<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_29_1232216</id>
	<title>Spirit Rover Begins Making Night Sky Observations</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1246282800000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.universetoday.com/" rel="nofollow">Nancy Atkinson</a> writes <i>"Even though the Spirit rover is stuck in loose soil on Mars, she has an overabundance of electrical power due to a wind event that cleaned off her solar panels.  While MER scientists and engineers are having the rover take pictures of her surroundings in an effort to figure a way to get her dislodged, there also is enough power (since the rover isn't moving anywhere) to do something extra:  keep the rover 'awake' at night and run her heaters so she can <a href="http://www.universetoday.com/2009/06/27/spirit-rover-begins-making-night-sky-observations/">take images of the night sky</a> on Mars. 'Certainly, a month or more ago, no one was considering astronomy with the rovers,' said Mark Lemmon, planetary scientist at Texas A&amp;M University and member of the rover team. 'We thought that was done. With the dust cleanings, though, everyone thinks it is better to use the new found energy on night time science than to just burn it with heaters.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nancy Atkinson writes " Even though the Spirit rover is stuck in loose soil on Mars , she has an overabundance of electrical power due to a wind event that cleaned off her solar panels .
While MER scientists and engineers are having the rover take pictures of her surroundings in an effort to figure a way to get her dislodged , there also is enough power ( since the rover is n't moving anywhere ) to do something extra : keep the rover 'awake ' at night and run her heaters so she can take images of the night sky on Mars .
'Certainly , a month or more ago , no one was considering astronomy with the rovers, ' said Mark Lemmon , planetary scientist at Texas A&amp;M University and member of the rover team .
'We thought that was done .
With the dust cleanings , though , everyone thinks it is better to use the new found energy on night time science than to just burn it with heaters .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nancy Atkinson writes "Even though the Spirit rover is stuck in loose soil on Mars, she has an overabundance of electrical power due to a wind event that cleaned off her solar panels.
While MER scientists and engineers are having the rover take pictures of her surroundings in an effort to figure a way to get her dislodged, there also is enough power (since the rover isn't moving anywhere) to do something extra:  keep the rover 'awake' at night and run her heaters so she can take images of the night sky on Mars.
'Certainly, a month or more ago, no one was considering astronomy with the rovers,' said Mark Lemmon, planetary scientist at Texas A&amp;M University and member of the rover team.
'We thought that was done.
With the dust cleanings, though, everyone thinks it is better to use the new found energy on night time science than to just burn it with heaters.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513977</id>
	<title>Re:Amazing Engineering</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246290120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe they just need to do a better job estimating the life of the rover...</p><p>"No one exceeds their potential. If they did, it would mean we did not accurately gauge their potential in the first place." - from Gattaca</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe they just need to do a better job estimating the life of the rover... " No one exceeds their potential .
If they did , it would mean we did not accurately gauge their potential in the first place .
" - from Gattaca</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe they just need to do a better job estimating the life of the rover..."No one exceeds their potential.
If they did, it would mean we did not accurately gauge their potential in the first place.
" - from Gattaca</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513541</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513495</id>
	<title>Re:Girl rover</title>
	<author>tverbeek</author>
	<datestamp>1246287660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Who decided she was female?</p></div></blockquote><p>
<i>She</i> did, of course.  Kind of like Chas Bono has decided he's not.  Welcome to the 21st century.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who decided she was female ?
She did , of course .
Kind of like Chas Bono has decided he 's not .
Welcome to the 21st century .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who decided she was female?
She did, of course.
Kind of like Chas Bono has decided he's not.
Welcome to the 21st century.
:)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513393</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513953</id>
	<title>picture of Earth</title>
	<author>Ogive17</author>
	<datestamp>1246290060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think it would be interesting seeing a picture of Earth taken from Mars..   even if it was only a faint dot of light in the sky.  I imagine the cameras could do this even if it isn't a great picture.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think it would be interesting seeing a picture of Earth taken from Mars.. even if it was only a faint dot of light in the sky .
I imagine the cameras could do this even if it is n't a great picture .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think it would be interesting seeing a picture of Earth taken from Mars..   even if it was only a faint dot of light in the sky.
I imagine the cameras could do this even if it isn't a great picture.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514225</id>
	<title>Re:Amazing Engineering</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246291380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I believe a erronous assumption is what the cause of their longevity.  They assumed the solar panels would be covered with dust and not generate enough power after about 90 days.  however, martian window washers have been coming around every so often and cleaning them.  The bill is gonna suck however.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe a erronous assumption is what the cause of their longevity .
They assumed the solar panels would be covered with dust and not generate enough power after about 90 days .
however , martian window washers have been coming around every so often and cleaning them .
The bill is gon na suck however .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe a erronous assumption is what the cause of their longevity.
They assumed the solar panels would be covered with dust and not generate enough power after about 90 days.
however, martian window washers have been coming around every so often and cleaning them.
The bill is gonna suck however.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513945</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514795</id>
	<title>Re:Amazing Engineering</title>
	<author>Chris Burke</author>
	<datestamp>1246293840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm wagering that designing a rover that you are certain is capable of running around Mars for 90 days would necessarily entail a degree of engineering that makes it at least theoretically capable of running around Mars for years.  Everything that broke and they worked their way out of in the last few years could have happened on day 10.  Thus redundancy, back-doors, and clever, robust engineering were the words, even for a short mission.</p><p>The 90 day expected life was due to the expectation that the solar panels would get covered in dust, and that the Martian wind would be too slight to blow them off (and various panel cleaning devices were considered and rejected for reasoning as solid as the rest of the rover design).  When that assumption was proven false, and the panels were kept clean enough to continue powering the rover, well, then the rover's "expected" life span goes way, way up.</p><p>It's not like they said "Oh the mission will only be 90 days, we can design this axle so that it would snap on day 91" or "Hey, the controller code will fail with an out of memory exception on day 100, but we won't fix it or put in a back door to get new code in the rover because who cares if it dies on day 100?"</p><p>So, yeah, yay for human ingenuity for sure, but that ingenuity was in there from the start and comparing the result to the 90 day expected life is a little misleading.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm wagering that designing a rover that you are certain is capable of running around Mars for 90 days would necessarily entail a degree of engineering that makes it at least theoretically capable of running around Mars for years .
Everything that broke and they worked their way out of in the last few years could have happened on day 10 .
Thus redundancy , back-doors , and clever , robust engineering were the words , even for a short mission.The 90 day expected life was due to the expectation that the solar panels would get covered in dust , and that the Martian wind would be too slight to blow them off ( and various panel cleaning devices were considered and rejected for reasoning as solid as the rest of the rover design ) .
When that assumption was proven false , and the panels were kept clean enough to continue powering the rover , well , then the rover 's " expected " life span goes way , way up.It 's not like they said " Oh the mission will only be 90 days , we can design this axle so that it would snap on day 91 " or " Hey , the controller code will fail with an out of memory exception on day 100 , but we wo n't fix it or put in a back door to get new code in the rover because who cares if it dies on day 100 ?
" So , yeah , yay for human ingenuity for sure , but that ingenuity was in there from the start and comparing the result to the 90 day expected life is a little misleading .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm wagering that designing a rover that you are certain is capable of running around Mars for 90 days would necessarily entail a degree of engineering that makes it at least theoretically capable of running around Mars for years.
Everything that broke and they worked their way out of in the last few years could have happened on day 10.
Thus redundancy, back-doors, and clever, robust engineering were the words, even for a short mission.The 90 day expected life was due to the expectation that the solar panels would get covered in dust, and that the Martian wind would be too slight to blow them off (and various panel cleaning devices were considered and rejected for reasoning as solid as the rest of the rover design).
When that assumption was proven false, and the panels were kept clean enough to continue powering the rover, well, then the rover's "expected" life span goes way, way up.It's not like they said "Oh the mission will only be 90 days, we can design this axle so that it would snap on day 91" or "Hey, the controller code will fail with an out of memory exception on day 100, but we won't fix it or put in a back door to get new code in the rover because who cares if it dies on day 100?
"So, yeah, yay for human ingenuity for sure, but that ingenuity was in there from the start and comparing the result to the 90 day expected life is a little misleading.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513541</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514183</id>
	<title>Re:Would be better to look for meteors</title>
	<author>Andor666</author>
	<datestamp>1246291140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can always take groups of photos on the longer exposition available without trailing, and stack them in a specialized software...</p><p>Not exactly the same result, but it can be nice, due to the low light contamination and thinner atmosphere (so I presume, less aberration, sharper images...)</p><p>Also, the cold temperatures there would allow more shoots to the sensor without heating up, and then, less noise on the images...</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrophotography" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrophotography</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can always take groups of photos on the longer exposition available without trailing , and stack them in a specialized software...Not exactly the same result , but it can be nice , due to the low light contamination and thinner atmosphere ( so I presume , less aberration , sharper images... ) Also , the cold temperatures there would allow more shoots to the sensor without heating up , and then , less noise on the images...http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrophotography [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can always take groups of photos on the longer exposition available without trailing, and stack them in a specialized software...Not exactly the same result, but it can be nice, due to the low light contamination and thinner atmosphere (so I presume, less aberration, sharper images...)Also, the cold temperatures there would allow more shoots to the sensor without heating up, and then, less noise on the images...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrophotography [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513721</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513317</id>
	<title>I wonder if they are going to look at</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246286640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>uranus?</htmltext>
<tokenext>uranus ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>uranus?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514811</id>
	<title>Re:Sell the images to raise funding money.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246293960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not I! I'd just download it from TPB...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not I !
I 'd just download it from TPB.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not I!
I'd just download it from TPB...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513663</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28515285</id>
	<title>Re:Wind Event?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246296180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since the coining of the term <a href="http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dust+devil" title="merriam-webster.com" rel="nofollow">predates</a> [merriam-webster.com] Looney Tunes, I suspect it has little to do with the way Taz moves.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since the coining of the term predates [ merriam-webster.com ] Looney Tunes , I suspect it has little to do with the way Taz moves .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since the coining of the term predates [merriam-webster.com] Looney Tunes, I suspect it has little to do with the way Taz moves.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514447</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28515397</id>
	<title>virgins and non virgins</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246296540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just a rough analogy, but try to explain to a non virgin what it means to be sexually aware with another, what it really means. It's quite hard.</p><p>Here's mine on a note related to your dismissive reply. I've seen-many years ago now, with additional witnesses, a group of friends-a UFO, and up pretty close. I cannot tell you exactly what it was or where it came from other than an intelligently controlled craft (I cannot say if it was "manned" or not, just it maneuvered intelligently) of such a propulsion system as to be centuries perhaps or more beyond what we have today. It was that slick. It really happened. I became a non virgin when it comes to that subject. It had incredible flight characteristics, ability to go slow and hover, dead stop, then go off at such a speed as it was hard to even follow it closely, much faster than missiles I have seen or videos of missiles. This was witnessed at approximately 60 yards or so at the closest approach, perhaps 40 feet above the ground. No noise, no exhaust, no rotors and certainly not a balloon or anything like that.</p><p>Your entire world changes when you become a non virgin, with sex..or with this other subject. It becomes incredibly difficult to try and explain to the still virgins exactly what this experience does, and the implications, or how it makes you feel or how it alters your world viewpoint, even in how you take "virgins" opinions on a subject that they haven't experienced yet, and especially official government pronouncements*. It well and truly does make you "question authority" and the viewpoints of those who have no first hand experience.</p><p>It is somewhat saddening to see this subject always reduced to illogical absurdity on this board. Go outside at night and look up. Billions of stars/galaxies. Now really contemplate the odds of the earth being the ONLY inhabited planet, or perhaps the most advanced with any sort of life, the most evolved, with the highest tech.</p><p>The odds for that being true are absurdly small.</p><p>All I can say is, don't be so knee jerk dismissive, because frankly, and I can say this with 100\% certainty now that I am a non virgin, you are wrong. There IS something out there, and my guess is, there are a variety of somethings out there. That they are occasionally seen here is a certainty, too many anecdotals to ignore now, and their stealth tech has to be orders of magnitude better than what we have now, so that is why it is fleeting and still sort of rare, they only appear when they (a very loose "they" as no adequate word exists) need to or feel like it.  And even if I had managed to get a snapshot (this was the time well before digital cameras existed), the pic itself would have come out pretty bad, because the object was glowing and at night, it would have just looked like a weird blob of light, but to our still sharp young persons eyeballs, it was the most amazing thing to see. Simply..just...a once in a lifetime experience. It is something you never, ever forget, just like losing virginity/gaining sexual awareness, right up there.</p><p>*because this was so profound to me, I have made it a point over the years to try and find out more about the subject, and in some cases, from governmental sources "off the record". Not a huge effort, just whenever the opportunity arose. So far, the true existence of some sort of ET visitation has been confirmed to me by a well regarded civilian scientist at JPL, an air force officer who worked before retirement in the highest levels of telemetry and near earth sensing, some other pilots both in private aviation and in commercial aviation (they are scared witless of losing license so most never will admit to seeing rather odd craft, and just won't even report it officially), two different professional air traffic controllers, and some other DOD type folks. One of the more unusual cases I was told about involved one of those hospital ships they used off the coast of viet nam back during the war. A friend had gotten wounded, an army NCO, and was undergoing treatment there. A disk shaped cr</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just a rough analogy , but try to explain to a non virgin what it means to be sexually aware with another , what it really means .
It 's quite hard.Here 's mine on a note related to your dismissive reply .
I 've seen-many years ago now , with additional witnesses , a group of friends-a UFO , and up pretty close .
I can not tell you exactly what it was or where it came from other than an intelligently controlled craft ( I can not say if it was " manned " or not , just it maneuvered intelligently ) of such a propulsion system as to be centuries perhaps or more beyond what we have today .
It was that slick .
It really happened .
I became a non virgin when it comes to that subject .
It had incredible flight characteristics , ability to go slow and hover , dead stop , then go off at such a speed as it was hard to even follow it closely , much faster than missiles I have seen or videos of missiles .
This was witnessed at approximately 60 yards or so at the closest approach , perhaps 40 feet above the ground .
No noise , no exhaust , no rotors and certainly not a balloon or anything like that.Your entire world changes when you become a non virgin , with sex..or with this other subject .
It becomes incredibly difficult to try and explain to the still virgins exactly what this experience does , and the implications , or how it makes you feel or how it alters your world viewpoint , even in how you take " virgins " opinions on a subject that they have n't experienced yet , and especially official government pronouncements * .
It well and truly does make you " question authority " and the viewpoints of those who have no first hand experience.It is somewhat saddening to see this subject always reduced to illogical absurdity on this board .
Go outside at night and look up .
Billions of stars/galaxies .
Now really contemplate the odds of the earth being the ONLY inhabited planet , or perhaps the most advanced with any sort of life , the most evolved , with the highest tech.The odds for that being true are absurdly small.All I can say is , do n't be so knee jerk dismissive , because frankly , and I can say this with 100 \ % certainty now that I am a non virgin , you are wrong .
There IS something out there , and my guess is , there are a variety of somethings out there .
That they are occasionally seen here is a certainty , too many anecdotals to ignore now , and their stealth tech has to be orders of magnitude better than what we have now , so that is why it is fleeting and still sort of rare , they only appear when they ( a very loose " they " as no adequate word exists ) need to or feel like it .
And even if I had managed to get a snapshot ( this was the time well before digital cameras existed ) , the pic itself would have come out pretty bad , because the object was glowing and at night , it would have just looked like a weird blob of light , but to our still sharp young persons eyeballs , it was the most amazing thing to see .
Simply..just...a once in a lifetime experience .
It is something you never , ever forget , just like losing virginity/gaining sexual awareness , right up there .
* because this was so profound to me , I have made it a point over the years to try and find out more about the subject , and in some cases , from governmental sources " off the record " .
Not a huge effort , just whenever the opportunity arose .
So far , the true existence of some sort of ET visitation has been confirmed to me by a well regarded civilian scientist at JPL , an air force officer who worked before retirement in the highest levels of telemetry and near earth sensing , some other pilots both in private aviation and in commercial aviation ( they are scared witless of losing license so most never will admit to seeing rather odd craft , and just wo n't even report it officially ) , two different professional air traffic controllers , and some other DOD type folks .
One of the more unusual cases I was told about involved one of those hospital ships they used off the coast of viet nam back during the war .
A friend had gotten wounded , an army NCO , and was undergoing treatment there .
A disk shaped cr</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just a rough analogy, but try to explain to a non virgin what it means to be sexually aware with another, what it really means.
It's quite hard.Here's mine on a note related to your dismissive reply.
I've seen-many years ago now, with additional witnesses, a group of friends-a UFO, and up pretty close.
I cannot tell you exactly what it was or where it came from other than an intelligently controlled craft (I cannot say if it was "manned" or not, just it maneuvered intelligently) of such a propulsion system as to be centuries perhaps or more beyond what we have today.
It was that slick.
It really happened.
I became a non virgin when it comes to that subject.
It had incredible flight characteristics, ability to go slow and hover, dead stop, then go off at such a speed as it was hard to even follow it closely, much faster than missiles I have seen or videos of missiles.
This was witnessed at approximately 60 yards or so at the closest approach, perhaps 40 feet above the ground.
No noise, no exhaust, no rotors and certainly not a balloon or anything like that.Your entire world changes when you become a non virgin, with sex..or with this other subject.
It becomes incredibly difficult to try and explain to the still virgins exactly what this experience does, and the implications, or how it makes you feel or how it alters your world viewpoint, even in how you take "virgins" opinions on a subject that they haven't experienced yet, and especially official government pronouncements*.
It well and truly does make you "question authority" and the viewpoints of those who have no first hand experience.It is somewhat saddening to see this subject always reduced to illogical absurdity on this board.
Go outside at night and look up.
Billions of stars/galaxies.
Now really contemplate the odds of the earth being the ONLY inhabited planet, or perhaps the most advanced with any sort of life, the most evolved, with the highest tech.The odds for that being true are absurdly small.All I can say is, don't be so knee jerk dismissive, because frankly, and I can say this with 100\% certainty now that I am a non virgin, you are wrong.
There IS something out there, and my guess is, there are a variety of somethings out there.
That they are occasionally seen here is a certainty, too many anecdotals to ignore now, and their stealth tech has to be orders of magnitude better than what we have now, so that is why it is fleeting and still sort of rare, they only appear when they (a very loose "they" as no adequate word exists) need to or feel like it.
And even if I had managed to get a snapshot (this was the time well before digital cameras existed), the pic itself would have come out pretty bad, because the object was glowing and at night, it would have just looked like a weird blob of light, but to our still sharp young persons eyeballs, it was the most amazing thing to see.
Simply..just...a once in a lifetime experience.
It is something you never, ever forget, just like losing virginity/gaining sexual awareness, right up there.
*because this was so profound to me, I have made it a point over the years to try and find out more about the subject, and in some cases, from governmental sources "off the record".
Not a huge effort, just whenever the opportunity arose.
So far, the true existence of some sort of ET visitation has been confirmed to me by a well regarded civilian scientist at JPL, an air force officer who worked before retirement in the highest levels of telemetry and near earth sensing, some other pilots both in private aviation and in commercial aviation (they are scared witless of losing license so most never will admit to seeing rather odd craft, and just won't even report it officially), two different professional air traffic controllers, and some other DOD type folks.
One of the more unusual cases I was told about involved one of those hospital ships they used off the coast of viet nam back during the war.
A friend had gotten wounded, an army NCO, and was undergoing treatment there.
A disk shaped cr</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513683</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513583</id>
	<title>Amazing what those little rovers can do</title>
	<author>bignetbuy</author>
	<datestamp>1246288320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Such an amazing project, those little rovers are.  With an planned life span of 90 days, they have now been running since...oh...2003?  Wonderful work, NASA.  Please keep the pictures and the science flowing.  Can you imagine how long that data takes to get from Earth to Mars?
<br>
<br>
Or what about the communication path from the rovers to NASA?  They use the Mars Odyssey or Mars Global Surveyor.  Check this out.  The rovers have a 250kbps link to those satellites.  Unreal.  Even with the satellite use, the data still takes TEN minutes to get to Earth.
<br>
<br>
This stuff is awesome.  Just awesome.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Such an amazing project , those little rovers are .
With an planned life span of 90 days , they have now been running since...oh...2003 ?
Wonderful work , NASA .
Please keep the pictures and the science flowing .
Can you imagine how long that data takes to get from Earth to Mars ?
Or what about the communication path from the rovers to NASA ?
They use the Mars Odyssey or Mars Global Surveyor .
Check this out .
The rovers have a 250kbps link to those satellites .
Unreal. Even with the satellite use , the data still takes TEN minutes to get to Earth .
This stuff is awesome .
Just awesome .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Such an amazing project, those little rovers are.
With an planned life span of 90 days, they have now been running since...oh...2003?
Wonderful work, NASA.
Please keep the pictures and the science flowing.
Can you imagine how long that data takes to get from Earth to Mars?
Or what about the communication path from the rovers to NASA?
They use the Mars Odyssey or Mars Global Surveyor.
Check this out.
The rovers have a 250kbps link to those satellites.
Unreal.  Even with the satellite use, the data still takes TEN minutes to get to Earth.
This stuff is awesome.
Just awesome.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28515229</id>
	<title>Re:Girl rover</title>
	<author>nametaken</author>
	<datestamp>1246296000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nor would it wait for NASA to send directions.  Look at what that got her.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nor would it wait for NASA to send directions .
Look at what that got her .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nor would it wait for NASA to send directions.
Look at what that got her.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513763</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514319</id>
	<title>Re:picture of Earth</title>
	<author>Thadd.Isolas</author>
	<datestamp>1246291800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/54/PIA05547-Spirit\_Rover-Earth\_seen\_from\_Mars.png" title="wikimedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/54/PIA05547-Spirit\_Rover-Earth\_seen\_from\_Mars.png</a> [wikimedia.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/54/PIA05547-Spirit \ _Rover-Earth \ _seen \ _from \ _Mars.png [ wikimedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/54/PIA05547-Spirit\_Rover-Earth\_seen\_from\_Mars.png [wikimedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513953</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28523311</id>
	<title>Re:Girl rover</title>
	<author>stephows</author>
	<datestamp>1246288380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Donna Shirley was the manager for the first Rover project and then later became manager for most of the other Mars projects. Since women were very rare in NASA at the time, she initiated a competition among high schools to name it after a female explorer. She details all this in her book "Managing Martians".</htmltext>
<tokenext>Donna Shirley was the manager for the first Rover project and then later became manager for most of the other Mars projects .
Since women were very rare in NASA at the time , she initiated a competition among high schools to name it after a female explorer .
She details all this in her book " Managing Martians " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Donna Shirley was the manager for the first Rover project and then later became manager for most of the other Mars projects.
Since women were very rare in NASA at the time, she initiated a competition among high schools to name it after a female explorer.
She details all this in her book "Managing Martians".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513393</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28516699</id>
	<title>Re:Phobos &amp; Deimos</title>
	<author>Kjella</author>
	<datestamp>1246301520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Phobos, by virtue of it's very close orbital distance, would have a shot at actually being recognized by a lay-Martian to be something special in the sky, but it would still appear quite small when compared to the grandeur of Luna.</p></div><p>Since you appear to have inside information, what do the scientific Martians think?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Phobos , by virtue of it 's very close orbital distance , would have a shot at actually being recognized by a lay-Martian to be something special in the sky , but it would still appear quite small when compared to the grandeur of Luna.Since you appear to have inside information , what do the scientific Martians think ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Phobos, by virtue of it's very close orbital distance, would have a shot at actually being recognized by a lay-Martian to be something special in the sky, but it would still appear quite small when compared to the grandeur of Luna.Since you appear to have inside information, what do the scientific Martians think?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513963</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28516403</id>
	<title>Re:nothing wrong with anthropomorphism</title>
	<author>greyhueofdoubt</author>
	<datestamp>1246300380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Jeez, the way you write about the human race, it seems like our odds of survival would be much higher if we could evolve tribesman who wouldn't kill us rather than the large brain to figure out WHO would inevitably *want* to kill us.</p><p>Wait, you're in New York. Our experiences may be different<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p>-b</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Jeez , the way you write about the human race , it seems like our odds of survival would be much higher if we could evolve tribesman who would n't kill us rather than the large brain to figure out WHO would inevitably * want * to kill us.Wait , you 're in New York .
Our experiences may be different ; ) -b</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jeez, the way you write about the human race, it seems like our odds of survival would be much higher if we could evolve tribesman who wouldn't kill us rather than the large brain to figure out WHO would inevitably *want* to kill us.Wait, you're in New York.
Our experiences may be different ;)-b</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513537</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28525381</id>
	<title>Re:Wind Event?</title>
	<author>metaforest</author>
	<datestamp>1246352580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You might get cheeky and point out that 'smells' come from the olfactory sense organs in her nasal passages.  The odor she is perceiving is indeed from a wind event.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/pedantic</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You might get cheeky and point out that 'smells ' come from the olfactory sense organs in her nasal passages .
The odor she is perceiving is indeed from a wind event .
/pedantic</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You might get cheeky and point out that 'smells' come from the olfactory sense organs in her nasal passages.
The odor she is perceiving is indeed from a wind event.
/pedantic</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513995</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514013</id>
	<title>That can't be right...</title>
	<author>Rival</author>
	<datestamp>1246290300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Did anyone else read this title as, "Sprint Rollover Begins Making Night Sky Observations"?</p><p>I was thinking, "Now what?  The phone companies won't let us use our rollover minutes after dusk?  Sheesh."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did anyone else read this title as , " Sprint Rollover Begins Making Night Sky Observations " ? I was thinking , " Now what ?
The phone companies wo n't let us use our rollover minutes after dusk ?
Sheesh. "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did anyone else read this title as, "Sprint Rollover Begins Making Night Sky Observations"?I was thinking, "Now what?
The phone companies won't let us use our rollover minutes after dusk?
Sheesh."</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513753</id>
	<title>Clark Kent's paper?</title>
	<author>clyde\_cadiddlehopper</author>
	<datestamp>1246289040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>As so many papers seem to be doing lately, the Daily Planet went under and merged with the Universe Gazette to form UniverseToday.  No longer available in a pulp-based life-form.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As so many papers seem to be doing lately , the Daily Planet went under and merged with the Universe Gazette to form UniverseToday .
No longer available in a pulp-based life-form .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As so many papers seem to be doing lately, the Daily Planet went under and merged with the Universe Gazette to form UniverseToday.
No longer available in a pulp-based life-form.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513721</id>
	<title>Would be better to look for meteors</title>
	<author>petes\_PoV</author>
	<datestamp>1246288920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>The pix of stars aren't very good.
<p>
As the article says, they trail after a few seconds, since they can't track. So they can't take deeper images of fainter objects. Without the ability to track, they might as well point the camera straight up (or whereever) and check for meteors. Apart from getting information about how many strike the martian atmosphere, they could correlate counts with meteor showers on earth, to see how the same showers impact (or not) two planets at the same time - a unique opportunity.
</p><p>
Also, a lot of metoers on earth at least, are fairly bright. So they might get quite a good hit-rate with their cam. Although I don't know what effect the thinner atmosphere would have. It would be interesting to see if the thinner atmosphere made meteors burn brighter (as they'd be slowed down by "air", less) or less bright, due to the lack of gases.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The pix of stars are n't very good .
As the article says , they trail after a few seconds , since they ca n't track .
So they ca n't take deeper images of fainter objects .
Without the ability to track , they might as well point the camera straight up ( or whereever ) and check for meteors .
Apart from getting information about how many strike the martian atmosphere , they could correlate counts with meteor showers on earth , to see how the same showers impact ( or not ) two planets at the same time - a unique opportunity .
Also , a lot of metoers on earth at least , are fairly bright .
So they might get quite a good hit-rate with their cam .
Although I do n't know what effect the thinner atmosphere would have .
It would be interesting to see if the thinner atmosphere made meteors burn brighter ( as they 'd be slowed down by " air " , less ) or less bright , due to the lack of gases .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The pix of stars aren't very good.
As the article says, they trail after a few seconds, since they can't track.
So they can't take deeper images of fainter objects.
Without the ability to track, they might as well point the camera straight up (or whereever) and check for meteors.
Apart from getting information about how many strike the martian atmosphere, they could correlate counts with meteor showers on earth, to see how the same showers impact (or not) two planets at the same time - a unique opportunity.
Also, a lot of metoers on earth at least, are fairly bright.
So they might get quite a good hit-rate with their cam.
Although I don't know what effect the thinner atmosphere would have.
It would be interesting to see if the thinner atmosphere made meteors burn brighter (as they'd be slowed down by "air", less) or less bright, due to the lack of gases.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514115</id>
	<title>Re:picture of Earth</title>
	<author>unfasten</author>
	<datestamp>1246290780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think you might be interested in the <a href="http://blogs.mie.utoronto.ca/roller/moradian/resource/PaleBlueDot.jpg" title="utoronto.ca">Pale Blue Dot</a> [utoronto.ca] picture (so named by Carl Sagan). It's a picture of earth taken by Voyager 1 from 3.7 <strong>billion</strong> miles away.</p><p>More info: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pale\_Blue\_Dot" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pale\_Blue\_Dot</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you might be interested in the Pale Blue Dot [ utoronto.ca ] picture ( so named by Carl Sagan ) .
It 's a picture of earth taken by Voyager 1 from 3.7 billion miles away.More info : http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pale \ _Blue \ _Dot [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you might be interested in the Pale Blue Dot [utoronto.ca] picture (so named by Carl Sagan).
It's a picture of earth taken by Voyager 1 from 3.7 billion miles away.More info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pale\_Blue\_Dot [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513953</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514667</id>
	<title>Re:Girl rover</title>
	<author>BrightSpark</author>
	<datestamp>1246293360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Because girls aren't easily turned on by nerdy scientists!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because girls are n't easily turned on by nerdy scientists !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because girls aren't easily turned on by nerdy scientists!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513393</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513825</id>
	<title>Re:nothing wrong with anthropomorphism</title>
	<author>fuzzyfuzzyfungus</author>
	<datestamp>1246289340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Unfortunately, while social intelligence is powerful(since we've been burning brainpower on social problems longer than we've been human), it is also an excellent way to bring nearly invisible and highly emotionally misleading contrafactual assumptions into your thinking.<br> <br>

Using social intelligence on a problem means implicitly assuming that the object(s) you are interacting with possess social qualities. Even if you tell yourself you aren't going to do that, actually not doing so means swimming against the current of millions of years of evolutionary optimization. When you are dealing with objects that very much don't possess social qualities(like computers, or bridges, or mars-exploring robots, or corporations, or sociopaths) using social intelligence is a powerful way to get the wrong answer. Even in situations where the objects in question do possess social qualities(dogs and other social animals, for instance) anthropomorphic thinking can lead you badly astray because these objects don't possess <i>the same</i> social qualities, or methods of signaling, than you do(just try giving a non-human primate a friendly grin, or treating your dog like a little person).<br> <br>

(Plus, robots <i>hate</i> being anthropomorphized)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately , while social intelligence is powerful ( since we 've been burning brainpower on social problems longer than we 've been human ) , it is also an excellent way to bring nearly invisible and highly emotionally misleading contrafactual assumptions into your thinking .
Using social intelligence on a problem means implicitly assuming that the object ( s ) you are interacting with possess social qualities .
Even if you tell yourself you are n't going to do that , actually not doing so means swimming against the current of millions of years of evolutionary optimization .
When you are dealing with objects that very much do n't possess social qualities ( like computers , or bridges , or mars-exploring robots , or corporations , or sociopaths ) using social intelligence is a powerful way to get the wrong answer .
Even in situations where the objects in question do possess social qualities ( dogs and other social animals , for instance ) anthropomorphic thinking can lead you badly astray because these objects do n't possess the same social qualities , or methods of signaling , than you do ( just try giving a non-human primate a friendly grin , or treating your dog like a little person ) .
( Plus , robots hate being anthropomorphized )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately, while social intelligence is powerful(since we've been burning brainpower on social problems longer than we've been human), it is also an excellent way to bring nearly invisible and highly emotionally misleading contrafactual assumptions into your thinking.
Using social intelligence on a problem means implicitly assuming that the object(s) you are interacting with possess social qualities.
Even if you tell yourself you aren't going to do that, actually not doing so means swimming against the current of millions of years of evolutionary optimization.
When you are dealing with objects that very much don't possess social qualities(like computers, or bridges, or mars-exploring robots, or corporations, or sociopaths) using social intelligence is a powerful way to get the wrong answer.
Even in situations where the objects in question do possess social qualities(dogs and other social animals, for instance) anthropomorphic thinking can lead you badly astray because these objects don't possess the same social qualities, or methods of signaling, than you do(just try giving a non-human primate a friendly grin, or treating your dog like a little person).
(Plus, robots hate being anthropomorphized)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513537</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513393</id>
	<title>Girl rover</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246287000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Who decided she was female?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who decided she was female ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who decided she was female?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28517667</id>
	<title>Solar Panels</title>
	<author>sexconker</author>
	<datestamp>1246305180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Where's that douche that insisted that solar panels don't need to be cleaned?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Where 's that douche that insisted that solar panels do n't need to be cleaned ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where's that douche that insisted that solar panels don't need to be cleaned?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514489</id>
	<title>Re:Phobos &amp; Deimos</title>
	<author>dotancohen</author>
	<datestamp>1246292580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The moons are tiny, and not round. They do not form symetrical cresents like ours does, and they show absolutely no surface detail other than their unusual shape from the Martian surface. Oh, and they are tiny.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The moons are tiny , and not round .
They do not form symetrical cresents like ours does , and they show absolutely no surface detail other than their unusual shape from the Martian surface .
Oh , and they are tiny .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The moons are tiny, and not round.
They do not form symetrical cresents like ours does, and they show absolutely no surface detail other than their unusual shape from the Martian surface.
Oh, and they are tiny.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513621</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514069</id>
	<title>Re:Wind Event?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246290540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>this is a gov't agency issuing press releases, what do you expect?</htmltext>
<tokenext>this is a gov't agency issuing press releases , what do you expect ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>this is a gov't agency issuing press releases, what do you expect?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513425</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28521023</id>
	<title>Re:picture of Earth</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246275180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I think it would be interesting seeing a picture of Earth taken from Mars..   even if it was only a faint dot of light in the sky.  I imagine the cameras could do this even if it isn't a great picture.</p></div><p>Here you go: http://www.nasa.gov/mission\_pages/MRO/multimedia/mro20080303earth.html</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think it would be interesting seeing a picture of Earth taken from Mars.. even if it was only a faint dot of light in the sky .
I imagine the cameras could do this even if it is n't a great picture.Here you go : http : //www.nasa.gov/mission \ _pages/MRO/multimedia/mro20080303earth.html</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think it would be interesting seeing a picture of Earth taken from Mars..   even if it was only a faint dot of light in the sky.
I imagine the cameras could do this even if it isn't a great picture.Here you go: http://www.nasa.gov/mission\_pages/MRO/multimedia/mro20080303earth.html
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513953</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514447</id>
	<title>Re:Wind Event?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246292460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Storm implies rain, as other commenters have mentioned. However, this is more than just wind, it is is a phenomenon typical of Mars but rare on Earth: very small tornadoes. The Mars folks call these "dustdevils" as the appear and move similar to Taz. So "wind" is inappropriate, "storm" implies water, and "dustdevil" sounds weird to the layman. "Wind event" suffers none of the drawbacks, and the less-inquiring layman will not ask any more questions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Storm implies rain , as other commenters have mentioned .
However , this is more than just wind , it is is a phenomenon typical of Mars but rare on Earth : very small tornadoes .
The Mars folks call these " dustdevils " as the appear and move similar to Taz .
So " wind " is inappropriate , " storm " implies water , and " dustdevil " sounds weird to the layman .
" Wind event " suffers none of the drawbacks , and the less-inquiring layman will not ask any more questions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Storm implies rain, as other commenters have mentioned.
However, this is more than just wind, it is is a phenomenon typical of Mars but rare on Earth: very small tornadoes.
The Mars folks call these "dustdevils" as the appear and move similar to Taz.
So "wind" is inappropriate, "storm" implies water, and "dustdevil" sounds weird to the layman.
"Wind event" suffers none of the drawbacks, and the less-inquiring layman will not ask any more questions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513425</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513851</id>
	<title>Re:Amazing what those little rovers can do</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246289580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>For future reference, the time it takes to communicate with the rovers is dependent on the speed of light, not the fact that there's a satellite bouncing the signal to us.</htmltext>
<tokenext>For future reference , the time it takes to communicate with the rovers is dependent on the speed of light , not the fact that there 's a satellite bouncing the signal to us .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For future reference, the time it takes to communicate with the rovers is dependent on the speed of light, not the fact that there's a satellite bouncing the signal to us.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513583</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513663</id>
	<title>Sell the images to raise funding money.</title>
	<author>InfinityWpi</author>
	<datestamp>1246288740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously, who here wouldn't donate a few bucks to NASA in exchange for a "Night sky as seen from Mars Rover" desktop image?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , who here would n't donate a few bucks to NASA in exchange for a " Night sky as seen from Mars Rover " desktop image ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, who here wouldn't donate a few bucks to NASA in exchange for a "Night sky as seen from Mars Rover" desktop image?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28517329</id>
	<title>Re:virgins and non virgins</title>
	<author>hairyfeet</author>
	<datestamp>1246303860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You want to know why it doesn't matter what they know/don't know they will never ever tell? To paraphrase MiB "A Person is smart. People are dumb dangerous panicky animals and you know it" that's why.</p><p>Hell you could have a saucer land on the White house lawn, complete with a couple of little green guys beating a dent out of their ship with a wrench and the US Gov would have NO CHOICE but to come up with that lame ass "weather balloon swamp gas" crap. Why? Because you would have religious loons saying it was the end of the world and committing mass suicide ala Heaven's Gate, you would have the dumb running around looting food stuffs and breaking into any gun store they can find, etc. It would be a total mass panic.</p><p> A smart person can figure the mathematical odds of us being the only thing out there is pretty damned small. The stupid are content in their nice little "we are king of the hill" view and WILL react violently if that view is threatened. Don't you think they would much rather say the easier to come up "We don't know what the hell that was either"? Any deviation from the course and you risk a "war of the world's" style mass panic.</p><p>Finally never dismiss them wanting to cover up their latest black ops toy. I live just north of  an AFB, which according to friends that are ex USAF is real popular with the black ops guys as a marker when trying out new planes. The beacons and lights are easy to pick out even in bad weather and unlike NV we don't have any "desert rats" trying to take pics. Most folks here are military or have family in the military and therefor don't give a shit. I can tell you from the lights and noise I've seen the past few years they have some seriously impressive toys coming down the pike they don't want to let leak out. I'm guessing from the G's that they are unmanned as a human pilot would pop like a zit from some of those turns.</p><p>

 So the simple fact is we will NEVER know what if anything the US Gov knows, because it would compromise their own programs and panic the herd. Sad our fellow man is so fucking retarded but there you go.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You want to know why it does n't matter what they know/do n't know they will never ever tell ?
To paraphrase MiB " A Person is smart .
People are dumb dangerous panicky animals and you know it " that 's why.Hell you could have a saucer land on the White house lawn , complete with a couple of little green guys beating a dent out of their ship with a wrench and the US Gov would have NO CHOICE but to come up with that lame ass " weather balloon swamp gas " crap .
Why ? Because you would have religious loons saying it was the end of the world and committing mass suicide ala Heaven 's Gate , you would have the dumb running around looting food stuffs and breaking into any gun store they can find , etc .
It would be a total mass panic .
A smart person can figure the mathematical odds of us being the only thing out there is pretty damned small .
The stupid are content in their nice little " we are king of the hill " view and WILL react violently if that view is threatened .
Do n't you think they would much rather say the easier to come up " We do n't know what the hell that was either " ?
Any deviation from the course and you risk a " war of the world 's " style mass panic.Finally never dismiss them wanting to cover up their latest black ops toy .
I live just north of an AFB , which according to friends that are ex USAF is real popular with the black ops guys as a marker when trying out new planes .
The beacons and lights are easy to pick out even in bad weather and unlike NV we do n't have any " desert rats " trying to take pics .
Most folks here are military or have family in the military and therefor do n't give a shit .
I can tell you from the lights and noise I 've seen the past few years they have some seriously impressive toys coming down the pike they do n't want to let leak out .
I 'm guessing from the G 's that they are unmanned as a human pilot would pop like a zit from some of those turns .
So the simple fact is we will NEVER know what if anything the US Gov knows , because it would compromise their own programs and panic the herd .
Sad our fellow man is so fucking retarded but there you go .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You want to know why it doesn't matter what they know/don't know they will never ever tell?
To paraphrase MiB "A Person is smart.
People are dumb dangerous panicky animals and you know it" that's why.Hell you could have a saucer land on the White house lawn, complete with a couple of little green guys beating a dent out of their ship with a wrench and the US Gov would have NO CHOICE but to come up with that lame ass "weather balloon swamp gas" crap.
Why? Because you would have religious loons saying it was the end of the world and committing mass suicide ala Heaven's Gate, you would have the dumb running around looting food stuffs and breaking into any gun store they can find, etc.
It would be a total mass panic.
A smart person can figure the mathematical odds of us being the only thing out there is pretty damned small.
The stupid are content in their nice little "we are king of the hill" view and WILL react violently if that view is threatened.
Don't you think they would much rather say the easier to come up "We don't know what the hell that was either"?
Any deviation from the course and you risk a "war of the world's" style mass panic.Finally never dismiss them wanting to cover up their latest black ops toy.
I live just north of  an AFB, which according to friends that are ex USAF is real popular with the black ops guys as a marker when trying out new planes.
The beacons and lights are easy to pick out even in bad weather and unlike NV we don't have any "desert rats" trying to take pics.
Most folks here are military or have family in the military and therefor don't give a shit.
I can tell you from the lights and noise I've seen the past few years they have some seriously impressive toys coming down the pike they don't want to let leak out.
I'm guessing from the G's that they are unmanned as a human pilot would pop like a zit from some of those turns.
So the simple fact is we will NEVER know what if anything the US Gov knows, because it would compromise their own programs and panic the herd.
Sad our fellow man is so fucking retarded but there you go.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28515397</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513987</id>
	<title>Re:Girl rover</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246290180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the Spirit rover is <strong>stuck in loose soil</strong> on Mars, <strong>she</strong>...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the Spirit rover is stuck in loose soil on Mars , she.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the Spirit rover is stuck in loose soil on Mars, she...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513393</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513963</id>
	<title>Re:Phobos &amp; Deimos</title>
	<author>brock bitumen</author>
	<datestamp>1246290060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>that *would* be cool. don't think the Martian sky has a sight like that tho
<p>
Put this in perspective, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luna\_(moon)" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">our moon</a> [wikipedia.org], which is a fairly large night-sky (or daytime) feature, is about 1800km mean radius, (which is about a quarter the size of Earth, mind you, and we posses the largest natural satellite, relative to the planet, in the solar system), and, by the way it's about 385,000 km from earth on average, which is not very close, but it still appears quite large.
</p><p>
However, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phobos\_(moon)" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Phobos</a> [wikipedia.org], and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deimos\_(moon)" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Deimos</a> [wikipedia.org], the two small moons possessed by Mars, are a paltry 11km and 6km in mean radius, respectively.  The smaller moon, Deimos, is also farther away, and would appear no more than a small dot in the sky (day or night as it would happen to be).  Phobos, by virtue of it's very close orbital distance, would have a shot at actually being recognized by a lay-Martian to be something special in the sky, but it would still appear quite small when compared to the grandeur of Luna.
</p><p>
The photos from these pages depicting a solar transit ("eclipse") from the the surface of Mars, help provide a good metric for comprehending these relative sizes.  Notice that neither moon is large enough to actually create an eclipse.  Of course, on the surface of Mars, the Sun is slightly smaller than on the surface of Earth, but not by very much. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transit\_of\_Phobos\_from\_Mars" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Phobos' transit</a> [wikipedia.org], <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:13-ml-04-deimos-A067R1.jpg" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Deimos' transit</a> [wikipedia.org]
</p><p>
Finally, both of these on first glance appear to be nothing more than lumps of rock drifting through space, hardly anything to cherish on a romantic skyline like we do the way our perfectly curved Luna hangs.  But maybe I'm just being ethnocentric....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>that * would * be cool .
do n't think the Martian sky has a sight like that tho Put this in perspective , our moon [ wikipedia.org ] , which is a fairly large night-sky ( or daytime ) feature , is about 1800km mean radius , ( which is about a quarter the size of Earth , mind you , and we posses the largest natural satellite , relative to the planet , in the solar system ) , and , by the way it 's about 385,000 km from earth on average , which is not very close , but it still appears quite large .
However , Phobos [ wikipedia.org ] , and Deimos [ wikipedia.org ] , the two small moons possessed by Mars , are a paltry 11km and 6km in mean radius , respectively .
The smaller moon , Deimos , is also farther away , and would appear no more than a small dot in the sky ( day or night as it would happen to be ) .
Phobos , by virtue of it 's very close orbital distance , would have a shot at actually being recognized by a lay-Martian to be something special in the sky , but it would still appear quite small when compared to the grandeur of Luna .
The photos from these pages depicting a solar transit ( " eclipse " ) from the the surface of Mars , help provide a good metric for comprehending these relative sizes .
Notice that neither moon is large enough to actually create an eclipse .
Of course , on the surface of Mars , the Sun is slightly smaller than on the surface of Earth , but not by very much .
Phobos ' transit [ wikipedia.org ] , Deimos ' transit [ wikipedia.org ] Finally , both of these on first glance appear to be nothing more than lumps of rock drifting through space , hardly anything to cherish on a romantic skyline like we do the way our perfectly curved Luna hangs .
But maybe I 'm just being ethnocentric... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that *would* be cool.
don't think the Martian sky has a sight like that tho

Put this in perspective, our moon [wikipedia.org], which is a fairly large night-sky (or daytime) feature, is about 1800km mean radius, (which is about a quarter the size of Earth, mind you, and we posses the largest natural satellite, relative to the planet, in the solar system), and, by the way it's about 385,000 km from earth on average, which is not very close, but it still appears quite large.
However, Phobos [wikipedia.org], and Deimos [wikipedia.org], the two small moons possessed by Mars, are a paltry 11km and 6km in mean radius, respectively.
The smaller moon, Deimos, is also farther away, and would appear no more than a small dot in the sky (day or night as it would happen to be).
Phobos, by virtue of it's very close orbital distance, would have a shot at actually being recognized by a lay-Martian to be something special in the sky, but it would still appear quite small when compared to the grandeur of Luna.
The photos from these pages depicting a solar transit ("eclipse") from the the surface of Mars, help provide a good metric for comprehending these relative sizes.
Notice that neither moon is large enough to actually create an eclipse.
Of course, on the surface of Mars, the Sun is slightly smaller than on the surface of Earth, but not by very much.
Phobos' transit [wikipedia.org], Deimos' transit [wikipedia.org]

Finally, both of these on first glance appear to be nothing more than lumps of rock drifting through space, hardly anything to cherish on a romantic skyline like we do the way our perfectly curved Luna hangs.
But maybe I'm just being ethnocentric....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513621</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513917</id>
	<title>Re:Wind Event?</title>
	<author>ScentCone</author>
	<datestamp>1246289880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Is that what we mere mortals call a 'storm'?</i>
<br> <br>
What, are you trying to make some sort of humor event?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is that what we mere mortals call a 'storm ' ?
What , are you trying to make some sort of humor event ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is that what we mere mortals call a 'storm'?
What, are you trying to make some sort of humor event?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513425</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28524199</id>
	<title>Re:Phobos &amp; Deimos</title>
	<author>rhombic</author>
	<datestamp>1246296420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As an old geezer, Phobos &amp; Deimos hold <a href="http://www.doomworld.com/pageofdoom/phobos.html" title="doomworld.com">less than</a> [doomworld.com] <a href="http://www.doomworld.com/pageofdoom/phobos.html" title="doomworld.com">romantic</a> [doomworld.com]memories.</p><p>Ah, memories. Skulls &amp; Chainsaws &amp; BFGs. But maybe that was your point.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As an old geezer , Phobos &amp; Deimos hold less than [ doomworld.com ] romantic [ doomworld.com ] memories.Ah , memories .
Skulls &amp; Chainsaws &amp; BFGs .
But maybe that was your point .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As an old geezer, Phobos &amp; Deimos hold less than [doomworld.com] romantic [doomworld.com]memories.Ah, memories.
Skulls &amp; Chainsaws &amp; BFGs.
But maybe that was your point.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513621</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28517413</id>
	<title>Re:Wind Event?</title>
	<author>Kompressor</author>
	<datestamp>1246304160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can assure you that Dust Devils are quite common on this mudball we call home:</p><p><a href="http://images.google.ca/images?hl=en&amp;q=dustdevil&amp;btnG=Search+Images&amp;gbv=2&amp;aq=f&amp;oq=" title="google.ca" rel="nofollow">http://images.google.ca/images?hl=en&amp;q=dustdevil&amp;btnG=Search+Images&amp;gbv=2&amp;aq=f&amp;oq=</a> [google.ca]</p><p>A couple of the more awe-inspiring shots:</p><p><a href="http://www.crh.noaa.gov/images/lmk/photo\_album/wxdata/dustdevil\_LEX1.jpg" title="noaa.gov" rel="nofollow">http://www.crh.noaa.gov/images/lmk/photo\_album/wxdata/dustdevil\_LEX1.jpg</a> [noaa.gov]</p><p><a href="http://www.crh.noaa.gov/images/lmk/Drought/sep07/glendale\_med.jpg" title="noaa.gov" rel="nofollow">http://www.crh.noaa.gov/images/lmk/Drought/sep07/glendale\_med.jpg</a> [noaa.gov]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can assure you that Dust Devils are quite common on this mudball we call home : http : //images.google.ca/images ? hl = en&amp;q = dustdevil&amp;btnG = Search + Images&amp;gbv = 2&amp;aq = f&amp;oq = [ google.ca ] A couple of the more awe-inspiring shots : http : //www.crh.noaa.gov/images/lmk/photo \ _album/wxdata/dustdevil \ _LEX1.jpg [ noaa.gov ] http : //www.crh.noaa.gov/images/lmk/Drought/sep07/glendale \ _med.jpg [ noaa.gov ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can assure you that Dust Devils are quite common on this mudball we call home:http://images.google.ca/images?hl=en&amp;q=dustdevil&amp;btnG=Search+Images&amp;gbv=2&amp;aq=f&amp;oq= [google.ca]A couple of the more awe-inspiring shots:http://www.crh.noaa.gov/images/lmk/photo\_album/wxdata/dustdevil\_LEX1.jpg [noaa.gov]http://www.crh.noaa.gov/images/lmk/Drought/sep07/glendale\_med.jpg [noaa.gov]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514447</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514843</id>
	<title>Re:Sell the images to raise funding money.</title>
	<author>confused one</author>
	<datestamp>1246294080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've already got the "Sunrise as seen from the Mars Rover" desktop image.  All you need to do is roam through the public archives of the images, then when you find one you like download it at full resolution and convert it to a jpg.  For what it's worth, you've already paid for them (taxes).</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've already got the " Sunrise as seen from the Mars Rover " desktop image .
All you need to do is roam through the public archives of the images , then when you find one you like download it at full resolution and convert it to a jpg .
For what it 's worth , you 've already paid for them ( taxes ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've already got the "Sunrise as seen from the Mars Rover" desktop image.
All you need to do is roam through the public archives of the images, then when you find one you like download it at full resolution and convert it to a jpg.
For what it's worth, you've already paid for them (taxes).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513663</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28515201</id>
	<title>This is just a temp gig.</title>
	<author>rickb928</author>
	<datestamp>1246295880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Until they get the other rover over to hook up the winch and drag the poor thing out of the muck.</p><p>Seriously, I don't doubt this is possible, and they are only waiting for the other team to give in and 'waste' the time driving over and hauling it's little bitty buddy to freedom.</p><p>Though maybe another wind event would solve this problem?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Until they get the other rover over to hook up the winch and drag the poor thing out of the muck.Seriously , I do n't doubt this is possible , and they are only waiting for the other team to give in and 'waste ' the time driving over and hauling it 's little bitty buddy to freedom.Though maybe another wind event would solve this problem ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Until they get the other rover over to hook up the winch and drag the poor thing out of the muck.Seriously, I don't doubt this is possible, and they are only waiting for the other team to give in and 'waste' the time driving over and hauling it's little bitty buddy to freedom.Though maybe another wind event would solve this problem?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513555</id>
	<title>Nautical tradition</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246288140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ships are female. Spirit is (kind of) a spaceship. There you go.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ships are female .
Spirit is ( kind of ) a spaceship .
There you go .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ships are female.
Spirit is (kind of) a spaceship.
There you go.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513393</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514277</id>
	<title>Re:why aren't any of the rover pics ever worth a d</title>
	<author>StarManta.Mini</author>
	<datestamp>1246291680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you're wondering why they don't make "true color" images, it's because "true" colors aren't scientifically useful. They choose the color filters very carefully to give them the most useful images for seeing certain things, not so that you can get "true color" pictures.</p><p>But then I read the second part of your comment and realized nothing I say will be understood.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're wondering why they do n't make " true color " images , it 's because " true " colors are n't scientifically useful .
They choose the color filters very carefully to give them the most useful images for seeing certain things , not so that you can get " true color " pictures.But then I read the second part of your comment and realized nothing I say will be understood .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're wondering why they don't make "true color" images, it's because "true" colors aren't scientifically useful.
They choose the color filters very carefully to give them the most useful images for seeing certain things, not so that you can get "true color" pictures.But then I read the second part of your comment and realized nothing I say will be understood.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513375</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513301</id>
	<title>Observe This</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246286520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>First Post, Bitches!!</htmltext>
<tokenext>First Post , Bitches !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First Post, Bitches!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28524339</id>
	<title>Re:Amazing Engineering</title>
	<author>adavies42</author>
	<datestamp>1246297560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>clearly you've never worked in government</htmltext>
<tokenext>clearly you 've never worked in government</tokentext>
<sentencetext>clearly you've never worked in government</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514777</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514777</id>
	<title>Re:Amazing Engineering</title>
	<author>Matje</author>
	<datestamp>1246293780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How is this a bad thing? If you can spend less to achieve your objective, why wouldn't you?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How is this a bad thing ?
If you can spend less to achieve your objective , why would n't you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is this a bad thing?
If you can spend less to achieve your objective, why wouldn't you?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513945</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514067</id>
	<title>Re:Nautical tradition</title>
	<author>Pictish Prince</author>
	<datestamp>1246290540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's a ROVER - who ever heard of a girl ROVER?</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a ROVER - who ever heard of a girl ROVER ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a ROVER - who ever heard of a girl ROVER?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513555</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513995</id>
	<title>Re:Wind Event?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246290240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Next time I'm under the covers with my wife and she asks where that smells come from, I can now say: a wind event.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Next time I 'm under the covers with my wife and she asks where that smells come from , I can now say : a wind event .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Next time I'm under the covers with my wife and she asks where that smells come from, I can now say: a wind event.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513425</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28517089</id>
	<title>Re:Would be better to look for meteors</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246302960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, Earth and Mars won't be affected by "the same" meteor showers... Meteor showers occur when the Earth moves through an area of space with debris from a comet (generally, the orbital path of a comet). These are relatively short occurrences. If there's a comet that happens to intersect both Earth's and Mars's orbits, you could say the two planets experience the same meteor shower but this wouldn't happen at the same time and the showers most likely wouldn't be left behind by the same pass of the comet so comparisons would be meaningless. (e.g. Halley's comet leaves a new track of particles in slightly varying positions every 76 years.. The strength of the related meteor showers changes depending on which track the Earth moves through, or if it misses them completely and we only get a few meteors that have drifted far off the original track)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , Earth and Mars wo n't be affected by " the same " meteor showers... Meteor showers occur when the Earth moves through an area of space with debris from a comet ( generally , the orbital path of a comet ) .
These are relatively short occurrences .
If there 's a comet that happens to intersect both Earth 's and Mars 's orbits , you could say the two planets experience the same meteor shower but this would n't happen at the same time and the showers most likely would n't be left behind by the same pass of the comet so comparisons would be meaningless .
( e.g. Halley 's comet leaves a new track of particles in slightly varying positions every 76 years.. The strength of the related meteor showers changes depending on which track the Earth moves through , or if it misses them completely and we only get a few meteors that have drifted far off the original track )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, Earth and Mars won't be affected by "the same" meteor showers... Meteor showers occur when the Earth moves through an area of space with debris from a comet (generally, the orbital path of a comet).
These are relatively short occurrences.
If there's a comet that happens to intersect both Earth's and Mars's orbits, you could say the two planets experience the same meteor shower but this wouldn't happen at the same time and the showers most likely wouldn't be left behind by the same pass of the comet so comparisons would be meaningless.
(e.g. Halley's comet leaves a new track of particles in slightly varying positions every 76 years.. The strength of the related meteor showers changes depending on which track the Earth moves through, or if it misses them completely and we only get a few meteors that have drifted far off the original track)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513721</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513935</id>
	<title>Re:Wind Event?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246289940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think "storm", or some other word/phrase would be more appropriate. "Wind event" is just too generic at term and doesn't really provide a useful description of a weather occurrence. Storm is pretty generic too, but a least we have an general notion of the kind of weather patterns associated with the term.</p><p>A "wind event" OTOH, could easily refer to the noxious gas that was just this minute expelled from my sphincter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think " storm " , or some other word/phrase would be more appropriate .
" Wind event " is just too generic at term and does n't really provide a useful description of a weather occurrence .
Storm is pretty generic too , but a least we have an general notion of the kind of weather patterns associated with the term.A " wind event " OTOH , could easily refer to the noxious gas that was just this minute expelled from my sphincter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think "storm", or some other word/phrase would be more appropriate.
"Wind event" is just too generic at term and doesn't really provide a useful description of a weather occurrence.
Storm is pretty generic too, but a least we have an general notion of the kind of weather patterns associated with the term.A "wind event" OTOH, could easily refer to the noxious gas that was just this minute expelled from my sphincter.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513425</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513467</id>
	<title>Observe what?</title>
	<author>ATestR</author>
	<datestamp>1246287480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At first glance, one might think that observation of the Martian night sky would return insignificant scientific data.  After all, how powerful of a telescope does Spirit mount?  Certainly not even in Hubble's league.  But they aren't looking to collect data about distant galaxies &amp; stars.</p><p>The real value is information about the Martian atmosphere.  By observing the "twinkle" of distant stars, the observations should return some useful information regarding night time atmospheric conditions.  Maybe not as much as a dedicated purpose designed atmospheric station, but certainly more than we have now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At first glance , one might think that observation of the Martian night sky would return insignificant scientific data .
After all , how powerful of a telescope does Spirit mount ?
Certainly not even in Hubble 's league .
But they are n't looking to collect data about distant galaxies &amp; stars.The real value is information about the Martian atmosphere .
By observing the " twinkle " of distant stars , the observations should return some useful information regarding night time atmospheric conditions .
Maybe not as much as a dedicated purpose designed atmospheric station , but certainly more than we have now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At first glance, one might think that observation of the Martian night sky would return insignificant scientific data.
After all, how powerful of a telescope does Spirit mount?
Certainly not even in Hubble's league.
But they aren't looking to collect data about distant galaxies &amp; stars.The real value is information about the Martian atmosphere.
By observing the "twinkle" of distant stars, the observations should return some useful information regarding night time atmospheric conditions.
Maybe not as much as a dedicated purpose designed atmospheric station, but certainly more than we have now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28515457</id>
	<title>Re:nothing wrong with anthropomorphism</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246296720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>you have this powerful cognition machine sitting in your head hewn from millenia of evolution in human groups<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... it is in fact, not some sort of weird mental trick i am referring to, it is in fact almost a subconcious and completely natural effort for most of us, this repurposing of social intelligence</p></div><p>Quite right. The human brain, like all things biological, was optimized in a constrained environment. Most of our "brain modules" (if you will) serve dual functions, which works quite well on average in natural environments. However, these tricks can fail quite spectacularly when applied in the wrong situations.<br> <br>

Hence why humans are generally so "bad" at gambling and statistics (we evolved in environments where most sequences of events were causally connected; so we are not well-adapted to thinking about sequences of events that are wholly independent). And why common sense so frequently fails.<br> <br>

Leveraging the brain's social modules to come up with solutions in other areas often works great, as you point out. But it can also fail in many areas. In fact, this human subconscious desire to ascribe agency to just about any effect gives rise to all sorts of superstition, supernatural explanations, and forms the basis of religion. In our original setting, spurious logic like "that lake killed my two brothers; it must be angry at our family; I will avoid swimming in it" was highly adaptive. Even if the reasoning was incorrect (really it's just a dangerous lake, not angry), the conclusion was correct (avoid it!).<br> <br>

My point here is that we should absolutely take advantage of our in-built brain modules to solve problems efficiently. But we must also be aware of our naturally-evolved biases and prejudices, so that we can identify when those modules are leading us astray. And we should very much expect to be led astray, considering how different our modern problems are from the problems evolution optimized us to solve.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>you have this powerful cognition machine sitting in your head hewn from millenia of evolution in human groups ... it is in fact , not some sort of weird mental trick i am referring to , it is in fact almost a subconcious and completely natural effort for most of us , this repurposing of social intelligenceQuite right .
The human brain , like all things biological , was optimized in a constrained environment .
Most of our " brain modules " ( if you will ) serve dual functions , which works quite well on average in natural environments .
However , these tricks can fail quite spectacularly when applied in the wrong situations .
Hence why humans are generally so " bad " at gambling and statistics ( we evolved in environments where most sequences of events were causally connected ; so we are not well-adapted to thinking about sequences of events that are wholly independent ) .
And why common sense so frequently fails .
Leveraging the brain 's social modules to come up with solutions in other areas often works great , as you point out .
But it can also fail in many areas .
In fact , this human subconscious desire to ascribe agency to just about any effect gives rise to all sorts of superstition , supernatural explanations , and forms the basis of religion .
In our original setting , spurious logic like " that lake killed my two brothers ; it must be angry at our family ; I will avoid swimming in it " was highly adaptive .
Even if the reasoning was incorrect ( really it 's just a dangerous lake , not angry ) , the conclusion was correct ( avoid it ! ) .
My point here is that we should absolutely take advantage of our in-built brain modules to solve problems efficiently .
But we must also be aware of our naturally-evolved biases and prejudices , so that we can identify when those modules are leading us astray .
And we should very much expect to be led astray , considering how different our modern problems are from the problems evolution optimized us to solve .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you have this powerful cognition machine sitting in your head hewn from millenia of evolution in human groups ... it is in fact, not some sort of weird mental trick i am referring to, it is in fact almost a subconcious and completely natural effort for most of us, this repurposing of social intelligenceQuite right.
The human brain, like all things biological, was optimized in a constrained environment.
Most of our "brain modules" (if you will) serve dual functions, which works quite well on average in natural environments.
However, these tricks can fail quite spectacularly when applied in the wrong situations.
Hence why humans are generally so "bad" at gambling and statistics (we evolved in environments where most sequences of events were causally connected; so we are not well-adapted to thinking about sequences of events that are wholly independent).
And why common sense so frequently fails.
Leveraging the brain's social modules to come up with solutions in other areas often works great, as you point out.
But it can also fail in many areas.
In fact, this human subconscious desire to ascribe agency to just about any effect gives rise to all sorts of superstition, supernatural explanations, and forms the basis of religion.
In our original setting, spurious logic like "that lake killed my two brothers; it must be angry at our family; I will avoid swimming in it" was highly adaptive.
Even if the reasoning was incorrect (really it's just a dangerous lake, not angry), the conclusion was correct (avoid it!).
My point here is that we should absolutely take advantage of our in-built brain modules to solve problems efficiently.
But we must also be aware of our naturally-evolved biases and prejudices, so that we can identify when those modules are leading us astray.
And we should very much expect to be led astray, considering how different our modern problems are from the problems evolution optimized us to solve.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513537</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514603</id>
	<title>Re:why aren't any of the rover pics ever worth a d</title>
	<author>Tablizer</author>
	<datestamp>1246293060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> and the pics are never, ever true colors. How come we can't get true color pics for our hundred million dollars?</p></div></blockquote><p>They have taken a few, especially earlier in the mission. But bandwidth to/from that far is expensive, so they do tend to limit the spectrum observed to "scientifically interesting" areas of the light spectrum. For one, the red and green detectors of the human eye are too close together wavelength-wise for Mars use. It may have been useful for finding ripe fruit in trees, but not for exploring Mars.</p><p>Actually, they can approximate a human-eye view based on comparisons with earlier images, but I find the "scientifically enhanced" ones more interesting anyhow. You can see differences in rock types and dust types much more clearly.</p><p>I do wish they put all the color panoramas together in one spot on the NASA web-site, with both the "real" approximation and the enhanced. (Perhaps they do, but I haven't found it yet.)<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp;</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>and the pics are never , ever true colors .
How come we ca n't get true color pics for our hundred million dollars ? They have taken a few , especially earlier in the mission .
But bandwidth to/from that far is expensive , so they do tend to limit the spectrum observed to " scientifically interesting " areas of the light spectrum .
For one , the red and green detectors of the human eye are too close together wavelength-wise for Mars use .
It may have been useful for finding ripe fruit in trees , but not for exploring Mars.Actually , they can approximate a human-eye view based on comparisons with earlier images , but I find the " scientifically enhanced " ones more interesting anyhow .
You can see differences in rock types and dust types much more clearly.I do wish they put all the color panoramas together in one spot on the NASA web-site , with both the " real " approximation and the enhanced .
( Perhaps they do , but I have n't found it yet .
)    </tokentext>
<sentencetext> and the pics are never, ever true colors.
How come we can't get true color pics for our hundred million dollars?They have taken a few, especially earlier in the mission.
But bandwidth to/from that far is expensive, so they do tend to limit the spectrum observed to "scientifically interesting" areas of the light spectrum.
For one, the red and green detectors of the human eye are too close together wavelength-wise for Mars use.
It may have been useful for finding ripe fruit in trees, but not for exploring Mars.Actually, they can approximate a human-eye view based on comparisons with earlier images, but I find the "scientifically enhanced" ones more interesting anyhow.
You can see differences in rock types and dust types much more clearly.I do wish they put all the color panoramas together in one spot on the NASA web-site, with both the "real" approximation and the enhanced.
(Perhaps they do, but I haven't found it yet.
)
   
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513375</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513985</id>
	<title>Re:Phobos &amp; Deimos</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246290180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wasn't actually sure if Mars's moons were visible with the naked eye, so I played with some quick numbers off of wikipedia... Our moon takes up 0.5 degrees in the sky. Phobos (the larger/closer of Mars's) only takes up 0.2 degrees. So, maybe they could grab the shot, if their cameras are high enough resolution.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was n't actually sure if Mars 's moons were visible with the naked eye , so I played with some quick numbers off of wikipedia... Our moon takes up 0.5 degrees in the sky .
Phobos ( the larger/closer of Mars 's ) only takes up 0.2 degrees .
So , maybe they could grab the shot , if their cameras are high enough resolution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wasn't actually sure if Mars's moons were visible with the naked eye, so I played with some quick numbers off of wikipedia... Our moon takes up 0.5 degrees in the sky.
Phobos (the larger/closer of Mars's) only takes up 0.2 degrees.
So, maybe they could grab the shot, if their cameras are high enough resolution.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513621</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28520515</id>
	<title>Re:Wind Event?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246272600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not sure but, shit, I hope I can get tickets to that!<br>{/carlin}</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not sure but , shit , I hope I can get tickets to that !
{ /carlin }</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not sure but, shit, I hope I can get tickets to that!
{/carlin}</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513425</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28518445</id>
	<title>Next Rover Lessons?</title>
	<author>Tablizer</author>
	<datestamp>1246308420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hope they are applying the lessons of soil traps to the next rover mission. Its wheels look bigger, but it's also much heavier. Thus, it looks just as likely to get stuck. It's also supposed to drive further than the current rovers can, meaning more chances to get stuck.</p><p>I'd suggest adjustable "(" or "V"-shaped "digging fins" on the wheels. You point them the way you want to push the dirt, and start spinning the wheel.</p><p>Either that, a little shovel at the end of an arm.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hope they are applying the lessons of soil traps to the next rover mission .
Its wheels look bigger , but it 's also much heavier .
Thus , it looks just as likely to get stuck .
It 's also supposed to drive further than the current rovers can , meaning more chances to get stuck.I 'd suggest adjustable " ( " or " V " -shaped " digging fins " on the wheels .
You point them the way you want to push the dirt , and start spinning the wheel.Either that , a little shovel at the end of an arm .
     </tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hope they are applying the lessons of soil traps to the next rover mission.
Its wheels look bigger, but it's also much heavier.
Thus, it looks just as likely to get stuck.
It's also supposed to drive further than the current rovers can, meaning more chances to get stuck.I'd suggest adjustable "(" or "V"-shaped "digging fins" on the wheels.
You point them the way you want to push the dirt, and start spinning the wheel.Either that, a little shovel at the end of an arm.
     </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28515723</id>
	<title>Re:You posted from "Angstrom Medal" Winner...</title>
	<author>TubeSteak</author>
	<datestamp>1246297920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Do you believe:</p><ul><li>Aliens built the pyramids?</li></ul></div><p> <a href="http://controversy.wearscience.com/design/ufo/" title="wearscience.com">Teach the Controversy!</a> [wearscience.com]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you believe : Aliens built the pyramids ?
Teach the Controversy !
[ wearscience.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you believe:Aliens built the pyramids?
Teach the Controversy!
[wearscience.com]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513683</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28517411</id>
	<title>Save some power</title>
	<author>PPH</author>
	<datestamp>1246304160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Once they figure out how Spirit is stuck, they might be better off charging the batteries up in the event that the wheels or arm will need the power to work its way out of its predicament.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Once they figure out how Spirit is stuck , they might be better off charging the batteries up in the event that the wheels or arm will need the power to work its way out of its predicament .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Once they figure out how Spirit is stuck, they might be better off charging the batteries up in the event that the wheels or arm will need the power to work its way out of its predicament.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513763</id>
	<title>Re:Girl rover</title>
	<author>RenderSeven</author>
	<datestamp>1246289100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>If it was a guy, clearly it wouldnt have gotten stuck. Would've had bigger mud tires and a hemi<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</htmltext>
<tokenext>If it was a guy , clearly it wouldnt have gotten stuck .
Would 've had bigger mud tires and a hemi .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If it was a guy, clearly it wouldnt have gotten stuck.
Would've had bigger mud tires and a hemi ...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513393</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28515213</id>
	<title>Re:picture of Earth</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246295940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are some photos in TFA of Earth + Venus during twilight.  We're both on the other side of the sun so we're pretty far away and faint.</p><p>TLDR: RTFA</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are some photos in TFA of Earth + Venus during twilight .
We 're both on the other side of the sun so we 're pretty far away and faint.TLDR : RTFA</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are some photos in TFA of Earth + Venus during twilight.
We're both on the other side of the sun so we're pretty far away and faint.TLDR: RTFA</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513953</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28516169</id>
	<title>Re:Girl rover</title>
	<author>dthx1138</author>
	<datestamp>1246299480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"He rode the tip of my rocket into orbit" sounded weird.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" He rode the tip of my rocket into orbit " sounded weird .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"He rode the tip of my rocket into orbit" sounded weird.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513393</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513683</id>
	<title>You posted from "Angstrom Medal" Winner...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246288800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Good, F\%&amp;king god, man. Did you seriously post a link from Richard C. "Art Bell's Best Buddy" Hoagland, "winner" (read: purchaser) of the Angstrom Medal, science "advisor" to Walter Cronkite during the Apollo missions, Mister "Face On Mars", glass tunnels on Mars? Did you seriously post that tripe on this site?</p><p>Do you believe:</p><ul>
<li>Aliens have Elvis?</li><li>Alien craft are in storage in "Area "Boogidy Boogidy" 51"?</li><li>Aliens built the pyramids?</li><li>Atlantis is near Bermuda/Bahamas/Catalina?</li><li>The world will end on December 21, 2012?</li></ul><p>You do know that this is<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. and not the "News of the World" site, right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Good , F \ % &amp;king god , man .
Did you seriously post a link from Richard C. " Art Bell 's Best Buddy " Hoagland , " winner " ( read : purchaser ) of the Angstrom Medal , science " advisor " to Walter Cronkite during the Apollo missions , Mister " Face On Mars " , glass tunnels on Mars ?
Did you seriously post that tripe on this site ? Do you believe : Aliens have Elvis ? Alien craft are in storage in " Area " Boogidy Boogidy " 51 " ? Aliens built the pyramids ? Atlantis is near Bermuda/Bahamas/Catalina ? The world will end on December 21 , 2012 ? You do know that this is / .
and not the " News of the World " site , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good, F\%&amp;king god, man.
Did you seriously post a link from Richard C. "Art Bell's Best Buddy" Hoagland, "winner" (read: purchaser) of the Angstrom Medal, science "advisor" to Walter Cronkite during the Apollo missions, Mister "Face On Mars", glass tunnels on Mars?
Did you seriously post that tripe on this site?Do you believe:
Aliens have Elvis?Alien craft are in storage in "Area "Boogidy Boogidy" 51"?Aliens built the pyramids?Atlantis is near Bermuda/Bahamas/Catalina?The world will end on December 21, 2012?You do know that this is /.
and not the "News of the World" site, right?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513375</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28515255</id>
	<title>Re:Wind Event?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246296120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Is that what we mere mortals call a 'storm'?</p></div></blockquote><p>I don't know; but among us mortars we call it a mere 'blitz'<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is that what we mere mortals call a 'storm ' ? I do n't know ; but among us mortars we call it a mere 'blitz ' .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is that what we mere mortals call a 'storm'?I don't know; but among us mortars we call it a mere 'blitz' ...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513425</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513927</id>
	<title>Re:why aren't any of the rover pics ever worth a d</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246289940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>They don't take true color pictures because true color pictures are less useful to them. They can occasionally put something together that looks impressive to help spur public interest, but the instruments they put on sattelites and rovers are first and foremost there to get the information that scientists need and there's a lot more information available by looking outside the visible spectrum.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They do n't take true color pictures because true color pictures are less useful to them .
They can occasionally put something together that looks impressive to help spur public interest , but the instruments they put on sattelites and rovers are first and foremost there to get the information that scientists need and there 's a lot more information available by looking outside the visible spectrum .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They don't take true color pictures because true color pictures are less useful to them.
They can occasionally put something together that looks impressive to help spur public interest, but the instruments they put on sattelites and rovers are first and foremost there to get the information that scientists need and there's a lot more information available by looking outside the visible spectrum.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513375</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513309</id>
	<title>I GET IT!</title>
	<author>WiglyWorm</author>
	<datestamp>1246286580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><b>burn</b> it with <b>heaters</b>!!!!!!</htmltext>
<tokenext>burn it with heaters ! ! ! ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>burn it with heaters!!!!!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28516775</id>
	<title>impatiently awaiting...</title>
	<author>TheSHAD0W</author>
	<datestamp>1246301760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...A time-lapse video of the night sky on Mars, the stars rolling overhead...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...A time-lapse video of the night sky on Mars , the stars rolling overhead.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...A time-lapse video of the night sky on Mars, the stars rolling overhead...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514133</id>
	<title>Re:Sell the images to raise funding money.</title>
	<author>meringuoid</author>
	<datestamp>1246290840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The night sky is difficult from a photography point of view; stars are terribly faint objects and are hard to image, especially since if you take a long exposure you get streaks instead of points. The Martian moons are tiny and unimpressive compared to Earth's moon, which is larger than most dwarf planets.

<p>However, this <a href="http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap050620.html" title="nasa.gov">Martian sunset</a> [nasa.gov] makes a very nice wallpaper.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The night sky is difficult from a photography point of view ; stars are terribly faint objects and are hard to image , especially since if you take a long exposure you get streaks instead of points .
The Martian moons are tiny and unimpressive compared to Earth 's moon , which is larger than most dwarf planets .
However , this Martian sunset [ nasa.gov ] makes a very nice wallpaper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The night sky is difficult from a photography point of view; stars are terribly faint objects and are hard to image, especially since if you take a long exposure you get streaks instead of points.
The Martian moons are tiny and unimpressive compared to Earth's moon, which is larger than most dwarf planets.
However, this Martian sunset [nasa.gov] makes a very nice wallpaper.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513663</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513375</id>
	<title>why aren't any of the rover pics ever worth a damn</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246286880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the sky image - those aren't stars, just "hot pixels"...  and the pics are never, ever true colors. How come we can't get true color pics for our hundred million dollars?</p><p>Then, when they DO image something interesting, like this <a href="http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.enterprisemission.com/\_articles/03-08-2004/images/Crinoid\%2520Martian\%2520Fossil.jpg&amp;imgrefurl=http://www.enterprisemission.com/\_articles/03-08-2004/crinoid\_cover-up.htm&amp;usg=\_\_xhVHsKy9Dcw3f9Sl8eQKuLRWd8A=&amp;h=378&amp;w=356&amp;sz=39&amp;hl=en&amp;start=1&amp;sig2=7-3ozo00\_4g7DWbaenWiXw&amp;tbnid=CCt84ZiHfCiRZM:&amp;tbnh=122&amp;tbnw=115&amp;prev=/images\%3Fq\%3Dmartian\%2Bcrinoid\%26gbv\%3D2\%26hl\%3Den\%26sa\%3DG&amp;ei=48VISrPcNoGwMreY9ZMJ" title="google.com" rel="nofollow">Martin crinoid</a> [google.com], they won't talk about it!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the sky image - those are n't stars , just " hot pixels " ... and the pics are never , ever true colors .
How come we ca n't get true color pics for our hundred million dollars ? Then , when they DO image something interesting , like this Martin crinoid [ google.com ] , they wo n't talk about it !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the sky image - those aren't stars, just "hot pixels"...  and the pics are never, ever true colors.
How come we can't get true color pics for our hundred million dollars?Then, when they DO image something interesting, like this Martin crinoid [google.com], they won't talk about it!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514583</id>
	<title>So much for NASA engineering...</title>
	<author>tech\_fixer</author>
	<datestamp>1246292940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe its more complicated, but you'd think that with all the dust on Mars, someone would've figured they needed wipers or a cleaning mechanism for the panels.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe its more complicated , but you 'd think that with all the dust on Mars , someone would 've figured they needed wipers or a cleaning mechanism for the panels .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe its more complicated, but you'd think that with all the dust on Mars, someone would've figured they needed wipers or a cleaning mechanism for the panels.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28524299</id>
	<title>Re:You posted from "Angstrom Medal" Winner...</title>
	<author>adavies42</author>
	<datestamp>1246297320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>science "advisor" to Walter Cronkite during the Apollo missions</p></div><p>that's an odd one to throw in. in context, i have to assume that (you think that) that's a bad thing, but in isolation, i'd tend to assume it would be quite the resume booster. details?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>science " advisor " to Walter Cronkite during the Apollo missionsthat 's an odd one to throw in .
in context , i have to assume that ( you think that ) that 's a bad thing , but in isolation , i 'd tend to assume it would be quite the resume booster .
details ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>science "advisor" to Walter Cronkite during the Apollo missionsthat's an odd one to throw in.
in context, i have to assume that (you think that) that's a bad thing, but in isolation, i'd tend to assume it would be quite the resume booster.
details?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513683</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513541</id>
	<title>Amazing Engineering</title>
	<author>deemen</author>
	<datestamp>1246287960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>That this rover landed in 2004 with a planned mission of 90 Martian days and we're now in 2009 still amazes me. To keep these rovers functioning for that long is an engineering triumph. Even with equipment failures, dust storms, broken wheels etc. the engineers at NASA manage to make the best of these rovers and learn more about Mars. If we're lucky, the rovers will still be working when we land there, one day. It's nice to see such human ingenuity.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That this rover landed in 2004 with a planned mission of 90 Martian days and we 're now in 2009 still amazes me .
To keep these rovers functioning for that long is an engineering triumph .
Even with equipment failures , dust storms , broken wheels etc .
the engineers at NASA manage to make the best of these rovers and learn more about Mars .
If we 're lucky , the rovers will still be working when we land there , one day .
It 's nice to see such human ingenuity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That this rover landed in 2004 with a planned mission of 90 Martian days and we're now in 2009 still amazes me.
To keep these rovers functioning for that long is an engineering triumph.
Even with equipment failures, dust storms, broken wheels etc.
the engineers at NASA manage to make the best of these rovers and learn more about Mars.
If we're lucky, the rovers will still be working when we land there, one day.
It's nice to see such human ingenuity.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28516755</id>
	<title>Re:Girl rover</title>
	<author>davester666</author>
	<datestamp>1246301700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They just counted, socket's vs plugs.  Socket's won.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They just counted , socket 's vs plugs .
Socket 's won .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They just counted, socket's vs plugs.
Socket's won.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513393</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28521271</id>
	<title>Re:why aren't any of the rover pics ever worth a d</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246276620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Did you see that site. I've seen more substantial claims from Scientologists. You're an idiot.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did you see that site .
I 've seen more substantial claims from Scientologists .
You 're an idiot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did you see that site.
I've seen more substantial claims from Scientologists.
You're an idiot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513375</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513621</id>
	<title>Phobos &amp; Deimos</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246288500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Please, please, please...<b>make a photo of those two moons on night/twilight sky, with barely visible ground/horizon</b></p><p>Ultimate romantic picture for all geeks throughout the world<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;&gt;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Please , please , please...make a photo of those two moons on night/twilight sky , with barely visible ground/horizonUltimate romantic picture for all geeks throughout the world ; &gt;</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Please, please, please...make a photo of those two moons on night/twilight sky, with barely visible ground/horizonUltimate romantic picture for all geeks throughout the world ;&gt;</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513945</id>
	<title>Re:Amazing Engineering</title>
	<author>Richard\_at\_work</author>
	<datestamp>1246290000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>The problem is, people will expect this again and again, for the same or less money - when the next 90 day rover is planned, whats its budget going to be set at?  The $500m that Spirit and Opportunity cost, or a fraction of that considering how 'overbuilt for the job' these two turned out to be?<br> <br>

The overperforming of this mission could turn out to be a wolf in sheeps clothing.  Be wary.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is , people will expect this again and again , for the same or less money - when the next 90 day rover is planned , whats its budget going to be set at ?
The $ 500m that Spirit and Opportunity cost , or a fraction of that considering how 'overbuilt for the job ' these two turned out to be ?
The overperforming of this mission could turn out to be a wolf in sheeps clothing .
Be wary .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is, people will expect this again and again, for the same or less money - when the next 90 day rover is planned, whats its budget going to be set at?
The $500m that Spirit and Opportunity cost, or a fraction of that considering how 'overbuilt for the job' these two turned out to be?
The overperforming of this mission could turn out to be a wolf in sheeps clothing.
Be wary.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513541</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513711</id>
	<title>Re:ten minutes</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246288920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>So no playing &lt;insert fps game of choice here/&gt;</htmltext>
<tokenext>So no playing</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So no playing </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513583</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513425</id>
	<title>Wind Event?</title>
	<author>Noodlenose</author>
	<datestamp>1246287240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is that what we mere mortals call a 'storm'?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is that what we mere mortals call a 'storm ' ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is that what we mere mortals call a 'storm'?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513537</id>
	<title>nothing wrong with anthropomorphism</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246287960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the human mind has many types of intelligence: spatial, social, emotional, etc.</p><p>one of our most powerful is, in fact, our social intelligence. a rodent needs a good sense of smell to escape predators and find food. living in a social group, the biggest threat and reward for you comes not from the bushes: berries or fangs, but from your fellow humans: jealous potential murderer or coy potential mate</p><p>therefore, you have this powerful cognition machine sitting in your head hewn from millenia of evolution in human groups. well, use it. there is nothing wrong with bringing your powerful social intelligence machinery to bear on nonsocial problems. think of it as using otherwise wasted cpu cycles on protein folding or finding mersenne primes: you "use" your social intelligence by imagining a math problem as a social setting (cue that famous scene from the russel crowe flick "a beautiful mind"), or reimagining your relationship as captain of a cruise ship and all its engineering problems as instead a relationship with a woman and all of the attendant problems that comes with that</p><p>it is in fact, not some sort of weird mental trick i am referring to, it is in fact almost a subconcious and completely natural effort for most of us, this repurposing of social intelligence, since our social intelligence is probably our most potent form of intelligence. you look at clouds and bark on trees and stars in the sky and see faces and bodies, its effortless. this is because your mind is powerfully prejudiced and primed to process its world in terms of social cues and meanings first. yes, spatial intelligence is important for many things, like throwing a spear or building a hut. but none of that matters if you didn't see the backstabber in your hunting party or missed the social cues that the big man's daughter was interested in you. social intelligence is our most important form of intelligence: i am sure plenty of people can outrank barack obama on a traditional iq test. but iq tests test only certain forms of intelligence. barack obama's ability to recognize, manipulate, and use social networks to gain power (or any politician's such ability, its called charisma) is in fact a much more important form of iq than anything a traditional iq test reveals</p><p>there is nothing wrong with anthropomorphism. it is entirely natural, and in fact, useful. in fact, if you see something wrong with anthropomorphism, all you are doing is denying a powerful aspect of your own intellect to come to bear on problems of interest to you. or perhaps you are in fact impoverished in your social intelligence abilities, and your anathema to anthropomorphism is just a symptom of your own poverty, not a valid comment on other people's lines of thinking</p><p>so when the engineers and technicians talk about and react to events with the mars rovers in terms of a social relationship with another person, specifically, a woman ("she"), all they are doing is putting themselves in a frame of mind to maximize their intellectual abilities to process the issues that come up</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the human mind has many types of intelligence : spatial , social , emotional , etc.one of our most powerful is , in fact , our social intelligence .
a rodent needs a good sense of smell to escape predators and find food .
living in a social group , the biggest threat and reward for you comes not from the bushes : berries or fangs , but from your fellow humans : jealous potential murderer or coy potential matetherefore , you have this powerful cognition machine sitting in your head hewn from millenia of evolution in human groups .
well , use it .
there is nothing wrong with bringing your powerful social intelligence machinery to bear on nonsocial problems .
think of it as using otherwise wasted cpu cycles on protein folding or finding mersenne primes : you " use " your social intelligence by imagining a math problem as a social setting ( cue that famous scene from the russel crowe flick " a beautiful mind " ) , or reimagining your relationship as captain of a cruise ship and all its engineering problems as instead a relationship with a woman and all of the attendant problems that comes with thatit is in fact , not some sort of weird mental trick i am referring to , it is in fact almost a subconcious and completely natural effort for most of us , this repurposing of social intelligence , since our social intelligence is probably our most potent form of intelligence .
you look at clouds and bark on trees and stars in the sky and see faces and bodies , its effortless .
this is because your mind is powerfully prejudiced and primed to process its world in terms of social cues and meanings first .
yes , spatial intelligence is important for many things , like throwing a spear or building a hut .
but none of that matters if you did n't see the backstabber in your hunting party or missed the social cues that the big man 's daughter was interested in you .
social intelligence is our most important form of intelligence : i am sure plenty of people can outrank barack obama on a traditional iq test .
but iq tests test only certain forms of intelligence .
barack obama 's ability to recognize , manipulate , and use social networks to gain power ( or any politician 's such ability , its called charisma ) is in fact a much more important form of iq than anything a traditional iq test revealsthere is nothing wrong with anthropomorphism .
it is entirely natural , and in fact , useful .
in fact , if you see something wrong with anthropomorphism , all you are doing is denying a powerful aspect of your own intellect to come to bear on problems of interest to you .
or perhaps you are in fact impoverished in your social intelligence abilities , and your anathema to anthropomorphism is just a symptom of your own poverty , not a valid comment on other people 's lines of thinkingso when the engineers and technicians talk about and react to events with the mars rovers in terms of a social relationship with another person , specifically , a woman ( " she " ) , all they are doing is putting themselves in a frame of mind to maximize their intellectual abilities to process the issues that come up</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the human mind has many types of intelligence: spatial, social, emotional, etc.one of our most powerful is, in fact, our social intelligence.
a rodent needs a good sense of smell to escape predators and find food.
living in a social group, the biggest threat and reward for you comes not from the bushes: berries or fangs, but from your fellow humans: jealous potential murderer or coy potential matetherefore, you have this powerful cognition machine sitting in your head hewn from millenia of evolution in human groups.
well, use it.
there is nothing wrong with bringing your powerful social intelligence machinery to bear on nonsocial problems.
think of it as using otherwise wasted cpu cycles on protein folding or finding mersenne primes: you "use" your social intelligence by imagining a math problem as a social setting (cue that famous scene from the russel crowe flick "a beautiful mind"), or reimagining your relationship as captain of a cruise ship and all its engineering problems as instead a relationship with a woman and all of the attendant problems that comes with thatit is in fact, not some sort of weird mental trick i am referring to, it is in fact almost a subconcious and completely natural effort for most of us, this repurposing of social intelligence, since our social intelligence is probably our most potent form of intelligence.
you look at clouds and bark on trees and stars in the sky and see faces and bodies, its effortless.
this is because your mind is powerfully prejudiced and primed to process its world in terms of social cues and meanings first.
yes, spatial intelligence is important for many things, like throwing a spear or building a hut.
but none of that matters if you didn't see the backstabber in your hunting party or missed the social cues that the big man's daughter was interested in you.
social intelligence is our most important form of intelligence: i am sure plenty of people can outrank barack obama on a traditional iq test.
but iq tests test only certain forms of intelligence.
barack obama's ability to recognize, manipulate, and use social networks to gain power (or any politician's such ability, its called charisma) is in fact a much more important form of iq than anything a traditional iq test revealsthere is nothing wrong with anthropomorphism.
it is entirely natural, and in fact, useful.
in fact, if you see something wrong with anthropomorphism, all you are doing is denying a powerful aspect of your own intellect to come to bear on problems of interest to you.
or perhaps you are in fact impoverished in your social intelligence abilities, and your anathema to anthropomorphism is just a symptom of your own poverty, not a valid comment on other people's lines of thinkingso when the engineers and technicians talk about and react to events with the mars rovers in terms of a social relationship with another person, specifically, a woman ("she"), all they are doing is putting themselves in a frame of mind to maximize their intellectual abilities to process the issues that come up</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28520515
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513425
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514183
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513721
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514667
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513393
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28517413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514447
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513425
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513621
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513425
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513851
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513583
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28515255
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513425
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28515457
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513537
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514319
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513953
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28524339
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514777
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513945
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513541
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513825
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513537
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28524299
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513683
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513375
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28523311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513393
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28521271
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513375
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28515723
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513683
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513375
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513495
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513393
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28517329
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28515397
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513683
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513375
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28516699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513963
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513621
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513977
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513541
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514133
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513663
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514843
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513663
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28524199
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513621
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514603
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513375
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28516403
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513537
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513935
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513425
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28521023
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513953
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28515213
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513953
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514069
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513425
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514225
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513945
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513541
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28515229
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513763
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513393
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514277
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513375
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513985
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513621
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513927
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513375
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514115
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513953
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28515285
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514447
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513425
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28516755
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513393
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28516169
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513393
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514811
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513663
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28525381
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513995
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513425
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514795
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513541
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513987
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513393
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28517089
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513721
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514067
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513555
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513393
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1232216_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513711
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513583
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_1232216.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513425
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513995
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28525381
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513935
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28520515
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28515255
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514069
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513917
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514447
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28517413
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28515285
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_1232216.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513583
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513851
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513711
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_1232216.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28515201
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_1232216.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513541
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514795
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513977
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513945
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514777
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28524339
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514225
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_1232216.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513393
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513495
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28516755
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28523311
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513987
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513555
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514067
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514667
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513763
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28515229
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28516169
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_1232216.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513375
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28521271
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513683
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28524299
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28515397
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28517329
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28515723
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514603
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514277
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513927
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_1232216.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513537
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28515457
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513825
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28516403
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_1232216.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513621
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28524199
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514489
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513963
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28516699
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513985
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_1232216.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28517667
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_1232216.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513953
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28521023
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514115
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514319
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28515213
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_1232216.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28516775
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_1232216.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513721
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514183
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28517089
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_1232216.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513467
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_1232216.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28513663
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514811
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514133
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28514843
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_1232216.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1232216.28517411
</commentlist>
</conversation>
