Kryten

I use google, because it works better than bing from what experience I've had with it. Has anyone actually used ask or yahoo search in the past ten years? I didn't know ask even still existed.

Problems with clones are due to epigenetic problems, not genetic ones, and aren't heritable; that's why people have already spent millions on commercially cloning stud horses and bulls. If he hasn't even got that right, I wouldn't exactly trust the rest of it.

Bear in mind many of the images are contradictory. ISRO have had a habit of releasing images with the wrong aspect ratio in the past, and it seems they've not quite kicked it...

Which is likely not much. We had 'dangerously radioactive material predicted to survive re-entry intact dumped over inhabited areas' as recently as '96, and there was barely a squeak from anybody.

People protest RTG launches, RTGs get launched. I don't see why this would be any different.

Assuming payload weight of 44 tons (weight of Apollo CSM+LM stack), the delta-v from both of those is; For S-IVB; (ln[268,000/164,000])*(421*9.81)=2,028 2,028m/s For S-N; (ln[222,000/78,000])*(1,200 850*9.81)=12,313 8,646 8,646m/s. A factor of six four seems a bit more than marginal to me. EDIT: misread one of the burn times as Isp; makes no major difference. S-IVB has higher propellant load.

It doesn't really matter if the tidal effects are survivable, when blueshifted by 0.45c background radiation definitely won't be.

Lead on that is Hwang Woo-suk. Look him up. Gut flora is acquired from the environment, and almost never tied to a single species.

I've done plenty of continous-burn trajectories in stock KSP, you just have to accept you probably won't be able to burn at the most efficient point.

It needs to work first. The concept is nice, but...

Technically it's supposed to be a sequel; the JP films never had an awful lot of respect for continuity.

One continous burn, with constant thrust. Only change was booster separation.

No, but CITES does. Asian elephants, the only close living relatives to woolly mammoths, are on CITES appendix one. Some behaviours would be adaptive for the morphological and ecological differences in woolly mammoth, and likely to be retained throughout the population; all currently gone. There must have been hundreds of cold-environment specific behaviours, none of which are exactly likely in living elephant species, and it is questionable if a resurrected mammoth would be fit to survive in such a habitat without these behaviours. Steppe tundra is not. Changing latitude changes length of the seasons as well as average temperature, this has major effects on ecology. They were as widespread as the steppe tundra; now it's gone, partially for climatic reasons and partially because there are no grazers left to maintain it. EDIT: Scientists have actually reached the point of un-extincting an organism; the Pyrenean Ibex, wiped out ca. 2000. Since it's merely a subspecies and the remaining subspecies live in very similar habitats, most of the original culture as well as genetics could be preserved, and it was closely enough related to very common animals (the goat) that they could have surrogacy without major ethical issues. Unfortunately the cloning only resulted in one animal, which died soon after birth, and they've not tried since.

They can't, and it's very likely they never will. This makes them not endangered how, exactly? I could put a saddlebag on a przewalski's horse, wouldn't change the IUCN listing. Culture is as fundamental a part of an animal as genetics; you might as well ask why you're bothering with this cloning instead of selectively breeding hairier elephants. That habitat no longer exists, that's my point. All areas now are too warm, or have too little sunlight, or too deep soil, or too much water. The same kinds of vegetation do exist, but only in small areas with the right conditions (well-drained south-facing hillslopes).

This is not going to happen. Even if we pretend we're going to get a complete enough DNA sequence for cloning, nobody would sign off on putting endangered animals in danger by using them as surrogates. If we pretend that wasn't an issue, we know mammoths were social animals and it'd be impossible to socialise cloned ones; and if we choose to ignore that issue, we run into the issue of the relevant ecosystem no longer existing.

Salyut 7? tenchars

I think the official position is that it never happened. At all. Canonically or non-canonically.

ESA are big on retaining independent access to space, but I don't see why they wouldn't just keep funding Ariane 6 in that case. Skylon wouldn't be able to perform most of the missions ESA actually undertakes.

Don't worry about it, they all officially never happened anyway. Only the films, the horrible animated 'clone wars' film and TV show, and some books published since the merger (those not labeled 'legends') are canon.

SSTOs are dependent on very high launch rates, which are dependent on very high demand for relatively small satellites. Venturestar and it's ilk were proposed when 'big LEO' projects like Iridium, Teledesic and Globalstar were generating a lot of potential demand, and failed when they did. Skylon is now going to be dependent on new projects in the same sector, like the WorldVue system; if the sector succeeds, it may succeed, but if it collapses like it did last time, they haven't got a chance.

Wireless internet in uni accommodation. Supposed to be 100Mb download, no upload speed mentioned (with good reason, it seems).

Have you considered that needing more than 128Gb on a mobile device is insane? What do you have on there, the complete Hitchcock filmography in 4k?

The giant solids of the latter models weren't exactly cheap either.

Throttlable solid rockers have been tested, using movable nozzle plugs, but not used on any actual vehicle yet.

If you can just as effectively use a moving sat, why use GEO at all?