, EndGameOmega wrote:
All colonies are initially a resource drain. It takes years before a new colony will be able to pay for it self. However, given the nature of such an environment it's extremely likely that any off world colony would be almost completely self-sustaining in terms of food, water, and O2. The only things that would need to be shipped are mechanical components and the like. After a few decades even these would be reduce in number.
Dude, ok, like explain how the colony would be capable of sustaining itself. We need to get oxygen sources, food sources, and soil for food sources to grow in, all the way to the moon without the solar radiation killing them(space shuttles don't filter it as well as our atmosphere. Do you know how much that would cost? And that's neglecting the fact that we would have to also keep them alive long enough to erect a green zone that they could survive in.
And on that note, since we don't have the ability to block solar radiation like our atmosphere does, what makes you think they'd survive all that long on the moon?
Well what do you define as essential?
Stuff that isn't moon rock?
The moon has resources that we don't have on earth. Hell mining He3 would make a small base more then worth wild, not to mention the significant concentrations of rare, and precious mettles, like gold, silver, yttrium, etc... Lastly the lower gravity, and effectively vacuous atmosphere would allow for far cheaper construction and launching of various probes, and space based vehicles.
And what of the expense in getting it all back to earth?
There are a lot of people who would love to live off world. Why; because it's adventurous, new, and a challenge. If any one were to setup a colony or outpost there would be no shortage of volunteers.
Pretty sure that 99% of them are willing to put up with this world for the time being instead of being irradiated by solar winds and struggling to keep from dying every single day on the moon.
A moon colony for humans can not practically exist. If it did, it would be a major drain on our resources. There are none of essential things that humans need on the moon, except solid ground. But that's not enough. If we could get to the moon in 2 seconds like in futurama, we could maybe set up some recreational place there, but I doubt anyone would wanna live there except to escape their governments.
