XPost: sci.space.policy, sci.physics   
   From: fjmccall@gmail.com   
      
   jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:   
      
   >In sci.physics Serigo  wrote:   
   >> On 10/15/2016 4:27 AM, Fred J. McCall wrote:   
   >>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Yes, just keep sending reactors until you have enough power, however   
   >>>> that is not going to be cheap.   
   >>>>   
   >>   
   >>> I think it's funny that someone had to suggest this before you thought   
   >>> of it and moved from 'impossible' to 'expensive'.  I think it's even   
   >>> funnier that you said it to me and I stupidly have your head up my   
   >>> ass to keep from seeing it.   
   >>   
   >>     no one cares what you think, troll.   
   >   
   >Notice that the lying troll says I said "impossible" when I never   
   >used that word.   
   >   
      
   Everyone hears that from you, Chimp, even if you avoid using the word.   
      
   >>> You only need enough reactors to get you started producing solar cells   
   >>> from in situ resources.  And it's no more 'expensive' than shipping   
   >>> anything else to Mars.   
   >>   
   >> bullshit.   
   >>   
   >> you gloss over the required complexity so fast, you must be stoned as   
   >> shit. or a lying shit.   
   >   
   >He also glosses over the fact that you only get an average of about   
   >40 W/m^2 of solar electricity on the surface of Mars.   
   >   
      
   Where did I do that, you lying asshole?  YOU gave the required solar   
   array size for a given power level on Mars.  All I did was point out   
   that the ground footprint required was not all that big.   
      
      
   --   
   "You take the lies out of him, and he'll shrink to the size of   
    your hat; you take the malice out of him, and he'll disappear."   
                                -- Mark Twain   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)