<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_07_13_2342220</id>
	<title>NASA Has the Lost Tapes</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1247487480000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>The Shuttle launch may have been delayed by two days, but NASA has better news to report. <a href="http://www.geocities.com/critter\_75075/" rel="nofollow">caffiend666</a> writes <i>"As <a href="//science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/06/28/186245&amp;tid=4537">speculated</a> a few weeks ago, NASA has found and is starting to restore the <a href="//science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/07/13/1654200&amp;tid=146">lost Apollo 11 tapes</a>. <a href="http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2009/jul/HQ\_M09-125\_Newseum\_Apollo\_tapes.html">A Briefing will be held July 16th</a> at the Newseum in Washington to 'release greatly improved video imagery from the July 1969 live broadcast of the Apollo 11 moonwalk... The original signals were recorded on high quality slow-scan TV (SSTV) tapes. What was released to the TV networks was reduced to lower quality commercial TV standards.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Shuttle launch may have been delayed by two days , but NASA has better news to report .
caffiend666 writes " As speculated a few weeks ago , NASA has found and is starting to restore the lost Apollo 11 tapes .
A Briefing will be held July 16th at the Newseum in Washington to 'release greatly improved video imagery from the July 1969 live broadcast of the Apollo 11 moonwalk... The original signals were recorded on high quality slow-scan TV ( SSTV ) tapes .
What was released to the TV networks was reduced to lower quality commercial TV standards .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Shuttle launch may have been delayed by two days, but NASA has better news to report.
caffiend666 writes "As speculated a few weeks ago, NASA has found and is starting to restore the lost Apollo 11 tapes.
A Briefing will be held July 16th at the Newseum in Washington to 'release greatly improved video imagery from the July 1969 live broadcast of the Apollo 11 moonwalk... The original signals were recorded on high quality slow-scan TV (SSTV) tapes.
What was released to the TV networks was reduced to lower quality commercial TV standards.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685419</id>
	<title>Re:Glad to hear that</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247497680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or maybe for the upcoming 40th anniversary celebration they actually sent some people looking. Probably too reasonable an explanation I'm sure.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or maybe for the upcoming 40th anniversary celebration they actually sent some people looking .
Probably too reasonable an explanation I 'm sure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or maybe for the upcoming 40th anniversary celebration they actually sent some people looking.
Probably too reasonable an explanation I'm sure.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684947</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684791</id>
	<title>Actornauts</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247491680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>n/t</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>n/t</tokentext>
<sentencetext>n/t</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685007</id>
	<title>Re:Greatly improved quality?</title>
	<author>WeblionX</author>
	<datestamp>1247493180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They pointed a TV camera at a monitor displaying the SSTV footage so it would be compatible with TV broadcasts, hence lower quality.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They pointed a TV camera at a monitor displaying the SSTV footage so it would be compatible with TV broadcasts , hence lower quality .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They pointed a TV camera at a monitor displaying the SSTV footage so it would be compatible with TV broadcasts, hence lower quality.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685167</id>
	<title>Re:Glad to hear that</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247494860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Coincidence.  The search kicked off at <a href="http://www.honeysucklecreek.net/Apollo\_11/tapes/Search\_for\_SSTV\_Tapes.pdf" title="honeysucklecreek.net" rel="nofollow">least seven years ago</a> [honeysucklecreek.net], when an ex-Honeysuckle Creek employee discovered an old tape in his garage.  It was sent for analysis, in the hope that high resolution video of the Apollo 11 landing could be recovered.  The tape turned out not to be of the moon landing.  It did prompt people to ask "what happened to the originals", and kicked off a serious search.  It turned out that NASA has misplaced their own copies.

</p><p>Copies of the telemetry tapes (hundreds of them)  were eventually discovered in the basement of the Physics building at Curtin University, Perth, Australia.  They had been placed in the Uni's care by an Australian scientist (Brian O'Brien) who had run an Apollo experiment.  He had the tapes as a record of the data from his own experiment, but by luck the telemetry stream includes everything, including the video.  It turns out that Curtin Uni thought they weren't that important, on the basis that if they were important, NASA would have already had copies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Coincidence .
The search kicked off at least seven years ago [ honeysucklecreek.net ] , when an ex-Honeysuckle Creek employee discovered an old tape in his garage .
It was sent for analysis , in the hope that high resolution video of the Apollo 11 landing could be recovered .
The tape turned out not to be of the moon landing .
It did prompt people to ask " what happened to the originals " , and kicked off a serious search .
It turned out that NASA has misplaced their own copies .
Copies of the telemetry tapes ( hundreds of them ) were eventually discovered in the basement of the Physics building at Curtin University , Perth , Australia .
They had been placed in the Uni 's care by an Australian scientist ( Brian O'Brien ) who had run an Apollo experiment .
He had the tapes as a record of the data from his own experiment , but by luck the telemetry stream includes everything , including the video .
It turns out that Curtin Uni thought they were n't that important , on the basis that if they were important , NASA would have already had copies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Coincidence.
The search kicked off at least seven years ago [honeysucklecreek.net], when an ex-Honeysuckle Creek employee discovered an old tape in his garage.
It was sent for analysis, in the hope that high resolution video of the Apollo 11 landing could be recovered.
The tape turned out not to be of the moon landing.
It did prompt people to ask "what happened to the originals", and kicked off a serious search.
It turned out that NASA has misplaced their own copies.
Copies of the telemetry tapes (hundreds of them)  were eventually discovered in the basement of the Physics building at Curtin University, Perth, Australia.
They had been placed in the Uni's care by an Australian scientist (Brian O'Brien) who had run an Apollo experiment.
He had the tapes as a record of the data from his own experiment, but by luck the telemetry stream includes everything, including the video.
It turns out that Curtin Uni thought they weren't that important, on the basis that if they were important, NASA would have already had copies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684947</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28687399</id>
	<title>Re:Greatly improved quality?</title>
	<author>MoFoQ</author>
	<datestamp>1247602200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Slow-scan TV or <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SSTV" title="wikipedia.org">SSTV</a> [wikipedia.org] is meant to be a narrowband transmission, only requiring about 3kHz according to the listing on wiki and it's FAR from high res.</p><p>so yea...dunno what they were smokin'</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Slow-scan TV or SSTV [ wikipedia.org ] is meant to be a narrowband transmission , only requiring about 3kHz according to the listing on wiki and it 's FAR from high res.so yea...dunno what they were smokin'</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Slow-scan TV or SSTV [wikipedia.org] is meant to be a narrowband transmission, only requiring about 3kHz according to the listing on wiki and it's FAR from high res.so yea...dunno what they were smokin'</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685065</id>
	<title>Exciting News</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247493840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I am especially excited about these tapes because I lived through the first moon landing.  I'll never forget where I watched it. In a motel room in St. Louis with the girl (at that time) of my dreams.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am especially excited about these tapes because I lived through the first moon landing .
I 'll never forget where I watched it .
In a motel room in St. Louis with the girl ( at that time ) of my dreams .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am especially excited about these tapes because I lived through the first moon landing.
I'll never forget where I watched it.
In a motel room in St. Louis with the girl (at that time) of my dreams.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684781</id>
	<title>Cool, any UFOs?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247491620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Excellent! I wonder if there's any evidence of UFOs.

Glad they were able to grab the images off the tape, and I look forward to looking at it, and meeting our new alien overlords.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Excellent !
I wonder if there 's any evidence of UFOs .
Glad they were able to grab the images off the tape , and I look forward to looking at it , and meeting our new alien overlords .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Excellent!
I wonder if there's any evidence of UFOs.
Glad they were able to grab the images off the tape, and I look forward to looking at it, and meeting our new alien overlords.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684995</id>
	<title>Wierd Image 12 Seconds In</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247493120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is it just me, or does it look like there is a hook-nosed Jew in the reflection of Niel Armstrong's visor?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is it just me , or does it look like there is a hook-nosed Jew in the reflection of Niel Armstrong 's visor ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is it just me, or does it look like there is a hook-nosed Jew in the reflection of Niel Armstrong's visor?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686607</id>
	<title>Re:if moon landings were possible in 1969...</title>
	<author>Tablizer</author>
	<datestamp>1247506620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> if moon landings were possible in 1969...wouldn't they be common today? surely technology has skyrocketed since then.</p></div></blockquote><p>I'll drive to the library in my <b>flying car</b> to research that question for you.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>if moon landings were possible in 1969...would n't they be common today ?
surely technology has skyrocketed since then.I 'll drive to the library in my flying car to research that question for you .
     </tokentext>
<sentencetext> if moon landings were possible in 1969...wouldn't they be common today?
surely technology has skyrocketed since then.I'll drive to the library in my flying car to research that question for you.
     
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686329</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684871</id>
	<title>Did NASA Hire Scotty?</title>
	<author>darkmeridian</author>
	<datestamp>1247492340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"We've lost the tapes." "No, sir, we've found the tapes after all."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" We 've lost the tapes .
" " No , sir , we 've found the tapes after all .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"We've lost the tapes.
" "No, sir, we've found the tapes after all.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685143</id>
	<title>They found the tapes!</title>
	<author>dbk25</author>
	<datestamp>1247494620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's one small step for a space agency,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's one small step for a space agency , .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's one small step for a space agency, ...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685279</id>
	<title>Yes! We don't have to wait until January</title>
	<author>VoyagerRadio</author>
	<datestamp>1247496060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I was hoping there would be more episodes to watch before the sixth and final season begins. I always knew they were probably taping during the strike!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was hoping there would be more episodes to watch before the sixth and final season begins .
I always knew they were probably taping during the strike !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was hoping there would be more episodes to watch before the sixth and final season begins.
I always knew they were probably taping during the strike!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28692047</id>
	<title>Re:if you believe.. they put a man on the moon..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247590680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Uh, ummm...  because you're an asshole?</p><p>Is that the reason?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Uh , ummm... because you 're an asshole ? Is that the reason ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uh, ummm...  because you're an asshole?Is that the reason?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688471</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684939</id>
	<title>Moonwalk?</title>
	<author>phunster</author>
	<datestamp>1247492700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Clearly the first moonwalk was done by Michael Jackson, we saw it live on television</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Clearly the first moonwalk was done by Michael Jackson , we saw it live on television</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Clearly the first moonwalk was done by Michael Jackson, we saw it live on television</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685045</id>
	<title>Decade of the remakes?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247493600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now even this great movie of fiction gets a remake? Or will it just be a weak director's cut, to prepare for the lauch of the sequel "Mars mission"?</p><p>I hope it will have better props this time. They were pretty unrealistic, and clearly retouched (or 'shopped in 2009 speak) in that old movie.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now even this great movie of fiction gets a remake ?
Or will it just be a weak director 's cut , to prepare for the lauch of the sequel " Mars mission " ? I hope it will have better props this time .
They were pretty unrealistic , and clearly retouched ( or 'shopped in 2009 speak ) in that old movie .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now even this great movie of fiction gets a remake?
Or will it just be a weak director's cut, to prepare for the lauch of the sequel "Mars mission"?I hope it will have better props this time.
They were pretty unrealistic, and clearly retouched (or 'shopped in 2009 speak) in that old movie.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28689443</id>
	<title>Re: Filosophers?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247579280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Filosophers?</p><p>Are they the ones that ponder the meaning of very thin pastry?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Filosophers ? Are they the ones that ponder the meaning of very thin pastry ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Filosophers?Are they the ones that ponder the meaning of very thin pastry?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685193</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684915</id>
	<title>I said all along</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247492580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Check in the Ark next to the dead alien in the jar. And you think they'd listen to me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Check in the Ark next to the dead alien in the jar .
And you think they 'd listen to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Check in the Ark next to the dead alien in the jar.
And you think they'd listen to me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684879</id>
	<title>They Need More Time To Edit The Footage</title>
	<author>CyberSlammer</author>
	<datestamp>1247492340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They didn't count on having to digitally erase the giant "BUGS BUNNY WAS HERE" sign made of moon rocks as Apollo was landing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They did n't count on having to digitally erase the giant " BUGS BUNNY WAS HERE " sign made of moon rocks as Apollo was landing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They didn't count on having to digitally erase the giant "BUGS BUNNY WAS HERE" sign made of moon rocks as Apollo was landing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28690151</id>
	<title>Re:In answer to your question</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247582340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The goal of the people behind the moon landing was to prove to the USSR that we had the technological ability to obliterate the world quickly and thoroughly. Why are those people given the benefit of the doubt?</p></div><p>Because they not only still have the ability to obliterate the world, they could probably even obliterate my blessed +3 helm of tin-foil if they suspected I didn't believe.</p><p>ACing for obvious reasons.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The goal of the people behind the moon landing was to prove to the USSR that we had the technological ability to obliterate the world quickly and thoroughly .
Why are those people given the benefit of the doubt ? Because they not only still have the ability to obliterate the world , they could probably even obliterate my blessed + 3 helm of tin-foil if they suspected I did n't believe.ACing for obvious reasons .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The goal of the people behind the moon landing was to prove to the USSR that we had the technological ability to obliterate the world quickly and thoroughly.
Why are those people given the benefit of the doubt?Because they not only still have the ability to obliterate the world, they could probably even obliterate my blessed +3 helm of tin-foil if they suspected I didn't believe.ACing for obvious reasons.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28687087</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684951</id>
	<title>Nice Title</title>
	<author>basementman</author>
	<datestamp>1247492760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>How about "NASA has Found the Lost Tapes"? Right now the title tells me that NASA is in ownership of the tapes, but just can't find them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How about " NASA has Found the Lost Tapes " ?
Right now the title tells me that NASA is in ownership of the tapes , but just ca n't find them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about "NASA has Found the Lost Tapes"?
Right now the title tells me that NASA is in ownership of the tapes, but just can't find them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685735</id>
	<title>Re:Now, In the Background, Aliens Waving</title>
	<author>Tablizer</author>
	<datestamp>1247499960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>if you believe the Moon Landing was faked, a hoax, then the soon-to-come high-def photos of the moon should answer that...</p></div> </blockquote><p>The "high definition" is relative. <b>Later Apollo's had much better resolution</b>, largely because they took a movie camera to the moon and brought it back to be developed rather than send live TV alone. The Apollo 11 footage is <b>primarily of historical significance</b>, being the first. Later missions also used color TV, unlike 11's B&amp;W (although Apollo 12 accidentally ruined their TV camera early in the mission).<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>if you believe the Moon Landing was faked , a hoax , then the soon-to-come high-def photos of the moon should answer that... The " high definition " is relative .
Later Apollo 's had much better resolution , largely because they took a movie camera to the moon and brought it back to be developed rather than send live TV alone .
The Apollo 11 footage is primarily of historical significance , being the first .
Later missions also used color TV , unlike 11 's B&amp;W ( although Apollo 12 accidentally ruined their TV camera early in the mission ) .
     </tokentext>
<sentencetext>if you believe the Moon Landing was faked, a hoax, then the soon-to-come high-def photos of the moon should answer that... The "high definition" is relative.
Later Apollo's had much better resolution, largely because they took a movie camera to the moon and brought it back to be developed rather than send live TV alone.
The Apollo 11 footage is primarily of historical significance, being the first.
Later missions also used color TV, unlike 11's B&amp;W (although Apollo 12 accidentally ruined their TV camera early in the mission).
     
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685189</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688107</id>
	<title>Re:Future preservation plans?</title>
	<author>redxblue</author>
	<datestamp>1247566860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Bittorrent - need I say more?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Bittorrent - need I say more ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bittorrent - need I say more?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685169</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684869</id>
	<title>oblig</title>
	<author>ocularDeathRay</author>
	<datestamp>1247492280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>ohhhh lizabeth... theres no water....</htmltext>
<tokenext>ohhhh lizabeth... theres no water... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ohhhh lizabeth... theres no water....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684731</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686553</id>
	<title>What irks me this week</title>
	<author>jra</author>
	<datestamp>1247506080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is that this is pretty close to the only video tape we're *going* to see:</p><p>if any of the networks are planning anything for the anniversary, they're doing an exceptional job keeping it under wraps.</p><p>Damnit; I wish Uncle Walter wasn't sick.  He'd just show up and say "let's go", and who at CBS is gonna tell him "No"?  They'll just assign him a camera crew and buy him plane tickets.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is that this is pretty close to the only video tape we 're * going * to see : if any of the networks are planning anything for the anniversary , they 're doing an exceptional job keeping it under wraps.Damnit ; I wish Uncle Walter was n't sick .
He 'd just show up and say " let 's go " , and who at CBS is gon na tell him " No " ?
They 'll just assign him a camera crew and buy him plane tickets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is that this is pretty close to the only video tape we're *going* to see:if any of the networks are planning anything for the anniversary, they're doing an exceptional job keeping it under wraps.Damnit; I wish Uncle Walter wasn't sick.
He'd just show up and say "let's go", and who at CBS is gonna tell him "No"?
They'll just assign him a camera crew and buy him plane tickets.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685843</id>
	<title>Re:Future preservation plans?</title>
	<author>jd2112</author>
	<datestamp>1247500680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why post it to various P2P networks with a title of 'Britney\_Spears\_Nekkid.mpg' of course...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why post it to various P2P networks with a title of 'Britney \ _Spears \ _Nekkid.mpg ' of course.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why post it to various P2P networks with a title of 'Britney\_Spears\_Nekkid.mpg' of course...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685169</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686799</id>
	<title>Re:Greatly improved quality?</title>
	<author>WoRLoKKeD</author>
	<datestamp>1247508120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>'Different' as in smoother, 'different' as in jerkier, or 'different' as in backflipping-across-the-surface-taking-advantage-of-reduced-gravity?<br><nobr> <wbr></nobr>...Damn Slashdot and my impressionable mind for making me raise my standards too high!</htmltext>
<tokenext>'Different ' as in smoother , 'different ' as in jerkier , or 'different ' as in backflipping-across-the-surface-taking-advantage-of-reduced-gravity ?
...Damn Slashdot and my impressionable mind for making me raise my standards too high !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'Different' as in smoother, 'different' as in jerkier, or 'different' as in backflipping-across-the-surface-taking-advantage-of-reduced-gravity?
...Damn Slashdot and my impressionable mind for making me raise my standards too high!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685061</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688033</id>
	<title>Yes yes yes</title>
	<author>AC-x</author>
	<datestamp>1247565960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been reading about these found tapes for weeks, post the youtube link already!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been reading about these found tapes for weeks , post the youtube link already !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been reading about these found tapes for weeks, post the youtube link already!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685189</id>
	<title>Now, In the Background, Aliens Waving</title>
	<author>curmudgeon99</author>
	<datestamp>1247495040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is one nice and juicy little factoid. Consider how much mythology lives around these hidden tapes. There was no way for Nixon to be implicated in their tampering...</p><p>It's a neat mythology: if you believe the Moon Landing was faked, a hoax, then the soon-to-come high-def photos of the moon should answer that by showing the trash we left behind and that should still be there, the Lunar Landers. And if the landings are proven by the images to have actually occurred, then those same people can migrate to the idea that alien presences on the Moon were airbrushed out. Terrible tragedy it is for NASA that so many of their moon photos have obvious smudge marks over certain details. It would be nice to find out if those were alien ruins, waving aliens or just machine malfunctions</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is one nice and juicy little factoid .
Consider how much mythology lives around these hidden tapes .
There was no way for Nixon to be implicated in their tampering...It 's a neat mythology : if you believe the Moon Landing was faked , a hoax , then the soon-to-come high-def photos of the moon should answer that by showing the trash we left behind and that should still be there , the Lunar Landers .
And if the landings are proven by the images to have actually occurred , then those same people can migrate to the idea that alien presences on the Moon were airbrushed out .
Terrible tragedy it is for NASA that so many of their moon photos have obvious smudge marks over certain details .
It would be nice to find out if those were alien ruins , waving aliens or just machine malfunctions</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is one nice and juicy little factoid.
Consider how much mythology lives around these hidden tapes.
There was no way for Nixon to be implicated in their tampering...It's a neat mythology: if you believe the Moon Landing was faked, a hoax, then the soon-to-come high-def photos of the moon should answer that by showing the trash we left behind and that should still be there, the Lunar Landers.
And if the landings are proven by the images to have actually occurred, then those same people can migrate to the idea that alien presences on the Moon were airbrushed out.
Terrible tragedy it is for NASA that so many of their moon photos have obvious smudge marks over certain details.
It would be nice to find out if those were alien ruins, waving aliens or just machine malfunctions</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688797</id>
	<title>Re:In answer to your question</title>
	<author>Ginger Unicorn</author>
	<datestamp>1247574840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>have you never met an intelligent idiot?</htmltext>
<tokenext>have you never met an intelligent idiot ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>have you never met an intelligent idiot?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686583</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685417</id>
	<title>Nice</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247497620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now we will get to see all the dental floss holding stuff up</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now we will get to see all the dental floss holding stuff up</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now we will get to see all the dental floss holding stuff up</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684947</id>
	<title>Glad to hear that</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247492760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>but why do they find the lunar tapes a few days before the 40th celebration of the Lunar mission (Apollo 11).</p><p>Is this a coincidence or PR?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>but why do they find the lunar tapes a few days before the 40th celebration of the Lunar mission ( Apollo 11 ) .Is this a coincidence or PR ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but why do they find the lunar tapes a few days before the 40th celebration of the Lunar mission (Apollo 11).Is this a coincidence or PR?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686001</id>
	<title>Re:Who has been to the Newseum?</title>
	<author>moosesocks</author>
	<datestamp>1247501760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, it does bring up the interesting question of why they're not doing it at the publicly-funded Smithsonian Air &amp; Space museum across the street.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , it does bring up the interesting question of why they 're not doing it at the publicly-funded Smithsonian Air &amp; Space museum across the street .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, it does bring up the interesting question of why they're not doing it at the publicly-funded Smithsonian Air &amp; Space museum across the street.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685031</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688931</id>
	<title>Re:In answer to your question</title>
	<author>witherstaff</author>
	<datestamp>1247576340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>While I'm not that much of a tinfoil hat wearer, I did once stumble across a site that <a href="http://www.xenotechresearch.com/NASAHACK.htm" title="xenotechresearch.com">shows supposed photo manipulation</a> [xenotechresearch.com] of the raw data images from the mars landers. This<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. story made me do some searches to find it again.  It's at least a more novel conspiracy than a sound stage in hollywood.</htmltext>
<tokenext>While I 'm not that much of a tinfoil hat wearer , I did once stumble across a site that shows supposed photo manipulation [ xenotechresearch.com ] of the raw data images from the mars landers .
This / .
story made me do some searches to find it again .
It 's at least a more novel conspiracy than a sound stage in hollywood .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While I'm not that much of a tinfoil hat wearer, I did once stumble across a site that shows supposed photo manipulation [xenotechresearch.com] of the raw data images from the mars landers.
This /.
story made me do some searches to find it again.
It's at least a more novel conspiracy than a sound stage in hollywood.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685069</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684737</id>
	<title>Maybe because of this ? :</title>
	<author>unity100</author>
	<datestamp>1247491260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlLN\_Jcg1pc&amp;feature=related" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlLN\_Jcg1pc&amp;feature=related</a> [youtube.com]</p><p>its more stupid to 'lose' stuff just in the convenient time than plain out let it out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = WlLN \ _Jcg1pc&amp;feature = related [ youtube.com ] its more stupid to 'lose ' stuff just in the convenient time than plain out let it out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlLN\_Jcg1pc&amp;feature=related [youtube.com]its more stupid to 'lose' stuff just in the convenient time than plain out let it out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685193</id>
	<title>Paradox alert</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247495100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>NASA doesn't have any lost tapes. If they have found them, they are by definition not lost anymore. I bet there are dozens of tapes that are lost because nobody knows their location but these tapes are not one of them. Correct headline would be "NASA has the found tapes". Sounds redundant? In the human mind that may be the case but if you think about it long enough, you can only come to this conclusion. Being lost is quite a fleeting and interesting feature and has no doubt been studied by filosophers around the ages.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>NASA does n't have any lost tapes .
If they have found them , they are by definition not lost anymore .
I bet there are dozens of tapes that are lost because nobody knows their location but these tapes are not one of them .
Correct headline would be " NASA has the found tapes " .
Sounds redundant ?
In the human mind that may be the case but if you think about it long enough , you can only come to this conclusion .
Being lost is quite a fleeting and interesting feature and has no doubt been studied by filosophers around the ages .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NASA doesn't have any lost tapes.
If they have found them, they are by definition not lost anymore.
I bet there are dozens of tapes that are lost because nobody knows their location but these tapes are not one of them.
Correct headline would be "NASA has the found tapes".
Sounds redundant?
In the human mind that may be the case but if you think about it long enough, you can only come to this conclusion.
Being lost is quite a fleeting and interesting feature and has no doubt been studied by filosophers around the ages.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685893</id>
	<title>It has to be said</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247500980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not only did we not go to the moon in 1969, when we really tried, we almost killed Tom Hanks...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not only did we not go to the moon in 1969 , when we really tried , we almost killed Tom Hanks.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not only did we not go to the moon in 1969, when we really tried, we almost killed Tom Hanks...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686583</id>
	<title>Re:In answer to your question</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247506440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What about the intelligent people who think that we never landed on the moon? Be sure to get the corners with that wide broom you're waving around.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What about the intelligent people who think that we never landed on the moon ?
Be sure to get the corners with that wide broom you 're waving around .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What about the intelligent people who think that we never landed on the moon?
Be sure to get the corners with that wide broom you're waving around.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685069</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28691183</id>
	<title>Re:Excellent, this is HD quality footage</title>
	<author>HonIsCool</author>
	<datestamp>1247586960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm afraid you are mixing up some things. The Lunar Orbiters photographed the moon onto 70mm optical film. This film was automatically processed onboard the spacecraft and then electronically scanned, with the result being sent to earth via the radiolink. The Apollo 11 video camera was obviously nothing like this system and if you are expecting resolution better than HD video cameras from any recovered tapes with the original radio stream, you are bound to be disappointed. On the other hand, there already exists high-definition footage of the first lunar landing as well as Armstrong stepping onto the surface: a 16mm film camera was brought and recorded many things. You can get 1080p out of this...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm afraid you are mixing up some things .
The Lunar Orbiters photographed the moon onto 70mm optical film .
This film was automatically processed onboard the spacecraft and then electronically scanned , with the result being sent to earth via the radiolink .
The Apollo 11 video camera was obviously nothing like this system and if you are expecting resolution better than HD video cameras from any recovered tapes with the original radio stream , you are bound to be disappointed .
On the other hand , there already exists high-definition footage of the first lunar landing as well as Armstrong stepping onto the surface : a 16mm film camera was brought and recorded many things .
You can get 1080p out of this.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm afraid you are mixing up some things.
The Lunar Orbiters photographed the moon onto 70mm optical film.
This film was automatically processed onboard the spacecraft and then electronically scanned, with the result being sent to earth via the radiolink.
The Apollo 11 video camera was obviously nothing like this system and if you are expecting resolution better than HD video cameras from any recovered tapes with the original radio stream, you are bound to be disappointed.
On the other hand, there already exists high-definition footage of the first lunar landing as well as Armstrong stepping onto the surface: a 16mm film camera was brought and recorded many things.
You can get 1080p out of this...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685797</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686397</id>
	<title>Re:Paradox alert</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247504880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Being lost is quite a fleeting and interesting feature and has no doubt been studied by filosophers around the ages."<br>I'm not a philosopher, but it seems to me that being lost is not so fleeting at all.</p><p>For example, if I misplace my keys, I could claim they are 'lost'.  I could search for 10 seconds and find them, or I could search all week, or a month, or even a year before finding them.  If I misplaced them well enough, I might -never- find them and they will be, forever, lost.  Even if somebody else finds them, unless they are then presented to me, they remain lost to me.</p><p>However... IF I find them, then I found them.  In that one single moment it goes from having been lost, to no longer being lost.  Finding something... now that's fleeting - there's simply no time span between 'finding' and 'having found' whatsoever.</p><p>So "NASA has the found tapes" is even sillier if you go by that metric - and by your logic, the title would have become "NASA has the tapes" - rather ambiguous (perhaps even ominous to those donning foil hats).</p><p>"NASA Has the Lost Tapes" is still an awful title... "NASA Found the Tapes that were Lost" may be more accurate.  But as others have pointed out, the tapes in question themselves have come to colloquially be known as "The Lost Tapes".  So "NASA has The Lost Tapes" wouldn't have been so bad; a simple change of case for two letters.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Being lost is quite a fleeting and interesting feature and has no doubt been studied by filosophers around the ages .
" I 'm not a philosopher , but it seems to me that being lost is not so fleeting at all.For example , if I misplace my keys , I could claim they are 'lost' .
I could search for 10 seconds and find them , or I could search all week , or a month , or even a year before finding them .
If I misplaced them well enough , I might -never- find them and they will be , forever , lost .
Even if somebody else finds them , unless they are then presented to me , they remain lost to me.However... IF I find them , then I found them .
In that one single moment it goes from having been lost , to no longer being lost .
Finding something... now that 's fleeting - there 's simply no time span between 'finding ' and 'having found ' whatsoever.So " NASA has the found tapes " is even sillier if you go by that metric - and by your logic , the title would have become " NASA has the tapes " - rather ambiguous ( perhaps even ominous to those donning foil hats ) .
" NASA Has the Lost Tapes " is still an awful title... " NASA Found the Tapes that were Lost " may be more accurate .
But as others have pointed out , the tapes in question themselves have come to colloquially be known as " The Lost Tapes " .
So " NASA has The Lost Tapes " would n't have been so bad ; a simple change of case for two letters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Being lost is quite a fleeting and interesting feature and has no doubt been studied by filosophers around the ages.
"I'm not a philosopher, but it seems to me that being lost is not so fleeting at all.For example, if I misplace my keys, I could claim they are 'lost'.
I could search for 10 seconds and find them, or I could search all week, or a month, or even a year before finding them.
If I misplaced them well enough, I might -never- find them and they will be, forever, lost.
Even if somebody else finds them, unless they are then presented to me, they remain lost to me.However... IF I find them, then I found them.
In that one single moment it goes from having been lost, to no longer being lost.
Finding something... now that's fleeting - there's simply no time span between 'finding' and 'having found' whatsoever.So "NASA has the found tapes" is even sillier if you go by that metric - and by your logic, the title would have become "NASA has the tapes" - rather ambiguous (perhaps even ominous to those donning foil hats).
"NASA Has the Lost Tapes" is still an awful title... "NASA Found the Tapes that were Lost" may be more accurate.
But as others have pointed out, the tapes in question themselves have come to colloquially be known as "The Lost Tapes".
So "NASA has The Lost Tapes" wouldn't have been so bad; a simple change of case for two letters.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685193</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686419</id>
	<title>Re:Greatly improved quality?</title>
	<author>nemesisrocks</author>
	<datestamp>1247505000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's easy.  The "lost tapes" saga was actually a hoax, just like the moon landing.</p><p>Since the public now thinks they've lost the original tapes, they can just re-render their models/scenes in 720p, then claim to have "found" the original tapes!</p><p> NASA just needed to wait for a generation to die out, so nobody asks the question "hang on a minute -- did we really have progressive scan back in the 60s?"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's easy .
The " lost tapes " saga was actually a hoax , just like the moon landing.Since the public now thinks they 've lost the original tapes , they can just re-render their models/scenes in 720p , then claim to have " found " the original tapes !
NASA just needed to wait for a generation to die out , so nobody asks the question " hang on a minute -- did we really have progressive scan back in the 60s ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's easy.
The "lost tapes" saga was actually a hoax, just like the moon landing.Since the public now thinks they've lost the original tapes, they can just re-render their models/scenes in 720p, then claim to have "found" the original tapes!
NASA just needed to wait for a generation to die out, so nobody asks the question "hang on a minute -- did we really have progressive scan back in the 60s?
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686847</id>
	<title>Re:Paradox alert</title>
	<author>rohan972</author>
	<datestamp>1247508600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>NASA has the tapes formerly known as lost.</htmltext>
<tokenext>NASA has the tapes formerly known as lost .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NASA has the tapes formerly known as lost.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685193</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688575</id>
	<title>Re:In answer to your question</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247572380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Unlike yourself, the Russians are not idiots, and would have been impossible to fool with a faked mission.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unlike yourself , the Russians are not idiots , and would have been impossible to fool with a faked mission .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unlike yourself, the Russians are not idiots, and would have been impossible to fool with a faked mission.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28687087</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688177</id>
	<title>Re:Who has been to the Newseum?</title>
	<author>gmhowell</author>
	<datestamp>1247567640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Beats the heck out of me. I've lived in the area 35 years and haven't yet exhausted the free museums and other forms of entertainment and education.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Beats the heck out of me .
I 've lived in the area 35 years and have n't yet exhausted the free museums and other forms of entertainment and education .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Beats the heck out of me.
I've lived in the area 35 years and haven't yet exhausted the free museums and other forms of entertainment and education.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685031</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684945</id>
	<title>Re:Greatly improved quality?</title>
	<author>ocularDeathRay</author>
	<datestamp>1247492700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>the truth is that they had the tapes all along... its just that the technology finally exists to remove all the alien spacecraft from the footage. Now they can show it to us in the alien free form god intended</htmltext>
<tokenext>the truth is that they had the tapes all along... its just that the technology finally exists to remove all the alien spacecraft from the footage .
Now they can show it to us in the alien free form god intended</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the truth is that they had the tapes all along... its just that the technology finally exists to remove all the alien spacecraft from the footage.
Now they can show it to us in the alien free form god intended</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685061</id>
	<title>Re:Greatly improved quality?</title>
	<author>Hadlock</author>
	<datestamp>1247493780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What was the scan resolution of a TV in 1969? Wikipedia says 262.5 lines per field. 320 &gt; 262.5.</p><p>It's like going from youtube quality to HQ YouTube for free! (and a 50 year wait). We should get 640x(480?) resolution video, interlaced as a result. Who knows what the framerate will be - perhaps 30fps? I'm pretty sure the 8mm video that's been distributed was originally 24fps, and then degraded further to 30fps again. The moon video's motion might look different from what we see now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What was the scan resolution of a TV in 1969 ?
Wikipedia says 262.5 lines per field .
320 &gt; 262.5.It 's like going from youtube quality to HQ YouTube for free !
( and a 50 year wait ) .
We should get 640x ( 480 ?
) resolution video , interlaced as a result .
Who knows what the framerate will be - perhaps 30fps ?
I 'm pretty sure the 8mm video that 's been distributed was originally 24fps , and then degraded further to 30fps again .
The moon video 's motion might look different from what we see now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What was the scan resolution of a TV in 1969?
Wikipedia says 262.5 lines per field.
320 &gt; 262.5.It's like going from youtube quality to HQ YouTube for free!
(and a 50 year wait).
We should get 640x(480?
) resolution video, interlaced as a result.
Who knows what the framerate will be - perhaps 30fps?
I'm pretty sure the 8mm video that's been distributed was originally 24fps, and then degraded further to 30fps again.
The moon video's motion might look different from what we see now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685261</id>
	<title>Re:Greatly improved quality?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247495820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem was not the lines, which, as you note, is roughly equivalent to broadcast TV's.<br>The problem was that the vision from the moon was slow scan - i.e. 10 frames per second (see <a href="http://www.parkes.atnf.csiro.au/news\_events/apollo11/" title="csiro.au">http://www.parkes.atnf.csiro.au/news\_events/apollo11/</a> [csiro.au] - a very good tale of the technical side of getting the signals back from the moon). The only way they had of converting that to the 50i or 60i signals of broadcast TV was a converter that basically consisted of a camera pointed at a long-phosphor CRT - although it was a single box containing both parts. If you want to know the details, check the article.<br>Also, <a href="http://www.parkes.atnf.csiro.au/news\_events/apollo11/Parkes\_Apollo11\_TV\_quality.html" title="csiro.au">http://www.parkes.atnf.csiro.au/news\_events/apollo11/Parkes\_Apollo11\_TV\_quality.html</a> [csiro.au] contains two pictures that compare a photograph taken from a SSTV display in '69, and the same frame from existing broadcast TV archives. Clearly shows why we want to find the original, unconverted recordings!</p><p>That said, I am ready to be disappointed: The news release seems to suggest that all they are releasing is filtered and cleaned up recordings of the broadcast TV - the originals are still lost, and, i greatly fear, have been mislabeled and subsequently destroyed in a 'clean up'.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem was not the lines , which , as you note , is roughly equivalent to broadcast TV 's.The problem was that the vision from the moon was slow scan - i.e .
10 frames per second ( see http : //www.parkes.atnf.csiro.au/news \ _events/apollo11/ [ csiro.au ] - a very good tale of the technical side of getting the signals back from the moon ) .
The only way they had of converting that to the 50i or 60i signals of broadcast TV was a converter that basically consisted of a camera pointed at a long-phosphor CRT - although it was a single box containing both parts .
If you want to know the details , check the article.Also , http : //www.parkes.atnf.csiro.au/news \ _events/apollo11/Parkes \ _Apollo11 \ _TV \ _quality.html [ csiro.au ] contains two pictures that compare a photograph taken from a SSTV display in '69 , and the same frame from existing broadcast TV archives .
Clearly shows why we want to find the original , unconverted recordings ! That said , I am ready to be disappointed : The news release seems to suggest that all they are releasing is filtered and cleaned up recordings of the broadcast TV - the originals are still lost , and , i greatly fear , have been mislabeled and subsequently destroyed in a 'clean up' .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem was not the lines, which, as you note, is roughly equivalent to broadcast TV's.The problem was that the vision from the moon was slow scan - i.e.
10 frames per second (see http://www.parkes.atnf.csiro.au/news\_events/apollo11/ [csiro.au] - a very good tale of the technical side of getting the signals back from the moon).
The only way they had of converting that to the 50i or 60i signals of broadcast TV was a converter that basically consisted of a camera pointed at a long-phosphor CRT - although it was a single box containing both parts.
If you want to know the details, check the article.Also, http://www.parkes.atnf.csiro.au/news\_events/apollo11/Parkes\_Apollo11\_TV\_quality.html [csiro.au] contains two pictures that compare a photograph taken from a SSTV display in '69, and the same frame from existing broadcast TV archives.
Clearly shows why we want to find the original, unconverted recordings!That said, I am ready to be disappointed: The news release seems to suggest that all they are releasing is filtered and cleaned up recordings of the broadcast TV - the originals are still lost, and, i greatly fear, have been mislabeled and subsequently destroyed in a 'clean up'.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685061</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28689637</id>
	<title>Re:Future preservation plans?</title>
	<author>HonIsCool</author>
	<datestamp>1247580180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The United States National Archives and Records Administration.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The United States National Archives and Records Administration .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The United States National Archives and Records Administration.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685169</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28704605</id>
	<title>CALL GEORGE LUCAS ...</title>
	<author>mkilpatric</author>
	<datestamp>1247678880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>His company can make it better!</htmltext>
<tokenext>His company can make it better !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>His company can make it better!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685075</id>
	<title>Lies, more lies and DAMN LIES!!!!</title>
	<author>MeatBag PussRocket</author>
	<datestamp>1247493900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> *puts on tinfoilhat*</p><p><div class="quote"><p> The original signals were recorded on high quality slow-scan TV (SSTV) tapes. What was released to the TV networks was reduced to lower quality commercial TV standards</p></div><p>yeah fuckin right... they just made some CGI footage and couldnt filter it properly to make it look like TV from the 60s since they never actually went to the moon and then made this crock of shit up as an excuse...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>* puts on tinfoilhat * The original signals were recorded on high quality slow-scan TV ( SSTV ) tapes .
What was released to the TV networks was reduced to lower quality commercial TV standardsyeah fuckin right... they just made some CGI footage and couldnt filter it properly to make it look like TV from the 60s since they never actually went to the moon and then made this crock of shit up as an excuse.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> *puts on tinfoilhat* The original signals were recorded on high quality slow-scan TV (SSTV) tapes.
What was released to the TV networks was reduced to lower quality commercial TV standardsyeah fuckin right... they just made some CGI footage and couldnt filter it properly to make it look like TV from the 60s since they never actually went to the moon and then made this crock of shit up as an excuse...
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688673</id>
	<title>They were there all the time...</title>
	<author>Capt James McCarthy</author>
	<datestamp>1247573520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Beside the large box containing the Arc of the Covenant.</p><p>I still dig the moon videos though. It is nice to see what Man can do when driven not by dollars, but by a quest. My how times have changed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Beside the large box containing the Arc of the Covenant.I still dig the moon videos though .
It is nice to see what Man can do when driven not by dollars , but by a quest .
My how times have changed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Beside the large box containing the Arc of the Covenant.I still dig the moon videos though.
It is nice to see what Man can do when driven not by dollars, but by a quest.
My how times have changed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685129</id>
	<title>Lost tapes?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247494380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost\_(TV\_series)</p><p>Heck, even I have those!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost \ _ ( TV \ _series ) Heck , even I have those !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost\_(TV\_series)Heck, even I have those!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28694933</id>
	<title>Re:Future preservation plans?</title>
	<author>Gravedigger3</author>
	<datestamp>1247603160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bittorrent should work pretty well for all of the above. Throw those babies up on The Pirate Bay and you have the most redundant backup you could possibly get.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bittorrent should work pretty well for all of the above .
Throw those babies up on The Pirate Bay and you have the most redundant backup you could possibly get .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bittorrent should work pretty well for all of the above.
Throw those babies up on The Pirate Bay and you have the most redundant backup you could possibly get.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685169</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28689871</id>
	<title>lies!</title>
	<author>sgt scrub</author>
	<datestamp>1247581020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The moon is cheeze!  Everyone knows it is held up by a fat old man.  Wait.  No.  That's Santa.  It is held up by a skinny old man.  Skinny and tall.  Yeah that's it.  The moon is cheese, held up by a tall skinny old man.</p><p><a href="http://www.ufos-aliens.co.uk/cosmicapollo.html" title="ufos-aliens.co.uk">http://www.ufos-aliens.co.uk/cosmicapollo.html</a> [ufos-aliens.co.uk]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The moon is cheeze !
Everyone knows it is held up by a fat old man .
Wait. No .
That 's Santa .
It is held up by a skinny old man .
Skinny and tall .
Yeah that 's it .
The moon is cheese , held up by a tall skinny old man.http : //www.ufos-aliens.co.uk/cosmicapollo.html [ ufos-aliens.co.uk ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The moon is cheeze!
Everyone knows it is held up by a fat old man.
Wait.  No.
That's Santa.
It is held up by a skinny old man.
Skinny and tall.
Yeah that's it.
The moon is cheese, held up by a tall skinny old man.http://www.ufos-aliens.co.uk/cosmicapollo.html [ufos-aliens.co.uk]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28700471</id>
	<title>Re:Future preservation plans?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247596740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>that's an easy one, they'll just upload it to youtube!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>that 's an easy one , they 'll just upload it to youtube !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that's an easy one, they'll just upload it to youtube!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685169</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28691741</id>
	<title>Re:Now, In the Background, Aliens Waving</title>
	<author>arielCo</author>
	<datestamp>1247589420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>then the soon-to-come high-def photos of the moon should answer that by showing the trash we left behind and that should still be there, the Lunar Landers</p></div><p>Unless you also posit that (a) the pics are fake too, or (b) automated probes were sent later to set up the equivalent of the New Mexico stage. They'll believe anything in order to disbelieve.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>then the soon-to-come high-def photos of the moon should answer that by showing the trash we left behind and that should still be there , the Lunar LandersUnless you also posit that ( a ) the pics are fake too , or ( b ) automated probes were sent later to set up the equivalent of the New Mexico stage .
They 'll believe anything in order to disbelieve .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>then the soon-to-come high-def photos of the moon should answer that by showing the trash we left behind and that should still be there, the Lunar LandersUnless you also posit that (a) the pics are fake too, or (b) automated probes were sent later to set up the equivalent of the New Mexico stage.
They'll believe anything in order to disbelieve.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685189</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28687537</id>
	<title>Re:In answer to your question</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247603580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The goal of the people behind the moon landing was to prove to the USSR that we had the technological ability to obliterate the world quickly and thoroughly. Why are those people given the benefit of the doubt?"</p><p>Hmmm. NO! Nukes were invented and showed the USSR what was possible. They then made their own.</p><p>The moon landings had nothing to do with it. Plus, the Russians were able to track the moon landings. You think they were soooooooooooooo stupid that they wouldn't have known they were fake? You think the Russians were such idiots, their spy services so foolish and inefficient that they didn't know what the US government and NASA were up to?</p><p>These arguments are so specious and full of holes they make a colander look like a life saving device.</p><p>Go home and play with something.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The goal of the people behind the moon landing was to prove to the USSR that we had the technological ability to obliterate the world quickly and thoroughly .
Why are those people given the benefit of the doubt ? " Hmmm .
NO ! Nukes were invented and showed the USSR what was possible .
They then made their own.The moon landings had nothing to do with it .
Plus , the Russians were able to track the moon landings .
You think they were soooooooooooooo stupid that they would n't have known they were fake ?
You think the Russians were such idiots , their spy services so foolish and inefficient that they did n't know what the US government and NASA were up to ? These arguments are so specious and full of holes they make a colander look like a life saving device.Go home and play with something .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The goal of the people behind the moon landing was to prove to the USSR that we had the technological ability to obliterate the world quickly and thoroughly.
Why are those people given the benefit of the doubt?"Hmmm.
NO! Nukes were invented and showed the USSR what was possible.
They then made their own.The moon landings had nothing to do with it.
Plus, the Russians were able to track the moon landings.
You think they were soooooooooooooo stupid that they wouldn't have known they were fake?
You think the Russians were such idiots, their spy services so foolish and inefficient that they didn't know what the US government and NASA were up to?These arguments are so specious and full of holes they make a colander look like a life saving device.Go home and play with something.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28687087</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684911</id>
	<title>Lost Tapes</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247492580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>After the 2nd season, I found it boring. And honestly NASA, tapes? Use a dvr if you're going to record Lost.</htmltext>
<tokenext>After the 2nd season , I found it boring .
And honestly NASA , tapes ?
Use a dvr if you 're going to record Lost .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After the 2nd season, I found it boring.
And honestly NASA, tapes?
Use a dvr if you're going to record Lost.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688307</id>
	<title>Re:Cool, any UFOs?</title>
	<author>dzfoo</author>
	<datestamp>1247569440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, these are just the "Special Edition" version of the faked moon landing tapes.  It was "produced" by Lucas Films, in collaboration with NASA, and contain newly added footage and CGI-enhanced visuals.</p><p>They look great, but some have already complained that the new tapes show Buzz Aldrin touching the surface first, which completely changes the character and motivation of the scene.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; -dZ.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , these are just the " Special Edition " version of the faked moon landing tapes .
It was " produced " by Lucas Films , in collaboration with NASA , and contain newly added footage and CGI-enhanced visuals.They look great , but some have already complained that the new tapes show Buzz Aldrin touching the surface first , which completely changes the character and motivation of the scene .
        -dZ .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, these are just the "Special Edition" version of the faked moon landing tapes.
It was "produced" by Lucas Films, in collaboration with NASA, and contain newly added footage and CGI-enhanced visuals.They look great, but some have already complained that the new tapes show Buzz Aldrin touching the surface first, which completely changes the character and motivation of the scene.
        -dZ.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684781</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28695999</id>
	<title>Re:Wired has a great article about the loss...</title>
	<author>PingXao</author>
	<datestamp>1247564760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is why I read slashdot.  Thanks for that link!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is why I read slashdot .
Thanks for that link !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is why I read slashdot.
Thanks for that link!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685381</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686413</id>
	<title>Re:Glad to hear that</title>
	<author>initialE</author>
	<datestamp>1247504940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>NASA \_needs\_ a good PR department, especially since they have to fight for budget dollars. They don't have a special interests group to lobby for science after all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>NASA \ _needs \ _ a good PR department , especially since they have to fight for budget dollars .
They do n't have a special interests group to lobby for science after all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NASA \_needs\_ a good PR department, especially since they have to fight for budget dollars.
They don't have a special interests group to lobby for science after all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684947</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685031</id>
	<title>Who has been to the Newseum?</title>
	<author>TubeSteak</author>
	<datestamp>1247493480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I tried to go once, but it turned out that the tickets are $19 bucks.<br>Is it worth the price?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I tried to go once , but it turned out that the tickets are $ 19 bucks.Is it worth the price ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I tried to go once, but it turned out that the tickets are $19 bucks.Is it worth the price?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28687859</id>
	<title>Re:Can we....</title>
	<author>maxwell demon</author>
	<datestamp>1247564220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So they finally found the duct tapes keeping together the original rockets?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So they finally found the duct tapes keeping together the original rockets ?
: - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So they finally found the duct tapes keeping together the original rockets?
:-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684799</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685323</id>
	<title>This may not be the lost tapes</title>
	<author>Steve1952</author>
	<datestamp>1247496480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's not clear to me from the press release if these are really the lost slow scan tapes, or just a really good restoration from 40 year-old tapes of the broadcast, which still suffered from the limited analog conversion problems of that era.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not clear to me from the press release if these are really the lost slow scan tapes , or just a really good restoration from 40 year-old tapes of the broadcast , which still suffered from the limited analog conversion problems of that era .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not clear to me from the press release if these are really the lost slow scan tapes, or just a really good restoration from 40 year-old tapes of the broadcast, which still suffered from the limited analog conversion problems of that era.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686395</id>
	<title>Re:Paradox alert</title>
	<author>Tablizer</author>
	<datestamp>1247504880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>for such a highly pedantic post, you shouldn't have ended it by misspelling philosophers.</p></div></blockquote><p>But the misspelling made you think, and that's what philosophers like to due.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>for such a highly pedantic post , you should n't have ended it by misspelling philosophers.But the misspelling made you think , and that 's what philosophers like to due .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>for such a highly pedantic post, you shouldn't have ended it by misspelling philosophers.But the misspelling made you think, and that's what philosophers like to due.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686147</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28687835</id>
	<title>Re:Future preservation plans?</title>
	<author>MadFarmAnimalz</author>
	<datestamp>1247563920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Once the data as been recovered, what are NASA's plans to archive and prevent the data from being lost over the next 40, or 400 years? How will they plan on making the data available to general public?</i>
<p>
I don't know.
</p><p>
(sorry, your comment just looked really interrogative)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Once the data as been recovered , what are NASA 's plans to archive and prevent the data from being lost over the next 40 , or 400 years ?
How will they plan on making the data available to general public ?
I do n't know .
( sorry , your comment just looked really interrogative )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Once the data as been recovered, what are NASA's plans to archive and prevent the data from being lost over the next 40, or 400 years?
How will they plan on making the data available to general public?
I don't know.
(sorry, your comment just looked really interrogative)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685169</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685103</id>
	<title>NASA intentionally delayed ...</title>
	<author>PPH</author>
	<datestamp>1247494020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... release of the high resolution version until the Blu-Ray/HD-DVD format issue was settled.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... release of the high resolution version until the Blu-Ray/HD-DVD format issue was settled .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... release of the high resolution version until the Blu-Ray/HD-DVD format issue was settled.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28687779</id>
	<title>Re:if moon landings were possible in 1969...</title>
	<author>ledow</author>
	<datestamp>1247563320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We've sent probes down to the Marianas trench, so why aren't we living in bubbles down there?  It's the same sort of question.  Basically, because it's 'king hard to do still.</p><p>Apollo was *unbelievably* expensive (now adjust for inflation!) to achieve and had ENORMOUS political backing... but well... not very much in terms of science got done (engineering, sure, but science? Not so much).  We can now do that science *MUCH* better from, say, the International Space Station, Hubble or the Mars Rovers.  There's three reasons where we haven't gone back to the moon.  Space missions are primarily about science, not land-grabs, military superiority or other factors.  It's the only way to recoup some of the costs (patents, etc.), provide impetus to the people doing it (scientists and engineers) and prove to other nations that your intentions are peaceful.</p><p>Sending humans to places adds orders of magnitude to the costs involved in going somewhere (compare cost of one satellite to costs of one manned orbiting mission).  Sending a probe, satellite or rover is so much cheaper in comparison, it's silly.  And why do you need to send a human?  To either say "Look, we stepped here" (Apollo, and Aldrin's recent suggestion to go back to Mars) or to colonise the place (way out of our capabilities at the moment, if not engineering then financial).  Look at the problems and costs faced with the ISS... now imagine that it's several MONTHS away and several MONTHS back, even when you manage to get the Shuttle in the air to supply it (which takes months / years in itself).  Astronaut ill?  Ooops.  He's dead.  Tool needed for critical repair?  Oops, there goes the air pressure before you can get to it.</p><p>The Moon landings were not only possible in 1969 but probably earlier if enough money had been thrown at it.  Modern satellites, shuttles, etc. really aren't that much more advanced (or, if they are, don't need to be in order to do the same job - most of the tech just makes it safer, more interesting, etc.).  It's not a question of technology... it's a question of how do you justify several BILLION dollars of ongoing costs for probably about a decade in order to step next to the footprint on the moon and say "Hey, look what I did?".  It worked back in 1969 because of the political backing and finances being MADE available.  No chance of that now, unless it comes from joint ventures with NASA, ESA etc. and why would a joint venture want to go back to the moon when Mars isn't "that" much farther out of our reach?  Or you could send a dozen probes to various places (Moon, Mars, orbit) for the same price.</p><p>BTW: The onboard computer on the Apollo is probably outclassed by a fancy digital watch, or a desktop calculator now.  Technology has moved on in orders of magnitude but it still doesn't really help when the only practical way to get thousands of tons of equipment off the ground against gravity is by lighting the end of a huge tube of liquid oxygen/hydrogen (literally TONS and TONS of it)... a gross simplification but that's basically the gist of the propulsion.  Simple physics demands a certain amount of acceleration to pull it off (computers can help find an optimal path, but there's still a minimum that you need), therefore a certain amount of thrust, therefore a certain amount of fuel... and fuel prices don't go down much as technology increases, even for simple fuels like this.  In fact, it's probably risen by quite a substantial amount because prices of things like metal for its containment, costs of transporting it etc. have risen.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We 've sent probes down to the Marianas trench , so why are n't we living in bubbles down there ?
It 's the same sort of question .
Basically , because it 's 'king hard to do still.Apollo was * unbelievably * expensive ( now adjust for inflation !
) to achieve and had ENORMOUS political backing... but well... not very much in terms of science got done ( engineering , sure , but science ?
Not so much ) .
We can now do that science * MUCH * better from , say , the International Space Station , Hubble or the Mars Rovers .
There 's three reasons where we have n't gone back to the moon .
Space missions are primarily about science , not land-grabs , military superiority or other factors .
It 's the only way to recoup some of the costs ( patents , etc .
) , provide impetus to the people doing it ( scientists and engineers ) and prove to other nations that your intentions are peaceful.Sending humans to places adds orders of magnitude to the costs involved in going somewhere ( compare cost of one satellite to costs of one manned orbiting mission ) .
Sending a probe , satellite or rover is so much cheaper in comparison , it 's silly .
And why do you need to send a human ?
To either say " Look , we stepped here " ( Apollo , and Aldrin 's recent suggestion to go back to Mars ) or to colonise the place ( way out of our capabilities at the moment , if not engineering then financial ) .
Look at the problems and costs faced with the ISS... now imagine that it 's several MONTHS away and several MONTHS back , even when you manage to get the Shuttle in the air to supply it ( which takes months / years in itself ) .
Astronaut ill ?
Ooops. He 's dead .
Tool needed for critical repair ?
Oops , there goes the air pressure before you can get to it.The Moon landings were not only possible in 1969 but probably earlier if enough money had been thrown at it .
Modern satellites , shuttles , etc .
really are n't that much more advanced ( or , if they are , do n't need to be in order to do the same job - most of the tech just makes it safer , more interesting , etc. ) .
It 's not a question of technology... it 's a question of how do you justify several BILLION dollars of ongoing costs for probably about a decade in order to step next to the footprint on the moon and say " Hey , look what I did ? " .
It worked back in 1969 because of the political backing and finances being MADE available .
No chance of that now , unless it comes from joint ventures with NASA , ESA etc .
and why would a joint venture want to go back to the moon when Mars is n't " that " much farther out of our reach ?
Or you could send a dozen probes to various places ( Moon , Mars , orbit ) for the same price.BTW : The onboard computer on the Apollo is probably outclassed by a fancy digital watch , or a desktop calculator now .
Technology has moved on in orders of magnitude but it still does n't really help when the only practical way to get thousands of tons of equipment off the ground against gravity is by lighting the end of a huge tube of liquid oxygen/hydrogen ( literally TONS and TONS of it ) ... a gross simplification but that 's basically the gist of the propulsion .
Simple physics demands a certain amount of acceleration to pull it off ( computers can help find an optimal path , but there 's still a minimum that you need ) , therefore a certain amount of thrust , therefore a certain amount of fuel... and fuel prices do n't go down much as technology increases , even for simple fuels like this .
In fact , it 's probably risen by quite a substantial amount because prices of things like metal for its containment , costs of transporting it etc .
have risen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We've sent probes down to the Marianas trench, so why aren't we living in bubbles down there?
It's the same sort of question.
Basically, because it's 'king hard to do still.Apollo was *unbelievably* expensive (now adjust for inflation!
) to achieve and had ENORMOUS political backing... but well... not very much in terms of science got done (engineering, sure, but science?
Not so much).
We can now do that science *MUCH* better from, say, the International Space Station, Hubble or the Mars Rovers.
There's three reasons where we haven't gone back to the moon.
Space missions are primarily about science, not land-grabs, military superiority or other factors.
It's the only way to recoup some of the costs (patents, etc.
), provide impetus to the people doing it (scientists and engineers) and prove to other nations that your intentions are peaceful.Sending humans to places adds orders of magnitude to the costs involved in going somewhere (compare cost of one satellite to costs of one manned orbiting mission).
Sending a probe, satellite or rover is so much cheaper in comparison, it's silly.
And why do you need to send a human?
To either say "Look, we stepped here" (Apollo, and Aldrin's recent suggestion to go back to Mars) or to colonise the place (way out of our capabilities at the moment, if not engineering then financial).
Look at the problems and costs faced with the ISS... now imagine that it's several MONTHS away and several MONTHS back, even when you manage to get the Shuttle in the air to supply it (which takes months / years in itself).
Astronaut ill?
Ooops.  He's dead.
Tool needed for critical repair?
Oops, there goes the air pressure before you can get to it.The Moon landings were not only possible in 1969 but probably earlier if enough money had been thrown at it.
Modern satellites, shuttles, etc.
really aren't that much more advanced (or, if they are, don't need to be in order to do the same job - most of the tech just makes it safer, more interesting, etc.).
It's not a question of technology... it's a question of how do you justify several BILLION dollars of ongoing costs for probably about a decade in order to step next to the footprint on the moon and say "Hey, look what I did?".
It worked back in 1969 because of the political backing and finances being MADE available.
No chance of that now, unless it comes from joint ventures with NASA, ESA etc.
and why would a joint venture want to go back to the moon when Mars isn't "that" much farther out of our reach?
Or you could send a dozen probes to various places (Moon, Mars, orbit) for the same price.BTW: The onboard computer on the Apollo is probably outclassed by a fancy digital watch, or a desktop calculator now.
Technology has moved on in orders of magnitude but it still doesn't really help when the only practical way to get thousands of tons of equipment off the ground against gravity is by lighting the end of a huge tube of liquid oxygen/hydrogen (literally TONS and TONS of it)... a gross simplification but that's basically the gist of the propulsion.
Simple physics demands a certain amount of acceleration to pull it off (computers can help find an optimal path, but there's still a minimum that you need), therefore a certain amount of thrust, therefore a certain amount of fuel... and fuel prices don't go down much as technology increases, even for simple fuels like this.
In fact, it's probably risen by quite a substantial amount because prices of things like metal for its containment, costs of transporting it etc.
have risen.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686329</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685381</id>
	<title>Wired has a great article about the loss...</title>
	<author>flux4</author>
	<datestamp>1247497140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...<a href="http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/15.01/nasa.html" title="wired.com">here</a> [wired.com].  Finding the tapes seemed nearly impossible at the time (2007) - the old reel-to-reel machines were dead, whole warehouses were being closed, and the people who were actually driving the recovery effort were mostly Apollo-class themselves - well into their golden years.  It reminded me of some of the Library of Congress horror stories, only more desperate and with better special effects.  If they do have the footage and can actually decode it, this is an amazing find - I wasn't holding out much hope.</p><p>Another cool site is Colin Mackellar's <a href="http://www.honeysucklecreek.net/Apollo\_11/" title="honeysucklecreek.net">Honeysuckle Creek Tribute Site</a> [honeysucklecreek.net].  Tons of info on the recording, the differences in quality, etc.</p><p>Really good news.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...here [ wired.com ] .
Finding the tapes seemed nearly impossible at the time ( 2007 ) - the old reel-to-reel machines were dead , whole warehouses were being closed , and the people who were actually driving the recovery effort were mostly Apollo-class themselves - well into their golden years .
It reminded me of some of the Library of Congress horror stories , only more desperate and with better special effects .
If they do have the footage and can actually decode it , this is an amazing find - I was n't holding out much hope.Another cool site is Colin Mackellar 's Honeysuckle Creek Tribute Site [ honeysucklecreek.net ] .
Tons of info on the recording , the differences in quality , etc.Really good news .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...here [wired.com].
Finding the tapes seemed nearly impossible at the time (2007) - the old reel-to-reel machines were dead, whole warehouses were being closed, and the people who were actually driving the recovery effort were mostly Apollo-class themselves - well into their golden years.
It reminded me of some of the Library of Congress horror stories, only more desperate and with better special effects.
If they do have the footage and can actually decode it, this is an amazing find - I wasn't holding out much hope.Another cool site is Colin Mackellar's Honeysuckle Creek Tribute Site [honeysucklecreek.net].
Tons of info on the recording, the differences in quality, etc.Really good news.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686239</id>
	<title>mod do;wN</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247503620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The BSD license, much organisatioN, Your own towel in the reaper BSD's culture of abuse</htmltext>
<tokenext>The BSD license , much organisatioN , Your own towel in the reaper BSD 's culture of abuse</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The BSD license, much organisatioN, Your own towel in the reaper BSD's culture of abuse</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685297</id>
	<title>Re:Nice Title</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247496240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>How about "NASA has Found the Lost Tapes"? Right now the title tells me that NASA is in ownership of the tapes, but just can't find them.</i></p><p>Well if you're going to be pedantic, on slashdot the correct title would be "NASA can haz Lost Tapes pleaz?"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about " NASA has Found the Lost Tapes " ?
Right now the title tells me that NASA is in ownership of the tapes , but just ca n't find them.Well if you 're going to be pedantic , on slashdot the correct title would be " NASA can haz Lost Tapes pleaz ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about "NASA has Found the Lost Tapes"?
Right now the title tells me that NASA is in ownership of the tapes, but just can't find them.Well if you're going to be pedantic, on slashdot the correct title would be "NASA can haz Lost Tapes pleaz?
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684951</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686351</id>
	<title>Here's to Packrats!</title>
	<author>Tablizer</author>
	<datestamp>1247504580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>3 Cheers for Packrats!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>3 Cheers for Packrats !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>3 Cheers for Packrats!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685167</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685315</id>
	<title>Rule of thumb:</title>
	<author>commodoresloat</author>
	<datestamp>1247496420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When dealing with NASA, there are no "coincidences."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When dealing with NASA , there are no " coincidences .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When dealing with NASA, there are no "coincidences.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684947</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684957</id>
	<title>Duh!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247492760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>These tapes come from the secret hollywood set where they filmed the moon landings, you idiot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>These tapes come from the secret hollywood set where they filmed the moon landings , you idiot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These tapes come from the secret hollywood set where they filmed the moon landings, you idiot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685987</id>
	<title>Re:Can we....</title>
	<author>moosesocks</author>
	<datestamp>1247501640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not a good idea if you're in DC....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not a good idea if you 're in DC... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not a good idea if you're in DC....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684799</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28694663</id>
	<title>Re:Future preservation plans?</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1247601720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They should take a tip from Linus Torvalds:</p><blockquote><div><p>Only wimps use tape backup: \_real\_ men just upload their important stuff on ftp, and let the rest of the world mirror it</p></div> </blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>They should take a tip from Linus Torvalds : Only wimps use tape backup : \ _real \ _ men just upload their important stuff on ftp , and let the rest of the world mirror it</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They should take a tip from Linus Torvalds:Only wimps use tape backup: \_real\_ men just upload their important stuff on ftp, and let the rest of the world mirror it 
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685169</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686263</id>
	<title>Re:Future preservation plans?</title>
	<author>Spacejock</author>
	<datestamp>1247503800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hiding it in the basement of a university in the most remote capital city on the planet seems to work. Unless the Vogons turn up.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hiding it in the basement of a university in the most remote capital city on the planet seems to work .
Unless the Vogons turn up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hiding it in the basement of a university in the most remote capital city on the planet seems to work.
Unless the Vogons turn up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685169</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28689197</id>
	<title>Re:Don't fall for it</title>
	<author>YourExperiment</author>
	<datestamp>1247578200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Perhaps the directors commentary will finally reveal why Neil Armstrong fluffed his lines.</p><p>(Just joking BTW, obviously the guy's a hero.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps the directors commentary will finally reveal why Neil Armstrong fluffed his lines .
( Just joking BTW , obviously the guy 's a hero .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps the directors commentary will finally reveal why Neil Armstrong fluffed his lines.
(Just joking BTW, obviously the guy's a hero.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685123</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685305</id>
	<title>More Anniversary Coverage</title>
	<author>necro81</author>
	<datestamp>1247496360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>The NYTimes has devoted its <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/pages/science/index.html" title="nytimes.com">Tuesday Science section</a> [nytimes.com] to the Apollo 11 anniversary.  A feature piece <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/14/science/space/14mission.html" title="nytimes.com">tries to convey just what it was like</a> [nytimes.com] that summer of '69, and the landing's backdrop of the Cold War.  Another tries to list some of the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/14/science/space/14scott.html" title="nytimes.com">impacts on popular culture of the time</a> [nytimes.com].  Yet another tries to compare the Apollo effort to what it'll take to <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/14/science/space/14future.html" title="nytimes.com">get back to the Moon and on to Mars</a> [nytimes.com].  <br> <br>

Yes, there is also a <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/14/science/space/14hoax.html" title="nytimes.com">piece on the hoax-spinners</a> [nytimes.com].</htmltext>
<tokenext>The NYTimes has devoted its Tuesday Science section [ nytimes.com ] to the Apollo 11 anniversary .
A feature piece tries to convey just what it was like [ nytimes.com ] that summer of '69 , and the landing 's backdrop of the Cold War .
Another tries to list some of the impacts on popular culture of the time [ nytimes.com ] .
Yet another tries to compare the Apollo effort to what it 'll take to get back to the Moon and on to Mars [ nytimes.com ] .
Yes , there is also a piece on the hoax-spinners [ nytimes.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The NYTimes has devoted its Tuesday Science section [nytimes.com] to the Apollo 11 anniversary.
A feature piece tries to convey just what it was like [nytimes.com] that summer of '69, and the landing's backdrop of the Cold War.
Another tries to list some of the impacts on popular culture of the time [nytimes.com].
Yet another tries to compare the Apollo effort to what it'll take to get back to the Moon and on to Mars [nytimes.com].
Yes, there is also a piece on the hoax-spinners [nytimes.com].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686635</id>
	<title>Re:Future preservation plans?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247506920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Convert it to WMV?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Convert it to WMV ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Convert it to WMV?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685169</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688441</id>
	<title>Grammar alert</title>
	<author>dzfoo</author>
	<datestamp>1247570820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>"I bet there are dozens of tapes that are lost because nobody knows their location but these tapes are not <b>it</b>."</i></p><p>There, fixed that for you.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; -dZ.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" I bet there are dozens of tapes that are lost because nobody knows their location but these tapes are not it .
" There , fixed that for you .
      -dZ .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I bet there are dozens of tapes that are lost because nobody knows their location but these tapes are not it.
"There, fixed that for you.
      -dZ.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685193</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684863</id>
	<title>Translation:  3D rendering technology ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247492220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... has finally made this possible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... has finally made this possible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... has finally made this possible.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685617</id>
	<title>Skilz</title>
	<author>Tablizer</author>
	<datestamp>1247499300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can I hire the finders to locate all my missing socks (of a pair) and missing power adapters? Kudos to the finders! I hope they get a big reward (no, silly, not my socks).<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can I hire the finders to locate all my missing socks ( of a pair ) and missing power adapters ?
Kudos to the finders !
I hope they get a big reward ( no , silly , not my socks ) .
   </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can I hire the finders to locate all my missing socks (of a pair) and missing power adapters?
Kudos to the finders!
I hope they get a big reward (no, silly, not my socks).
   </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28698993</id>
	<title>Re:Exciting News</title>
	<author>jra</author>
	<datestamp>1247582880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>She's a guy now?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>She 's a guy now ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>She's a guy now?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685065</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685069</id>
	<title>In answer to your question</title>
	<author>sir\_eccles</author>
	<datestamp>1247493840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, it won't convince any of the idiots who think we never landed on the moon. No amount of evidence ever will.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , it wo n't convince any of the idiots who think we never landed on the moon .
No amount of evidence ever will .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, it won't convince any of the idiots who think we never landed on the moon.
No amount of evidence ever will.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686683</id>
	<title>WARNING</title>
	<author>Tablizer</author>
	<datestamp>1247507220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anything with "moon" and "high res" in it makes me nervous. NASA should be wary of a detailed <b>goatse</b> hoax.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anything with " moon " and " high res " in it makes me nervous .
NASA should be wary of a detailed goatse hoax .
   </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anything with "moon" and "high res" in it makes me nervous.
NASA should be wary of a detailed goatse hoax.
   </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684961</id>
	<title>Re:Headline</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247492820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Interesting, I read it that way and thought they lost them again, as well.
Dang, we must have tumors.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Interesting , I read it that way and thought they lost them again , as well .
Dang , we must have tumors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interesting, I read it that way and thought they lost them again, as well.
Dang, we must have tumors.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684859</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28687087</id>
	<title>Re:In answer to your question</title>
	<author>treat</author>
	<datestamp>1247512080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>No, it won't convince any of the idiots who think we never landed on the moon. No amount of evidence ever will.</p></div><p>Sorry - did you have any evidence? Was the behavior of the federal government at that time so trustworthy that their word is acceptable?</p><p>I believed the moon landing was real until I found out about the loss of these tapes and the subsequent "recovery" which turns out to be another copy made at the same time.</p><p>The goal of the people behind the moon landing was to prove to the USSR that we had the technological ability to obliterate the world quickly and thoroughly. Why are those people given the benefit of the doubt?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>No , it wo n't convince any of the idiots who think we never landed on the moon .
No amount of evidence ever will.Sorry - did you have any evidence ?
Was the behavior of the federal government at that time so trustworthy that their word is acceptable ? I believed the moon landing was real until I found out about the loss of these tapes and the subsequent " recovery " which turns out to be another copy made at the same time.The goal of the people behind the moon landing was to prove to the USSR that we had the technological ability to obliterate the world quickly and thoroughly .
Why are those people given the benefit of the doubt ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, it won't convince any of the idiots who think we never landed on the moon.
No amount of evidence ever will.Sorry - did you have any evidence?
Was the behavior of the federal government at that time so trustworthy that their word is acceptable?I believed the moon landing was real until I found out about the loss of these tapes and the subsequent "recovery" which turns out to be another copy made at the same time.The goal of the people behind the moon landing was to prove to the USSR that we had the technological ability to obliterate the world quickly and thoroughly.
Why are those people given the benefit of the doubt?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685069</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688813</id>
	<title>Re:Future preservation plans?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247575020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>NASA is under orders to retain all data from planetary missions, including lunar missions. Once the data as been recovered, what are NASA's plans to archive and prevent the data from being lost over the next 40, or 400 years? How will they plan on making the data available to general public?</p></div><p>Thats easy, they just rename the files to "paris hilton sex tape" and seed it with bittorrent...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>NASA is under orders to retain all data from planetary missions , including lunar missions .
Once the data as been recovered , what are NASA 's plans to archive and prevent the data from being lost over the next 40 , or 400 years ?
How will they plan on making the data available to general public ? Thats easy , they just rename the files to " paris hilton sex tape " and seed it with bittorrent.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NASA is under orders to retain all data from planetary missions, including lunar missions.
Once the data as been recovered, what are NASA's plans to archive and prevent the data from being lost over the next 40, or 400 years?
How will they plan on making the data available to general public?Thats easy, they just rename the files to "paris hilton sex tape" and seed it with bittorrent...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685169</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686147</id>
	<title>Re:Paradox alert</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247502840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>for such a highly pedantic post, you shouldn't have ended it by misspelling philosophers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>for such a highly pedantic post , you should n't have ended it by misspelling philosophers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>for such a highly pedantic post, you shouldn't have ended it by misspelling philosophers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685193</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685159</id>
	<title>Re:Who has been to the Newseum?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247494800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I tried to go once, but it turned out that the tickets are $19 bucks.
Is it worth the price?</p></div><p>If $19 is too much you have more pressing concerns than being enriched with history and science.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I tried to go once , but it turned out that the tickets are $ 19 bucks .
Is it worth the price ? If $ 19 is too much you have more pressing concerns than being enriched with history and science .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I tried to go once, but it turned out that the tickets are $19 bucks.
Is it worth the price?If $19 is too much you have more pressing concerns than being enriched with history and science.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685031</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685123</id>
	<title>Don't fall for it</title>
	<author>Palestrina</author>
	<datestamp>1247494320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just wait six months and they'll have the special director's edition EVD with 10 extra minutes and a "making of" featurette.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just wait six months and they 'll have the special director 's edition EVD with 10 extra minutes and a " making of " featurette .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just wait six months and they'll have the special director's edition EVD with 10 extra minutes and a "making of" featurette.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28687971</id>
	<title>Re:Paradox alert</title>
	<author>L4t3r4lu5</author>
	<datestamp>1247565360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If they had decent filosophers to organise and index the records, they'd not have lost the tapes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If they had decent filosophers to organise and index the records , they 'd not have lost the tapes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they had decent filosophers to organise and index the records, they'd not have lost the tapes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685193</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28693871</id>
	<title>Re:Cool, any UFOs?</title>
	<author>Chris Burke</author>
	<datestamp>1247598120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>They look great, but some have already complained that the new tapes show Buzz Aldrin touching the surface first, which completely changes the character and motivation of the scene.</i></p><p>I can accept that, but what really ruined the tapes for me was the new extended musical sequence.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They look great , but some have already complained that the new tapes show Buzz Aldrin touching the surface first , which completely changes the character and motivation of the scene.I can accept that , but what really ruined the tapes for me was the new extended musical sequence .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They look great, but some have already complained that the new tapes show Buzz Aldrin touching the surface first, which completely changes the character and motivation of the scene.I can accept that, but what really ruined the tapes for me was the new extended musical sequence.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688307</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688159</id>
	<title>Re:Now, In the Background, Aliens Waving</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247567400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If I believed the moon landing was faked, no amount of... well, pretty much anything would shake my belief. Once something goes far enough away that I can't see it, who's to say what happens? Photos aren't good enough. Video is good, but there's no reason to think it's more reliable than photographs any more.</p><p>I believe in GPS satellites, because they seem to know where I am when I'm alone, but that's just orbit.</p><p>Anyway, the moon landings happened. Just saying, once you get into the same mindset as the ruler of the universe, it's hard to get out.</p><p>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_minor\_characters\_from\_The\_Hitchhiker's\_Guide\_to\_the\_Galaxy#The\_Ruler\_of\_the\_Universe</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If I believed the moon landing was faked , no amount of... well , pretty much anything would shake my belief .
Once something goes far enough away that I ca n't see it , who 's to say what happens ?
Photos are n't good enough .
Video is good , but there 's no reason to think it 's more reliable than photographs any more.I believe in GPS satellites , because they seem to know where I am when I 'm alone , but that 's just orbit.Anyway , the moon landings happened .
Just saying , once you get into the same mindset as the ruler of the universe , it 's hard to get out.http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List \ _of \ _minor \ _characters \ _from \ _The \ _Hitchhiker 's \ _Guide \ _to \ _the \ _Galaxy # The \ _Ruler \ _of \ _the \ _Universe</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I believed the moon landing was faked, no amount of... well, pretty much anything would shake my belief.
Once something goes far enough away that I can't see it, who's to say what happens?
Photos aren't good enough.
Video is good, but there's no reason to think it's more reliable than photographs any more.I believe in GPS satellites, because they seem to know where I am when I'm alone, but that's just orbit.Anyway, the moon landings happened.
Just saying, once you get into the same mindset as the ruler of the universe, it's hard to get out.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_minor\_characters\_from\_The\_Hitchhiker's\_Guide\_to\_the\_Galaxy#The\_Ruler\_of\_the\_Universe</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685189</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684731</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247491200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah but those shadows will still indicate a shooting location of the NEVADA DESERT!!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah but those shadows will still indicate a shooting location of the NEVADA DESERT ! ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah but those shadows will still indicate a shooting location of the NEVADA DESERT!!!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685353</id>
	<title>Re:Lies, more lies and DAMN LIES!!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247496780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>no, no.  these are the original faked mission tapes, CGI done with analog computers, otherwise known as anal-CGI, done by way of the non-linear characteristics of the bridge-rectum-fryer driving a sextode W. Allen orgasmotron.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>no , no .
these are the original faked mission tapes , CGI done with analog computers , otherwise known as anal-CGI , done by way of the non-linear characteristics of the bridge-rectum-fryer driving a sextode W. Allen orgasmotron .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>no, no.
these are the original faked mission tapes, CGI done with analog computers, otherwise known as anal-CGI, done by way of the non-linear characteristics of the bridge-rectum-fryer driving a sextode W. Allen orgasmotron.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685075</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684859</id>
	<title>Headline</title>
	<author>Adrian Lopez</author>
	<datestamp>1247492220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Initially I thought the headline read "<i>Nasa Has Lost the Tapes</i>", and I almost believed it. "What? Already? They lost them <i>again</i>? Those idiots!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... oh wait."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Initially I thought the headline read " Nasa Has Lost the Tapes " , and I almost believed it .
" What ? Already ?
They lost them again ?
Those idiots !
... oh wait .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Initially I thought the headline read "Nasa Has Lost the Tapes", and I almost believed it.
"What? Already?
They lost them again?
Those idiots!
... oh wait.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686339</id>
	<title>Re:Paradox alert</title>
	<author>silentphate</author>
	<datestamp>1247504460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>NASA doesn't have any lost tapes. If they have found them, they are by definition not lost anymore. I bet there are dozens of tapes that are lost because nobody knows their location but these tapes are not one of them. Correct headline would be "NASA has the found tapes". Sounds redundant? In the human mind that may be the case but if you think about it long enough, you can only come to this conclusion. Being lost is quite a fleeting and interesting feature and has no doubt been studied by filosophers around the ages.</p></div><p>BTW philosophers is spelled with a ph. Furthermore, maybe there should say NASA has found the tapes that were once lost.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>NASA does n't have any lost tapes .
If they have found them , they are by definition not lost anymore .
I bet there are dozens of tapes that are lost because nobody knows their location but these tapes are not one of them .
Correct headline would be " NASA has the found tapes " .
Sounds redundant ?
In the human mind that may be the case but if you think about it long enough , you can only come to this conclusion .
Being lost is quite a fleeting and interesting feature and has no doubt been studied by filosophers around the ages.BTW philosophers is spelled with a ph .
Furthermore , maybe there should say NASA has found the tapes that were once lost .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NASA doesn't have any lost tapes.
If they have found them, they are by definition not lost anymore.
I bet there are dozens of tapes that are lost because nobody knows their location but these tapes are not one of them.
Correct headline would be "NASA has the found tapes".
Sounds redundant?
In the human mind that may be the case but if you think about it long enough, you can only come to this conclusion.
Being lost is quite a fleeting and interesting feature and has no doubt been studied by filosophers around the ages.BTW philosophers is spelled with a ph.
Furthermore, maybe there should say NASA has found the tapes that were once lost.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685193</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28695841</id>
	<title>Re:Future preservation plans?</title>
	<author>sbjornda</author>
	<datestamp>1247564160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>NASA is under orders to retain all data from planetary missions, including lunar missions. Once the data as been recovered, what are NASA's plans to archive and prevent the data from being lost over the next 40, or 400 years? How will they plan on making the data available to general public?</p></div><p>Writing it on papyrus and burying it in the sands of Egypt ought to get us through at least the next 2,000 years. It worked pretty well for the past couple of millenia.</p><p>--<br>.nosig</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>NASA is under orders to retain all data from planetary missions , including lunar missions .
Once the data as been recovered , what are NASA 's plans to archive and prevent the data from being lost over the next 40 , or 400 years ?
How will they plan on making the data available to general public ? Writing it on papyrus and burying it in the sands of Egypt ought to get us through at least the next 2,000 years .
It worked pretty well for the past couple of millenia.--.nosig</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NASA is under orders to retain all data from planetary missions, including lunar missions.
Once the data as been recovered, what are NASA's plans to archive and prevent the data from being lost over the next 40, or 400 years?
How will they plan on making the data available to general public?Writing it on papyrus and burying it in the sands of Egypt ought to get us through at least the next 2,000 years.
It worked pretty well for the past couple of millenia.--.nosig
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685169</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28687125</id>
	<title>Slysdexia ftw</title>
	<author>Cprossu</author>
	<datestamp>1247512560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I initially read "Nasa has lost the moon tapes"<br>and I was thinking, 'didn't they just find them????' and 'not another old regurgitated<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. article'</p><p>thankfully I read it wrong, I can't wait to see what I never got to see broadcasted live in the first place!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I initially read " Nasa has lost the moon tapes " and I was thinking , 'did n't they just find them ? ? ? ?
' and 'not another old regurgitated / .
article'thankfully I read it wrong , I ca n't wait to see what I never got to see broadcasted live in the first place !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I initially read "Nasa has lost the moon tapes"and I was thinking, 'didn't they just find them????
' and 'not another old regurgitated /.
article'thankfully I read it wrong, I can't wait to see what I never got to see broadcasted live in the first place!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688495</id>
	<title>You're crazy...</title>
	<author>jonaskoelker</author>
	<datestamp>1247571480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If they have found them, they are by definition not lost anymore.</p></div><p>Well then, I think I've found your marbles!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If they have found them , they are by definition not lost anymore.Well then , I think I 've found your marbles !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they have found them, they are by definition not lost anymore.Well then, I think I've found your marbles!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685193</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686329</id>
	<title>if moon landings were possible in 1969...</title>
	<author>DragonTHC</author>
	<datestamp>1247504340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>wouldn't they be common today?</p><p>surely technology has skyrocketed since then.</p><p>does anyone really remember what 'state of the art' was in 1969?</p><p>everything was overly heavy and large and bulky.  The IC had just been mass produced 6 years earlier.</p><p>In fact, every major advancement we achieved in any form of technology for the two decades after was due to the moon missions.</p><p>I'm just wondering why we haven't gone back?  No money?  No interest?</p><p>Not possible?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>would n't they be common today ? surely technology has skyrocketed since then.does anyone really remember what 'state of the art ' was in 1969 ? everything was overly heavy and large and bulky .
The IC had just been mass produced 6 years earlier.In fact , every major advancement we achieved in any form of technology for the two decades after was due to the moon missions.I 'm just wondering why we have n't gone back ?
No money ?
No interest ? Not possible ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>wouldn't they be common today?surely technology has skyrocketed since then.does anyone really remember what 'state of the art' was in 1969?everything was overly heavy and large and bulky.
The IC had just been mass produced 6 years earlier.In fact, every major advancement we achieved in any form of technology for the two decades after was due to the moon missions.I'm just wondering why we haven't gone back?
No money?
No interest?Not possible?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28693661</id>
	<title>Setup for censorship</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247597160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You'd have to be an idiot to put out live information of the moon landing when the goal was political (an attempt at a  peaceful cold war pissing contest.)  We'd have "lost" or simply falsely reported a disaster; not sent out video or audio of men screaming to death as their eyes pop out on camera.</p><p>To make us look technologically superior, we'd surely play it safe if not enhance some things... Some legit skeptics on the moon landing conspiracy side do not deny it happened, but they claim some of the images and events did not happen as NASA said they did.  Some idiots take that info and use it for their stupid claim it was all fake (completely ignoring the USSR had the means to verify it and would have loved to prove to the world we lied instead of admitting we did in fact do it.)</p><p>Ever since FOX NEWS ran a show with some ignorant but reasonable sounding claims, and a few actually interesting questions-- there has been a large number of complete idiot skeptics (fox news viewers are largely idiots afterall...)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 'd have to be an idiot to put out live information of the moon landing when the goal was political ( an attempt at a peaceful cold war pissing contest .
) We 'd have " lost " or simply falsely reported a disaster ; not sent out video or audio of men screaming to death as their eyes pop out on camera.To make us look technologically superior , we 'd surely play it safe if not enhance some things... Some legit skeptics on the moon landing conspiracy side do not deny it happened , but they claim some of the images and events did not happen as NASA said they did .
Some idiots take that info and use it for their stupid claim it was all fake ( completely ignoring the USSR had the means to verify it and would have loved to prove to the world we lied instead of admitting we did in fact do it .
) Ever since FOX NEWS ran a show with some ignorant but reasonable sounding claims , and a few actually interesting questions-- there has been a large number of complete idiot skeptics ( fox news viewers are largely idiots afterall... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You'd have to be an idiot to put out live information of the moon landing when the goal was political (an attempt at a  peaceful cold war pissing contest.
)  We'd have "lost" or simply falsely reported a disaster; not sent out video or audio of men screaming to death as their eyes pop out on camera.To make us look technologically superior, we'd surely play it safe if not enhance some things... Some legit skeptics on the moon landing conspiracy side do not deny it happened, but they claim some of the images and events did not happen as NASA said they did.
Some idiots take that info and use it for their stupid claim it was all fake (completely ignoring the USSR had the means to verify it and would have loved to prove to the world we lied instead of admitting we did in fact do it.
)Ever since FOX NEWS ran a show with some ignorant but reasonable sounding claims, and a few actually interesting questions-- there has been a large number of complete idiot skeptics (fox news viewers are largely idiots afterall...)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685069</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685375</id>
	<title>Typographical error.</title>
	<author>Larryish</author>
	<datestamp>1247497020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>As speculated a few weeks ago, NASA has found and is starting to <b>redact</b> the lost Apollo 11 tapes.</p></div><p>There, fixed that for ya.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As speculated a few weeks ago , NASA has found and is starting to redact the lost Apollo 11 tapes.There , fixed that for ya .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As speculated a few weeks ago, NASA has found and is starting to redact the lost Apollo 11 tapes.There, fixed that for ya.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28760641</id>
	<title>Jack and Shit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1248122520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>If I was in their position, I wouldn't even bother. Ever heard of extremophiles? If it's possible here, it's possible out there. Pure logic.

If the government doesn't want you to know, you're not going to.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If I was in their position , I would n't even bother .
Ever heard of extremophiles ?
If it 's possible here , it 's possible out there .
Pure logic .
If the government does n't want you to know , you 're not going to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I was in their position, I wouldn't even bother.
Ever heard of extremophiles?
If it's possible here, it's possible out there.
Pure logic.
If the government doesn't want you to know, you're not going to.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686647</id>
	<title>Re:Exciting News</title>
	<author>Tablizer</author>
	<datestamp>1247506980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I am especially excited about these tapes because I lived through the first moon landing.</p></div> </blockquote><p>What were you doing at the landing site anyhow? Did it hurt?<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am especially excited about these tapes because I lived through the first moon landing .
What were you doing at the landing site anyhow ?
Did it hurt ?
     </tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am especially excited about these tapes because I lived through the first moon landing.
What were you doing at the landing site anyhow?
Did it hurt?
     
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685065</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685169</id>
	<title>Future preservation plans?</title>
	<author>mjallison</author>
	<datestamp>1247494860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>NASA is under orders to retain all data from planetary missions, including lunar missions. Once the data as been recovered, what are NASA's plans to archive and prevent the data from being lost over the next 40, or 400 years? How will they plan on making the data available to general public?</htmltext>
<tokenext>NASA is under orders to retain all data from planetary missions , including lunar missions .
Once the data as been recovered , what are NASA 's plans to archive and prevent the data from being lost over the next 40 , or 400 years ?
How will they plan on making the data available to general public ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NASA is under orders to retain all data from planetary missions, including lunar missions.
Once the data as been recovered, what are NASA's plans to archive and prevent the data from being lost over the next 40, or 400 years?
How will they plan on making the data available to general public?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686591</id>
	<title>Re:Decade of the remakes?</title>
	<author>Lunzo</author>
	<datestamp>1247506500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's not any different from the original. Buzz won't land first in this one. They're just re-releasing it in high definition.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not any different from the original .
Buzz wo n't land first in this one .
They 're just re-releasing it in high definition .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not any different from the original.
Buzz won't land first in this one.
They're just re-releasing it in high definition.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685045</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684829</id>
	<title>Re:Can we....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247492040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes we can, however our parents will shout down the stairs for us to shut up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes we can , however our parents will shout down the stairs for us to shut up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes we can, however our parents will shout down the stairs for us to shut up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684799</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28687025</id>
	<title>Re:Greatly improved quality?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247510880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, but the Industrial Light &amp; Magic logo at the beginning makes some people a bit skeptic.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , but the Industrial Light &amp; Magic logo at the beginning makes some people a bit skeptic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, but the Industrial Light &amp; Magic logo at the beginning makes some people a bit skeptic.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684945</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28692113</id>
	<title>Re:Can we....</title>
	<author>drxenos</author>
	<datestamp>1247590980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Then I would tell them to get out of my house, and go home.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Then I would tell them to get out of my house , and go home .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then I would tell them to get out of my house, and go home.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684829</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685431</id>
	<title>sstv modes?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247497800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>According to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slow-scan\_television#Modes" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">wikipedia</a> [wikipedia.org] the highest resolution I can see there is 256x256, I'm not exactly sure I understand how any greater quality cant be seen on something that small.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>According to wikipedia [ wikipedia.org ] the highest resolution I can see there is 256x256 , I 'm not exactly sure I understand how any greater quality cant be seen on something that small .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According to wikipedia [wikipedia.org] the highest resolution I can see there is 256x256, I'm not exactly sure I understand how any greater quality cant be seen on something that small.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28715389</id>
	<title>NOT the lost tapes, just a cleanup of existing VT</title>
	<author>yoshac</author>
	<datestamp>1247752740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>ITEM 1 - NASA RELEASES PRELIMINARY RESTORED APOLLO 11 VIDEO &#226;" GSFC (NEW)

To commemorate the 40th anniversary of Apollo 11, NASA released partially restored video of a series
of 15 memorable moments from the July 20 moonwalk. The source material for the restoration project is
the best of the available broadcast-format video. Lowry Digital, Burbank, Calif., is significantly enhancing
the video using the company&#226;(TM)s proprietary software technology and other restoration techniques. The
video is part of a larger restoration project that will be completed in September and provide a newly
restored high definition video of the entire Apollo 11 moonwalk. The completed restoration will provide
the public with the highest quality video of this historic event.

(Video shows the partially restored footage of the Apollo 11 astronauts taking their first steps on the
moon and other scenes of significance.  NASA plans to release the fully restored Apollo 11 video later
this fall. )

TRT:  22:00
Super:  NASA
Center Contact:  Rani Gran, 301.286.8955
HQ Contact: John Yembrick, 202-358-0602
For more info: www.nasa.gov/apollo40th</htmltext>
<tokenext>ITEM 1 - NASA RELEASES PRELIMINARY RESTORED APOLLO 11 VIDEO   " GSFC ( NEW ) To commemorate the 40th anniversary of Apollo 11 , NASA released partially restored video of a series of 15 memorable moments from the July 20 moonwalk .
The source material for the restoration project is the best of the available broadcast-format video .
Lowry Digital , Burbank , Calif. , is significantly enhancing the video using the company   ( TM ) s proprietary software technology and other restoration techniques .
The video is part of a larger restoration project that will be completed in September and provide a newly restored high definition video of the entire Apollo 11 moonwalk .
The completed restoration will provide the public with the highest quality video of this historic event .
( Video shows the partially restored footage of the Apollo 11 astronauts taking their first steps on the moon and other scenes of significance .
NASA plans to release the fully restored Apollo 11 video later this fall .
) TRT : 22 : 00 Super : NASA Center Contact : Rani Gran , 301.286.8955 HQ Contact : John Yembrick , 202-358-0602 For more info : www.nasa.gov/apollo40th</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ITEM 1 - NASA RELEASES PRELIMINARY RESTORED APOLLO 11 VIDEO â" GSFC (NEW)

To commemorate the 40th anniversary of Apollo 11, NASA released partially restored video of a series
of 15 memorable moments from the July 20 moonwalk.
The source material for the restoration project is
the best of the available broadcast-format video.
Lowry Digital, Burbank, Calif., is significantly enhancing
the video using the companyâ(TM)s proprietary software technology and other restoration techniques.
The
video is part of a larger restoration project that will be completed in September and provide a newly
restored high definition video of the entire Apollo 11 moonwalk.
The completed restoration will provide
the public with the highest quality video of this historic event.
(Video shows the partially restored footage of the Apollo 11 astronauts taking their first steps on the
moon and other scenes of significance.
NASA plans to release the fully restored Apollo 11 video later
this fall.
)

TRT:  22:00
Super:  NASA
Center Contact:  Rani Gran, 301.286.8955
HQ Contact: John Yembrick, 202-358-0602
For more info: www.nasa.gov/apollo40th</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686335</id>
	<title>Re:Lies, more lies and DAMN LIES!!!!</title>
	<author>MeatBag PussRocket</author>
	<datestamp>1247504400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>wow... nerds apparently have a terrible grasp on humor, i thought the tinfoilhat reference would clear mea of any allegations of flambait, clearly this situation is confimed antecdotal evidence that nerds cannot read.... i \_must\_ make a submission on this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>wow... nerds apparently have a terrible grasp on humor , i thought the tinfoilhat reference would clear mea of any allegations of flambait , clearly this situation is confimed antecdotal evidence that nerds can not read.... i \ _must \ _ make a submission on this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>wow... nerds apparently have a terrible grasp on humor, i thought the tinfoilhat reference would clear mea of any allegations of flambait, clearly this situation is confimed antecdotal evidence that nerds cannot read.... i \_must\_ make a submission on this.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685075</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28687943</id>
	<title>Re:Lost Tapes</title>
	<author>L4t3r4lu5</author>
	<datestamp>1247564940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wasn't the second season where Hurley had flashbacks <b>all the time</b>? I mean I know he <i>looks</i> like a fat hippy, but really... That's just not politically correct, guys.<br> <br> <b>And I still don't know what that frigging black smoke was!!</b> God damn it, that show irritated the shit out of me...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Was n't the second season where Hurley had flashbacks all the time ?
I mean I know he looks like a fat hippy , but really... That 's just not politically correct , guys .
And I still do n't know what that frigging black smoke was ! !
God damn it , that show irritated the shit out of me.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wasn't the second season where Hurley had flashbacks all the time?
I mean I know he looks like a fat hippy, but really... That's just not politically correct, guys.
And I still don't know what that frigging black smoke was!!
God damn it, that show irritated the shit out of me...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684911</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685047</id>
	<title>Seen the new footage and...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247493660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Our new junkie alien overlords seem to be asking for 10\% of our children.</p><p>They can have my wife too, I insist.</p><p>GD</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Our new junkie alien overlords seem to be asking for 10 \ % of our children.They can have my wife too , I insist.GD</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Our new junkie alien overlords seem to be asking for 10\% of our children.They can have my wife too, I insist.GD</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685797</id>
	<title>Excellent, this is HD quality footage</title>
	<author>SuperKendall</author>
	<datestamp>1247500260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At WWDC this year (the Apple developer conference) they had a lunch speaker whose whole job was recovering video from tapes exactly like these.   The resolution you can get from them is amazing, they are equivalent (or perhaps surpass) modern HD video cameras.  One example was comparing a video pass over the moon to the same are taken with 35mm film, the result wasn't even close - the recovered video offered far more detail.</p><p>I am really looking forward to the footage from this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At WWDC this year ( the Apple developer conference ) they had a lunch speaker whose whole job was recovering video from tapes exactly like these .
The resolution you can get from them is amazing , they are equivalent ( or perhaps surpass ) modern HD video cameras .
One example was comparing a video pass over the moon to the same are taken with 35mm film , the result was n't even close - the recovered video offered far more detail.I am really looking forward to the footage from this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At WWDC this year (the Apple developer conference) they had a lunch speaker whose whole job was recovering video from tapes exactly like these.
The resolution you can get from them is amazing, they are equivalent (or perhaps surpass) modern HD video cameras.
One example was comparing a video pass over the moon to the same are taken with 35mm film, the result wasn't even close - the recovered video offered far more detail.I am really looking forward to the footage from this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28690917</id>
	<title>Pyramids of Giza</title>
	<author>ObsessiveMathsFreak</author>
	<datestamp>1247585760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If the construction of the Pyramids was possible in 2500 BC....<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...wouldn't they be common today?</p><p>Surely technology has skyrocketed since then.</p><p>Does anyone really remember what 'state of the art' was in 2500 BC? They didn't even have cranes.</p><p>Everything was overly heavy and large and bulky. Most tools were made of wood and stone or copper. The Iron Age hadn't even begun.</p><p>In fact, every major advancement we achieved in any form of technology for two centuries after was due to the construction of the pyramids.</p><p>I'm just wondering why we haven't built more? No money? No interest?</p><p>Not possible?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If the construction of the Pyramids was possible in 2500 BC.... ...would n't they be common today ? Surely technology has skyrocketed since then.Does anyone really remember what 'state of the art ' was in 2500 BC ?
They did n't even have cranes.Everything was overly heavy and large and bulky .
Most tools were made of wood and stone or copper .
The Iron Age had n't even begun.In fact , every major advancement we achieved in any form of technology for two centuries after was due to the construction of the pyramids.I 'm just wondering why we have n't built more ?
No money ?
No interest ? Not possible ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the construction of the Pyramids was possible in 2500 BC.... ...wouldn't they be common today?Surely technology has skyrocketed since then.Does anyone really remember what 'state of the art' was in 2500 BC?
They didn't even have cranes.Everything was overly heavy and large and bulky.
Most tools were made of wood and stone or copper.
The Iron Age hadn't even begun.In fact, every major advancement we achieved in any form of technology for two centuries after was due to the construction of the pyramids.I'm just wondering why we haven't built more?
No money?
No interest?Not possible?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686329</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684799</id>
	<title>Can we....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247491740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>actually now go around and start yelling at the top of our lungs "THEY FOUND THE TAPES!!!!!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>actually now go around and start yelling at the top of our lungs " THEY FOUND THE TAPES ! ! ! ! !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>actually now go around and start yelling at the top of our lungs "THEY FOUND THE TAPES!!!!!
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685507</id>
	<title>ahem</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247498520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>don't you mean NASA has finished sanitising the lost tapes?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>do n't you mean NASA has finished sanitising the lost tapes ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>don't you mean NASA has finished sanitising the lost tapes?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688513</id>
	<title>Re:In answer to your question</title>
	<author>Yvanhoe</author>
	<datestamp>1247571660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>But HD quality will provide them with newer proofs that we never landed there. You know, I am waiting fot his, these conspiracy theories are always funny and I usually learn some science I did not know when reading the retorts.</htmltext>
<tokenext>But HD quality will provide them with newer proofs that we never landed there .
You know , I am waiting fot his , these conspiracy theories are always funny and I usually learn some science I did not know when reading the retorts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But HD quality will provide them with newer proofs that we never landed there.
You know, I am waiting fot his, these conspiracy theories are always funny and I usually learn some science I did not know when reading the retorts.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685069</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688471</id>
	<title>if you believe.. they put a man on the moon..</title>
	<author>biancmb</author>
	<datestamp>1247571120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hellooo??!!!
Do you really think they took rovers with them but not a single telescope and did not take any picture of the stars?
Hellooo??!!!
Is anybody out there with a sane mind?
YES, NASA did downgrade the images sent to the world by the media.
Guess why.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hellooo ? ? ! ! !
Do you really think they took rovers with them but not a single telescope and did not take any picture of the stars ?
Hellooo ? ? ! ! ! Is anybody out there with a sane mind ?
YES , NASA did downgrade the images sent to the world by the media .
Guess why .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hellooo??!!!
Do you really think they took rovers with them but not a single telescope and did not take any picture of the stars?
Hellooo??!!!
Is anybody out there with a sane mind?
YES, NASA did downgrade the images sent to the world by the media.
Guess why.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686993</id>
	<title>Re:Greatly improved quality?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247510400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It must be true. I heard it on <a href="http://coasttocoastam.com/" title="coasttocoastam.com" rel="nofollow">Coast To Coast AM!</a> [coasttocoastam.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It must be true .
I heard it on Coast To Coast AM !
[ coasttocoastam.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It must be true.
I heard it on Coast To Coast AM!
[coasttocoastam.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684945</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685429</id>
	<title>What took so freaking long?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247497800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Instead of doing this themselves they should have just shopped it out to Weta Digital. We would have had it years sooner. Probably higher quality as well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Instead of doing this themselves they should have just shopped it out to Weta Digital .
We would have had it years sooner .
Probably higher quality as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Instead of doing this themselves they should have just shopped it out to Weta Digital.
We would have had it years sooner.
Probably higher quality as well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28689435</id>
	<title>Re:Greatly improved quality?</title>
	<author>AlecC</author>
	<datestamp>1247579280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>262.5 lines per field, interlaced scan, is 525 lines per frame - the current NTSC standard definition. This was 320 line non-interlaced, 10 fps. But modern digital processing can make a pretty good job of converting to any reasonable line standard and frame rate. It is going to look a lot better this time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>262.5 lines per field , interlaced scan , is 525 lines per frame - the current NTSC standard definition .
This was 320 line non-interlaced , 10 fps .
But modern digital processing can make a pretty good job of converting to any reasonable line standard and frame rate .
It is going to look a lot better this time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>262.5 lines per field, interlaced scan, is 525 lines per frame - the current NTSC standard definition.
This was 320 line non-interlaced, 10 fps.
But modern digital processing can make a pretty good job of converting to any reasonable line standard and frame rate.
It is going to look a lot better this time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685061</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686787</id>
	<title>Existing video is a Film recording of broadcast</title>
	<author>robbak</author>
	<datestamp>1247508060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just one thing additional thing I learned from that document: It seems that all existing video is film of CRT screens displaying a live feed of the broadcast signals. So we have the scan conversion, which was lossy, and then the broadcast 60i (or 50i) to film (more lossage and noise), and then film - digital video (as little loss as possible). No wonder the video looks so horrid!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just one thing additional thing I learned from that document : It seems that all existing video is film of CRT screens displaying a live feed of the broadcast signals .
So we have the scan conversion , which was lossy , and then the broadcast 60i ( or 50i ) to film ( more lossage and noise ) , and then film - digital video ( as little loss as possible ) .
No wonder the video looks so horrid !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just one thing additional thing I learned from that document: It seems that all existing video is film of CRT screens displaying a live feed of the broadcast signals.
So we have the scan conversion, which was lossy, and then the broadcast 60i (or 50i) to film (more lossage and noise), and then film - digital video (as little loss as possible).
No wonder the video looks so horrid!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685261</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685013</id>
	<title>Then they're not bloody well lost, are, they?</title>
	<author>EsJay</author>
	<datestamp>1247493300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ahem</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ahem</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ahem</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684847</id>
	<title>Greatly improved quality?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247492160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Umm, according to the technical specifications NASA itself published, the SSTV only had two modes -- 320 was the only mode used during the mission. The other mode, operating at 1280 lines, was never engaged according to mission reports from Apollo 9, 11, 13, and 14, which were the only ones to use a module capable of scanning higher than 320 lines (standard TV).</p><p>Where, pray tell, did these tapes come from if the machinery was never enabled to run in that operating mode?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Umm , according to the technical specifications NASA itself published , the SSTV only had two modes -- 320 was the only mode used during the mission .
The other mode , operating at 1280 lines , was never engaged according to mission reports from Apollo 9 , 11 , 13 , and 14 , which were the only ones to use a module capable of scanning higher than 320 lines ( standard TV ) .Where , pray tell , did these tapes come from if the machinery was never enabled to run in that operating mode ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Umm, according to the technical specifications NASA itself published, the SSTV only had two modes -- 320 was the only mode used during the mission.
The other mode, operating at 1280 lines, was never engaged according to mission reports from Apollo 9, 11, 13, and 14, which were the only ones to use a module capable of scanning higher than 320 lines (standard TV).Where, pray tell, did these tapes come from if the machinery was never enabled to run in that operating mode?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684947
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685419
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686329
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28690917
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685007
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685169
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28694663
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685069
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688931
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685069
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28687087
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688575
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685065
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28698993
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685123
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28689197
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685169
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686635
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684945
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28687025
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28687859
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685069
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28693661
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685169
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688813
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684829
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28692113
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685061
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685261
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686787
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684957
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685169
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28689637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685189
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28691741
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685069
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686583
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688797
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685069
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28687087
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28690151
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685169
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28687835
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685189
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685735
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685061
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28689435
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685193
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688495
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686419
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685061
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686799
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685069
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688513
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685189
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688159
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28692047
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685797
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28691183
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685169
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688107
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684731
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684869
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685193
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686147
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686395
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685031
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688177
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685193
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28687971
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685381
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28695999
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684945
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686993
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684947
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686413
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684781
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688307
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28693871
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685169
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28695841
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685169
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686263
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684951
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685297
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685069
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28687087
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28687537
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685031
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685159
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684947
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685167
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686351
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684911
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28687943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685045
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686591
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685987
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685169
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28694933
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685075
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685353
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685193
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686339
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685065
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686647
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685193
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28687399
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685075
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686335
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684859
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684961
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685169
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685843
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686329
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686607
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685031
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686001
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684947
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685315
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686329
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28687779
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685193
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686397
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685193
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28689443
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685193
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688441
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2342220_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685169
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28700471
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2342220.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685431
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2342220.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688471
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28692047
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2342220.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685169
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28689637
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688107
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686635
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28700471
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686263
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688813
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685843
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28694663
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28687835
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28695841
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28694933
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2342220.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685123
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28689197
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2342220.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684911
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28687943
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2342220.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684951
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685297
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2342220.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684915
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2342220.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684731
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684869
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2342220.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684859
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684961
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2342220.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685305
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2342220.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685189
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688159
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685735
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28691741
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2342220.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684947
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685315
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685419
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685167
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686351
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686413
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2342220.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688033
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2342220.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685031
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685159
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686001
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688177
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2342220.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685193
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686339
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688441
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686397
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28689443
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688495
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686147
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686395
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686847
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28687971
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2342220.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684781
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688307
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28693871
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2342220.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684847
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28687399
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686419
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685007
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684957
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685061
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686799
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28689435
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685261
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686787
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684945
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686993
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28687025
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2342220.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686553
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2342220.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28689871
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2342220.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685047
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2342220.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685069
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28693661
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688513
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686583
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688797
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688931
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28687087
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28687537
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28690151
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28688575
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2342220.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685381
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28695999
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2342220.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686329
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28690917
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28687779
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686607
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2342220.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685075
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685353
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686335
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2342220.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685797
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28691183
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2342220.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684799
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28687859
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685987
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28684829
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28692113
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2342220.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685045
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686591
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2342220.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28685065
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28686647
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2342220.28698993
</commentlist>
</conversation>
