JoeSchmuckatelli

Remind me: is the spray only for sound, or does it also help minimize the chance of an 'oops'?

I'd forgotten that; he's basically a reprise of Bilbo from Hobbit then.

Whoops - merged my two thoughts; you said you did not like Frodo... why?

There's been a lot of speculation - with folks saying that given the cost of recent games and the effort & investment Take2 has put into it, they wouldn't be surprised if the full game cost that much. I doubt there was ever even a whisper of confirmation of that speculative number. Although, there were people who said they'd pay that much for a feature-complete version without thinking twice.

Today is the traditional day of drinking beer and eating cake.

Won't deny it - I was there too!

Explain, pazhalsta. Aside from being a bit too weepy looking - I wasn't bothered by the casting. Vis RoP - the casting seems to be a preference for actors who possess some vague visual resemblance to Jackson's cast. Although Galadriel should have been filmed to look more than 6' tall, as Cate Blanchett was. The Elrond actor had a very vague resemblance Hugo Weaving - he lacks so much of the 'air' that Weaving gave the character.

If anyone at Intercept reads this: PLEASE POST IT ON YOUTUBE - FREE - not on TikSpy or InstaTracked

Is today a certain day in February? (grin!)

Those kinds of things are fun, and good training. Hosting one at an Air Show makes sense; you get a lot of military-interested types in addition to simply plane-interested. >>>>>> Wish the Forum Did NOT Automatically Link Posts! (Steve's deserved its own response) <<<<<<< >>>>>> TOTALLY UNRELATED POST <<<<<<< Some folks look back to an imagined form of history and think 'man, times were good back then... wish we could go back'. I posit we're living in the best of times - regardless of all the problems we have. Point in favor of this opinion: Lab-made blood could have enormous potential for people with rare blood conditions | CNN We just keep getting better!

Huh - my brain said 'Science JR' (but then I'm on my phone so what do I know!)

Also - Science Jr. looks cool - assuming that's what is under the pod

No. It's sensors are so sensitive that exposing them to the sun would permanently damage the observatory. Given its orbit in the Lagrange point it would have to view the sun to view the Earth. Also - somewhere up thread there is a picture of Jupiter and Mars - they're almost overexposed and too bright for Webb

A portion of the dwarf galaxy Wolf–Lundmark–Melotte (WLM) captured by the Spitzer Space Telescope’s Infrared Array Camera (left) and the James Webb Space Telescope’s Near-Infrared Camera (right). The images demonstrate Webb’s remarkable ability to resolve faint stars outside the Milky Way. We can see a myriad of individual stars of different colors, sizes, temperatures, ages, and stages of evolution; interesting clouds of nebular gas within the galaxy; foreground stars with Webb’s diffraction spikes; and background galaxies with neat features like tidal tails. We already studied this exact same field very carefully with Hubble. Now we’re looking at the near-infrared light with Webb, and we’re using WLM as a sort of standard for comparison (like you would use in a lab) to help us make sure we understand the Webb observations. We want to make sure we’re measuring the stars’ brightnesses really, really accurately and precisely. We also want to make sure that we understand our stellar evolution models in the near-infrared. From the blog. James Webb Space Telescope (nasa.gov)

Playing with the doll was fun for exactly 3 videos hinting at the EA announcement.

They say they will use a sea level nozzle for testing and then replace with vacuum for flight... Is that common?

Dass ist kein video

Does it though? For what purpose? Remember, we have to identify the problem and recommend solutions. Trying to get people to go back to 1850s level technology / industrial output / pollution levels is not only unrealistic, it would be inhumane. There's a big difference between just having data, and using it purposefully. The Little Ice Age did not occur because of or in spite of human activity. It apparently did not end because of or in spite of it, either. Thus - using the 1850s as a baseline projects a false sense of scale.

Sadly, those graphs I see have the 'shifting zero' or 'what zero' problem. The State of the Climate in Europe 2021 (arcgis.com). I can't copy the graphs directly, but the first one has the 'zero' in the 1850 - 1930 band. The second has the 'zero' in the 1940 - 1990 band. While correcting (or corelating) the zero across graphs doesn't change the shape of the graph, I've mentioned before that it is disingenuous if not counter-productive to show the zero during or immediately after 'The Little Ice Age'. It should be noted that temperatures in those lower ranges were exceptionally hard on human life and crops. Suggesting that policy makers and individuals should strive for carbon levels akin to the 1850s is bad 'science' and ignores the human experience. Lately, I've seen what I consider a 'better' zero showing up; that's the period between the 1940s and 1980s.

I remind myself that this is in relation to our hopes for a very interesting revamp to the science system and player progression mechanics. First off - I'm a fan of, and anticipate they will retain some version of the tech tree system. Primarily because it enhances gameplay. It also reduces confusion for new players and is quite educational. At the same time, I respect the fact that there are players who've mastered KSP and are looking forward to rapidly unlocking everything and exploring the expanded '2' cosmos. If I read your concern correctly - you don't want the science system to become too grindy or a barrier to 'getting to the outer planets, colony parts or other systems'. I agree. But let me point out something from the current game: skilled players can accomplish the 'unlocks' easily. I've referred to my second play through - and where in the first I struggled to get to orbit or build a plane that can fly or to land on a moon, in the second I readily did all those things - and unlocked most of the parts without having to to leave the Kerbin SOI. There is a real value for new / inexperienced players to having a limited number of parts in that it both reduces complexity and forces creativity and learning. It's why playing the progression is better than playing the sandbox.

https://www.cnn.com/videos/world/2022/11/06/katharine-hayhoe-climate-scientist-gps-contd-vpx.cnn Climate Scientist points out that the forecast, while still warming, looks a lot better than it did 20 ya. Government, personal and industry efforts to increase renewables and reduce pollution are working. Finally - the efforts at remediation, specifically carbon capture, should be natural solutions, like ecosystem restoration.

Don't forget or minimize how hard this game is for some folks. The first time I figured out how to do an orbital rendezvous and actually docked two ships together seemed like a major accomplishment. Like seriously, I was proud of myself for figuring it out! After I took a couple of years off, I had to relearn this, and again felt a sense of 'man, that was hard - glad I remembered how to do this!' In that (last) playthrough, I got to a point where I was doing docking runs routinely, flying Kerbals and Fuel all over the place... and yeah, after a while, that can seem a bit grindy. But those of us who've played this and mastered 'the basics' should not gloss over just how difficult this can be for some people - and how unbelievably compelling it can be to do something so difficult. My first go... After I had done all I wanted to in the Kerbin SOI, I flung a couple of probes out, and then dove a ship toward Eve and again was just amazed that I was able to get it into an orbit. A very ugly orbit... but it was an orbit -- and I did it! Those 'little' moments of accomplishment are something very very few other games have given me. Besting a Boss on SuperFlamingDemonHunterVII does not even come close.

That's how it's always been when I do 'Push Ups' (odd term, given what I really do is grab the Earth and shake it).

This has long been my concern. For all we know there's been scores of successful time machines - but the inventors failed to make them TimeAndSpace machines... and they go back in time only to discover that here isn't here yet.

Agree - sadly we're still in the age where flying rockets is precious. We've been sailing boats and flying planes in storms for generations and, (with the acknowledgement that we avoid where possible) when necessary - we do brave the bad weather. Which kind of brings me to 'when necessary'. Not only is flying rockets to space 'precious' we do really seem to treat the practice as unnecessary. To wit: we only do it when conditions are ideal and its convenient to do so.