<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_07_09_1820249</id>
	<title>Stacking of New Space Vehicle Begins At KSC</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1247167380000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://spacefellowship.com/" rel="nofollow">Matt\_dk</a> writes <i>"For the first time in more than a quarter-century, <a href="http://spacefellowship.com/2009/07/09/stacking-of-new-space-vehicle-begins-at-kennedy-space-center/">a new space vehicle will begin stacking</a> on a mobile launch platform (MLP) at Kennedy Space Center. The Ares I-X aft skirt, which was mated to a solid fuel segment in the Rotation, Processing and Surge Facility at KSC, rolled over to the 528-foot-tall Vehicle Assembly Building today, where it will be lifted and placed on the MLP in High Bay 3. On that platform, workers will secure the aft booster and continue adding segments of the first stage rocket, the upper stage simulators, the crew module mockup and the launch abort system simulator, taking the vehicle to a height of 327 feet."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Matt \ _dk writes " For the first time in more than a quarter-century , a new space vehicle will begin stacking on a mobile launch platform ( MLP ) at Kennedy Space Center .
The Ares I-X aft skirt , which was mated to a solid fuel segment in the Rotation , Processing and Surge Facility at KSC , rolled over to the 528-foot-tall Vehicle Assembly Building today , where it will be lifted and placed on the MLP in High Bay 3 .
On that platform , workers will secure the aft booster and continue adding segments of the first stage rocket , the upper stage simulators , the crew module mockup and the launch abort system simulator , taking the vehicle to a height of 327 feet .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Matt\_dk writes "For the first time in more than a quarter-century, a new space vehicle will begin stacking on a mobile launch platform (MLP) at Kennedy Space Center.
The Ares I-X aft skirt, which was mated to a solid fuel segment in the Rotation, Processing and Surge Facility at KSC, rolled over to the 528-foot-tall Vehicle Assembly Building today, where it will be lifted and placed on the MLP in High Bay 3.
On that platform, workers will secure the aft booster and continue adding segments of the first stage rocket, the upper stage simulators, the crew module mockup and the launch abort system simulator, taking the vehicle to a height of 327 feet.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28649759</id>
	<title>Re:This is the way to spend taxpayer money!</title>
	<author>tjstork</author>
	<datestamp>1247240640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>This is where I think NASA is fairly criticized. They want manned missions because they are cool and sexy...science to justify the outrageous costs involved</i></p><p>The science is actually the art of keeping people alive in space.  But, I agree that proponents of manned space flight, such as myself, need to do come up with a better story than just sending people out into space.</p><p>One of the stories that I plan on writing for my site is going to be a call for a doubling of NASA's budget, and map out political and human interest reasons to be on other planets to appeal to my more right wing audience.  It's about spreading humanity out to preserve freedom, and so I'm going to replace the simple technocratic science argument with a priceless reason.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is where I think NASA is fairly criticized .
They want manned missions because they are cool and sexy...science to justify the outrageous costs involvedThe science is actually the art of keeping people alive in space .
But , I agree that proponents of manned space flight , such as myself , need to do come up with a better story than just sending people out into space.One of the stories that I plan on writing for my site is going to be a call for a doubling of NASA 's budget , and map out political and human interest reasons to be on other planets to appeal to my more right wing audience .
It 's about spreading humanity out to preserve freedom , and so I 'm going to replace the simple technocratic science argument with a priceless reason .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is where I think NASA is fairly criticized.
They want manned missions because they are cool and sexy...science to justify the outrageous costs involvedThe science is actually the art of keeping people alive in space.
But, I agree that proponents of manned space flight, such as myself, need to do come up with a better story than just sending people out into space.One of the stories that I plan on writing for my site is going to be a call for a doubling of NASA's budget, and map out political and human interest reasons to be on other planets to appeal to my more right wing audience.
It's about spreading humanity out to preserve freedom, and so I'm going to replace the simple technocratic science argument with a priceless reason.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28642193</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28645201</id>
	<title>Re:wrong macro engineering again</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247150400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>pretty sure nasa is standardizing all new designs on metric units.  the main reason they have not done so with the ares system is that it is based on a lot of shuttle technology.  I remember somewhere, sometime, some article stated the cost of converting all the schematics to metric was in the tens of millions.  If I had a choice, I'd spend money on more exploration before I spend money on updating schematics.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>pretty sure nasa is standardizing all new designs on metric units .
the main reason they have not done so with the ares system is that it is based on a lot of shuttle technology .
I remember somewhere , sometime , some article stated the cost of converting all the schematics to metric was in the tens of millions .
If I had a choice , I 'd spend money on more exploration before I spend money on updating schematics .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>pretty sure nasa is standardizing all new designs on metric units.
the main reason they have not done so with the ares system is that it is based on a lot of shuttle technology.
I remember somewhere, sometime, some article stated the cost of converting all the schematics to metric was in the tens of millions.
If I had a choice, I'd spend money on more exploration before I spend money on updating schematics.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641759</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28642001</id>
	<title>Re:This is the way to spend taxpayer money!</title>
	<author>peragrin</author>
	<datestamp>1247132880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>while I agree. i also don't want them to completely mothball the shuttles either.  There is a handful of missions that only a shuttle can accomplish that would be worth every penny in keeping one on hand.</p><p>My personal favorite goal.  When the Hubbel is finally dying And beyond repair, Send up a 2-3 man crew retrieve it and return it to earth safely.  That is what the shuttle were meant to do with old satellites.  retrieve them for proper disposal on earth.  It is one mission not yet attempted.  Besides how cool would it be to have the Hubbel space telescope setting in the Smithsonian?  heck the majority of the shuttle launch could be financed by donors.  It would be risky, but for that honor, i bet you get lots of volunteers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>while I agree .
i also do n't want them to completely mothball the shuttles either .
There is a handful of missions that only a shuttle can accomplish that would be worth every penny in keeping one on hand.My personal favorite goal .
When the Hubbel is finally dying And beyond repair , Send up a 2-3 man crew retrieve it and return it to earth safely .
That is what the shuttle were meant to do with old satellites .
retrieve them for proper disposal on earth .
It is one mission not yet attempted .
Besides how cool would it be to have the Hubbel space telescope setting in the Smithsonian ?
heck the majority of the shuttle launch could be financed by donors .
It would be risky , but for that honor , i bet you get lots of volunteers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>while I agree.
i also don't want them to completely mothball the shuttles either.
There is a handful of missions that only a shuttle can accomplish that would be worth every penny in keeping one on hand.My personal favorite goal.
When the Hubbel is finally dying And beyond repair, Send up a 2-3 man crew retrieve it and return it to earth safely.
That is what the shuttle were meant to do with old satellites.
retrieve them for proper disposal on earth.
It is one mission not yet attempted.
Besides how cool would it be to have the Hubbel space telescope setting in the Smithsonian?
heck the majority of the shuttle launch could be financed by donors.
It would be risky, but for that honor, i bet you get lots of volunteers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641073</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28645519</id>
	<title>Re:This is the way to spend taxpayer money!</title>
	<author>khallow</author>
	<datestamp>1247153220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It won't test most of the Ares I: the first stage, the second stage, and the thrust oscillation mitigation strategies. We also don't yet know if the Ares I will be able to perform the duties that it has been designed for.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It wo n't test most of the Ares I : the first stage , the second stage , and the thrust oscillation mitigation strategies .
We also do n't yet know if the Ares I will be able to perform the duties that it has been designed for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It won't test most of the Ares I: the first stage, the second stage, and the thrust oscillation mitigation strategies.
We also don't yet know if the Ares I will be able to perform the duties that it has been designed for.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28642167</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641073</id>
	<title>This is the way to spend taxpayer money!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247172000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know a lot of other people might be down on NASA.  They say its too much of this, or too much of that, should be privatized, etc..  but...last time I checked:</p><p>NASA was the only organization to put a man on the moon, land a couple of rovers on Mars, fly by Jupiter, Saturn, and the outer planets, build and operate a space plane and a space station.</p><p>Everyone says NASA is expensive, but, I think the value is just tremendous.</p><p>I cannot reiterate my support for NASA, enough.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know a lot of other people might be down on NASA .
They say its too much of this , or too much of that , should be privatized , etc.. but...last time I checked : NASA was the only organization to put a man on the moon , land a couple of rovers on Mars , fly by Jupiter , Saturn , and the outer planets , build and operate a space plane and a space station.Everyone says NASA is expensive , but , I think the value is just tremendous.I can not reiterate my support for NASA , enough .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know a lot of other people might be down on NASA.
They say its too much of this, or too much of that, should be privatized, etc..  but...last time I checked:NASA was the only organization to put a man on the moon, land a couple of rovers on Mars, fly by Jupiter, Saturn, and the outer planets, build and operate a space plane and a space station.Everyone says NASA is expensive, but, I think the value is just tremendous.I cannot reiterate my support for NASA, enough.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28640887</id>
	<title>AERQWEDF</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247171340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>KENTUCKY FRIED CHICKEN!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>KENTUCKY FRIED CHICKEN !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>KENTUCKY FRIED CHICKEN!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641177</id>
	<title>Note the "mobile launch pad" disclaimer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247172300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"For the first time in more than a quarter-century [...] on a mobile launch platform (MLP)"</p><p>Good thing they had that little disclaimer. SpaceX's Falcon 9 showed up there earlier this year. From the pictures, the Falcon's launch platform doesn't look like it's going anywhere.</p><p>http://spacex.com/updates.php</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" For the first time in more than a quarter-century [ ... ] on a mobile launch platform ( MLP ) " Good thing they had that little disclaimer .
SpaceX 's Falcon 9 showed up there earlier this year .
From the pictures , the Falcon 's launch platform does n't look like it 's going anywhere.http : //spacex.com/updates.php</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"For the first time in more than a quarter-century [...] on a mobile launch platform (MLP)"Good thing they had that little disclaimer.
SpaceX's Falcon 9 showed up there earlier this year.
From the pictures, the Falcon's launch platform doesn't look like it's going anywhere.http://spacex.com/updates.php</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641371</id>
	<title>!chicken, !kfc ???</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247173140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>these tags are ridiculous, how many stories does slashdot have about Kentucky Fried Chicken?<br> <br>

is anyone really so stupid as to think that the Colonel is making a space ship?</htmltext>
<tokenext>these tags are ridiculous , how many stories does slashdot have about Kentucky Fried Chicken ?
is anyone really so stupid as to think that the Colonel is making a space ship ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>these tags are ridiculous, how many stories does slashdot have about Kentucky Fried Chicken?
is anyone really so stupid as to think that the Colonel is making a space ship?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28643943</id>
	<title>Re:wrong macro engineering again</title>
	<author>TheRocketMan</author>
	<datestamp>1247141220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And while I am on it, no vehicles should be built at all until the scientific metric system of measurement is introduced and imperial medieval system is banned. It should be forbidden, I do not know, by the Geneva convention. Due to pseudo-patriotism the complicated systems are built with archaic feet, elbows, inches, etc. All would be fine, but alive people are to fly it.</p></div><p>It's not patriotism as much as infrastructure for fabrication and test.  I'm thinking of propulsion here, but this is true of other areas as well.  Raw materials required/needed are only available in the USA in English units (5/8in tubing for prop lines, etc), for that to become metric would require all the suppliers to support metric as well: it's not just NASA.  Also, machining and test equipment in many facilities (again, not just NASA) are non-metric: again this infrastructure could be converted but would be expensive and nobody has ponied up the bread to do the conversion and re-cert required.
  <br> <br>
All certainly do-able but there is a cost: not arguing against metric as I work only in metric, switching to all metric would make my life easier.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And while I am on it , no vehicles should be built at all until the scientific metric system of measurement is introduced and imperial medieval system is banned .
It should be forbidden , I do not know , by the Geneva convention .
Due to pseudo-patriotism the complicated systems are built with archaic feet , elbows , inches , etc .
All would be fine , but alive people are to fly it.It 's not patriotism as much as infrastructure for fabrication and test .
I 'm thinking of propulsion here , but this is true of other areas as well .
Raw materials required/needed are only available in the USA in English units ( 5/8in tubing for prop lines , etc ) , for that to become metric would require all the suppliers to support metric as well : it 's not just NASA .
Also , machining and test equipment in many facilities ( again , not just NASA ) are non-metric : again this infrastructure could be converted but would be expensive and nobody has ponied up the bread to do the conversion and re-cert required .
All certainly do-able but there is a cost : not arguing against metric as I work only in metric , switching to all metric would make my life easier .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And while I am on it, no vehicles should be built at all until the scientific metric system of measurement is introduced and imperial medieval system is banned.
It should be forbidden, I do not know, by the Geneva convention.
Due to pseudo-patriotism the complicated systems are built with archaic feet, elbows, inches, etc.
All would be fine, but alive people are to fly it.It's not patriotism as much as infrastructure for fabrication and test.
I'm thinking of propulsion here, but this is true of other areas as well.
Raw materials required/needed are only available in the USA in English units (5/8in tubing for prop lines, etc), for that to become metric would require all the suppliers to support metric as well: it's not just NASA.
Also, machining and test equipment in many facilities (again, not just NASA) are non-metric: again this infrastructure could be converted but would be expensive and nobody has ponied up the bread to do the conversion and re-cert required.
All certainly do-able but there is a cost: not arguing against metric as I work only in metric, switching to all metric would make my life easier.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641759</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28640937</id>
	<title>Maybe next year</title>
	<author>proslack</author>
	<datestamp>1247171520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Too bad they don't have a webcam or something like that aimed at it...would be interesting to watch.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Too bad they do n't have a webcam or something like that aimed at it...would be interesting to watch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Too bad they don't have a webcam or something like that aimed at it...would be interesting to watch.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28645461</id>
	<title>Re:This is the way to spend taxpayer money!</title>
	<author>khallow</author>
	<datestamp>1247152680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There's a two word rebuttal: "opportunity cost". Imagine if you will, if that trillion plus dollars spent on NASA over its lifetime were instead spent on space exploration and development. That's a lot of money. We could have space colonies, massive surveys of asteroids and the surface of all major bodies in the Solar System, a huge economy in space, etc. Instead, we got "put a man on the moon, land a couple of rovers on Mars, fly by Jupiter, Saturn, and the outer planets, build and operate a space plane and a space station". Ho hum.<br> <br>

In other words, that "tremendous value" came at a larger tremendous hidden cost.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's a two word rebuttal : " opportunity cost " .
Imagine if you will , if that trillion plus dollars spent on NASA over its lifetime were instead spent on space exploration and development .
That 's a lot of money .
We could have space colonies , massive surveys of asteroids and the surface of all major bodies in the Solar System , a huge economy in space , etc .
Instead , we got " put a man on the moon , land a couple of rovers on Mars , fly by Jupiter , Saturn , and the outer planets , build and operate a space plane and a space station " .
Ho hum .
In other words , that " tremendous value " came at a larger tremendous hidden cost .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's a two word rebuttal: "opportunity cost".
Imagine if you will, if that trillion plus dollars spent on NASA over its lifetime were instead spent on space exploration and development.
That's a lot of money.
We could have space colonies, massive surveys of asteroids and the surface of all major bodies in the Solar System, a huge economy in space, etc.
Instead, we got "put a man on the moon, land a couple of rovers on Mars, fly by Jupiter, Saturn, and the outer planets, build and operate a space plane and a space station".
Ho hum.
In other words, that "tremendous value" came at a larger tremendous hidden cost.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641073</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28642915</id>
	<title>Re:wrong macro engineering again</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247136540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>And while I am on it, no vehicles should be built at all until the scientific metric system of measurement is introduced and imperial medieval system is banned. It should be forbidden, I do not know, by the Geneva convention. Due to pseudo-patriotism the complicated systems are built with archaic feet, elbows, inches, etc. All would be fine, but alive people are to fly it.</i></p><p>Don't be retarded.  The English system is better for many things, like pints for beer and Fahrenheit for telling people what the weather is like today.</p><p>For scientific work, it sucks, and that's what just about all science (even in the USA) is done with metric units.  Yes, NASA probably should be standardizing on metric units.  But what scientists use for their daily work has nothing to do with what common people use in their daily lives.</p><p>Use the right tool for the job.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And while I am on it , no vehicles should be built at all until the scientific metric system of measurement is introduced and imperial medieval system is banned .
It should be forbidden , I do not know , by the Geneva convention .
Due to pseudo-patriotism the complicated systems are built with archaic feet , elbows , inches , etc .
All would be fine , but alive people are to fly it.Do n't be retarded .
The English system is better for many things , like pints for beer and Fahrenheit for telling people what the weather is like today.For scientific work , it sucks , and that 's what just about all science ( even in the USA ) is done with metric units .
Yes , NASA probably should be standardizing on metric units .
But what scientists use for their daily work has nothing to do with what common people use in their daily lives.Use the right tool for the job .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And while I am on it, no vehicles should be built at all until the scientific metric system of measurement is introduced and imperial medieval system is banned.
It should be forbidden, I do not know, by the Geneva convention.
Due to pseudo-patriotism the complicated systems are built with archaic feet, elbows, inches, etc.
All would be fine, but alive people are to fly it.Don't be retarded.
The English system is better for many things, like pints for beer and Fahrenheit for telling people what the weather is like today.For scientific work, it sucks, and that's what just about all science (even in the USA) is done with metric units.
Yes, NASA probably should be standardizing on metric units.
But what scientists use for their daily work has nothing to do with what common people use in their daily lives.Use the right tool for the job.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641759</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641139</id>
	<title>zharko</title>
	<author>zharko</author>
	<datestamp>1247172180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://sinfree.net/nlo/free-wow5c/cikeadloach.html" title="sinfree.net" rel="nofollow"> uno online play </a> [sinfree.net]
<a href="http://sinfree.net/nlo/free-wow5c/htheruigetof.html" title="sinfree.net" rel="nofollow"> nude mujra </a> [sinfree.net]
<a href="http://nbz.myftp.org/additing/qutherin.html" title="myftp.org" rel="nofollow"> youngasiansex </a> [myftp.org]
<a href="http://yoll.net/nlo/free-wow28/qusutod.html" title="yoll.net" rel="nofollow"> tamilnude </a> [yoll.net]
<a href="http://yoll.net/nlo/free-wow28/wntomncace.html" title="yoll.net" rel="nofollow"> internet special </a> [yoll.net]
<a href="http://yoll.net/nlo/free-wow28/onersuerrea.html" title="yoll.net" rel="nofollow"> onlydudes. </a> [yoll.net]
<a href="http://yoll.net/nlo/free-wow28/bofren.html" title="yoll.net" rel="nofollow"> mets trade rumors </a> [yoll.net]
<a href="http://nbz.myftp.org/additing/xaddirimasik.html" title="myftp.org" rel="nofollow"> tom and jerry games </a> [myftp.org]
<a href="http://sinfree.net/nlo/free-wow5c/index.html" title="sinfree.net" rel="nofollow"> saas billing ipapplications case study </a> [sinfree.net]
<a href="http://yoll.net/nlo/free-wow28/reryodesc.html" title="yoll.net" rel="nofollow"> screwfix </a> [yoll.net]
<a href="http://nbz.myftp.org/additing/vetuduedri.html" title="myftp.org" rel="nofollow"> upvc double glazed windows india </a> [myftp.org]
<a href="http://nba.myftp.org/peoplepc-webmail/qurdito.html" title="myftp.org" rel="nofollow"> online related links </a> [myftp.org]
<a href="http://nbz.myftp.org/additing/wachedl.html" title="myftp.org" rel="nofollow"> toner </a> [myftp.org]
<a href="http://yoll.net/nlo/free-wow28/beithoff.html" title="yoll.net" rel="nofollow"> nude mujra </a> [yoll.net]
<a href="http://nbz.myftp.org/additing/vonthitol.html" title="myftp.org" rel="nofollow"> picturesex </a> [myftp.org]
<a href="http://yoll.net/nlo/free-wow28/xalyelouch.html" title="yoll.net" rel="nofollow"> ba promotional code </a> [yoll.net]
<a href="http://nba.myftp.org/peoplepc-webmail/zdetithewapo.html" title="myftp.org" rel="nofollow"> circuit city locations </a> [myftp.org]
<a href="http://nbz.myftp.org/additing/onsthi.html" title="myftp.org" rel="nofollow"> goldiehawnnude </a> [myftp.org]
<a href="http://sinfree.net/nlo/free-wow5c/rexiolasenth.html" title="sinfree.net" rel="nofollow"> spadroon sword </a> [sinfree.net]
<a href="http://sinfree.net/nlo/free-wow5c/sindecsthet.html" title="sinfree.net" rel="nofollow"> screwfix </a> [sinfree.net]
<a href="http://nbz.myftp.org/additing/endsexadiok.html" title="myftp.org" rel="nofollow"> weightwatchers atworketools </a> [myftp.org]
<a href="http://nbz.myftp.org/additing/pevet.html" title="myftp.org" rel="nofollow"> cash books for cerebral palsy </a> [myftp.org]
<a href="http://sinfree.net/nlo/free-wow5c/qusayinderoe.html" title="sinfree.net" rel="nofollow"> upvc double glazed windows india </a> [sinfree.net]
<a href="http://nba.myftp.org/peoplepc-webmail/plorichoner.html" title="myftp.org" rel="nofollow"> ba promotional code </a> [myftp.org]
<a href="http://nba.myftp.org/peoplepc-webmail/omarindexc.html" title="myftp.org" rel="nofollow"> smokey mountain knife works </a> [myftp.org]
<a href="http://sinfree.net/nlo/free-wow5c/liozlyinan.html" title="sinfree.net" rel="nofollow"> cytherea </a> [sinfree.net]
<a href="http://nbz.myftp.org/additing/pededitor.html" title="myftp.org" rel="nofollow"> sprint blackberry </a> [myftp.org]
<a href="http://nbz.myftp.org/additing/gmoutanci.html" title="myftp.org" rel="nofollow"> rum recipe </a> [myftp.org]
<a href="http://sinfree.net/nlo/free-wow5c/myeymerevext.html" title="sinfree.net" rel="nofollow"> who is the best eyelid surgeon in michig </a> [sinfree.net]
<a href="http://yoll.net/nlo/free-wow28/momurisex.html" title="yoll.net" rel="nofollow"> google video </a> [yoll.net]
<a href="http://nba.myftp.org/peoplepc-webmail/ngullyo.html" title="myftp.org" rel="nofollow"> british airways promotional code </a> [myftp.org]
<a href="http://sinfree.net/nlo/free-wow5c/hadeno.html" title="sinfree.net" rel="nofollow"> boost mobile </a> [sinfree.net]
<a href="http://yoll.net/nlo/free-wow28/umatha.html" title="yoll.net" rel="nofollow"> online related links </a> [yoll.net]
<a href="http://yoll.net/nlo/free-wow28/dleth.html" title="yoll.net" rel="nofollow"> hello kitty agame </a> [yoll.net]
<a href="http://nba.myftp.org/peoplepc-webmail/jeadinteco.html" title="myftp.org" rel="nofollow"> compare the market </a> [myftp.org]
<a href="http://sinfree.net/nlo/free-wow5c/erixanghai.html" title="sinfree.net" rel="nofollow"> circuit city locations </a> [sinfree.net]
<a href="http://sinfree.net/nlo/free-wow5c/prsprdut.html" title="sinfree.net" rel="nofollow"> additing </a> [sinfree.net]
<a href="http://yoll.net/nlo/free-wow28/onoathaccond.html" title="yoll.net" rel="nofollow"> sprint blackberry </a> [yoll.net]
<a href="http://yoll.net/nlo/free-wow28/plytysatecom.html" title="yoll.net" rel="nofollow"> additing </a> [yoll.net]
<a href="http://sinfree.net/nlo/free-wow5c/herestip.html" title="sinfree.net" rel="nofollow"> felony odometer </a> [sinfree.net]
<a href="http://sinfree.net/nlo/free-wow5c/semmad.html" title="sinfree.net" rel="nofollow"> uno online </a> [sinfree.net]
<a href="http://yoll.net/nlo/free-wow28/yemplennddr.html" title="yoll.net" rel="nofollow"> picasso software </a> [yoll.net]
<a href="http://nbz.myftp.org/additing/quthery.html" title="myftp.org" rel="nofollow"> onlydudes. </a> [myftp.org]
<a href="http://sinfree.net/nlo/free-wow5c/arommndeytsu.html" title="sinfree.net" rel="nofollow"> compare the market </a> [sinfree.net]
<a href="http://yoll.net/nlo/free-wow28/eaterendo.html" title="yoll.net" rel="nofollow"> electric ukulele </a> [yoll.net]
<a href="http://sinfree.net/nlo/free-wow5c/uthigacicodi.html" title="sinfree.net" rel="nofollow"> jesse james hollywood </a> [sinfree.net]
<a href="http://nbz.myftp.org/additing/zthedstury.html" title="myftp.org" rel="nofollow"> audience response system dubai </a> [myftp.org]
<a href="http://yoll.net/nlo/free-wow28/fayimatho.html" title="yoll.net" rel="nofollow"> hasni mp </a> [yoll.net]
<a href="http://nbz.myftp.org/additing/cenyenthind.html" title="myftp.org" rel="nofollow"> lezsex </a> [myftp.org]
<a href="http://yoll.net/nlo/free-wow28/himendednale.html" title="yoll.net" rel="nofollow"> ba promotion code </a> [yoll.net]</htmltext>
<tokenext>uno online play [ sinfree.net ] nude mujra [ sinfree.net ] youngasiansex [ myftp.org ] tamilnude [ yoll.net ] internet special [ yoll.net ] onlydudes .
[ yoll.net ] mets trade rumors [ yoll.net ] tom and jerry games [ myftp.org ] saas billing ipapplications case study [ sinfree.net ] screwfix [ yoll.net ] upvc double glazed windows india [ myftp.org ] online related links [ myftp.org ] toner [ myftp.org ] nude mujra [ yoll.net ] picturesex [ myftp.org ] ba promotional code [ yoll.net ] circuit city locations [ myftp.org ] goldiehawnnude [ myftp.org ] spadroon sword [ sinfree.net ] screwfix [ sinfree.net ] weightwatchers atworketools [ myftp.org ] cash books for cerebral palsy [ myftp.org ] upvc double glazed windows india [ sinfree.net ] ba promotional code [ myftp.org ] smokey mountain knife works [ myftp.org ] cytherea [ sinfree.net ] sprint blackberry [ myftp.org ] rum recipe [ myftp.org ] who is the best eyelid surgeon in michig [ sinfree.net ] google video [ yoll.net ] british airways promotional code [ myftp.org ] boost mobile [ sinfree.net ] online related links [ yoll.net ] hello kitty agame [ yoll.net ] compare the market [ myftp.org ] circuit city locations [ sinfree.net ] additing [ sinfree.net ] sprint blackberry [ yoll.net ] additing [ yoll.net ] felony odometer [ sinfree.net ] uno online [ sinfree.net ] picasso software [ yoll.net ] onlydudes .
[ myftp.org ] compare the market [ sinfree.net ] electric ukulele [ yoll.net ] jesse james hollywood [ sinfree.net ] audience response system dubai [ myftp.org ] hasni mp [ yoll.net ] lezsex [ myftp.org ] ba promotion code [ yoll.net ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext> uno online play  [sinfree.net]
 nude mujra  [sinfree.net]
 youngasiansex  [myftp.org]
 tamilnude  [yoll.net]
 internet special  [yoll.net]
 onlydudes.
[yoll.net]
 mets trade rumors  [yoll.net]
 tom and jerry games  [myftp.org]
 saas billing ipapplications case study  [sinfree.net]
 screwfix  [yoll.net]
 upvc double glazed windows india  [myftp.org]
 online related links  [myftp.org]
 toner  [myftp.org]
 nude mujra  [yoll.net]
 picturesex  [myftp.org]
 ba promotional code  [yoll.net]
 circuit city locations  [myftp.org]
 goldiehawnnude  [myftp.org]
 spadroon sword  [sinfree.net]
 screwfix  [sinfree.net]
 weightwatchers atworketools  [myftp.org]
 cash books for cerebral palsy  [myftp.org]
 upvc double glazed windows india  [sinfree.net]
 ba promotional code  [myftp.org]
 smokey mountain knife works  [myftp.org]
 cytherea  [sinfree.net]
 sprint blackberry  [myftp.org]
 rum recipe  [myftp.org]
 who is the best eyelid surgeon in michig  [sinfree.net]
 google video  [yoll.net]
 british airways promotional code  [myftp.org]
 boost mobile  [sinfree.net]
 online related links  [yoll.net]
 hello kitty agame  [yoll.net]
 compare the market  [myftp.org]
 circuit city locations  [sinfree.net]
 additing  [sinfree.net]
 sprint blackberry  [yoll.net]
 additing  [yoll.net]
 felony odometer  [sinfree.net]
 uno online  [sinfree.net]
 picasso software  [yoll.net]
 onlydudes.
[myftp.org]
 compare the market  [sinfree.net]
 electric ukulele  [yoll.net]
 jesse james hollywood  [sinfree.net]
 audience response system dubai  [myftp.org]
 hasni mp  [yoll.net]
 lezsex  [myftp.org]
 ba promotion code  [yoll.net]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28647479</id>
	<title>waste of money</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247224200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What would the NSA say? "Why are you wasting money on technologies and personnel we can't monitor?"</p><p>Seriously though, Ares to Mars, blah blah, it's cheaper and delivers better science to send robots. We could cover Mars with 100 Rovers for 1/10th the price of sending a human being there.</p><p>Even one person dead in Apollo/STS/whatevernext is too much to spend when we're quite capable of doing great science without the individual 'I saw it' useless media wow-factor.</p><p>When is the US Gubment Cheese Factory going to realize that humans don't have to die to explore the Solar System? How many more examples have to be provided to prove that hypothesis correct?</p><p>Of course, if Mars is just an excuse to get rid of the best and brightest on some foolhardy lark, I can actually see that working as long as your goal is to get rid of the best, brightest and most courageous.</p><p>Can't have any of those around these days now can we?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What would the NSA say ?
" Why are you wasting money on technologies and personnel we ca n't monitor ?
" Seriously though , Ares to Mars , blah blah , it 's cheaper and delivers better science to send robots .
We could cover Mars with 100 Rovers for 1/10th the price of sending a human being there.Even one person dead in Apollo/STS/whatevernext is too much to spend when we 're quite capable of doing great science without the individual 'I saw it ' useless media wow-factor.When is the US Gubment Cheese Factory going to realize that humans do n't have to die to explore the Solar System ?
How many more examples have to be provided to prove that hypothesis correct ? Of course , if Mars is just an excuse to get rid of the best and brightest on some foolhardy lark , I can actually see that working as long as your goal is to get rid of the best , brightest and most courageous.Ca n't have any of those around these days now can we ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What would the NSA say?
"Why are you wasting money on technologies and personnel we can't monitor?
"Seriously though, Ares to Mars, blah blah, it's cheaper and delivers better science to send robots.
We could cover Mars with 100 Rovers for 1/10th the price of sending a human being there.Even one person dead in Apollo/STS/whatevernext is too much to spend when we're quite capable of doing great science without the individual 'I saw it' useless media wow-factor.When is the US Gubment Cheese Factory going to realize that humans don't have to die to explore the Solar System?
How many more examples have to be provided to prove that hypothesis correct?Of course, if Mars is just an excuse to get rid of the best and brightest on some foolhardy lark, I can actually see that working as long as your goal is to get rid of the best, brightest and most courageous.Can't have any of those around these days now can we?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28640831</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28642161</id>
	<title>Re:wrong macro engineering again</title>
	<author>ShadowRangerRIT</author>
	<datestamp>1247133600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Aerodynamics, last I checked, is not a completely solved problem (granted, it's in better shape than the more general fluid dynamics, but still not solved), nor are a large number of other design decisions involved with producing spacecraft.  I somehow doubt that aesthetics are trumping science in the look; rather, they're probably guiding the selection among a number of similarly efficient designs.</p><p>As for imperial vs. metric, I think the big hurdle isn't patriotism, it's inertia.  People were born and raised on imperial, and it's hard to reprogram them later in life.  And teachers start with imperial because you encounter it more often.  It's Catch-22; you can't switch until people are comfortable with it, and you can't get comfortable with it until you switch.  The U.S. is slowly starting to switch the teaching to metric, so I suspect we'll try the transition again in the next decade or two, once the majority of the population can deal with it.  Otherwise, you get smartasses/idiots driving 100 MPH on every highway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Aerodynamics , last I checked , is not a completely solved problem ( granted , it 's in better shape than the more general fluid dynamics , but still not solved ) , nor are a large number of other design decisions involved with producing spacecraft .
I somehow doubt that aesthetics are trumping science in the look ; rather , they 're probably guiding the selection among a number of similarly efficient designs.As for imperial vs. metric , I think the big hurdle is n't patriotism , it 's inertia .
People were born and raised on imperial , and it 's hard to reprogram them later in life .
And teachers start with imperial because you encounter it more often .
It 's Catch-22 ; you ca n't switch until people are comfortable with it , and you ca n't get comfortable with it until you switch .
The U.S. is slowly starting to switch the teaching to metric , so I suspect we 'll try the transition again in the next decade or two , once the majority of the population can deal with it .
Otherwise , you get smartasses/idiots driving 100 MPH on every highway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Aerodynamics, last I checked, is not a completely solved problem (granted, it's in better shape than the more general fluid dynamics, but still not solved), nor are a large number of other design decisions involved with producing spacecraft.
I somehow doubt that aesthetics are trumping science in the look; rather, they're probably guiding the selection among a number of similarly efficient designs.As for imperial vs. metric, I think the big hurdle isn't patriotism, it's inertia.
People were born and raised on imperial, and it's hard to reprogram them later in life.
And teachers start with imperial because you encounter it more often.
It's Catch-22; you can't switch until people are comfortable with it, and you can't get comfortable with it until you switch.
The U.S. is slowly starting to switch the teaching to metric, so I suspect we'll try the transition again in the next decade or two, once the majority of the population can deal with it.
Otherwise, you get smartasses/idiots driving 100 MPH on every highway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641759</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28645343</id>
	<title>Frist 'psot</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247151540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>AMERICA) is the Baby take my come Here but now VITALITY. LIKE AN *BSD has lost more BSDI is also dead, consistent with the brilliant Bplan</htmltext>
<tokenext>AMERICA ) is the Baby take my come Here but now VITALITY .
LIKE AN * BSD has lost more BSDI is also dead , consistent with the brilliant Bplan</tokentext>
<sentencetext>AMERICA) is the Baby take my come Here but now VITALITY.
LIKE AN *BSD has lost more BSDI is also dead, consistent with the brilliant Bplan</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641711</id>
	<title>Re:Spaceship modules</title>
	<author>Drone69</author>
	<datestamp>1247131500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you played Sid's follow-up classic Alpha Centauri/Alien Crossfire then you would have been there already!</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you played Sid 's follow-up classic Alpha Centauri/Alien Crossfire then you would have been there already !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you played Sid's follow-up classic Alpha Centauri/Alien Crossfire then you would have been there already!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28640831</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641725</id>
	<title>Re:This is the way to spend taxpayer money!</title>
	<author>FleaPlus</author>
	<datestamp>1247131560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I know a lot of other people might be down on NASA. They say its too much of this, or too much of that, should be privatized, etc.. but...last time I checked:</p><p>NASA was the only organization to put a man on the moon, land a couple of rovers on Mars, fly by Jupiter, Saturn, and the outer planets, build and operate a space plane and a space station.</p></div><p>NASA's done a lot of great things, but the Ares I-X isn't one of them. It's just a suborbital rocket model being put together mostly for political reasons, and has almost nothing in common with the Ares I rocket it's supposed to be a test for. It's been designed to specifically avoid all the big problems and question-marks which are threatening to doom the Ares I, making it almost useless as a test. I feel really bad for all the skilled NASA engineers whose time has been wasted on this make-work project instead of something more fruitful.</p><p>Like another commenter, I'm quite a bit more impressed by the <a href="http://www.spacex.com/updates.php" title="spacex.com">SpaceX Falcon 9</a> [spacex.com] rocket which is already at Cape Canaveral, even if it isn't using the MLP. That's going to be quite a bit more important to the future of spaceflight than the Ares I-X.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I know a lot of other people might be down on NASA .
They say its too much of this , or too much of that , should be privatized , etc.. but...last time I checked : NASA was the only organization to put a man on the moon , land a couple of rovers on Mars , fly by Jupiter , Saturn , and the outer planets , build and operate a space plane and a space station.NASA 's done a lot of great things , but the Ares I-X is n't one of them .
It 's just a suborbital rocket model being put together mostly for political reasons , and has almost nothing in common with the Ares I rocket it 's supposed to be a test for .
It 's been designed to specifically avoid all the big problems and question-marks which are threatening to doom the Ares I , making it almost useless as a test .
I feel really bad for all the skilled NASA engineers whose time has been wasted on this make-work project instead of something more fruitful.Like another commenter , I 'm quite a bit more impressed by the SpaceX Falcon 9 [ spacex.com ] rocket which is already at Cape Canaveral , even if it is n't using the MLP .
That 's going to be quite a bit more important to the future of spaceflight than the Ares I-X .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know a lot of other people might be down on NASA.
They say its too much of this, or too much of that, should be privatized, etc.. but...last time I checked:NASA was the only organization to put a man on the moon, land a couple of rovers on Mars, fly by Jupiter, Saturn, and the outer planets, build and operate a space plane and a space station.NASA's done a lot of great things, but the Ares I-X isn't one of them.
It's just a suborbital rocket model being put together mostly for political reasons, and has almost nothing in common with the Ares I rocket it's supposed to be a test for.
It's been designed to specifically avoid all the big problems and question-marks which are threatening to doom the Ares I, making it almost useless as a test.
I feel really bad for all the skilled NASA engineers whose time has been wasted on this make-work project instead of something more fruitful.Like another commenter, I'm quite a bit more impressed by the SpaceX Falcon 9 [spacex.com] rocket which is already at Cape Canaveral, even if it isn't using the MLP.
That's going to be quite a bit more important to the future of spaceflight than the Ares I-X.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641073</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28666947</id>
	<title>Re:This is the way to spend taxpayer money!</title>
	<author>M1FCJ</author>
	<datestamp>1247409060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You're not only forgetting Mir, Salyuts 1 to 7 will be solely missed as well. Salyut 1 was on 1971 so when US was winding down their moon programme, Russians were already busy building space habitats. Only after Salyuts' success, NASA decided to have a go at it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're not only forgetting Mir , Salyuts 1 to 7 will be solely missed as well .
Salyut 1 was on 1971 so when US was winding down their moon programme , Russians were already busy building space habitats .
Only after Salyuts ' success , NASA decided to have a go at it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're not only forgetting Mir, Salyuts 1 to 7 will be solely missed as well.
Salyut 1 was on 1971 so when US was winding down their moon programme, Russians were already busy building space habitats.
Only after Salyuts' success, NASA decided to have a go at it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641073</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28643117</id>
	<title>Re:This is the way to spend taxpayer money!</title>
	<author>pete-classic</author>
	<datestamp>1247137440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>NASA was the only organization to put a man on the moon [...]</p></div></blockquote><p>Yes, but NASA wasn't much help during Katrina.  And it never saved a single farm.  And they have utterly failed to implement auto safety standards.</p><p>-Peter</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>NASA was the only organization to put a man on the moon [ ... ] Yes , but NASA was n't much help during Katrina .
And it never saved a single farm .
And they have utterly failed to implement auto safety standards.-Peter</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NASA was the only organization to put a man on the moon [...]Yes, but NASA wasn't much help during Katrina.
And it never saved a single farm.
And they have utterly failed to implement auto safety standards.-Peter
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641073</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641057</id>
	<title>Just one question</title>
	<author>T Murphy</author>
	<datestamp>1247171940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Does this mean I can soon buy a retired space shuttle? (I'm sure the shuttles will go to museums or stay with NASA, but I can still hope... I just need that winning lottery ticket still.)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does this mean I can soon buy a retired space shuttle ?
( I 'm sure the shuttles will go to museums or stay with NASA , but I can still hope... I just need that winning lottery ticket still .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does this mean I can soon buy a retired space shuttle?
(I'm sure the shuttles will go to museums or stay with NASA, but I can still hope... I just need that winning lottery ticket still.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28642193</id>
	<title>Re:This is the way to spend taxpayer money!</title>
	<author>cetialphav</author>
	<datestamp>1247133660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Everyone says NASA is expensive, but, I think the value is just tremendous.</p></div><p>When you look at the scientific value of the various unmanned programs, you are right.  As a percentage of the nation's GDP, it is quite small and we can make tremendous discoveries.</p><p>The manned programs are a different story.  They are hugely expensive, dangerous and provide little scientific value.  Apollo, the Space Shuttle, ISS are not much more than engineering exercises that answer the question of "Can we build this?"  Even the goal of putting a man on Mars is an engineering exercise.  How many remote probes with specialized instruments can we send there for the cost of a single manned mission?  There is no question that the science value is better with unmanned missions.</p><p>This is where I think NASA is fairly criticized.  They want manned missions because they are cool and sexy, but they use science to justify the outrageous costs involved.  Now I'm not saying the engineering problems are unworthy of being solved.  But NASA needs to be honest about why things are being done.  If they want to pursue engineering challenges, then they also need to pursue the relatively unsexy challenges of taking things we already know how to do and making it cheaper and more reliable.  I just don't see where they have that commitment.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Everyone says NASA is expensive , but , I think the value is just tremendous.When you look at the scientific value of the various unmanned programs , you are right .
As a percentage of the nation 's GDP , it is quite small and we can make tremendous discoveries.The manned programs are a different story .
They are hugely expensive , dangerous and provide little scientific value .
Apollo , the Space Shuttle , ISS are not much more than engineering exercises that answer the question of " Can we build this ?
" Even the goal of putting a man on Mars is an engineering exercise .
How many remote probes with specialized instruments can we send there for the cost of a single manned mission ?
There is no question that the science value is better with unmanned missions.This is where I think NASA is fairly criticized .
They want manned missions because they are cool and sexy , but they use science to justify the outrageous costs involved .
Now I 'm not saying the engineering problems are unworthy of being solved .
But NASA needs to be honest about why things are being done .
If they want to pursue engineering challenges , then they also need to pursue the relatively unsexy challenges of taking things we already know how to do and making it cheaper and more reliable .
I just do n't see where they have that commitment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everyone says NASA is expensive, but, I think the value is just tremendous.When you look at the scientific value of the various unmanned programs, you are right.
As a percentage of the nation's GDP, it is quite small and we can make tremendous discoveries.The manned programs are a different story.
They are hugely expensive, dangerous and provide little scientific value.
Apollo, the Space Shuttle, ISS are not much more than engineering exercises that answer the question of "Can we build this?
"  Even the goal of putting a man on Mars is an engineering exercise.
How many remote probes with specialized instruments can we send there for the cost of a single manned mission?
There is no question that the science value is better with unmanned missions.This is where I think NASA is fairly criticized.
They want manned missions because they are cool and sexy, but they use science to justify the outrageous costs involved.
Now I'm not saying the engineering problems are unworthy of being solved.
But NASA needs to be honest about why things are being done.
If they want to pursue engineering challenges, then they also need to pursue the relatively unsexy challenges of taking things we already know how to do and making it cheaper and more reliable.
I just don't see where they have that commitment.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641073</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28647713</id>
	<title>Re:wrong macro engineering again</title>
	<author>CharlieG</author>
	<datestamp>1247228400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not even that.  ARES is reusing a LOT of parts from the STS, including jigs, fixtures, drawings etc.  Guess what units they used when designed back in the 1970s?  Hint, it wasn't metric</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not even that .
ARES is reusing a LOT of parts from the STS , including jigs , fixtures , drawings etc .
Guess what units they used when designed back in the 1970s ?
Hint , it was n't metric</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not even that.
ARES is reusing a LOT of parts from the STS, including jigs, fixtures, drawings etc.
Guess what units they used when designed back in the 1970s?
Hint, it wasn't metric</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28642161</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28646031</id>
	<title>Re:This is the way to spend taxpayer money!</title>
	<author>questionableswami</author>
	<datestamp>1247161380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Using the shuttle to retrieve the Hubble is a moot point anyway. The only shuttle capable of retrieving it was the Columbia -- all the other shuttle bays were reconfigured with equipment to enable them to dock with the ISS. The telescope won't fit with into the reconfigured bay.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Using the shuttle to retrieve the Hubble is a moot point anyway .
The only shuttle capable of retrieving it was the Columbia -- all the other shuttle bays were reconfigured with equipment to enable them to dock with the ISS .
The telescope wo n't fit with into the reconfigured bay .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Using the shuttle to retrieve the Hubble is a moot point anyway.
The only shuttle capable of retrieving it was the Columbia -- all the other shuttle bays were reconfigured with equipment to enable them to dock with the ISS.
The telescope won't fit with into the reconfigured bay.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28642001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28644593</id>
	<title>Re:This is the way to spend taxpayer money!</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1247145000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"It is one mission not yet attempted"<br>Becasue generally it's lame.<br>The exception would be the Hubble because of it's historical value.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" It is one mission not yet attempted " Becasue generally it 's lame.The exception would be the Hubble because of it 's historical value .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"It is one mission not yet attempted"Becasue generally it's lame.The exception would be the Hubble because of it's historical value.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28642001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28644851</id>
	<title>Re:wrong macro engineering again</title>
	<author>Man Eating Duck</author>
	<datestamp>1247147220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr><i>...and Fahrenheit for telling people what the weather is like today.</i></p></div> </blockquote><p>I guess that depends on <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit#Usage" title="wikipedia.org">who you're talking to</a> [wikipedia.org]. In the case of Belize I would guess that "too damn hot" would suffice most of the time anyway, eliminating the problem. The rest of the world is not perfect either, I frequently hear people make the common off-by-273.15 error<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...and Fahrenheit for telling people what the weather is like today .
I guess that depends on who you 're talking to [ wikipedia.org ] .
In the case of Belize I would guess that " too damn hot " would suffice most of the time anyway , eliminating the problem .
The rest of the world is not perfect either , I frequently hear people make the common off-by-273.15 error : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...and Fahrenheit for telling people what the weather is like today.
I guess that depends on who you're talking to [wikipedia.org].
In the case of Belize I would guess that "too damn hot" would suffice most of the time anyway, eliminating the problem.
The rest of the world is not perfect either, I frequently hear people make the common off-by-273.15 error :)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28642915</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641055</id>
	<title>That's a low ceiling..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247171940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>327 feet?  I was hoping it could fly higher than that...</htmltext>
<tokenext>327 feet ?
I was hoping it could fly higher than that.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>327 feet?
I was hoping it could fly higher than that...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641565</id>
	<title>Re:Spaceship modules</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1247130780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe you spent too much time, moving your units "around" the north and south pole.</p><p>Or your 500 sq. mile "cities" were too big, and you could not build enough onto that small map?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe you spent too much time , moving your units " around " the north and south pole.Or your 500 sq .
mile " cities " were too big , and you could not build enough onto that small map ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe you spent too much time, moving your units "around" the north and south pole.Or your 500 sq.
mile "cities" were too big, and you could not build enough onto that small map?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28640831</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28645495</id>
	<title>Re:This is the way to spend taxpayer money!</title>
	<author>khallow</author>
	<datestamp>1247152920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>My personal favorite goal. When the Hubbel is finally dying And beyond repair, Send up a 2-3 man crew retrieve it and return it to earth safely. That is what the shuttle were meant to do with old satellites. retrieve them for proper disposal on earth. It is one mission not yet attempted. Besides how cool would it be to have the Hubbel space telescope setting in the Smithsonian? heck the majority of the shuttle launch could be financed by donors. It would be risky, but for that honor, i bet you get lots of volunteers.</p></div><p>You need at least a billion dollars to fund the mission (somewhere between 250 and 450 million in marginal costs for the flight and up to a billion to employ the Shuttle workforce for up to six months). Better get to work. My view is nothing, including a retrieval of the Hubble justifies that cost.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>My personal favorite goal .
When the Hubbel is finally dying And beyond repair , Send up a 2-3 man crew retrieve it and return it to earth safely .
That is what the shuttle were meant to do with old satellites .
retrieve them for proper disposal on earth .
It is one mission not yet attempted .
Besides how cool would it be to have the Hubbel space telescope setting in the Smithsonian ?
heck the majority of the shuttle launch could be financed by donors .
It would be risky , but for that honor , i bet you get lots of volunteers.You need at least a billion dollars to fund the mission ( somewhere between 250 and 450 million in marginal costs for the flight and up to a billion to employ the Shuttle workforce for up to six months ) .
Better get to work .
My view is nothing , including a retrieval of the Hubble justifies that cost .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My personal favorite goal.
When the Hubbel is finally dying And beyond repair, Send up a 2-3 man crew retrieve it and return it to earth safely.
That is what the shuttle were meant to do with old satellites.
retrieve them for proper disposal on earth.
It is one mission not yet attempted.
Besides how cool would it be to have the Hubbel space telescope setting in the Smithsonian?
heck the majority of the shuttle launch could be financed by donors.
It would be risky, but for that honor, i bet you get lots of volunteers.You need at least a billion dollars to fund the mission (somewhere between 250 and 450 million in marginal costs for the flight and up to a billion to employ the Shuttle workforce for up to six months).
Better get to work.
My view is nothing, including a retrieval of the Hubble justifies that cost.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28642001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28643415</id>
	<title>Re:wrong macro engineering again</title>
	<author>lennier</author>
	<datestamp>1247138700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"But what scientists use for their daily work has nothing to do with what common people use in their daily lives."</p><p>Except for us here in the rest of the world, who've been using Centigrade temperatures since before I was born.</p><p>Mid 20s is nice and warm. 30 is hot. 0 is precisely freezing. Right now it's a chilly 4 degrees at Christchurch Airport.</p><p>Works just fine for us.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" But what scientists use for their daily work has nothing to do with what common people use in their daily lives .
" Except for us here in the rest of the world , who 've been using Centigrade temperatures since before I was born.Mid 20s is nice and warm .
30 is hot .
0 is precisely freezing .
Right now it 's a chilly 4 degrees at Christchurch Airport.Works just fine for us .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"But what scientists use for their daily work has nothing to do with what common people use in their daily lives.
"Except for us here in the rest of the world, who've been using Centigrade temperatures since before I was born.Mid 20s is nice and warm.
30 is hot.
0 is precisely freezing.
Right now it's a chilly 4 degrees at Christchurch Airport.Works just fine for us.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28642915</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641877</id>
	<title>Re:Spaceship modules</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247132280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Lol, shaddap you mind worms, this is a serious discussion about the new KFC stacker.  Pipe down or I'll nerve staple you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Lol , shaddap you mind worms , this is a serious discussion about the new KFC stacker .
Pipe down or I 'll nerve staple you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lol, shaddap you mind worms, this is a serious discussion about the new KFC stacker.
Pipe down or I'll nerve staple you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28640831</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28646043</id>
	<title>Re:This is the way to spend taxpayer money!</title>
	<author>demachina</author>
	<datestamp>1247161560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"NASA was the only organization to put a man on the moon"</p><p>That was 40 years ago, completely different organization now.  They for the most part don't even remember how they did it since all nearly all the Apollo veterans have retired.</p><p>"and a couple of rovers on Mars, fly by Jupiter, Saturn, and the outer planets"</p><p>These are more JPL than NASA.  JPL manages to operate in a little cocoon that has prevented it from being infected by the pointless bureaucracy in the rest of NASA</p><p>"build and operate a space plane and a space station."</p><p>Soviet Union/Russia operated Mir long before ISS came along and they actually did it on a reasonable budget and actually did stuff on it.  NASA has spent way over a $100 billion, 30 years on ISS and its still not doing much useful science or anything else.  They mostly spend all their time repairing and maintaining it.  They NASA time line has them pretty much abandoning it as soon as they finish building it.  No one will even be able to get there without the Russian's and Soyuz if the the Shuttle retires next year.</p><p>Soviet Union did build and fly a space plane but only to keep up with the U.S.  I think they quickly realized it wasn't reusable because it had to be practically rebuilt between every flight, was staggeringly expensive to fly, and was very unreliable.  It was common sense on their part they killed it and stuck the affordable Soyuz which is basically what NASA is coming back to with Orion.  ISS and Space Shuttle weren't really NASA's finest hour.  They justified the space shuttle because they needed it for the ISS.  They needed the ISS so the shuttle would have a place to go.  It was a circular firing squad.</p><p>The fundamental problem with the manned spaced division in NASA is that since Apollo they have never really had a mission.  They just create the barest minimum mission they can think of to keep themselves employed.  They know the President and Congress will never fund them to do anything amazing like put a colony on Mars, so they ask for missions that they can get funds for but they are kind of stupid and pointless.   ISS and space shuttle were just so they had something safe for astronauts do in LEO and then they squander large amounts of money doing next to nothing.  It was mostly a jobs program and the return to the Moon isn't really any better.  Bill Nelson, Senator from Florida in particular insures NASA keeps getting funded just so he keeps the jobs in Florida.</p><p>NASA either needs to figure out manned missions that are compelling and useful or they need to stop wasting money and fall back on robotic mission until they find a reason for men to work in space.  They only manned mission I can really see at the moment is a colony on Mars, everything else seems better done with robots and it would be a lot cheaper.</p><p>Buzz Aldrin, second man on the moon, wrote a piece a few weeks back about how silly it is for NASA to just repeat Apollo again forty years later.  He proposed NASA partner with China, India, Russia and EU and let them lead the lunar mission because it would be new and exciting to them, while NASA focused on going to Mars and do something really exciting and with a point. He advocated my position is that Mars should be a one way trip for colonist and not another stunt like Apollo where we go, pick up rocks, and leave.  I would be inclined to say the U.S. is too broke to do Mars but when you see us squander trillions of dollars on corrupt bankers, Iraq and a brain dead stimulas a colony on Mars almost seems pretty good by comparison.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" NASA was the only organization to put a man on the moon " That was 40 years ago , completely different organization now .
They for the most part do n't even remember how they did it since all nearly all the Apollo veterans have retired .
" and a couple of rovers on Mars , fly by Jupiter , Saturn , and the outer planets " These are more JPL than NASA .
JPL manages to operate in a little cocoon that has prevented it from being infected by the pointless bureaucracy in the rest of NASA " build and operate a space plane and a space station .
" Soviet Union/Russia operated Mir long before ISS came along and they actually did it on a reasonable budget and actually did stuff on it .
NASA has spent way over a $ 100 billion , 30 years on ISS and its still not doing much useful science or anything else .
They mostly spend all their time repairing and maintaining it .
They NASA time line has them pretty much abandoning it as soon as they finish building it .
No one will even be able to get there without the Russian 's and Soyuz if the the Shuttle retires next year.Soviet Union did build and fly a space plane but only to keep up with the U.S. I think they quickly realized it was n't reusable because it had to be practically rebuilt between every flight , was staggeringly expensive to fly , and was very unreliable .
It was common sense on their part they killed it and stuck the affordable Soyuz which is basically what NASA is coming back to with Orion .
ISS and Space Shuttle were n't really NASA 's finest hour .
They justified the space shuttle because they needed it for the ISS .
They needed the ISS so the shuttle would have a place to go .
It was a circular firing squad.The fundamental problem with the manned spaced division in NASA is that since Apollo they have never really had a mission .
They just create the barest minimum mission they can think of to keep themselves employed .
They know the President and Congress will never fund them to do anything amazing like put a colony on Mars , so they ask for missions that they can get funds for but they are kind of stupid and pointless .
ISS and space shuttle were just so they had something safe for astronauts do in LEO and then they squander large amounts of money doing next to nothing .
It was mostly a jobs program and the return to the Moon is n't really any better .
Bill Nelson , Senator from Florida in particular insures NASA keeps getting funded just so he keeps the jobs in Florida.NASA either needs to figure out manned missions that are compelling and useful or they need to stop wasting money and fall back on robotic mission until they find a reason for men to work in space .
They only manned mission I can really see at the moment is a colony on Mars , everything else seems better done with robots and it would be a lot cheaper.Buzz Aldrin , second man on the moon , wrote a piece a few weeks back about how silly it is for NASA to just repeat Apollo again forty years later .
He proposed NASA partner with China , India , Russia and EU and let them lead the lunar mission because it would be new and exciting to them , while NASA focused on going to Mars and do something really exciting and with a point .
He advocated my position is that Mars should be a one way trip for colonist and not another stunt like Apollo where we go , pick up rocks , and leave .
I would be inclined to say the U.S. is too broke to do Mars but when you see us squander trillions of dollars on corrupt bankers , Iraq and a brain dead stimulas a colony on Mars almost seems pretty good by comparison .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"NASA was the only organization to put a man on the moon"That was 40 years ago, completely different organization now.
They for the most part don't even remember how they did it since all nearly all the Apollo veterans have retired.
"and a couple of rovers on Mars, fly by Jupiter, Saturn, and the outer planets"These are more JPL than NASA.
JPL manages to operate in a little cocoon that has prevented it from being infected by the pointless bureaucracy in the rest of NASA"build and operate a space plane and a space station.
"Soviet Union/Russia operated Mir long before ISS came along and they actually did it on a reasonable budget and actually did stuff on it.
NASA has spent way over a $100 billion, 30 years on ISS and its still not doing much useful science or anything else.
They mostly spend all their time repairing and maintaining it.
They NASA time line has them pretty much abandoning it as soon as they finish building it.
No one will even be able to get there without the Russian's and Soyuz if the the Shuttle retires next year.Soviet Union did build and fly a space plane but only to keep up with the U.S.  I think they quickly realized it wasn't reusable because it had to be practically rebuilt between every flight, was staggeringly expensive to fly, and was very unreliable.
It was common sense on their part they killed it and stuck the affordable Soyuz which is basically what NASA is coming back to with Orion.
ISS and Space Shuttle weren't really NASA's finest hour.
They justified the space shuttle because they needed it for the ISS.
They needed the ISS so the shuttle would have a place to go.
It was a circular firing squad.The fundamental problem with the manned spaced division in NASA is that since Apollo they have never really had a mission.
They just create the barest minimum mission they can think of to keep themselves employed.
They know the President and Congress will never fund them to do anything amazing like put a colony on Mars, so they ask for missions that they can get funds for but they are kind of stupid and pointless.
ISS and space shuttle were just so they had something safe for astronauts do in LEO and then they squander large amounts of money doing next to nothing.
It was mostly a jobs program and the return to the Moon isn't really any better.
Bill Nelson, Senator from Florida in particular insures NASA keeps getting funded just so he keeps the jobs in Florida.NASA either needs to figure out manned missions that are compelling and useful or they need to stop wasting money and fall back on robotic mission until they find a reason for men to work in space.
They only manned mission I can really see at the moment is a colony on Mars, everything else seems better done with robots and it would be a lot cheaper.Buzz Aldrin, second man on the moon, wrote a piece a few weeks back about how silly it is for NASA to just repeat Apollo again forty years later.
He proposed NASA partner with China, India, Russia and EU and let them lead the lunar mission because it would be new and exciting to them, while NASA focused on going to Mars and do something really exciting and with a point.
He advocated my position is that Mars should be a one way trip for colonist and not another stunt like Apollo where we go, pick up rocks, and leave.
I would be inclined to say the U.S. is too broke to do Mars but when you see us squander trillions of dollars on corrupt bankers, Iraq and a brain dead stimulas a colony on Mars almost seems pretty good by comparison.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641073</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641993</id>
	<title>Re:wrong macro engineering again</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247132880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Please stop mangling English.  I know there are very few interesting forums available in your native tongue and I'm sorry about that, but please stop posting that engrish gobbledygook.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Please stop mangling English .
I know there are very few interesting forums available in your native tongue and I 'm sorry about that , but please stop posting that engrish gobbledygook .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Please stop mangling English.
I know there are very few interesting forums available in your native tongue and I'm sorry about that, but please stop posting that engrish gobbledygook.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641759</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28645503</id>
	<title>Vertical Assembly Building</title>
	<author>gfim</author>
	<datestamp>1247153100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I heard a story once (no idea of the truth) that the Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) used to be called the Vertical Assembly Building. But they got tired of dumb tourists asking "What's a vertical?".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I heard a story once ( no idea of the truth ) that the Vehicle Assembly Building ( VAB ) used to be called the Vertical Assembly Building .
But they got tired of dumb tourists asking " What 's a vertical ?
" .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I heard a story once (no idea of the truth) that the Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) used to be called the Vertical Assembly Building.
But they got tired of dumb tourists asking "What's a vertical?
".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28640831</id>
	<title>Spaceship modules</title>
	<author>sopssa</author>
	<datestamp>1247170980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dudes, the game ends at 2020. There's around 10 years to go, and the trip to alpha centauri takes way more turns. All the modules should had been installed by now and the space vehicle should be on its way already! I mean, I did take my extra time to build the better modules and prioritized production in all cities to do it, but I would had never left it this late in game to actually launch it.</p><p>Aah, Civ2 times.. All the lost weekends, while still learning so much from it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dudes , the game ends at 2020 .
There 's around 10 years to go , and the trip to alpha centauri takes way more turns .
All the modules should had been installed by now and the space vehicle should be on its way already !
I mean , I did take my extra time to build the better modules and prioritized production in all cities to do it , but I would had never left it this late in game to actually launch it.Aah , Civ2 times.. All the lost weekends , while still learning so much from it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dudes, the game ends at 2020.
There's around 10 years to go, and the trip to alpha centauri takes way more turns.
All the modules should had been installed by now and the space vehicle should be on its way already!
I mean, I did take my extra time to build the better modules and prioritized production in all cities to do it, but I would had never left it this late in game to actually launch it.Aah, Civ2 times.. All the lost weekends, while still learning so much from it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28644169</id>
	<title>Re:This is the way to spend taxpayer money!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247142540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There was at least one mission that returned satellites to Earth.  STS-51A returned two satellites that had malfunctioned; these were later repaired and successfully relaunched.  I thought there were one or two others that did the same (and perhaps they were military missions), but I can't immediately find them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There was at least one mission that returned satellites to Earth .
STS-51A returned two satellites that had malfunctioned ; these were later repaired and successfully relaunched .
I thought there were one or two others that did the same ( and perhaps they were military missions ) , but I ca n't immediately find them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There was at least one mission that returned satellites to Earth.
STS-51A returned two satellites that had malfunctioned; these were later repaired and successfully relaunched.
I thought there were one or two others that did the same (and perhaps they were military missions), but I can't immediately find them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28642001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28642167</id>
	<title>Re:This is the way to spend taxpayer money!</title>
	<author>flitty</author>
	<datestamp>1247133600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ares I-X is being made just to answer those "question marks" you infer, not build around them.  Most of the Boosters will be very similar to the ones used For Ares I.  Most of the test is to test separation and instruments to gather data on how the flight performs.  The parachute, RSRM motors, Launch abort Motor, and other instruments have already been tested independantly, this is just to test all the systems together.<br>
I know it's a site built by the Ares group, but here's more info.
<a href="http://www.safesimplesoon.com/AresI-1.htm" title="safesimplesoon.com">Linky</a> [safesimplesoon.com]<blockquote><div><p>The purpose of Ares I-X is to provide data that can be used to design Ares I, reduce risk to the Ares I project and Constellation Program, and provide experience with ground processing and flying a vehicle similar to Ares I.</p></div></blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ares I-X is being made just to answer those " question marks " you infer , not build around them .
Most of the Boosters will be very similar to the ones used For Ares I. Most of the test is to test separation and instruments to gather data on how the flight performs .
The parachute , RSRM motors , Launch abort Motor , and other instruments have already been tested independantly , this is just to test all the systems together .
I know it 's a site built by the Ares group , but here 's more info .
Linky [ safesimplesoon.com ] The purpose of Ares I-X is to provide data that can be used to design Ares I , reduce risk to the Ares I project and Constellation Program , and provide experience with ground processing and flying a vehicle similar to Ares I .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ares I-X is being made just to answer those "question marks" you infer, not build around them.
Most of the Boosters will be very similar to the ones used For Ares I.  Most of the test is to test separation and instruments to gather data on how the flight performs.
The parachute, RSRM motors, Launch abort Motor, and other instruments have already been tested independantly, this is just to test all the systems together.
I know it's a site built by the Ares group, but here's more info.
Linky [safesimplesoon.com]The purpose of Ares I-X is to provide data that can be used to design Ares I, reduce risk to the Ares I project and Constellation Program, and provide experience with ground processing and flying a vehicle similar to Ares I.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641725</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28642621</id>
	<title>Re:This is the way to spend taxpayer money!</title>
	<author>gad\_zuki!</author>
	<datestamp>1247135400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;heck the majority of the shuttle launch could be financed by donors.</p><p>Donors? We're looking at 600 million or so dollars. Yeah, good luck finding someone willing to donate that much. A mock-up works just as well in the museum. I'd rather see that kind of money used for food security, healthcare, or education. Or at least a new space mission that isnt for museum bragging rights.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; heck the majority of the shuttle launch could be financed by donors.Donors ?
We 're looking at 600 million or so dollars .
Yeah , good luck finding someone willing to donate that much .
A mock-up works just as well in the museum .
I 'd rather see that kind of money used for food security , healthcare , or education .
Or at least a new space mission that isnt for museum bragging rights .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;heck the majority of the shuttle launch could be financed by donors.Donors?
We're looking at 600 million or so dollars.
Yeah, good luck finding someone willing to donate that much.
A mock-up works just as well in the museum.
I'd rather see that kind of money used for food security, healthcare, or education.
Or at least a new space mission that isnt for museum bragging rights.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28642001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641607</id>
	<title>Re:AERQWEDF</title>
	<author>K. S. Kyosuke</author>
	<datestamp>1247131020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Did you mean Florida Fried <a href="http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/03/18/1232233" title="slashdot.org">Bat</a> [slashdot.org]?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did you mean Florida Fried Bat [ slashdot.org ] ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did you mean Florida Fried Bat [slashdot.org]?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28640887</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641759</id>
	<title>wrong macro engineering again</title>
	<author>Max\_W</author>
	<datestamp>1247131740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Again, cool shape, just for the sake to make it look cool and non-Russian. But there are certain things in physics, which are fundamental and cannot be made different.
<br> <br>
NASA should make a rocket with the right architecture. It means it shall look like Soyuz vehicle. No other way exists.
<br> <br>
It is like with Sylvester Stallone's Rocky. He did boxing with hands down in movies. Many boxers in real sport got traumas and spoiled their careers because they wanted to look as cool as Rocky on the ring.
<br> <br>
And while I am on it, no vehicles should be built at all until the scientific metric system of measurement is introduced and imperial medieval system is banned. It should be forbidden, I do not know, by the Geneva convention. Due to pseudo-patriotism the complicated systems are built with archaic feet, elbows, inches, etc. All would be fine, but alive people are to fly it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Again , cool shape , just for the sake to make it look cool and non-Russian .
But there are certain things in physics , which are fundamental and can not be made different .
NASA should make a rocket with the right architecture .
It means it shall look like Soyuz vehicle .
No other way exists .
It is like with Sylvester Stallone 's Rocky .
He did boxing with hands down in movies .
Many boxers in real sport got traumas and spoiled their careers because they wanted to look as cool as Rocky on the ring .
And while I am on it , no vehicles should be built at all until the scientific metric system of measurement is introduced and imperial medieval system is banned .
It should be forbidden , I do not know , by the Geneva convention .
Due to pseudo-patriotism the complicated systems are built with archaic feet , elbows , inches , etc .
All would be fine , but alive people are to fly it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Again, cool shape, just for the sake to make it look cool and non-Russian.
But there are certain things in physics, which are fundamental and cannot be made different.
NASA should make a rocket with the right architecture.
It means it shall look like Soyuz vehicle.
No other way exists.
It is like with Sylvester Stallone's Rocky.
He did boxing with hands down in movies.
Many boxers in real sport got traumas and spoiled their careers because they wanted to look as cool as Rocky on the ring.
And while I am on it, no vehicles should be built at all until the scientific metric system of measurement is introduced and imperial medieval system is banned.
It should be forbidden, I do not know, by the Geneva convention.
Due to pseudo-patriotism the complicated systems are built with archaic feet, elbows, inches, etc.
All would be fine, but alive people are to fly it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28640903</id>
	<title>Will it be...</title>
	<author>Drone69</author>
	<datestamp>1247171340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...built just in time to intercept the oncoming Meteor of Doom?</htmltext>
<tokenext>...built just in time to intercept the oncoming Meteor of Doom ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...built just in time to intercept the oncoming Meteor of Doom?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28646157</id>
	<title>KFC?  Wait... what?  KSC?</title>
	<author>macraig</author>
	<datestamp>1247163120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I first read the title I thought it read "Stacking of new space vehicle begins at KFC", and I'm thinking to myself "KFC is making sandwiches outta rockets now?"</p><p>Then I read it more carefully.  It's weird because I eat at KFC maybe once a year, so why is "KFC Stacker" embedded in my brain?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I first read the title I thought it read " Stacking of new space vehicle begins at KFC " , and I 'm thinking to myself " KFC is making sandwiches outta rockets now ?
" Then I read it more carefully .
It 's weird because I eat at KFC maybe once a year , so why is " KFC Stacker " embedded in my brain ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I first read the title I thought it read "Stacking of new space vehicle begins at KFC", and I'm thinking to myself "KFC is making sandwiches outta rockets now?
"Then I read it more carefully.
It's weird because I eat at KFC maybe once a year, so why is "KFC Stacker" embedded in my brain?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1820249_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641565
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28640831
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1820249_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28644593
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28642001
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641073
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1820249_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28645519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28642167
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641725
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641073
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1820249_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28642621
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28642001
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641073
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1820249_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28646031
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28642001
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641073
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1820249_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28649759
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28642193
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641073
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1820249_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28645495
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28642001
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641073
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1820249_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28643117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641073
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1820249_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641993
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641759
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1820249_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28647479
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28640831
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1820249_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28644851
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28642915
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641759
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1820249_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28666947
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641073
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1820249_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28643415
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28642915
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641759
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1820249_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641607
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28640887
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1820249_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28644169
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28642001
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641073
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1820249_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28646043
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641073
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1820249_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641711
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28640831
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1820249_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28645201
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641759
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1820249_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28647713
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28642161
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641759
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1820249_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28643943
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641759
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1820249_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28645461
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641073
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1820249_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641877
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28640831
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_1820249.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28640831
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641877
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641565
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641711
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28647479
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_1820249.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641759
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641993
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28643943
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28645201
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28642161
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28647713
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28642915
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28643415
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28644851
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_1820249.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641073
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28645461
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28666947
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641725
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28642167
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28645519
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28642001
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28642621
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28645495
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28644169
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28644593
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28646031
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28643117
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28642193
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28649759
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28646043
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_1820249.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641055
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_1820249.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641057
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_1820249.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28640937
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_1820249.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28640887
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641607
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_1820249.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28646157
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_1820249.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641177
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_1820249.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1820249.28641371
</commentlist>
</conversation>
