Kryten

USOS can't practically operate as a separate station without more some unfunded extra modules, but the USOS and most ROS modules are nearing the end of their service lives anyway. The only reason the Russians are continuing with OPSEK is that some of their ISS modules are so delayed they haven't launched yet and barely will've done by end-of-life; the entire current ROS would be deorbited under this plan.

'Deep cryo' refers to subchilling the oxygen to increase the density. Increased oxidiser load without having to increase the size of the tank.

You'd either have to have a lift big enough to support all the payload and lv electronics, or do payload processing at the top of a mountain.

Not a story, that happened at Goiana, Brazil. Scrap metal scavengers found 137CsCl radiotherapy source in old hospital, opened it, found blue glowing stuff. Head of scrapyard brought it into his house. Four fatalities.

I'm trying to find images of 137CsCl for comparison, but all I get are images of Cerenkov radiation. Anyone have better luck?

You can spend less money than you would for a bone or PS4 and still get something that'll play the latest games reasonably well. PCs have scalability, whereas consoles don't even backwards compatibility anymore.

'Class E' doesn't seem a very plausible translation, given I've not heard of anything in the program referred to as class anything.

It's an operator issue, nothing to do with OS or manufacturer.

Orbital has only had one customer for Pegasus quite some time-NASA. Their priority is getting small science payloads in odd orbits that can't be covered with secondary payloads, or cheap small launchers from existing launchsites.

Also if you use emoticons/emojis/whateverthey'recallednow that can cause it to be converted to MMS.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goi%C3%A2nia_accident

I have it, but I haven't played it in a good while. It just feels so bland, and doesn't really do anything Civ V+expansions doesn't do better.

Not too uncommon with hypergolic propulsion systems, thought it's usually rocket stages rather than actual satellites. 30 years of nitrogen tet corrosion-->impingement on hydrazine/MMH/UDMH tank-->boom.

No, this isn't going to be remotely possible in this kind of timeframe. Reconnecting the entire spinal cord would be orders of magnitude more neuronal connections than we've able to manage so far, and keeping the body alive without any input from the brain while this is happening is far beyond what anybody's done in that area. That this one guy's statements are being regurgitated by even such sites as new scientist is a pretty shocking indictment of the state of science journalism in 2015, and the only site I've seen with reasonable factchecking is sodding Buzzfeed.

For what it's worth my post in the other thread was based on play of the PC version. And I stand by it fully.

Nitromethane, in terms of energy content, is worse than standard kerosene. What can give it an advantage in some situations is that it includes some of it's own oxygen, but that doesn't help you much in a rocketry situation as you're providing your own oxidiser anyway.

As they had to take out the ejection seats to save space, there was no abort system for large parts of the flight. This at a time when the success rate for R-7 based launchers was still something like 75%. And they stopped doing that on Soyuz because it lead to people dying. You're not exactly helping your case here.

That there is at least some outgassing of water at Ceres is an observation, not a hypothesis.

And I pointed out they had been superseded by later studies with larger sample sizes. If you have a small enough sample size, and enough people do similar experiments, then seemingly significant results will occur by chance, this is basic statistics. Under systematic review, yes.

[Dude, no, you know better than that - The Moderators]

Try actually reading my post.

Well, for a start here's the one single paper cited for 'DNA damage' claim you were harping on about; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2714176/ Note it's not even an animal study, it's in vitro. And not only that, but it's in vitro study that is flatly contradicted by later studies with larger sample sizes.

Darnok, that site doesn't contain any actual studies and is run by somebody hawking 'health guides' and cosmetics. There's a huge difference between a real study in a peer-reviewed journal and a random website.

Surely if you want to be, it doesn't count as abduction?

You haven't even demonstrated the first part of this statement! All you have is a study that showed effects in rats that were unable to move, there's no evidence that such effects would show up in larger animals at all. Assuming hotspots would show up in larger animals with better thermoregulatory mechanisms and assuming that the hotspots could form in something that could actually move and assuming that the hotspots could reach temperatures high enough to be harmful in areas that are much less vulnerable to thermal effects all without evidence is not science. You've already admitted you don't even know how the scientific method works, the least you could do is look it up; I don't see any point trying to help somebody who is willfully ignorant.