tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post9221850077820592979..comments2024-03-28T23:39:08.616-07:00Comments on CONTRARY BRIN: The Moon Landing: 45 Years LaterDavid Brinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comBlogger72125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-2357762562421958362014-07-26T08:43:15.260-07:002014-07-26T08:43:15.260-07:00Appropos David's comment on the cultural signi...Appropos David's comment on the cultural significance of the Apollo 8 photograph of the Earth from the Moon. Robert Poole's book, "Earthrise: How Man First Saw the Earth" (2008 Yale Unviversity Press), is a thoroughly researched account of the first photographs of the whole Earth including the iconic Apollo 8 photograph. As a historian of science, Poole documents the technical development of space photography from the first photographs to show the Earth's curvature to the more familiar whole Earth Apollo photographs. But Poole also discusses the cultural meaning of these photographs which, for the first time, gave all of humanity a way to grasp a planetary perspective of our home planet as it exists in its environment of solar space. It's a great read.Dennis M Davidsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13861850532281473798noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-80785807770694137152014-07-24T05:44:14.190-07:002014-07-24T05:44:14.190-07:00Posted here to avoid contaminating the new post:
...Posted here to avoid contaminating the new post:<br /><br />Daniel Duffy,<br />Re: Terraforming.<br /><br />The other thing is that for the whole duration of terraforming, not only would colonists have to live in restricted space (tented or underground habitats on Mars, floating habs on Venus), but that those colonists are <i>in the damn way of the actual terraforming</i>. Very little work needs to be done on the ground to support terraforming. Want to seed the surface with genetically engineered bacteria, a wheeled vehicle is a pretty inefficient way to do it when you can shower the sky from orbit. The overwhelming majority of the resources required come from space (such as comets in your example), or require large orbital construction (such as giant sun-shades for Venus, or annular reflectors for Mars/Titan).<br /><br />So the terraformers will need to primarily operate in space, with any planetary colonies the poor cousin dependent on hand-outs for centuries or millennia (even ignoring your maths and using the most optimistic estimates of the advocates).<br /><br />And all those resources, planetary oceans worth, would be better spent directly on in-space habitats, rather then poured onto dead worlds in the hope that one day they'll be as habitable as the most barren desert on Earth..<br /><br />Re: Oil rigs and oceans as an analogy for space.<br /><br />The problem with oceans is that any given pressure-vessel is restricted to a narrow band of ocean. Most of the ocean is deep. (If we had force-fields or some similar magic SF technology, I suspect we'd have "colonised" the oceans much more.)<br /><br />With space, once you can live anywhere out there, you can live everywhere out there. Once you have technology to hold 1 atm, it works everywhere. Once you have radiation shielding (bulk mass or something cleverer), that works outside the Earth's magnetosphere, it works throughout the entire solar system (*), even in interstellar space.<br /><br />Have an ocean habitat that holds three atmospheres (much harder than 1atm in space) and it still only works to 20m. Develop the tech to work at 10 atmospheres, and you're still limited to the top 90m. Most of the ocean floor is 2km or more. 2km down is about 200 atm. (200 tonnes per square metre. 1 1/3 tons per square inch.) Space is actually pretty easy compared to oceans, the only advantage oceans have had is that they don't need rockets to get there and they have had centuries of head start.<br /><br />For me, a better analogy with the ocean is the land/islands/coves that early humans spread through, usually first by sea before the inland routes followed. We used the sea to skip quickly (in geological terms) between resource sites, and we left colonies as we went. The asteroids and moons in space are those islands, coves, etc, that we will skip across.<br /><br />(* Except within Jupiter's magnetosphere. Attempt no landings there.)Paul451https://www.blogger.com/profile/12119086761190994938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-30624672260524712542014-07-23T14:07:33.609-07:002014-07-23T14:07:33.609-07:00onwardonwardDavid Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-88955443899304557842014-07-23T13:29:54.723-07:002014-07-23T13:29:54.723-07:00Aeons, feel free to stick around. If you've lo...Aeons, feel free to stick around. If you've looked at previous posts by Dr. Brin, you'll see that he doesn't mollycoddle people here. I've had comments smacked down by him multiple times, and sometimes even for valid reasons. ;)<br /><br />However, I do want to comment on your "heroes" thing. You might look too much into the term. I don't think Dr. Brin considers the astronauts and like to be above reproach or iconic figures. Instead he looks at them as figures that did great things in their time. Oh, and trust me - if NASA had thought of it, they'd definitely sent a female astronaut to the Moon. After Valentina Tereshkova's leap into the history books as the first woman in space, it was over 20 years before the next would go there.<br /><br />The thing is, I think they considered Tereshkova to be a "look what we did!" PR moment from the Soviets. If the Soviets had continued to send women into space, then things may very well have been different.<br /><br />Or maybe not. Establishing an effective and clean method of going to the bathroom in space was difficult enough for men. NASA might not have wanted to risk potential problems. <br /><br />Also, when looking back at people from 200 years ago or even 45 years ago, do realize this: it was a different time and social views were different then. Looking at the past through a 21st century American viewpoint will distort things. It's something I've warned individuals about when they rail on about history and the like.<br /><br />What is important is that we learn from the past and move on.<br /><br />Rob H.Acacia H.https://www.blogger.com/profile/07678539067303911329noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-85652389871075027962014-07-23T12:19:29.655-07:002014-07-23T12:19:29.655-07:00Dr. Brin,
And how long would Venus stay "mug...Dr. Brin,<br /><br />And how long would Venus stay "muggy"? It's current surface temp is that of molten lead. Even if we could magically eliminate its CO2 atmosphere tomorrow it would still take millenia for the surface to radiate enough heat to be cool enough to walk on. <br /><br />In the meantime, its hot surface would flash vaporize any water created by the Bosch process and melt the concurrent graphite deposits while still under massive atmospheric pressure (creating a layer of diamond?).<br /><br />Not gonna happen.DPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07087941506162882852noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-614141084592173612014-07-23T12:03:59.368-07:002014-07-23T12:03:59.368-07:00We don't have a vibrant space program for the ...We don't have a vibrant space program for the same reason we have bridges that need repair and kids can't afford to go to college without taking on debt. The baby boomers didn't want to pay for any of it. They got talked into tax cuts that helped the top 1% capture the economy.Gatornoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-2451760114293559852014-07-23T12:03:31.806-07:002014-07-23T12:03:31.806-07:00@Daniel Duffy:
It is theoretically possible to t...@Daniel Duffy: <br /><br />It is theoretically possible to terraform Venus in an extremely rapid fashion through the use of adapted Epsilonproteobacteria, a bacteria associated with sulfur oxidation in marine environments, whose 2 to 12 day doubling time would make it a far far better choice for sulfur and carbon fixation than the Pacific Redwood.anonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-43921127075005184692014-07-23T11:43:58.093-07:002014-07-23T11:43:58.093-07:00Daniel Duffy, thanks for a way-fun appraisal of te...Daniel Duffy, thanks for a way-fun appraisal of terraforming options for Venus. And yes, even if you assume super-duper-godlike robotic machines, you still need a source of hydrogen and yes, comets are the only possible source.<br /><br />(My doctoral dissertation established the current model of dust layers on cometary surfaces.<br /><br />In fact, I wrote a story recently, set on a Venus that had been pummeled by comets... several daily for a thousand years, while others skimmed past, dragging some atmosphere with them. By timing the impacts right, they also were speeding up the planet's day. You still have problems with sulfuric acid etc. And you'd have to meet Venus halfway by modifying earth life (and humans) to tolerate lots of CO2 and sulfur...<br /><br />Anyway, it's a good story, set after the oceans have returned to muggy venus!David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-58858828601536826512014-07-23T11:38:44.575-07:002014-07-23T11:38:44.575-07:00In short, don't think of mankind colonizing sp...In short, don't think of mankind colonizing space so much as working in space. <br /><br />We have oil rigs in all of the world's oceans, but we have not colonized them. We have science labs and weather stations all over Antarctica, but we have not colonized it.<br /><br />We will have asteroid mining, factory and shipbuilding operations throughout the asteroid belt, but we won't be colonizing it. We will have science stations on the Moon, Phobos, the surface of Mars and the skies of Venus, but we won't be colonizing them.DPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07087941506162882852noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-37655164544598124122014-07-23T11:36:11.630-07:002014-07-23T11:36:11.630-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.DPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07087941506162882852noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-15184257073933339182014-07-23T11:27:58.540-07:002014-07-23T11:27:58.540-07:00(cont.)
But it would also result in the depositio...(cont.)<br /><br />But it would also result in the deposition of a layer of graphite with an average thickness over the entire surface of Venus roughly equal to a 40 story building:<br /><br />E. Ratio of C (graphite) to CO2 (12 / 44) 0.273 <br /> Resultant Mass of C (graphite) 1.26E+20 kg<br /> <br /> Density of C (graphite) 2.230 g / cm^3<br /> 2,230,000.000 g / M^3<br /> 2,230.000 kg / M^3<br /> <br /> Volume of Resultant C (graphite) 5.66E+16 M^3<br /> 5.66E+07 kM^3<br /> <br /> Area of Venus Surface 4.602E+08 kM^2<br /> Average Depth of C (graphite) 0.123 kM <br /><br />And where will this hydrogen come from? We could try the water bearing Type C asteroids of the asteroid belt. These make up 75% of all asteroids and have a water ice content between 10% and 15%. But even if we used all of their water, we would only have 80% of the amount of hydrogen required:<br /><br />F. Total Mass of Asteroids 3.20E+21 kg<br /> Percent Type "C" 75.00% <br /> Total Mass of Type "C" 2.40E+21 kg<br /> <br /> Percent Mass Water Ice 12.50% <br /> Total Mass of Water Ice 3.00E+20 kg<br /> <br /> Ratio of H2 to H2O (2 / 18) 0.111 <br /> Total Mass of H2 3.33E+19 kg<br /> Ratio to Required H2 0.792 <br /><br />Comets, being far more numerous with a typical 40% water ice content, seem to be a better choice, though farther away and more expensive to retrieve, we would only need 0.003% of available comets:<br /><br />G. Total Mass of Comets 3.20E+25 kg<br /> Percent Mass Water Ice 40.00% <br /> Total Mass of Water Ice 1.28E+25 kg<br /> <br /> Ratio of H2 to H2O (2 / 18) 0.111 <br /> Total Mass of H2 1.42E+24 kg<br /> Ratio to Required H2 33,774.707 <br /><br /><br />Suppose we convert all that carbon into physical structures (sun shades, floating habitats, etc.) made out of carbon fiber which is stronger than steel? We would create a mass of carbon fiber equivalent to a layer almost two football fields thick over the entire planet’s surface:<br /><br />H. Density of Carbon Fiber 1.600 g / cm^3<br /> 1,600,000.000 g / M^3<br /> 1,600.000 kg / M^3<br /> <br /> Ratio of C to CO2 (12 / 44) 0.273 <br /> Available Mass of C 1.26E+20 kg<br /> <br /> Volume of resultant Carbon Fiber 7.90E+16 M^3<br /> 7.90E+07 kM^3<br /> Thickness of Carbon Fiber 0.172 kM <br /><br />Or we could try to convert all that CO2 into biomass. Using one of the best carbon sequestration plants known, fast growing redwoods, the process would take a trillion years:<br /><br />I. Annual Biomass Sequestration Rate (CO2) 10.000 tonne/ha<br /> Total Venus Surface Area 4.602E+10 ha<br /> Total Annual Biomass Sequestration 4.602E+11 tonne<br /> <br /> Years to Complete Sequestration 1.01E+09 years<br /><br />So terraforming appears to be neither necessary nor desirable – a complete waste of time and energy when all the living space you need can be had quickly via para-terraforming.<br /><br />DPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07087941506162882852noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-32265639555905935092014-07-23T11:27:04.024-07:002014-07-23T11:27:04.024-07:00Paul 451,
Para-terraforming provides immediately ...Paul 451,<br /><br />Para-terraforming provides immediately available living space (no need to wait for hundreds or thousands of year before the entire planet is fit for human habitation), at a fraction of the cost in terms of energy and raw materials. <br /><br />Few people who blithely talk about terraforming have a grasp at how big of an undertaking it is to transform another planet.<br /><br />Let’s take Venus for example, where Paul Burch proposes using the Bosch reaction to rapidly terraform Venus in less than a century. And on paper it looks like a possibility since the process is relatively simple, but the size of the task is truly staggering.<br /><br />Assuming I haven’t made any bone headed math errors, begin with the mass of the Venusian atmosphere (almost 100 times more massive than Earth’s):<br /><br />A. Total Mass of Venus Atmosphere 4.80E+20 kg<br /> Percent Atmosphere CO2 96.50% <br /> Total Mass of CO2 4.63E+20 kg<br /> <br /> Total Mass of Earth's Atmosphere 5.10E+18 kg<br /> Mass Ratio Venus to Earth 94.118 <br /><br /><br />Utilizing the Bosch reaction, combining hydrogen with carbon dioxide to make carbon graphite and water:<br /><br />B. Utilizing Bosch Reaction (CO2 + 2H2 -> C + 2H2O) <br /> <br /> Molecular Weight of CO2 44 <br /> Molecular Weight of 2*H2 4 <br /> Total Initial Molecular Weight 48 <br /> <br /> Molecular Weight of C (graphite) 12 <br /> Molecular Weight of 2*H2O 36 <br /> Total Final Molecular Weight 48 <br /><br />You would need a ball of solid hydrogen slightly larger than the dwarf planet Ceres:<br /><br />C. Ratio of 2*H2 to CO2 (4 / 44) 0.091 <br /> Required Mass of H2 4.21E+19 kg<br /> <br /> Density of Solid H2 0.086 g / cm^3<br /> 86,000.000 g / M^3<br /> 86.000 kg / M^3<br /> <br /> Volume of Required H2 4.90E+17 M^3<br /> 4.90E+08 kM^3<br /> <br /> Volume of a Sphere (1.333 * pi * R^3) <br /> Radius of H2 Sphere 488.989 kM<br /> Radius of Ceres 476.000 kM<br /> <br />Granted, this massive reaction would create an ocean nearly as large as 1/3 of the Earth’s ocean:<br /><br />D. Ratio of 2*H2O to CO2 (36 / 44) 0.818 <br /> Resultant Mass of H2O 3.79E+20 kg<br /> <br /> Density of H2O 1.000 g / cm^3<br /> 1,000,000.000 g / M^3<br /> 1,000.000 kg / M^3<br /> <br /> Volume of Resultant H2O 3.79E+17 M^3<br /> 3.79E+08 kM^3<br /> <br /> Area of Venus Surface 4.602E+08 kM^2<br /> Average Depth of H2O 0.824 kM <br /> <br /> Total Volume of Earth's Oceans 1.300E+09 kM^3<br /> Average Depth of Earth's Oceans 3.682 kMDPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07087941506162882852noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-57389458163990102142014-07-23T10:51:02.005-07:002014-07-23T10:51:02.005-07:00Let put a challenge out there for all of the regul...Let put a challenge out there for all of the regular commentators.<br /><br />Lets put a reading/viewing list for Aeons. Fiction and nonfiction list of women you admire and want to be like.<br /><br />Nell from Diamond Age<br />Bunny Watson (Katherine Hepburn) in the Desk Set. (best movie about AI ever)<br />Harriet Tubman occam's comicnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-7560074540383199082014-07-23T10:31:17.971-07:002014-07-23T10:31:17.971-07:00Hi Aeons,
I hope you stick around and be a part of...Hi Aeons,<br />I hope you stick around and be a part of the (ir)regular commentators. Talking with a greater diversity of people with different life experiences allows us all to see the world anew (if we let it.)And to be honest more women commentators for Contrary Brin will make this place an even more interesting place to talk.<br /><br />I would like to recommend a book of fiction with a wonderful female protagonist: The Diamond Age by Neal Stephenson. <br />Or if nonfiction is helpful try reading about Harriet Tubman if you haven't already. Her life story has an odd parallel to the story of the Bodhisattva.occam's comicnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-84341882695517824162014-07-23T07:04:52.022-07:002014-07-23T07:04:52.022-07:00"Please take it as a mark of respect and utte..."Please take it as a mark of respect and utter equality that I treat your assertion the way I would a similar gross-exaggeration by anyone else, on any other topic...by calling it complete horse hockey."<br /><br />"Ah David, the entire way of addressing me such a way is itself a sign of chauvanism."<br /><br />I think what Aeons is trying to say is that the very act of pointing out that you are replying to her as you would to "anyone else on any other topic" is actually treating her differently? That the best way to demonstrate equality would to to simply offer your rebuttal without qualifying it in any way?Andyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10918881673638295065noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-43445924382416934882014-07-23T06:14:07.037-07:002014-07-23T06:14:07.037-07:00All in all, the Blue Staters (with their Obamacare...All in all, the Blue Staters (with their Obamacare, New Age nuturing & PC femininity) are so much more **mature** than those juvenile Red Staters who need to put away their childish guns, markets & competitive natures and **grow up** so, maybe later, after they learn to clean up their planet, play well with others and fold & store their duvet covers, we can allow them to **play** astronaut & explore Space with their little phallic rocket ships, assuming that they do so in private, so not to offend those of a more mature feminine sensibility, and otherwise keep their filthy masculine impulses in check.<br /><br /><br />Bestlocumranchnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-73335586077960910662014-07-23T00:09:04.515-07:002014-07-23T00:09:04.515-07:00The "apparently lethal" blow to Obamacar...The "apparently lethal" blow to Obamacare in the 10th DIstrict Appeals court decision is anything-but. First, it will probably be overturned and/or minimized. But let's say it holds. Then tens of millions of folks in red states, where the GOP refused to set up exchanges for people to buy competitive, market rate insurance policies, will lose their federal subsidy and probably lose their insurance and go back to using state funded emergency rooms.<br /><br />http://finance.yahoo.com/news/breaking-federal-appeals-court-deals-142529173.html<br /><br />The crux? Blue America will save the tens of billions that it is currently sending to those red states, in order to insure the poor there. Red state voters will see their own taxes go up as the emergency rooms fill again (they had been emptying, under Obamacare). And the poor in red states will - having their insurance yanked away from them - become radicalized and angry.<br /><br />Um... explain to me again how I should sweat about this? The ACA stands and continues to function vastly better than predicted. Completely in blue states and now hampered in red ones. Net money from blue to red is stopped... I remain puzzled by the huzzahs, over at Fox.<br /><br />The New Confederacy has declared a re-ignited US Civil War. As in earlier phases, logic and self-interest do not even remotely come into it. This decision helps blue America and harms red states in every way. Yet, look who is cheering! <br /><br />At some point, our dear brethren and sistren in those states are going to wake up to how their movement has been hijacked. Till then. Shrug.David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-34884102143520055672014-07-22T21:12:08.600-07:002014-07-22T21:12:08.600-07:00Before Chris Hadfield and guitar there was Cady Co...Before Chris Hadfield and guitar there was <a href="http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2011-04/4/iss-flute" rel="nofollow">Cady Coleman, with flute</a><br /><br />Whatever the gender, bumps are damage to be routed round.Tony Fiskhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14578160528746657971noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-1518154390651620352014-07-22T20:03:22.420-07:002014-07-22T20:03:22.420-07:00One of my friends constructed a laser for the purp...One of my friends constructed a laser for the purpose of pulsing off the corner reflector at the Apollo landing site. He got into a conversation with a gent at our annual Institute for Astronomy Open House, who, as it turned out, was one of the original experiment's designers. Last year he was able to confirm capture of a handful of photons reflected from the Moon. Yes, goffunnit, we did go there!<br /><br />TheMadLibrarian<br />ongionse: the first (smelly) crop grown in Lunar dirtTheMadLibrariannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-43772948181892114352014-07-22T19:01:08.712-07:002014-07-22T19:01:08.712-07:00My mom was a chemist in the South who fought for e...My mom was a chemist in the South who fought for equality and worked in the war effort, then as the G.I.s returned, was disenfranchised.<br /><br />She's one of my heroes, and if you ask me if I'm cognizant of what the culture did to her, Aeons, I'm going to gently point out that your presumptions might be more scurrilous than you know.Jumperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11794110173836133321noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-34704056155352287302014-07-22T18:14:29.923-07:002014-07-22T18:14:29.923-07:00Locumranch is in one of his cogent phases and offe...Locumranch is in one of his cogent phases and offers up thought provoking assertions... that are about 60% flat-out wrong. This year ALL of the Nebula Awards were won by female authors. <br /><br />Those who assert that science and technology are immature/male will have to first deal with the gales of laughter they receive from several million women scientists and engineers, who enjoy more professional respect than women have received in any other field, and for whom assertiveness and boldness and argumentation and competition and reductionist problem solving are not "male" traits but the traits of ... adults.<br /><br />Indeed, look back at my interaction with Aeons. Her insistence that she proclaim vast and generalized stereotypes without challenge... indeed, when challenged, attributed that challenge to chauvinistic bullying... was a combination of your male and female immature traits. Aggressiveness combined with quickness to proclaim victimhood.<br /><br />Sorry. Ambition and argumentative competitiveness are not "male" traits. They are human. What is immature is when they are pursued by methods that amount to CHEATING. Such as male-stle overbearing bullying... or else gossipy backbiting... or a myriad other cheating methods that have long been curses on our species.<br /><br />Declaring ambition and competitiveness to be immature is tantamount to turning our back on the ways that great women and men have changed the world.David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-59916318837895919802014-07-22T18:01:54.009-07:002014-07-22T18:01:54.009-07:00Heroes are **masculine** by definition
B*llocks.<i>Heroes are **masculine** by definition</i><br /><br />B*llocks.Alex Tolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01556422553154817988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-23585523496119713422014-07-22T17:51:13.356-07:002014-07-22T17:51:13.356-07:00Aeons does have a valid point about sexual chauvin...Aeons does have a valid point about sexual chauvinism, mostly because our society tends to define maturity by gender specific terminology, insomuch as the personality traits of impatience, exuberance, risk-taking, brashness & adventurism are believed to be classically 'masculine' while the traits of patience, emotionality, passivity, submissiveness & risk-aversion are thought to be classically 'feminine'. <br /><br />What David fails to take into account, however, is that (1) the so-called masculine traits are more reflective of immaturity rather than gender, (2) the line between youthful exuberance AND youthful indiscretion is largely arbitrary, and (3) the achievement of social maturity requires a close adherence to the feminine ideal as mentioned above.<br /><br />In this sense, Space Exploration died the moment Our Society decided to become **mature** because Space Exploration (or the lack thereof) reflects gender stereotypes, meaning that we either 'race to space' in a heedlessly brash, wanton, amorous, adolescent & masculine manner, or we commit ourselves to global monogamy and stay at home as the most feminine of nurturers, house-keepers, conservationists & oath-keepers.<br /><br />Heroes are **masculine** by definition: They dare the impossible; they take **risks** (a lot of them); and they confront the big 'If' of human existence, making one heap of all their winnings, risking it on one turn of pitch-and-toss, and lose, and start again at their beginnings and never breathe a word about their loss.<br /><br />Maturity is intrinsically boring; Our Society has become 'old' rather than 'better; and we have become our parents and we embarrass us.<br /><br /><br /><br />Best.locumranchnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-25480011094493161602014-07-22T15:58:41.450-07:002014-07-22T15:58:41.450-07:00Another possible reason it is too early to tell is...Another possible reason it is too early to tell is that we are still getting used to the idea that we can vote for our second choice in districts where the top vote getter is almost determined. I only just started doing that this last go around. After explaining it to some of my friends and family, they usually had one of those 'huh!' moments. We can do that? Why would we? Oh...Alfred Differnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-29197164238116332422014-07-22T14:50:46.804-07:002014-07-22T14:50:46.804-07:00A.F. Rey, it is hard to tell because California po...A.F. Rey, it is hard to tell because California politics are inherently moderate. Even when the dems had 2/3 in both houses, they did very little that was extreme-lefty, and in fact, moderate dems brought republicans in to help in showdowns over Jerry Brown's strong rainy day fund and debt buy-down.David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.com