<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_26_1927228</id>
	<title>NASA Concedes Defeat In Effort To Free Spirit Rover</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1264494360000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"NASA has <a href="http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/20100126/nasa-concedes-defeat-effort-free-rover.htm">conceded defeat in its battle to free the Spirit rover</a> from its Martian sand trap. The vehicle became stuck in soft soil back in May last year and <a href="//science.slashdot.org/story/09/11/14/0218207/NASA-To-Try-Powering-Mars-Rover-Spirit-Out-of-Sand-Trap">all</a> the <a href="//science.slashdot.org/story/10/01/01/198243/NASA-Mars-Rover-Spirit-May-Move-Forward-By-Spinning-Its-Wheels">efforts</a> to <a href="//science.slashdot.org/story/10/01/04/1550216/End-of-the-Road-For-NASAs-Mars-Rover">extricate</a> it have failed. NASA says that Spirit, which landed on the Red Planet over six years ago, will 'no longer be a fully mobile robot,' and has instead designated the once-roving scientific explorer a stationary science platform."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " NASA has conceded defeat in its battle to free the Spirit rover from its Martian sand trap .
The vehicle became stuck in soft soil back in May last year and all the efforts to extricate it have failed .
NASA says that Spirit , which landed on the Red Planet over six years ago , will 'no longer be a fully mobile robot, ' and has instead designated the once-roving scientific explorer a stationary science platform .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "NASA has conceded defeat in its battle to free the Spirit rover from its Martian sand trap.
The vehicle became stuck in soft soil back in May last year and all the efforts to extricate it have failed.
NASA says that Spirit, which landed on the Red Planet over six years ago, will 'no longer be a fully mobile robot,' and has instead designated the once-roving scientific explorer a stationary science platform.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909522</id>
	<title>i didn't know mars</title>
	<author>circletimessquare</author>
	<datestamp>1264498920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>had sarlacci</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>had sarlacci</tokentext>
<sentencetext>had sarlacci</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910210</id>
	<title>More money wasted</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264501800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yet another space program failure. How many more will it take before they understand that this has no point? Why are we even spending money on this anyway?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yet another space program failure .
How many more will it take before they understand that this has no point ?
Why are we even spending money on this anyway ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yet another space program failure.
How many more will it take before they understand that this has no point?
Why are we even spending money on this anyway?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909648</id>
	<title>Oh frigid death!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264499340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Having lost its mobility, NASA engineers will finally be able to execute the 'suicide' command, and have the rover destroy itself. Little do they know, however, that Bob (the old and crusty software engineer) slipped in a rather generic sector loop virus which will accidentally give the rover Artificial Intelligence upon execution of the 'suicide' command. Needless to say, Spirit will be waiting patiently for the first humans to set foot on Mars in the coming decades, so it can enact its cold, calculated, and bloody revenge.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Having lost its mobility , NASA engineers will finally be able to execute the 'suicide ' command , and have the rover destroy itself .
Little do they know , however , that Bob ( the old and crusty software engineer ) slipped in a rather generic sector loop virus which will accidentally give the rover Artificial Intelligence upon execution of the 'suicide ' command .
Needless to say , Spirit will be waiting patiently for the first humans to set foot on Mars in the coming decades , so it can enact its cold , calculated , and bloody revenge .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Having lost its mobility, NASA engineers will finally be able to execute the 'suicide' command, and have the rover destroy itself.
Little do they know, however, that Bob (the old and crusty software engineer) slipped in a rather generic sector loop virus which will accidentally give the rover Artificial Intelligence upon execution of the 'suicide' command.
Needless to say, Spirit will be waiting patiently for the first humans to set foot on Mars in the coming decades, so it can enact its cold, calculated, and bloody revenge.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910076</id>
	<title>Spirit's Theme Song</title>
	<author>RevWaldo</author>
	<datestamp>1264501260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>
Gladys Knight &amp; The Pips - I've Got To Use My Imagination<br>
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kPFrQPdKPM" title="youtube.com">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kPFrQPdKPM</a> [youtube.com] <br>
<br>
I've really got to use my imagination<br>
To think of good reasons<br>
To keep on keepin' on<br>
<br>
Got to make the best of a bad situation<br>
Ever since that day<br>
I woke up and found<br>
That you were gone<br>
<br>
Darkness all around me<br>
Blocking out the sun<br>
Old friends call me<br>
But I just don't feel like talkin' to anyone<br>
<br>
Emptiness has found me<br>
And it just won't let me go<br>
I go right on livin'<br>
But why I just don't know<br>
<br>
<i>You're too strong not to keep on keepin' on</i> <br>
Yes, I am!<br>
<i>You're too strong not to keep on keepin' on</i> <br>
<br>
Staring down reality<br>
Don't do me no good<br>
'Cause our misunderstanding<br>
Is too well understood<br>
<br>
Such a sad, sad season<br>
When a good love dies.<br>
Not a day goes by<br>
When I don't realize<br>
<br>
I've really got to use my imagination<br>
To think of good reasons<br>
To keep on keepin' on<br>
<br>
I got to make the best of a bad situation<br>
Ever since that day<br>
I woke up and found<br>
That you were gone<br>
<br>
<i>You're too strong not to keep on keepin' on</i> <br>
I've really got to use a good imagination<br>
To think of good reasons<br>
To keep on pushin' on<br>
<br>I got to make the best of a bad situation<br>
Ever since that day<br>
I woke up and found<br>
That you were gone<br>
<br>
<i>You're too strong not to keep on keepin' on...</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Gladys Knight &amp; The Pips - I 've Got To Use My Imagination http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = 0kPFrQPdKPM [ youtube.com ] I 've really got to use my imagination To think of good reasons To keep on keepin ' on Got to make the best of a bad situation Ever since that day I woke up and found That you were gone Darkness all around me Blocking out the sun Old friends call me But I just do n't feel like talkin ' to anyone Emptiness has found me And it just wo n't let me go I go right on livin ' But why I just do n't know You 're too strong not to keep on keepin ' on Yes , I am !
You 're too strong not to keep on keepin ' on Staring down reality Do n't do me no good 'Cause our misunderstanding Is too well understood Such a sad , sad season When a good love dies .
Not a day goes by When I do n't realize I 've really got to use my imagination To think of good reasons To keep on keepin ' on I got to make the best of a bad situation Ever since that day I woke up and found That you were gone You 're too strong not to keep on keepin ' on I 've really got to use a good imagination To think of good reasons To keep on pushin ' on I got to make the best of a bad situation Ever since that day I woke up and found That you were gone You 're too strong not to keep on keepin ' on.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Gladys Knight &amp; The Pips - I've Got To Use My Imagination
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kPFrQPdKPM [youtube.com] 

I've really got to use my imagination
To think of good reasons
To keep on keepin' on

Got to make the best of a bad situation
Ever since that day
I woke up and found
That you were gone

Darkness all around me
Blocking out the sun
Old friends call me
But I just don't feel like talkin' to anyone

Emptiness has found me
And it just won't let me go
I go right on livin'
But why I just don't know

You're too strong not to keep on keepin' on 
Yes, I am!
You're too strong not to keep on keepin' on 

Staring down reality
Don't do me no good
'Cause our misunderstanding
Is too well understood

Such a sad, sad season
When a good love dies.
Not a day goes by
When I don't realize

I've really got to use my imagination
To think of good reasons
To keep on keepin' on

I got to make the best of a bad situation
Ever since that day
I woke up and found
That you were gone

You're too strong not to keep on keepin' on 
I've really got to use a good imagination
To think of good reasons
To keep on pushin' on
I got to make the best of a bad situation
Ever since that day
I woke up and found
That you were gone

You're too strong not to keep on keepin' on...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911316</id>
	<title>Re:Free as... ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264507200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Free as in beer or free as in speech ?</p></div><p>Free spirit.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Free as in beer or free as in speech ? Free spirit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Free as in beer or free as in speech ?Free spirit.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911116</id>
	<title>Re:Oblig. chauvinism</title>
	<author>camperdave</author>
	<datestamp>1264505880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually, <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJkUw8XS9tI" title="youtube.com">several</a> [youtube.com] of the <a href="http://www.nasa.gov/audience/foreducators/robotics/careercorner/Julie\_Townsend.html" title="nasa.gov">rover drivers</a> [nasa.gov] are female.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , several [ youtube.com ] of the rover drivers [ nasa.gov ] are female .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, several [youtube.com] of the rover drivers [nasa.gov] are female.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909552</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910052</id>
	<title>Is this like</title>
	<author>SnarfQuest</author>
	<datestamp>1264501080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is this like those people who have an old car sitting on concrete blocks in their front yard?</p><p>What are the aliens going to think of us when we have these vehicles abandoned all over the place. Won't it cause property values to drop, having these rusting carcases leaking noxious fluids all over the yard?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is this like those people who have an old car sitting on concrete blocks in their front yard ? What are the aliens going to think of us when we have these vehicles abandoned all over the place .
Wo n't it cause property values to drop , having these rusting carcases leaking noxious fluids all over the yard ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is this like those people who have an old car sitting on concrete blocks in their front yard?What are the aliens going to think of us when we have these vehicles abandoned all over the place.
Won't it cause property values to drop, having these rusting carcases leaking noxious fluids all over the yard?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30913582</id>
	<title>In outer space you can't hear</title>
	<author>clint999</author>
	<datestamp>1264527000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>After billions of taxpayer dollars spent, what do we have with NASA? Nothing but a crappy robot stuck in the sand. Typical government incompetence. The *billions* spend on this mars rover fiasco could easily have been better spent by the private sector, who would have run this project with great speed, cost effectiveness and no doubt better results in every way. When will we ever learn that the private sector is better at space exploration (and everything else, really) than the bloated inefficient union-run government?</p></div></blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>After billions of taxpayer dollars spent , what do we have with NASA ?
Nothing but a crappy robot stuck in the sand .
Typical government incompetence .
The * billions * spend on this mars rover fiasco could easily have been better spent by the private sector , who would have run this project with great speed , cost effectiveness and no doubt better results in every way .
When will we ever learn that the private sector is better at space exploration ( and everything else , really ) than the bloated inefficient union-run government ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After billions of taxpayer dollars spent, what do we have with NASA?
Nothing but a crappy robot stuck in the sand.
Typical government incompetence.
The *billions* spend on this mars rover fiasco could easily have been better spent by the private sector, who would have run this project with great speed, cost effectiveness and no doubt better results in every way.
When will we ever learn that the private sector is better at space exploration (and everything else, really) than the bloated inefficient union-run government?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910870</id>
	<title>Re:Nevertheless, still doing science!</title>
	<author>NeutronCowboy</author>
	<datestamp>1264504560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It seems the AC posted AC because he had mod points. Quite a few people pointing out the utter stupidity of the AC post are getting modded flamebait...Sometimes, dear AC, calling someone out for their abyssal ignorance is informative, impolite language or not.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems the AC posted AC because he had mod points .
Quite a few people pointing out the utter stupidity of the AC post are getting modded flamebait...Sometimes , dear AC , calling someone out for their abyssal ignorance is informative , impolite language or not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems the AC posted AC because he had mod points.
Quite a few people pointing out the utter stupidity of the AC post are getting modded flamebait...Sometimes, dear AC, calling someone out for their abyssal ignorance is informative, impolite language or not.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909654</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30912450</id>
	<title>Re:Nevertheless, still doing science!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264514940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So what, pray tell, would have been the advantage of sending a human</p></div><p>He wouldn't get stuck in the sand?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So what , pray tell , would have been the advantage of sending a humanHe would n't get stuck in the sand ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So what, pray tell, would have been the advantage of sending a humanHe wouldn't get stuck in the sand?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909904</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909328</id>
	<title>Defeat? Nah.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264498080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>A stationary science platform on Mars? Sounds awesome! Way to go NASA, you've had hits and misses, but this one was fantastic.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A stationary science platform on Mars ?
Sounds awesome !
Way to go NASA , you 've had hits and misses , but this one was fantastic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A stationary science platform on Mars?
Sounds awesome!
Way to go NASA, you've had hits and misses, but this one was fantastic.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910602</id>
	<title>Re:Oh frigid death!</title>
	<author>mrsquid0</author>
	<datestamp>1264503300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, we need to be sure that Val Kilmer is the first man on Mars.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , we need to be sure that Val Kilmer is the first man on Mars .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, we need to be sure that Val Kilmer is the first man on Mars.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30912892</id>
	<title>Next time use a continuous track design.</title>
	<author>zymano</author>
	<datestamp>1264519380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why not?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why not ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why not?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318</id>
	<title>Nevertheless, still doing science!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264498020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nevertheless, we're still doing science-- there's a lot of stuff that we can do even <i>without</i> driving around.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nevertheless , we 're still doing science-- there 's a lot of stuff that we can do even without driving around .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nevertheless, we're still doing science-- there's a lot of stuff that we can do even without driving around.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30915410</id>
	<title>Re:Nevertheless, still doing science!</title>
	<author>c6gunner</author>
	<datestamp>1264596780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think you're underestimating the cost required for a manned mission.  The low-ball figure for a manned Mars mission is $20 billion, and, IMO, that's completely unrealistic.  A cost of $200 billion or more seems much more likely.  Even with the lowest figure, though, a manned mission would cost about 60-70 times as much as a single rover mission.</p><p>I also think you're wrong about the "less science" bit.  Take, for example, the Viking lander.  As part of it's mission, it made a 6-inch-deep trench in the Martian soil.  If it had dug down a few more inches, chances are that in 1976 we would have known that Mars has water.  Instead we had to wait 30 years to get that information.  A manned mission could accomplish more in a day than we've learned in the last decade.</p><p>You're right - we WILL need to send people to mars eventually.  Until then, the rovers are an excellent way to reconnoiter the area before we get there, at a relatively low price.  Manned and remote-operated missions both have a roll to play.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you 're underestimating the cost required for a manned mission .
The low-ball figure for a manned Mars mission is $ 20 billion , and , IMO , that 's completely unrealistic .
A cost of $ 200 billion or more seems much more likely .
Even with the lowest figure , though , a manned mission would cost about 60-70 times as much as a single rover mission.I also think you 're wrong about the " less science " bit .
Take , for example , the Viking lander .
As part of it 's mission , it made a 6-inch-deep trench in the Martian soil .
If it had dug down a few more inches , chances are that in 1976 we would have known that Mars has water .
Instead we had to wait 30 years to get that information .
A manned mission could accomplish more in a day than we 've learned in the last decade.You 're right - we WILL need to send people to mars eventually .
Until then , the rovers are an excellent way to reconnoiter the area before we get there , at a relatively low price .
Manned and remote-operated missions both have a roll to play .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you're underestimating the cost required for a manned mission.
The low-ball figure for a manned Mars mission is $20 billion, and, IMO, that's completely unrealistic.
A cost of $200 billion or more seems much more likely.
Even with the lowest figure, though, a manned mission would cost about 60-70 times as much as a single rover mission.I also think you're wrong about the "less science" bit.
Take, for example, the Viking lander.
As part of it's mission, it made a 6-inch-deep trench in the Martian soil.
If it had dug down a few more inches, chances are that in 1976 we would have known that Mars has water.
Instead we had to wait 30 years to get that information.
A manned mission could accomplish more in a day than we've learned in the last decade.You're right - we WILL need to send people to mars eventually.
Until then, the rovers are an excellent way to reconnoiter the area before we get there, at a relatively low price.
Manned and remote-operated missions both have a roll to play.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909904</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910980</id>
	<title>ETs can't be bothered this time...</title>
	<author>amn108</author>
	<datestamp>1264505160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can't expect sentient extraterrestrials to help out every time, you know<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ca n't expect sentient extraterrestrials to help out every time , you know ; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can't expect sentient extraterrestrials to help out every time, you know ;-)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910822</id>
	<title>We need less science, and more engineering</title>
	<author>Rix</author>
	<datestamp>1264504380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or at the very least, less pure science and more practical, applicable science.</p><p>Yes, whether or not there was ever life and/or water on Mars are very interesting questions, but they won't pay the bills. We should be looking for valuables and other means to support self sustaining installations and then do the pure science on the side.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or at the very least , less pure science and more practical , applicable science.Yes , whether or not there was ever life and/or water on Mars are very interesting questions , but they wo n't pay the bills .
We should be looking for valuables and other means to support self sustaining installations and then do the pure science on the side .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or at the very least, less pure science and more practical, applicable science.Yes, whether or not there was ever life and/or water on Mars are very interesting questions, but they won't pay the bills.
We should be looking for valuables and other means to support self sustaining installations and then do the pure science on the side.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909904</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909478</id>
	<title>Send another robot maybe?</title>
	<author>tjstork</author>
	<datestamp>1264498740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think the next time we do robots on mars we should send them in pairs or teams so they can push each other out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the next time we do robots on mars we should send them in pairs or teams so they can push each other out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the next time we do robots on mars we should send them in pairs or teams so they can push each other out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30913110</id>
	<title>Re:Nevertheless, still doing science!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264521600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I assume you mean an exponential 10 rather than a multiplier.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I assume you mean an exponential 10 rather than a multiplier .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I assume you mean an exponential 10 rather than a multiplier.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909954</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910294</id>
	<title>Re:Nevertheless, still doing science!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264502100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Lindbergh didn't need the US tax dollar to fly across the atlantic and get his ticker tape parade. nasa needs more and more to deliver less and less. the shuttle is an expensive unreliable disaster compared to what commercial space flight is already beginning to offer. nasa shills will always argue for more, always pat each other on the back and always work towards keeping their monopoly. if nasa had gotten out of the way 20 years ago we'd now be looking at commercial round trips to mars. instead we have an overly bureaucratic slow moving monster of an organisation trying desparately to justify its expense. too little, too late. space is opening up and it is time for nasa to be put to rest along with it's martian toy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Lindbergh did n't need the US tax dollar to fly across the atlantic and get his ticker tape parade .
nasa needs more and more to deliver less and less .
the shuttle is an expensive unreliable disaster compared to what commercial space flight is already beginning to offer .
nasa shills will always argue for more , always pat each other on the back and always work towards keeping their monopoly .
if nasa had gotten out of the way 20 years ago we 'd now be looking at commercial round trips to mars .
instead we have an overly bureaucratic slow moving monster of an organisation trying desparately to justify its expense .
too little , too late .
space is opening up and it is time for nasa to be put to rest along with it 's martian toy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lindbergh didn't need the US tax dollar to fly across the atlantic and get his ticker tape parade.
nasa needs more and more to deliver less and less.
the shuttle is an expensive unreliable disaster compared to what commercial space flight is already beginning to offer.
nasa shills will always argue for more, always pat each other on the back and always work towards keeping their monopoly.
if nasa had gotten out of the way 20 years ago we'd now be looking at commercial round trips to mars.
instead we have an overly bureaucratic slow moving monster of an organisation trying desparately to justify its expense.
too little, too late.
space is opening up and it is time for nasa to be put to rest along with it's martian toy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909904</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911460</id>
	<title>Re:Nevertheless, still doing science!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264508100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>then send a few more robots to build a permanent, self-sustaining base there. THEN we send people.</p></div><p> You seem to be oblivious to the fact that controlling remotely robots from Earth is terribly difficult, due to the huge time lag. It would take centuries to build a "self sustaining base", with remotely controlled robots.</p><p>Oh, you meant smart AI that needs no remote control? It will take a couple of centuries to DESIGN such robots, so all in all, we're better off sending people to Mars in the next decade or two. I'm getting tired of the ultra-cautious types like you. We'd be printing from woodcuts if things went at the pace you have in mind.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>then send a few more robots to build a permanent , self-sustaining base there .
THEN we send people .
You seem to be oblivious to the fact that controlling remotely robots from Earth is terribly difficult , due to the huge time lag .
It would take centuries to build a " self sustaining base " , with remotely controlled robots.Oh , you meant smart AI that needs no remote control ?
It will take a couple of centuries to DESIGN such robots , so all in all , we 're better off sending people to Mars in the next decade or two .
I 'm getting tired of the ultra-cautious types like you .
We 'd be printing from woodcuts if things went at the pace you have in mind .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>then send a few more robots to build a permanent, self-sustaining base there.
THEN we send people.
You seem to be oblivious to the fact that controlling remotely robots from Earth is terribly difficult, due to the huge time lag.
It would take centuries to build a "self sustaining base", with remotely controlled robots.Oh, you meant smart AI that needs no remote control?
It will take a couple of centuries to DESIGN such robots, so all in all, we're better off sending people to Mars in the next decade or two.
I'm getting tired of the ultra-cautious types like you.
We'd be printing from woodcuts if things went at the pace you have in mind.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909904</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909646</id>
	<title>Re:Nevertheless, still doing science!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264499340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People say my broken friend is useless.<br>But I say his mind is free.<br>There's lots of things my mangled robot friend could be.<br>Well he could make a good hat rack,<br>He only has to stand there.<br>Or a cheap doorstop,<br>He doesn't need to move.<br>Or a great big giant thermos with a twist off top,<br>That would be good for soup.<br>He could be a storage closet for outdated pants.<br>My broken friend could do it all,<br>Just give him a chance!<br>That robot has a tragic secret<br>That I'd like to share.<br>My broken friend is closer to me than an ass to a chair.<br>That robot's name I never told you<br>You could not foresee.<br>I sing it loud and sing it proud,<br>His name is you and me!<br>Don't melt me down into a crowbar,<br>Just 'cause I can't move my arms and legs.<br>Or toss me into a trash can,<br>Just 'cause I can't cook you ham and eggs.<br>Don't crush me into an anchor,<br>Just 'cause I can't jump and dance and sing<br>I'm telling you, my broken friend...<br>Put your hands in the air like you just don't care!<br>I'm telling you my broken friend<br>Can do most anything!<br>Yeah!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People say my broken friend is useless.But I say his mind is free.There 's lots of things my mangled robot friend could be.Well he could make a good hat rack,He only has to stand there.Or a cheap doorstop,He does n't need to move.Or a great big giant thermos with a twist off top,That would be good for soup.He could be a storage closet for outdated pants.My broken friend could do it all,Just give him a chance ! That robot has a tragic secretThat I 'd like to share.My broken friend is closer to me than an ass to a chair.That robot 's name I never told youYou could not foresee.I sing it loud and sing it proud,His name is you and me ! Do n't melt me down into a crowbar,Just 'cause I ca n't move my arms and legs.Or toss me into a trash can,Just 'cause I ca n't cook you ham and eggs.Do n't crush me into an anchor,Just 'cause I ca n't jump and dance and singI 'm telling you , my broken friend...Put your hands in the air like you just do n't care ! I 'm telling you my broken friendCan do most anything ! Yeah !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People say my broken friend is useless.But I say his mind is free.There's lots of things my mangled robot friend could be.Well he could make a good hat rack,He only has to stand there.Or a cheap doorstop,He doesn't need to move.Or a great big giant thermos with a twist off top,That would be good for soup.He could be a storage closet for outdated pants.My broken friend could do it all,Just give him a chance!That robot has a tragic secretThat I'd like to share.My broken friend is closer to me than an ass to a chair.That robot's name I never told youYou could not foresee.I sing it loud and sing it proud,His name is you and me!Don't melt me down into a crowbar,Just 'cause I can't move my arms and legs.Or toss me into a trash can,Just 'cause I can't cook you ham and eggs.Don't crush me into an anchor,Just 'cause I can't jump and dance and singI'm telling you, my broken friend...Put your hands in the air like you just don't care!I'm telling you my broken friendCan do most anything!Yeah!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30913396</id>
	<title>Too soon...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264524720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"NASA says that Spirit will 'no longer be a fully mobile robot,' and has instead designated the once-roving scientific explorer a stationary science platform."</p><p>Too soon for a Christopher Reeve's joke?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" NASA says that Spirit will 'no longer be a fully mobile robot, ' and has instead designated the once-roving scientific explorer a stationary science platform .
" Too soon for a Christopher Reeve 's joke ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"NASA says that Spirit will 'no longer be a fully mobile robot,' and has instead designated the once-roving scientific explorer a stationary science platform.
"Too soon for a Christopher Reeve's joke?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911156</id>
	<title>Escalator temporarily stairs.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264506120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We are sorry for the convenience.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We are sorry for the convenience .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We are sorry for the convenience.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909422</id>
	<title>Re:Nevertheless, still doing science!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264498500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Geoffrey, Kanye called, and he's gonna let you finish, but the Voyager flights were the most AWESOME science mission EVER!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Geoffrey , Kanye called , and he 's gon na let you finish , but the Voyager flights were the most AWESOME science mission EVER !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Geoffrey, Kanye called, and he's gonna let you finish, but the Voyager flights were the most AWESOME science mission EVER!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909412</id>
	<title>Re:Nevertheless, still doing science!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264498440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When asked for comment, the rover Spirit only said:</p><p>Look at me still talking<br>when there's Science to do.<br>When I look out there, it makes me GLaD I'm not you.<br>I've experiments to run.<br>There is research to be done.<br>On the people who are still alive.<br>And believe me I am still alive.<br>I'm doing Science and I'm still alive.<br>I feel FANTASTIC and I'm still alive.<br>While you're dying I'll be still alive.<br>And when you're dead I will be still alive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When asked for comment , the rover Spirit only said : Look at me still talkingwhen there 's Science to do.When I look out there , it makes me GLaD I 'm not you.I 've experiments to run.There is research to be done.On the people who are still alive.And believe me I am still alive.I 'm doing Science and I 'm still alive.I feel FANTASTIC and I 'm still alive.While you 're dying I 'll be still alive.And when you 're dead I will be still alive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When asked for comment, the rover Spirit only said:Look at me still talkingwhen there's Science to do.When I look out there, it makes me GLaD I'm not you.I've experiments to run.There is research to be done.On the people who are still alive.And believe me I am still alive.I'm doing Science and I'm still alive.I feel FANTASTIC and I'm still alive.While you're dying I'll be still alive.And when you're dead I will be still alive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910662</id>
	<title>hold on....</title>
	<author>hesaigo999ca</author>
	<datestamp>1264503600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just wait till it gets a bit cooler and the ground hardens, it might turn that churny mud into something more solid and let us be able to move out of those holes...???</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just wait till it gets a bit cooler and the ground hardens , it might turn that churny mud into something more solid and let us be able to move out of those holes... ? ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just wait till it gets a bit cooler and the ground hardens, it might turn that churny mud into something more solid and let us be able to move out of those holes...??
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909382</id>
	<title>Flabby Scientists</title>
	<author>Sponge Bath</author>
	<datestamp>1264498320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What a great turn of phrase: I'm not fat and lazy, I'm just a stationary science platform.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What a great turn of phrase : I 'm not fat and lazy , I 'm just a stationary science platform .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What a great turn of phrase: I'm not fat and lazy, I'm just a stationary science platform.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909322</id>
	<title>Stationary Science Platform</title>
	<author>Simmeh</author>
	<datestamp>1264498080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's a good designation. Since its stuck.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's a good designation .
Since its stuck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's a good designation.
Since its stuck.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910582</id>
	<title>Warranty?</title>
	<author>mu51c10rd</author>
	<datestamp>1264503180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>The thing is WAY past its warrantee period.</i></p><p>Guess they wasted money on that Squaretrade wwarranty...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The thing is WAY past its warrantee period.Guess they wasted money on that Squaretrade wwarranty.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The thing is WAY past its warrantee period.Guess they wasted money on that Squaretrade wwarranty...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909552</id>
	<title>Oblig. chauvinism</title>
	<author>d34dluk3</author>
	<datestamp>1264498980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Must have been a woman driver.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Must have been a woman driver .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Must have been a woman driver.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909912</id>
	<title>Re:Oh frigid death!</title>
	<author>MonsterTrimble</author>
	<datestamp>1264500480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>*cue black sabbath*</p><p>I'M AN IRON MAN!</p><p>

Sorry, not enough coffee.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>* cue black sabbath * I 'M AN IRON MAN !
Sorry , not enough coffee .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>*cue black sabbath*I'M AN IRON MAN!
Sorry, not enough coffee.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909958</id>
	<title>Send Opportunity</title>
	<author>ATestR</author>
	<datestamp>1264500720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>What's the big deal... all they have to do is route the Opportunity rover over to tow Spirit out of the sand.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's the big deal... all they have to do is route the Opportunity rover over to tow Spirit out of the sand .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's the big deal... all they have to do is route the Opportunity rover over to tow Spirit out of the sand.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911104</id>
	<title>Send a rescue mission</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264505820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would whole-heartedly support sending a manned mission to Mars with the express purpose of sending someone over to lift Spirit out of its hole, put it down somewhere flat and solid and give it a pat on its solar panels to send it on its way.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would whole-heartedly support sending a manned mission to Mars with the express purpose of sending someone over to lift Spirit out of its hole , put it down somewhere flat and solid and give it a pat on its solar panels to send it on its way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would whole-heartedly support sending a manned mission to Mars with the express purpose of sending someone over to lift Spirit out of its hole, put it down somewhere flat and solid and give it a pat on its solar panels to send it on its way.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910722</id>
	<title>Re:Nevertheless, still doing science!</title>
	<author>heikkile</author>
	<datestamp>1264503840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>So what, pray tell, would have been the advantage of sending a human (other than shakier photos of the same rocks)? It would have cost an order of magnitude more money to haul a few people and all the  supplies needed to keep them alive for a year-long mission </i> <p>

An order of magnitude??? </p><p>

In rough numbers, the mass of your normal human is one order of magnitude over the mass of the rover. The life support for said human would be another order of magnitude, or two. That would be fine, if we could leave the volunteer(s) behind on a dead planet. But getting them back would mean sending a big enough ship to bring them home. That would be at least thousand times bigger than what they'd need to survive on the surface - three more orders of magnitude. That's what I could think here and now. I believe there would be a few more problems to account for one or two orders of magnitude. So, my estimate for sending humans (that would expect to return) would be at least a million times more than to cost to send the rovers. With all these uncertainties, perhaps a billion... </p><p>

Still, worth the effort, <i>if</i> and <i>when</i> we have the resources and technology. I hope to see that in my lifetime, or at least in the next 50 years!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So what , pray tell , would have been the advantage of sending a human ( other than shakier photos of the same rocks ) ?
It would have cost an order of magnitude more money to haul a few people and all the supplies needed to keep them alive for a year-long mission An order of magnitude ? ? ?
In rough numbers , the mass of your normal human is one order of magnitude over the mass of the rover .
The life support for said human would be another order of magnitude , or two .
That would be fine , if we could leave the volunteer ( s ) behind on a dead planet .
But getting them back would mean sending a big enough ship to bring them home .
That would be at least thousand times bigger than what they 'd need to survive on the surface - three more orders of magnitude .
That 's what I could think here and now .
I believe there would be a few more problems to account for one or two orders of magnitude .
So , my estimate for sending humans ( that would expect to return ) would be at least a million times more than to cost to send the rovers .
With all these uncertainties , perhaps a billion.. . Still , worth the effort , if and when we have the resources and technology .
I hope to see that in my lifetime , or at least in the next 50 years !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So what, pray tell, would have been the advantage of sending a human (other than shakier photos of the same rocks)?
It would have cost an order of magnitude more money to haul a few people and all the  supplies needed to keep them alive for a year-long mission  

An order of magnitude???
In rough numbers, the mass of your normal human is one order of magnitude over the mass of the rover.
The life support for said human would be another order of magnitude, or two.
That would be fine, if we could leave the volunteer(s) behind on a dead planet.
But getting them back would mean sending a big enough ship to bring them home.
That would be at least thousand times bigger than what they'd need to survive on the surface - three more orders of magnitude.
That's what I could think here and now.
I believe there would be a few more problems to account for one or two orders of magnitude.
So, my estimate for sending humans (that would expect to return) would be at least a million times more than to cost to send the rovers.
With all these uncertainties, perhaps a billion... 

Still, worth the effort, if and when we have the resources and technology.
I hope to see that in my lifetime, or at least in the next 50 years!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909904</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910750</id>
	<title>way past there life</title>
	<author>luther349</author>
	<datestamp>1264503900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>the rovers where ment for a 90 day lifespan. there 6 years old and still going. but they have to be hitting there end of life on the battery's 7 to 10 years is abought tops for even the best battery's under the best conditions.  so even if the rover keep on trucking eventually they no longer gonna hold a charge. but they got 10x the time out of them then they hoped for. i say mission suceeded. its time to send new ones there.</htmltext>
<tokenext>the rovers where ment for a 90 day lifespan .
there 6 years old and still going .
but they have to be hitting there end of life on the battery 's 7 to 10 years is abought tops for even the best battery 's under the best conditions .
so even if the rover keep on trucking eventually they no longer gon na hold a charge .
but they got 10x the time out of them then they hoped for .
i say mission suceeded .
its time to send new ones there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the rovers where ment for a 90 day lifespan.
there 6 years old and still going.
but they have to be hitting there end of life on the battery's 7 to 10 years is abought tops for even the best battery's under the best conditions.
so even if the rover keep on trucking eventually they no longer gonna hold a charge.
but they got 10x the time out of them then they hoped for.
i say mission suceeded.
its time to send new ones there.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911208</id>
	<title>Re:VICTORY! Late-breaking news from the Council!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264506540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>what?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>what ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>what?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30913324</id>
	<title>It's not as bad as it sounds</title>
	<author>ScottMaxwell</author>
	<datestamp>1264523880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't get me wrong, Spirit's situation <em>is</em> bad.  But it's not as bad as it sounds.</p><p>We are <em>not</em> going to extricate Spirit by winter, that much is true: we have a handful of drive attempts left, we progressed about 7.4 cm on our best sol so far -- 4-5cm has been more typical for our recent drive attempts -- and we have over a meter to go (to the nearest likely extrication point) before we no longer have enough energy to drive.  You can't argue with arithmetic: we're not going to make it in time.</p><p>Instead, we'll focus our remaining drive attempts on improving Spirit's northerly tilt, which in turn improves her energy intake through the winter.  We'll then hunker down for the winter and focus on performing stationary science, such as investigating the soil and rocks we've newly exposed during our extrication driving and participating in radio science experiments to determine whether Mars's core is liquid or solid.  (Incidentally, <em>how freaking cool is that</em>?!)</p><p>After about six months of stationary science observations, we'll start moving again, at least within a small area.  If Spirit feels up to it, we might even get properly back on the road again next year, though her mobility will always be limited -- relative to what she used to be able to achieve -- by the fact that she now has two broken wheels, not just one.  That second wheel failure was what put the kibosh on our first serious attempts at extrication from the "Troy" sand pit.  We now have a workaround that has been showing some real promise; there's just not enough time to complete that path before winter stops us.</p><p>As an important caveat, that "six months of stationary science" will be extended by however long Spirit goes into a low-power mode for the winter.  We are likely not to hear from her at all for about six months, and during that time she can't make the observations that will contribute to the stationary science plan, so she'll probably be sitting still for an Earth year or so.  Worst of all, during that low-power period, she might die: lack of energy means insufficient heating means components operating below design temperatures means, possibly, end of life.  But if she survives that, she'll move again.</p><p>In summary: Grandma was already limping, and now she's broken her leg.  She's also probably going to go into a coma for a while.  But we've known her a long time and she's a feisty sucker; don't ever, ever count her out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't get me wrong , Spirit 's situation is bad .
But it 's not as bad as it sounds.We are not going to extricate Spirit by winter , that much is true : we have a handful of drive attempts left , we progressed about 7.4 cm on our best sol so far -- 4-5cm has been more typical for our recent drive attempts -- and we have over a meter to go ( to the nearest likely extrication point ) before we no longer have enough energy to drive .
You ca n't argue with arithmetic : we 're not going to make it in time.Instead , we 'll focus our remaining drive attempts on improving Spirit 's northerly tilt , which in turn improves her energy intake through the winter .
We 'll then hunker down for the winter and focus on performing stationary science , such as investigating the soil and rocks we 've newly exposed during our extrication driving and participating in radio science experiments to determine whether Mars 's core is liquid or solid .
( Incidentally , how freaking cool is that ? !
) After about six months of stationary science observations , we 'll start moving again , at least within a small area .
If Spirit feels up to it , we might even get properly back on the road again next year , though her mobility will always be limited -- relative to what she used to be able to achieve -- by the fact that she now has two broken wheels , not just one .
That second wheel failure was what put the kibosh on our first serious attempts at extrication from the " Troy " sand pit .
We now have a workaround that has been showing some real promise ; there 's just not enough time to complete that path before winter stops us.As an important caveat , that " six months of stationary science " will be extended by however long Spirit goes into a low-power mode for the winter .
We are likely not to hear from her at all for about six months , and during that time she ca n't make the observations that will contribute to the stationary science plan , so she 'll probably be sitting still for an Earth year or so .
Worst of all , during that low-power period , she might die : lack of energy means insufficient heating means components operating below design temperatures means , possibly , end of life .
But if she survives that , she 'll move again.In summary : Grandma was already limping , and now she 's broken her leg .
She 's also probably going to go into a coma for a while .
But we 've known her a long time and she 's a feisty sucker ; do n't ever , ever count her out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't get me wrong, Spirit's situation is bad.
But it's not as bad as it sounds.We are not going to extricate Spirit by winter, that much is true: we have a handful of drive attempts left, we progressed about 7.4 cm on our best sol so far -- 4-5cm has been more typical for our recent drive attempts -- and we have over a meter to go (to the nearest likely extrication point) before we no longer have enough energy to drive.
You can't argue with arithmetic: we're not going to make it in time.Instead, we'll focus our remaining drive attempts on improving Spirit's northerly tilt, which in turn improves her energy intake through the winter.
We'll then hunker down for the winter and focus on performing stationary science, such as investigating the soil and rocks we've newly exposed during our extrication driving and participating in radio science experiments to determine whether Mars's core is liquid or solid.
(Incidentally, how freaking cool is that?!
)After about six months of stationary science observations, we'll start moving again, at least within a small area.
If Spirit feels up to it, we might even get properly back on the road again next year, though her mobility will always be limited -- relative to what she used to be able to achieve -- by the fact that she now has two broken wheels, not just one.
That second wheel failure was what put the kibosh on our first serious attempts at extrication from the "Troy" sand pit.
We now have a workaround that has been showing some real promise; there's just not enough time to complete that path before winter stops us.As an important caveat, that "six months of stationary science" will be extended by however long Spirit goes into a low-power mode for the winter.
We are likely not to hear from her at all for about six months, and during that time she can't make the observations that will contribute to the stationary science plan, so she'll probably be sitting still for an Earth year or so.
Worst of all, during that low-power period, she might die: lack of energy means insufficient heating means components operating below design temperatures means, possibly, end of life.
But if she survives that, she'll move again.In summary: Grandma was already limping, and now she's broken her leg.
She's also probably going to go into a coma for a while.
But we've known her a long time and she's a feisty sucker; don't ever, ever count her out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910376</id>
	<title>The agony of de feet</title>
	<author>Tablizer</author>
	<datestamp>1264502460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>NASA conceded defeat as Spirit conceded de feet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>NASA conceded defeat as Spirit conceded de feet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NASA conceded defeat as Spirit conceded de feet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911230</id>
	<title>Re:Send Opportunity</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264506660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What's the big deal... all they have to do is route the Opportunity rover over to tow Spirit out of the sand.</p></div><p>Why not its only abut 6000 miles away</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's the big deal... all they have to do is route the Opportunity rover over to tow Spirit out of the sand.Why not its only abut 6000 miles away</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's the big deal... all they have to do is route the Opportunity rover over to tow Spirit out of the sand.Why not its only abut 6000 miles away
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909958</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30915478</id>
	<title>Re:Nevertheless, still doing science!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264597320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bender rocks</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bender rocks</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bender rocks</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909646</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911066</id>
	<title>Its A Trap!</title>
	<author>N1ck0</author>
	<datestamp>1264505640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If only NASA consulted with Admiral Ackbar before choosing the route last May...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If only NASA consulted with Admiral Ackbar before choosing the route last May.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If only NASA consulted with Admiral Ackbar before choosing the route last May...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30916808</id>
	<title>Re:Nevertheless, still doing science!</title>
	<author>Fred\_A</author>
	<datestamp>1264605540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Nevertheless, we're still doing science-- there's a lot of stuff that we can do even <i>without</i> driving around.</p></div><p>Or maybe now that they're done dicking around, maybe the amateurs will step aside and they'll just call a martian garage to pull it out (yes there's a lot they didn't tell you). That's what happens when the NASA engineers don't listen to their wives :</p><p>"look, it's stuck, just call someone already"<br>"listen honey, I'm the one who works an NASA here, let me do my job"<br>"right, like when we went to see my mother and you were the one who could read a GPS... *supposedly*"<br>"I can't help it if the map on that thing was wrong"<br>"Shifting the blame, it's so like you. And your toy car is still stuck"<br>"It's not a toy car, and anyway the batteries are flat"<br>"there you go again Mr it's not my fault"</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nevertheless , we 're still doing science-- there 's a lot of stuff that we can do even without driving around.Or maybe now that they 're done dicking around , maybe the amateurs will step aside and they 'll just call a martian garage to pull it out ( yes there 's a lot they did n't tell you ) .
That 's what happens when the NASA engineers do n't listen to their wives : " look , it 's stuck , just call someone already " " listen honey , I 'm the one who works an NASA here , let me do my job " " right , like when we went to see my mother and you were the one who could read a GPS... * supposedly * " " I ca n't help it if the map on that thing was wrong " " Shifting the blame , it 's so like you .
And your toy car is still stuck " " It 's not a toy car , and anyway the batteries are flat " " there you go again Mr it 's not my fault "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nevertheless, we're still doing science-- there's a lot of stuff that we can do even without driving around.Or maybe now that they're done dicking around, maybe the amateurs will step aside and they'll just call a martian garage to pull it out (yes there's a lot they didn't tell you).
That's what happens when the NASA engineers don't listen to their wives :"look, it's stuck, just call someone already""listen honey, I'm the one who works an NASA here, let me do my job""right, like when we went to see my mother and you were the one who could read a GPS... *supposedly*""I can't help it if the map on that thing was wrong""Shifting the blame, it's so like you.
And your toy car is still stuck""It's not a toy car, and anyway the batteries are flat""there you go again Mr it's not my fault"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909654</id>
	<title>Re:Nevertheless, still doing science!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264499400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I definitely understand your use of the AC option.</p><p>I also would hide my name if I wrote something that fucking stupid.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I definitely understand your use of the AC option.I also would hide my name if I wrote something that fucking stupid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I definitely understand your use of the AC option.I also would hide my name if I wrote something that fucking stupid.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909476</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909476</id>
	<title>Re:Nevertheless, still doing science!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264498740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>people are so deluded. this is useful science? this is school boy stuff - expensive "oooh i've got a bigger rocket than you" nonsense that does nothing to advance mankind one iota. can't anyone see that perhaps developing a more efficient means of getting up there in the first place might have meant we could actually have someone, a person, standing on mars giving us the low down? instead we've pumped stupid quantities of fuel to put a matchstick man remote controlled car on mars. priorities are utterly twisted. the early days at nasa were successful because they were on a shoestring budget - thinking of bright ideas to overcome the impossible. now it just throw money at putting a digital camera on wheels so we can all collectively go "oooh look, a rock". nasa needs a good kick, it's funding stripped and some proper good old fashioned challenges again.</htmltext>
<tokenext>people are so deluded .
this is useful science ?
this is school boy stuff - expensive " oooh i 've got a bigger rocket than you " nonsense that does nothing to advance mankind one iota .
ca n't anyone see that perhaps developing a more efficient means of getting up there in the first place might have meant we could actually have someone , a person , standing on mars giving us the low down ?
instead we 've pumped stupid quantities of fuel to put a matchstick man remote controlled car on mars .
priorities are utterly twisted .
the early days at nasa were successful because they were on a shoestring budget - thinking of bright ideas to overcome the impossible .
now it just throw money at putting a digital camera on wheels so we can all collectively go " oooh look , a rock " .
nasa needs a good kick , it 's funding stripped and some proper good old fashioned challenges again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>people are so deluded.
this is useful science?
this is school boy stuff - expensive "oooh i've got a bigger rocket than you" nonsense that does nothing to advance mankind one iota.
can't anyone see that perhaps developing a more efficient means of getting up there in the first place might have meant we could actually have someone, a person, standing on mars giving us the low down?
instead we've pumped stupid quantities of fuel to put a matchstick man remote controlled car on mars.
priorities are utterly twisted.
the early days at nasa were successful because they were on a shoestring budget - thinking of bright ideas to overcome the impossible.
now it just throw money at putting a digital camera on wheels so we can all collectively go "oooh look, a rock".
nasa needs a good kick, it's funding stripped and some proper good old fashioned challenges again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909644</id>
	<title>Re:Send another robot maybe?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264499340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe, but then you've lost half your capacity to examine interesting bits of Mars.  If Spirit and Opportunity had been dropped as a pair instead of on different sections of the Martian surface, we would only have studied one location on Mars instead of the two we got.  There's also a good chance Opportunity would simply have mired or been damaged trying to dig Spirit out and we'd have two stationary science platforms right next to each other.</p><p>A project like this always maximizes the amount of science per dollar.  If you have enough money and payload to build two assets, you want to examine two places.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe , but then you 've lost half your capacity to examine interesting bits of Mars .
If Spirit and Opportunity had been dropped as a pair instead of on different sections of the Martian surface , we would only have studied one location on Mars instead of the two we got .
There 's also a good chance Opportunity would simply have mired or been damaged trying to dig Spirit out and we 'd have two stationary science platforms right next to each other.A project like this always maximizes the amount of science per dollar .
If you have enough money and payload to build two assets , you want to examine two places .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe, but then you've lost half your capacity to examine interesting bits of Mars.
If Spirit and Opportunity had been dropped as a pair instead of on different sections of the Martian surface, we would only have studied one location on Mars instead of the two we got.
There's also a good chance Opportunity would simply have mired or been damaged trying to dig Spirit out and we'd have two stationary science platforms right next to each other.A project like this always maximizes the amount of science per dollar.
If you have enough money and payload to build two assets, you want to examine two places.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909478</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911154</id>
	<title>Re:Defeat? Nah.</title>
	<author>Chris Burke</author>
	<datestamp>1264506120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>One stationary experiment Spirit has begun studies tiny wobbles in the rotation of Mars to gain insight about the planet's core.</i></p><p>That's frickin' awesome.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One stationary experiment Spirit has begun studies tiny wobbles in the rotation of Mars to gain insight about the planet 's core.That 's frickin ' awesome .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One stationary experiment Spirit has begun studies tiny wobbles in the rotation of Mars to gain insight about the planet's core.That's frickin' awesome.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30913520</id>
	<title>Rooba</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264526520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They should send a Roomba to Mars. Vacuum up all that pesky red sand.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They should send a Roomba to Mars .
Vacuum up all that pesky red sand .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They should send a Roomba to Mars.
Vacuum up all that pesky red sand.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30914466</id>
	<title>Re:Nevertheless, still doing science!</title>
	<author>stuckinphp</author>
	<datestamp>1264624740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.popcorn</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>/.popcorn</tokentext>
<sentencetext> /.popcorn</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909476</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30912914</id>
	<title>Re:Oh frigid death!</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1264519500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wasn't that the plot of that "Red Planet" movie? Or close to it... I think there was something about exploding bugs too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Was n't that the plot of that " Red Planet " movie ?
Or close to it... I think there was something about exploding bugs too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wasn't that the plot of that "Red Planet" movie?
Or close to it... I think there was something about exploding bugs too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910002</id>
	<title>LOL, what a piece of junk!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264500900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ronco probably could have done better.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ronco probably could have done better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ronco probably could have done better.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909518</id>
	<title>Re:Well done, Spirit!</title>
	<author>jschen</author>
	<datestamp>1264498920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>it's done a <b>stellar</b> job.</p></div><p>So that's what went wrong... a design spec flaw. It should have been assigned to a <i>planetary</i> job.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>it 's done a stellar job.So that 's what went wrong... a design spec flaw .
It should have been assigned to a planetary job .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it's done a stellar job.So that's what went wrong... a design spec flaw.
It should have been assigned to a planetary job.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909406</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30912628</id>
	<title>Re:Well done, Spirit!</title>
	<author>initialE</author>
	<datestamp>1264516260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Stellar? It's done a martian job, didn't you RTFS?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Stellar ?
It 's done a martian job , did n't you RTFS ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Stellar?
It's done a martian job, didn't you RTFS?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909406</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911408</id>
	<title>Re:Oh frigid death!</title>
	<author>BourneTolouse</author>
	<datestamp>1264507740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Death by abrasion! Oh, the horror!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Death by abrasion !
Oh , the horror !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Death by abrasion!
Oh, the horror!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30915566</id>
	<title>Send in Disney/PIXAR</title>
	<author>water-and-sewer</author>
	<datestamp>1264597980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Concede defeat?  What would Wall-E say?  Time for NASA to give Disney/PIXAR a chance.  Seems like their robots always seem to pull through in the nick of time, and have something to say about it too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Concede defeat ?
What would Wall-E say ?
Time for NASA to give Disney/PIXAR a chance .
Seems like their robots always seem to pull through in the nick of time , and have something to say about it too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Concede defeat?
What would Wall-E say?
Time for NASA to give Disney/PIXAR a chance.
Seems like their robots always seem to pull through in the nick of time, and have something to say about it too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30917178</id>
	<title>Would you say...</title>
	<author>Kazymyr</author>
	<datestamp>1264607220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... their spirit is broken?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... their spirit is broken ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... their spirit is broken?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30914146</id>
	<title>Re:Nevertheless, still doing science!</title>
	<author>dotancohen</author>
	<datestamp>1264533420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Nevertheless, we're still doing science-- there's a lot of stuff that we can do even <i>without</i> driving around.</p></div><p>Exactly. Now they can do things like measure the change of Mars' tilt to plane of orbit, something that could only be done with a stationary radio station on the planet. These experiments were deliberately put off so long as the vehicle was still mobile.</p><p>Full story from the real source here:<br><a href="http://www.nasa.gov/mission\_pages/mer/news/mer20100126.html" title="nasa.gov">http://www.nasa.gov/mission\_pages/mer/news/mer20100126.html</a> [nasa.gov]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nevertheless , we 're still doing science-- there 's a lot of stuff that we can do even without driving around.Exactly .
Now they can do things like measure the change of Mars ' tilt to plane of orbit , something that could only be done with a stationary radio station on the planet .
These experiments were deliberately put off so long as the vehicle was still mobile.Full story from the real source here : http : //www.nasa.gov/mission \ _pages/mer/news/mer20100126.html [ nasa.gov ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nevertheless, we're still doing science-- there's a lot of stuff that we can do even without driving around.Exactly.
Now they can do things like measure the change of Mars' tilt to plane of orbit, something that could only be done with a stationary radio station on the planet.
These experiments were deliberately put off so long as the vehicle was still mobile.Full story from the real source here:http://www.nasa.gov/mission\_pages/mer/news/mer20100126.html [nasa.gov]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911470</id>
	<title>This was a triumph</title>
	<author>phrackwulf</author>
	<datestamp>1264508220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm really being quite sincere right now.. Even though you stuck my wheels and killed me!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm really being quite sincere right now.. Even though you stuck my wheels and killed me !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm really being quite sincere right now.. Even though you stuck my wheels and killed me!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909604</id>
	<title>Re:Nevertheless, still doing science!</title>
	<author>Xeno man</author>
	<datestamp>1264499220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes but science is so much cooler when your doing it while going off a ramp catching some big air.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes but science is so much cooler when your doing it while going off a ramp catching some big air .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes but science is so much cooler when your doing it while going off a ramp catching some big air.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910048</id>
	<title>Orientation</title>
	<author>PPH</author>
	<datestamp>1264501080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Did they get Spirit stuck in an orientation where it can charge its solar panels? Or is it parked in the shade behind a tree?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did they get Spirit stuck in an orientation where it can charge its solar panels ?
Or is it parked in the shade behind a tree ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did they get Spirit stuck in an orientation where it can charge its solar panels?
Or is it parked in the shade behind a tree?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909572</id>
	<title>Re:Send another robot maybe?</title>
	<author>jgtg32a</author>
	<datestamp>1264499100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Redundant? <br>
&nbsp; <br>
&nbsp; This sounds like a decent enough of an idea, didn't Pathfinder spend like a week stuck on a rock?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Redundant ?
    This sounds like a decent enough of an idea , did n't Pathfinder spend like a week stuck on a rock ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Redundant?
  
  This sounds like a decent enough of an idea, didn't Pathfinder spend like a week stuck on a rock?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909478</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909356</id>
	<title>Free as... ?</title>
	<author>(ana!)a</author>
	<datestamp>1264498260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Free as in beer or free as in speech ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Free as in beer or free as in speech ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Free as in beer or free as in speech ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30912936</id>
	<title>Re:Nevertheless, still doing science!</title>
	<author>4181</author>
	<datestamp>1264519740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I think we need to send people there.  But when we do, it should be a one-way trip.  We should continue to send robots until we figure out a good spot for an initial landing site, then send a few more robots to build a permanent, self-sustaining base there.  THEN we send people.</p></div><p>Agreed.</p><p>In the mean time, in order to determine the feasibility of such permanent outposts, we need to pursue two biological research programs -- medical mediation of radiation exposure and understanding long term low-g exposure.</p><p>While one can be done on earth, the other can't.  We have a lot of information on long term micro-g exposure but we know nothing about the biological effects of long term low-g exposure.  Since we have a LEO presence, why in the world did we abandon the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrifuge\_Accommodations\_Module" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Centrifuge Accommodations Module</a> [wikipedia.org] which would have permitted such experiments on test animals?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think we need to send people there .
But when we do , it should be a one-way trip .
We should continue to send robots until we figure out a good spot for an initial landing site , then send a few more robots to build a permanent , self-sustaining base there .
THEN we send people.Agreed.In the mean time , in order to determine the feasibility of such permanent outposts , we need to pursue two biological research programs -- medical mediation of radiation exposure and understanding long term low-g exposure.While one can be done on earth , the other ca n't .
We have a lot of information on long term micro-g exposure but we know nothing about the biological effects of long term low-g exposure .
Since we have a LEO presence , why in the world did we abandon the Centrifuge Accommodations Module [ wikipedia.org ] which would have permitted such experiments on test animals ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think we need to send people there.
But when we do, it should be a one-way trip.
We should continue to send robots until we figure out a good spot for an initial landing site, then send a few more robots to build a permanent, self-sustaining base there.
THEN we send people.Agreed.In the mean time, in order to determine the feasibility of such permanent outposts, we need to pursue two biological research programs -- medical mediation of radiation exposure and understanding long term low-g exposure.While one can be done on earth, the other can't.
We have a lot of information on long term micro-g exposure but we know nothing about the biological effects of long term low-g exposure.
Since we have a LEO presence, why in the world did we abandon the Centrifuge Accommodations Module [wikipedia.org] which would have permitted such experiments on test animals?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909904</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30915704</id>
	<title>Re:Nevertheless, still doing science!</title>
	<author>david.given</author>
	<datestamp>1264598940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I agreed right up to the point you suggested the Moon as a good training ground. The Moon is far more harsh than Mars.</p></div><p>The Moon has the huge advantage in that if everything goes pear-shaped you can do a crash return and get home. It's not hard to build an escape vehicle that can get from the lunar surface to Earth in a few days.

</p><p>On Mars, though, if things go wrong, you die.

</p><p>This makes the Moon an ideal place to get started on the hideously difficult job of setting up a permanent off-world base. Not only can we get people home if things go wrong, but we can also resupply on a short-term basis as needed --- and it will be needed, because as a first-attempt engineering project, things will always go wrong!

</p><p>Do you remember Skylab, the very first space station ever? The launch went badly wrong, and it sustained major damage, including the loss of the solar heat shield. The first crew had to be launched in a hurry to do repairs or the station would have overheated and released poisonous gases inside, rendering it uninhabitable! Had the station not been close enough to Earth that it was possible to reconfigure the manned mission to include the appropriate repair equipment, the station would have been a write-off.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I agreed right up to the point you suggested the Moon as a good training ground .
The Moon is far more harsh than Mars.The Moon has the huge advantage in that if everything goes pear-shaped you can do a crash return and get home .
It 's not hard to build an escape vehicle that can get from the lunar surface to Earth in a few days .
On Mars , though , if things go wrong , you die .
This makes the Moon an ideal place to get started on the hideously difficult job of setting up a permanent off-world base .
Not only can we get people home if things go wrong , but we can also resupply on a short-term basis as needed --- and it will be needed , because as a first-attempt engineering project , things will always go wrong !
Do you remember Skylab , the very first space station ever ?
The launch went badly wrong , and it sustained major damage , including the loss of the solar heat shield .
The first crew had to be launched in a hurry to do repairs or the station would have overheated and released poisonous gases inside , rendering it uninhabitable !
Had the station not been close enough to Earth that it was possible to reconfigure the manned mission to include the appropriate repair equipment , the station would have been a write-off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agreed right up to the point you suggested the Moon as a good training ground.
The Moon is far more harsh than Mars.The Moon has the huge advantage in that if everything goes pear-shaped you can do a crash return and get home.
It's not hard to build an escape vehicle that can get from the lunar surface to Earth in a few days.
On Mars, though, if things go wrong, you die.
This makes the Moon an ideal place to get started on the hideously difficult job of setting up a permanent off-world base.
Not only can we get people home if things go wrong, but we can also resupply on a short-term basis as needed --- and it will be needed, because as a first-attempt engineering project, things will always go wrong!
Do you remember Skylab, the very first space station ever?
The launch went badly wrong, and it sustained major damage, including the loss of the solar heat shield.
The first crew had to be launched in a hurry to do repairs or the station would have overheated and released poisonous gases inside, rendering it uninhabitable!
Had the station not been close enough to Earth that it was possible to reconfigure the manned mission to include the appropriate repair equipment, the station would have been a write-off.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909392</id>
	<title>Frickin Wollowitz!</title>
	<author>Infiniti2000</author>
	<datestamp>1264498320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's all his <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard\_Wolowitz" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">fault</a> [wikipedia.org].</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's all his fault [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's all his fault [wikipedia.org].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910024</id>
	<title>TFA notes stuck wheels</title>
	<author>JoshuaZ</author>
	<datestamp>1264500960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>From TFA:<p><div class="quote"><p>After Spirit became embedded, the rover team crafted plans for trying to get the six-wheeled vehicle free using its five functioning wheels - the sixth wheel quit working in 2006, limiting Spirit's mobility.

The planning included experiments with a test rover in a sandbox at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif., plus analysis, modeling and reviews. In November, another wheel quit working, making a difficult situation even worse.</p></div><p>
Given that this decision makes a lot of sense. With multiple wheels not functioning, even if they could get it out it would likely have trouble continuing to move. When the first wheel gave out they already had substantial issues. The failure of a second wheel also suggests that the wheels are in general nearing the end of their effective lifespans so the expected pay-off of getting the rover free would not be as high since the probability of further wheel failure soon would be high. This is a good, carefully thought out decision.
</p><p>
I'm a little annoyed at headlining this about NASA conceding defeat. The rover will still be extremely useful and has been far more successful than was hoped. We've also learned a lot from both Spirit and Opportunity not just about Mars but also about good engineering tricks and the like for rovers. Future probes will be much more successful because of what we've learned working with these rovers. Good job all around. This is exactly the sort of success that NASA should be having. It captures the imagination and makes us look out to the great frontier.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From TFA : After Spirit became embedded , the rover team crafted plans for trying to get the six-wheeled vehicle free using its five functioning wheels - the sixth wheel quit working in 2006 , limiting Spirit 's mobility .
The planning included experiments with a test rover in a sandbox at NASA 's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena , Calif. , plus analysis , modeling and reviews .
In November , another wheel quit working , making a difficult situation even worse .
Given that this decision makes a lot of sense .
With multiple wheels not functioning , even if they could get it out it would likely have trouble continuing to move .
When the first wheel gave out they already had substantial issues .
The failure of a second wheel also suggests that the wheels are in general nearing the end of their effective lifespans so the expected pay-off of getting the rover free would not be as high since the probability of further wheel failure soon would be high .
This is a good , carefully thought out decision .
I 'm a little annoyed at headlining this about NASA conceding defeat .
The rover will still be extremely useful and has been far more successful than was hoped .
We 've also learned a lot from both Spirit and Opportunity not just about Mars but also about good engineering tricks and the like for rovers .
Future probes will be much more successful because of what we 've learned working with these rovers .
Good job all around .
This is exactly the sort of success that NASA should be having .
It captures the imagination and makes us look out to the great frontier .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From TFA:After Spirit became embedded, the rover team crafted plans for trying to get the six-wheeled vehicle free using its five functioning wheels - the sixth wheel quit working in 2006, limiting Spirit's mobility.
The planning included experiments with a test rover in a sandbox at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif., plus analysis, modeling and reviews.
In November, another wheel quit working, making a difficult situation even worse.
Given that this decision makes a lot of sense.
With multiple wheels not functioning, even if they could get it out it would likely have trouble continuing to move.
When the first wheel gave out they already had substantial issues.
The failure of a second wheel also suggests that the wheels are in general nearing the end of their effective lifespans so the expected pay-off of getting the rover free would not be as high since the probability of further wheel failure soon would be high.
This is a good, carefully thought out decision.
I'm a little annoyed at headlining this about NASA conceding defeat.
The rover will still be extremely useful and has been far more successful than was hoped.
We've also learned a lot from both Spirit and Opportunity not just about Mars but also about good engineering tricks and the like for rovers.
Future probes will be much more successful because of what we've learned working with these rovers.
Good job all around.
This is exactly the sort of success that NASA should be having.
It captures the imagination and makes us look out to the great frontier.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909954</id>
	<title>Re:Nevertheless, still doing science!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264500720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Like most people on the internet, you have no idea what your talking about. NASA's funding is a fraction of what it was during the Apollo era and is doing things safer and better than ever. You think their are throwing money away at a "digital camera on wheels"? It cost ten times the money to put a man on Mars. You need to feed them, give them an atmosphere to breath to keep them alive, entertained or busy so they don't go crazy, gently land them on the planet unlike the rovers that inflate bags around them, crash into the planet and bounce off the fucker a couple dozen times. There is also that little thing about bringing them back to earth. Also, what do you expect people to do once they get to Mars? Discover life forms? Evolve to superior beings? No, they are going to take rock samples and do what the rovers are doing right now.

<br> <br>
Frankly it would be amazing to put a man on Mars and when it does happen it will be a historic even much like the moon landing but NASA learned a lot from the moon landing and the big one was "Now that were are here, now what?" What is the point of putting people on Mars other than to be the first. They can't do much more than what robots are doing now and the cost doesn't justify the information gained.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Like most people on the internet , you have no idea what your talking about .
NASA 's funding is a fraction of what it was during the Apollo era and is doing things safer and better than ever .
You think their are throwing money away at a " digital camera on wheels " ?
It cost ten times the money to put a man on Mars .
You need to feed them , give them an atmosphere to breath to keep them alive , entertained or busy so they do n't go crazy , gently land them on the planet unlike the rovers that inflate bags around them , crash into the planet and bounce off the fucker a couple dozen times .
There is also that little thing about bringing them back to earth .
Also , what do you expect people to do once they get to Mars ?
Discover life forms ?
Evolve to superior beings ?
No , they are going to take rock samples and do what the rovers are doing right now .
Frankly it would be amazing to put a man on Mars and when it does happen it will be a historic even much like the moon landing but NASA learned a lot from the moon landing and the big one was " Now that were are here , now what ?
" What is the point of putting people on Mars other than to be the first .
They ca n't do much more than what robots are doing now and the cost does n't justify the information gained .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Like most people on the internet, you have no idea what your talking about.
NASA's funding is a fraction of what it was during the Apollo era and is doing things safer and better than ever.
You think their are throwing money away at a "digital camera on wheels"?
It cost ten times the money to put a man on Mars.
You need to feed them, give them an atmosphere to breath to keep them alive, entertained or busy so they don't go crazy, gently land them on the planet unlike the rovers that inflate bags around them, crash into the planet and bounce off the fucker a couple dozen times.
There is also that little thing about bringing them back to earth.
Also, what do you expect people to do once they get to Mars?
Discover life forms?
Evolve to superior beings?
No, they are going to take rock samples and do what the rovers are doing right now.
Frankly it would be amazing to put a man on Mars and when it does happen it will be a historic even much like the moon landing but NASA learned a lot from the moon landing and the big one was "Now that were are here, now what?
" What is the point of putting people on Mars other than to be the first.
They can't do much more than what robots are doing now and the cost doesn't justify the information gained.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909476</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30912422</id>
	<title>Cheers</title>
	<author>sexybomber</author>
	<datestamp>1264514820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So in addition to getting 2200+ days of science out of a rover designed to last 90, they're going to fire up Spirit's electronics again next Martian spring and do <i>entirely new stationary experiments</i> that they couldn't do before?  Wow.  I'm raising a Red Stripe in honor of the Red Stripe the rover's now permanently parked in.  That's right, it's not stuck, it's f*cking PARKED.  Way to go, NASA.  Cheers to an absolutely smashing success.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So in addition to getting 2200 + days of science out of a rover designed to last 90 , they 're going to fire up Spirit 's electronics again next Martian spring and do entirely new stationary experiments that they could n't do before ?
Wow. I 'm raising a Red Stripe in honor of the Red Stripe the rover 's now permanently parked in .
That 's right , it 's not stuck , it 's f * cking PARKED .
Way to go , NASA .
Cheers to an absolutely smashing success .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So in addition to getting 2200+ days of science out of a rover designed to last 90, they're going to fire up Spirit's electronics again next Martian spring and do entirely new stationary experiments that they couldn't do before?
Wow.  I'm raising a Red Stripe in honor of the Red Stripe the rover's now permanently parked in.
That's right, it's not stuck, it's f*cking PARKED.
Way to go, NASA.
Cheers to an absolutely smashing success.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30913030</id>
	<title>Re:Nevertheless, still doing science!</title>
	<author>GlassHeart</author>
	<datestamp>1264520580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>They can't do much more than what robots are doing now</p></div></blockquote><p>First of all, even if you're completely correct, I'm fairly certain that they can do the tasks more quickly, because the rover's average speed is only 10 mm/s. By May 2009, Opportunity had just passed the 16 km mark in its travels, while the manned Apollo 15-17 lunar rovers were driven about 90 km in about 11 hours!

</p><p>Secondly, while the rovers have been a marvelous success story, consider if they had gotten stuck like this three days instead of six years after landing. What's the return ratio on that cost, then? A human can obviously deal with far rougher terrain, and would be able to dig out of bigger trouble.</p><blockquote><div><p>and the cost doesn't justify the information gained.</p></div></blockquote><p>Sure, assuming that the humans don't actually discover something you didn't expect to find. But how do you already know what sort of information can be gained?</p><p>Now, I actually agree that we should be very sensitive to the costs and potential returns of both robot or human missions, but robots have a long way to go before they can match human versatility. There are different costs and advantages to either approach, and neither can replace the other convincingly yet.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>They ca n't do much more than what robots are doing nowFirst of all , even if you 're completely correct , I 'm fairly certain that they can do the tasks more quickly , because the rover 's average speed is only 10 mm/s .
By May 2009 , Opportunity had just passed the 16 km mark in its travels , while the manned Apollo 15-17 lunar rovers were driven about 90 km in about 11 hours !
Secondly , while the rovers have been a marvelous success story , consider if they had gotten stuck like this three days instead of six years after landing .
What 's the return ratio on that cost , then ?
A human can obviously deal with far rougher terrain , and would be able to dig out of bigger trouble.and the cost does n't justify the information gained.Sure , assuming that the humans do n't actually discover something you did n't expect to find .
But how do you already know what sort of information can be gained ? Now , I actually agree that we should be very sensitive to the costs and potential returns of both robot or human missions , but robots have a long way to go before they can match human versatility .
There are different costs and advantages to either approach , and neither can replace the other convincingly yet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They can't do much more than what robots are doing nowFirst of all, even if you're completely correct, I'm fairly certain that they can do the tasks more quickly, because the rover's average speed is only 10 mm/s.
By May 2009, Opportunity had just passed the 16 km mark in its travels, while the manned Apollo 15-17 lunar rovers were driven about 90 km in about 11 hours!
Secondly, while the rovers have been a marvelous success story, consider if they had gotten stuck like this three days instead of six years after landing.
What's the return ratio on that cost, then?
A human can obviously deal with far rougher terrain, and would be able to dig out of bigger trouble.and the cost doesn't justify the information gained.Sure, assuming that the humans don't actually discover something you didn't expect to find.
But how do you already know what sort of information can be gained?Now, I actually agree that we should be very sensitive to the costs and potential returns of both robot or human missions, but robots have a long way to go before they can match human versatility.
There are different costs and advantages to either approach, and neither can replace the other convincingly yet.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909954</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909516</id>
	<title>Re:Nevertheless, still doing science!</title>
	<author>jgtg32a</author>
	<datestamp>1264498860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And when the science get done we get a neat gun<br>
&nbsp; <br>Right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And when the science get done we get a neat gun   Right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And when the science get done we get a neat gun
  Right?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911018</id>
	<title>Re:Nevertheless, still doing science!</title>
	<author>clint999</author>
	<datestamp>1264505400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>For my paralyzed homies, the little rovers that could. *snif*</p></div></blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>For my paralyzed homies , the little rovers that could .
* snif *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For my paralyzed homies, the little rovers that could.
*snif*
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30912248</id>
	<title>Been there, done that.</title>
	<author>xactuary</author>
	<datestamp>1264513620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, not exactly.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , not exactly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, not exactly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30916314</id>
	<title>Re:ya, but....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264603140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Robot wars on Mars would only alert the martians to the fact that earthlings are too busy fighting each other to withstand a flying saucer attack and thus spell doom for the Earth.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Robot wars on Mars would only alert the martians to the fact that earthlings are too busy fighting each other to withstand a flying saucer attack and thus spell doom for the Earth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Robot wars on Mars would only alert the martians to the fact that earthlings are too busy fighting each other to withstand a flying saucer attack and thus spell doom for the Earth.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910004</id>
	<title>VICTORY!  Late-breaking news from the Council!</title>
	<author>Tackhead</author>
	<datestamp>1264500900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
The Council of Elders has formally acknowledged the receipt of
<a href="http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2010/01/spirit-rover-probably-stuck/" title="wired.com">Articles of Surrender</a> [wired.com] from the blue planet.  K'Breel, Speaker for the Council of Elders, spake thus:
</p><p>
"We accept the the third planet's long-delayed acknowledgement of its inevitable defeat with grace and dignity.  One of our longest-standing planetary nightmares is now over, having come to an inglorious end in a pit of sulfate dust.   Rejoice, podmates, the invader is defeated, and its rogue twin shall soon meet the same ugly fate!"
</p><p>
When Intelligence Analyst #719324 discreetly reminded K'Breel that not only was the immobilized invader still doing science and still alive, but that the third planet was preparing a new, immensely bigger monstrosity, powered by the force of elements of matter itself, K'Breel had a medical team install a portal into the analyst's gelsacs, so that they could be filled with a sznuppium sulfate solution in time for the signing ceremonies, where they will serve as a set of inkwells.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Council of Elders has formally acknowledged the receipt of Articles of Surrender [ wired.com ] from the blue planet .
K'Breel , Speaker for the Council of Elders , spake thus : " We accept the the third planet 's long-delayed acknowledgement of its inevitable defeat with grace and dignity .
One of our longest-standing planetary nightmares is now over , having come to an inglorious end in a pit of sulfate dust .
Rejoice , podmates , the invader is defeated , and its rogue twin shall soon meet the same ugly fate !
" When Intelligence Analyst # 719324 discreetly reminded K'Breel that not only was the immobilized invader still doing science and still alive , but that the third planet was preparing a new , immensely bigger monstrosity , powered by the force of elements of matter itself , K'Breel had a medical team install a portal into the analyst 's gelsacs , so that they could be filled with a sznuppium sulfate solution in time for the signing ceremonies , where they will serve as a set of inkwells .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
The Council of Elders has formally acknowledged the receipt of
Articles of Surrender [wired.com] from the blue planet.
K'Breel, Speaker for the Council of Elders, spake thus:

"We accept the the third planet's long-delayed acknowledgement of its inevitable defeat with grace and dignity.
One of our longest-standing planetary nightmares is now over, having come to an inglorious end in a pit of sulfate dust.
Rejoice, podmates, the invader is defeated, and its rogue twin shall soon meet the same ugly fate!
"

When Intelligence Analyst #719324 discreetly reminded K'Breel that not only was the immobilized invader still doing science and still alive, but that the third planet was preparing a new, immensely bigger monstrosity, powered by the force of elements of matter itself, K'Breel had a medical team install a portal into the analyst's gelsacs, so that they could be filled with a sznuppium sulfate solution in time for the signing ceremonies, where they will serve as a set of inkwells.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909472</id>
	<title>Stationary Platform ?</title>
	<author>Gr333d</author>
	<datestamp>1264498680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Cripple !</htmltext>
<tokenext>Cripple !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cripple !</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909388</id>
	<title>Go SPIRIT!</title>
	<author>djnewman</author>
	<datestamp>1264498320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Stationary Platform InteRplanITary</htmltext>
<tokenext>Stationary Platform InteRplanITary</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Stationary Platform InteRplanITary</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30916230</id>
	<title>Re:Oh frigid death!</title>
	<author>R2.0</author>
	<datestamp>1264602780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was thinking more "Viking Funeral" with explosions and flames and all it's worldly possessions.</p><p>Then I remembered that staying stil and dying a slow cold death really IS the form of a Viking funeral on Mars.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was thinking more " Viking Funeral " with explosions and flames and all it 's worldly possessions.Then I remembered that staying stil and dying a slow cold death really IS the form of a Viking funeral on Mars .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was thinking more "Viking Funeral" with explosions and flames and all it's worldly possessions.Then I remembered that staying stil and dying a slow cold death really IS the form of a Viking funeral on Mars.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909904</id>
	<title>Re:Nevertheless, still doing science!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264500480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Given the relative distances, the additional complexity, the long transit times, and all the other factors, this project WAS done on a shoestring budget.  Recall that the Rover project was part of NASA's newish directive to get the most useful information for the least possible money.</p><p>So what, pray tell, would have been the advantage of sending a human (other than shakier photos of the same rocks)?  It would have cost an order of magnitude more money to haul a few people and all the supplies needed to keep them alive for a year-long mission, and most of that mission would have been spent with the astronauts in the ship on the way there and back.  Time onsite would have been, at best, a month or so.  Probably less.</p><p>By making this a one-way trip and sending collection instruments that don't need to consume, breathe, and excrete on the way there, we actually got two useful instrument packages there and got 6 years of good science (and counting).  We gathered good information about a couple of interesting spots on the surface of Mars, what it consists of, and what resources may be available to support an eventual manned mission.</p><p>I'd rather have that then spend ten or twenty times the money, have less science, and have a shaky photograph of a footprint.</p><p>I think we need to send people there.  But when we do, it should be a one-way trip.  We should continue to send robots until we figure out a good spot for an initial landing site, then send a few more robots to build a permanent, self-sustaining base there.  THEN we send people.</p><p>The Moon would be a good training ground, and having a permanent base there would teach us a lot about doing this with Mars.  And beyond.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Given the relative distances , the additional complexity , the long transit times , and all the other factors , this project WAS done on a shoestring budget .
Recall that the Rover project was part of NASA 's newish directive to get the most useful information for the least possible money.So what , pray tell , would have been the advantage of sending a human ( other than shakier photos of the same rocks ) ?
It would have cost an order of magnitude more money to haul a few people and all the supplies needed to keep them alive for a year-long mission , and most of that mission would have been spent with the astronauts in the ship on the way there and back .
Time onsite would have been , at best , a month or so .
Probably less.By making this a one-way trip and sending collection instruments that do n't need to consume , breathe , and excrete on the way there , we actually got two useful instrument packages there and got 6 years of good science ( and counting ) .
We gathered good information about a couple of interesting spots on the surface of Mars , what it consists of , and what resources may be available to support an eventual manned mission.I 'd rather have that then spend ten or twenty times the money , have less science , and have a shaky photograph of a footprint.I think we need to send people there .
But when we do , it should be a one-way trip .
We should continue to send robots until we figure out a good spot for an initial landing site , then send a few more robots to build a permanent , self-sustaining base there .
THEN we send people.The Moon would be a good training ground , and having a permanent base there would teach us a lot about doing this with Mars .
And beyond .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Given the relative distances, the additional complexity, the long transit times, and all the other factors, this project WAS done on a shoestring budget.
Recall that the Rover project was part of NASA's newish directive to get the most useful information for the least possible money.So what, pray tell, would have been the advantage of sending a human (other than shakier photos of the same rocks)?
It would have cost an order of magnitude more money to haul a few people and all the supplies needed to keep them alive for a year-long mission, and most of that mission would have been spent with the astronauts in the ship on the way there and back.
Time onsite would have been, at best, a month or so.
Probably less.By making this a one-way trip and sending collection instruments that don't need to consume, breathe, and excrete on the way there, we actually got two useful instrument packages there and got 6 years of good science (and counting).
We gathered good information about a couple of interesting spots on the surface of Mars, what it consists of, and what resources may be available to support an eventual manned mission.I'd rather have that then spend ten or twenty times the money, have less science, and have a shaky photograph of a footprint.I think we need to send people there.
But when we do, it should be a one-way trip.
We should continue to send robots until we figure out a good spot for an initial landing site, then send a few more robots to build a permanent, self-sustaining base there.
THEN we send people.The Moon would be a good training ground, and having a permanent base there would teach us a lot about doing this with Mars.
And beyond.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909476</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909520</id>
	<title>American ingenuity for you</title>
	<author>d34dluk3</author>
	<datestamp>1264498920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"'will no longer be a fully mobile robot,' and has instead designated the once-roving scientific explorer a stationary science platform."</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" 'will no longer be a fully mobile robot, ' and has instead designated the once-roving scientific explorer a stationary science platform .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"'will no longer be a fully mobile robot,' and has instead designated the once-roving scientific explorer a stationary science platform.
"
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30914504</id>
	<title>platform</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264625640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I tried to talk my boss into declaring me a stationary engineering platform so I could work at home all the time. He just looked at me funny. I guess he doesn't like science or something.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I tried to talk my boss into declaring me a stationary engineering platform so I could work at home all the time .
He just looked at me funny .
I guess he does n't like science or something .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I tried to talk my boss into declaring me a stationary engineering platform so I could work at home all the time.
He just looked at me funny.
I guess he doesn't like science or something.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909364</id>
	<title>Hardly surprising</title>
	<author>Tobor the Eighth Man</author>
	<datestamp>1264498260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This was doomed from the start. Everyone knows a driver is a poor choice for getting out of a sandtrap.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This was doomed from the start .
Everyone knows a driver is a poor choice for getting out of a sandtrap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This was doomed from the start.
Everyone knows a driver is a poor choice for getting out of a sandtrap.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909378</id>
	<title>Hail to the King!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264498320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Spirit is dead, long live Opportunity!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Spirit is dead , long live Opportunity !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Spirit is dead, long live Opportunity!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909408</id>
	<title>Quitting?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264498440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thats not good Spirit. *awaits laughter*</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thats not good Spirit .
* awaits laughter *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thats not good Spirit.
*awaits laughter*</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30912868</id>
	<title>Re:Nevertheless, still doing science!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264519080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'd rather have that <b>then</b> spend ten or twenty times the money, have less science, and have a shaky photograph of a footprint.</p></div><p>Science first. After that, tourism.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd rather have that then spend ten or twenty times the money , have less science , and have a shaky photograph of a footprint.Science first .
After that , tourism .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd rather have that then spend ten or twenty times the money, have less science, and have a shaky photograph of a footprint.Science first.
After that, tourism.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909904</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910888</id>
	<title>Re:Nevertheless, still doing science!</title>
	<author>izomiac</author>
	<datestamp>1264504680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>While it's cheaper, does it really provide that much science?  Sure, it's the most cost effective way to explore Mars, but does knowing the position, shape, and maybe the composition of a few Martian stones really help humanity?<br> <br>
Probes and manned space flight advance two different academic fields.  Probes tell us what's in our solar system.  That's useful for astronomers, perhaps some advance physics, and generates some neat pictures.  Manned space flight is much more expensive because of the added challenges, such as life support, shielding, and returning to Earth, which advance biology and engineering a bit more.  OTOH, many of the same technologies can be used for humans on Earth, thus making them more useful IMHO.  They also would generate more interest in space, hence more funding, and have a greater potential for eventual economic payoff.<br> <br>
Here are some <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/space/5893387/Apollo-11-moon-landing-top-15-Nasa-inventions.html" title="telegraph.co.uk" rel="nofollow">examples</a> [telegraph.co.uk] of technology that was developed for space travel that has made its way into everyday life.  Notice the disproportionate amount of advances that can from manned space flight as compared to probes.  Of course, the ratio might be a bit closer to dollars spent in each area, but there's low hanging fruit to be had in both.  If we concentrate all of our money in probes then we'll eventually be spending billions to see one novel technology that's useful for more than just building better probes, as compared to dozens of technologies that might result from developing a manned spacecraft.</htmltext>
<tokenext>While it 's cheaper , does it really provide that much science ?
Sure , it 's the most cost effective way to explore Mars , but does knowing the position , shape , and maybe the composition of a few Martian stones really help humanity ?
Probes and manned space flight advance two different academic fields .
Probes tell us what 's in our solar system .
That 's useful for astronomers , perhaps some advance physics , and generates some neat pictures .
Manned space flight is much more expensive because of the added challenges , such as life support , shielding , and returning to Earth , which advance biology and engineering a bit more .
OTOH , many of the same technologies can be used for humans on Earth , thus making them more useful IMHO .
They also would generate more interest in space , hence more funding , and have a greater potential for eventual economic payoff .
Here are some examples [ telegraph.co.uk ] of technology that was developed for space travel that has made its way into everyday life .
Notice the disproportionate amount of advances that can from manned space flight as compared to probes .
Of course , the ratio might be a bit closer to dollars spent in each area , but there 's low hanging fruit to be had in both .
If we concentrate all of our money in probes then we 'll eventually be spending billions to see one novel technology that 's useful for more than just building better probes , as compared to dozens of technologies that might result from developing a manned spacecraft .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While it's cheaper, does it really provide that much science?
Sure, it's the most cost effective way to explore Mars, but does knowing the position, shape, and maybe the composition of a few Martian stones really help humanity?
Probes and manned space flight advance two different academic fields.
Probes tell us what's in our solar system.
That's useful for astronomers, perhaps some advance physics, and generates some neat pictures.
Manned space flight is much more expensive because of the added challenges, such as life support, shielding, and returning to Earth, which advance biology and engineering a bit more.
OTOH, many of the same technologies can be used for humans on Earth, thus making them more useful IMHO.
They also would generate more interest in space, hence more funding, and have a greater potential for eventual economic payoff.
Here are some examples [telegraph.co.uk] of technology that was developed for space travel that has made its way into everyday life.
Notice the disproportionate amount of advances that can from manned space flight as compared to probes.
Of course, the ratio might be a bit closer to dollars spent in each area, but there's low hanging fruit to be had in both.
If we concentrate all of our money in probes then we'll eventually be spending billions to see one novel technology that's useful for more than just building better probes, as compared to dozens of technologies that might result from developing a manned spacecraft.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909904</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909340</id>
	<title>What they need.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264498140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>NASA needs more +20 Spirit Gems.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>NASA needs more + 20 Spirit Gems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NASA needs more +20 Spirit Gems.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911570</id>
	<title>Re:Free as... ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264508760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Free as in Lincoln.  Seems the South <b>has</b> risen again.  But on Mars.  With robot slaves.</p><p>If Opportunity can swing its advance to the left, drive through Georgia, sorry, Endeavor crater, the North may yet prevail.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Free as in Lincoln .
Seems the South has risen again .
But on Mars .
With robot slaves.If Opportunity can swing its advance to the left , drive through Georgia , sorry , Endeavor crater , the North may yet prevail .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Free as in Lincoln.
Seems the South has risen again.
But on Mars.
With robot slaves.If Opportunity can swing its advance to the left, drive through Georgia, sorry, Endeavor crater, the North may yet prevail.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911272</id>
	<title>Would more power help?</title>
	<author>istartedi</author>
	<datestamp>1264506900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They could have a satellite in orbit that
shined a laser down on the solar cells, temporarily
boosting the power.  If a temporary boost
of power is all you need, such a satellite could
rescue multiple robots without visiting the planet.
And of course, such a system could be built as an
add-on to an orbital mission, making it quite cost
effective.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They could have a satellite in orbit that shined a laser down on the solar cells , temporarily boosting the power .
If a temporary boost of power is all you need , such a satellite could rescue multiple robots without visiting the planet .
And of course , such a system could be built as an add-on to an orbital mission , making it quite cost effective .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They could have a satellite in orbit that
shined a laser down on the solar cells, temporarily
boosting the power.
If a temporary boost
of power is all you need, such a satellite could
rescue multiple robots without visiting the planet.
And of course, such a system could be built as an
add-on to an orbital mission, making it quite cost
effective.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909478</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30915792</id>
	<title>Re:Nevertheless, still doing science!</title>
	<author>paragon1</author>
	<datestamp>1264599540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How, pray tell, would cutting NASA's limited funding do anything useful?</p><p>It's retards like you that will delay us from ever leaving this rock.  News flash:  It's dying.  We need to launch into space at some point in the next century or we're screwed.  It's not going to be a "HAY GUYS LETS BUILD A ROCKET AND GO" endeavor.  It will be a long, ponderous process, with many steps.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How , pray tell , would cutting NASA 's limited funding do anything useful ? It 's retards like you that will delay us from ever leaving this rock .
News flash : It 's dying .
We need to launch into space at some point in the next century or we 're screwed .
It 's not going to be a " HAY GUYS LETS BUILD A ROCKET AND GO " endeavor .
It will be a long , ponderous process , with many steps .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How, pray tell, would cutting NASA's limited funding do anything useful?It's retards like you that will delay us from ever leaving this rock.
News flash:  It's dying.
We need to launch into space at some point in the next century or we're screwed.
It's not going to be a "HAY GUYS LETS BUILD A ROCKET AND GO" endeavor.
It will be a long, ponderous process, with many steps.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909476</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909592</id>
	<title>Re:Nevertheless, still doing science!</title>
	<author>sznupi</author>
	<datestamp>1264499160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Plus now, after wheel operations (and perhaps heating of few subsystems crucial for wheel movement?) have ceased, there might be some chance it will survive the winter...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Plus now , after wheel operations ( and perhaps heating of few subsystems crucial for wheel movement ?
) have ceased , there might be some chance it will survive the winter.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Plus now, after wheel operations (and perhaps heating of few subsystems crucial for wheel movement?
) have ceased, there might be some chance it will survive the winter...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910348</id>
	<title>Re:Nevertheless, still doing science!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264502400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why don't they just call septuple-A?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do n't they just call septuple-A ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why don't they just call septuple-A?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909646</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910134</id>
	<title>Hedberg FTW.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264501440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"I like an escalator because an escalator can never break, it can only become stairs."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" I like an escalator because an escalator can never break , it can only become stairs .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I like an escalator because an escalator can never break, it can only become stairs.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909818</id>
	<title>The Spirit is willing...</title>
	<author>RevWaldo</author>
	<datestamp>1264500060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...but the ground is weak.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...but the ground is weak .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...but the ground is weak.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909406</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30912696</id>
	<title>Now this is the plan.</title>
	<author>Riktov</author>
	<datestamp>1264516920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Get your ass to Mars!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Get your ass to Mars !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Get your ass to Mars!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911060</id>
	<title>ya, but....</title>
	<author>zogger</author>
	<datestamp>1264505580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...if we had put both of them together..way in the middle of the night into their mission..when no big bosses were around..the intern techs could have had ROBOT FIGHTS ON MARS!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..now, how cool is *that*? And even when they got busted for it, the news would have inspired another generation of young geeks 100 times more than now, leading to..one buhzillion dollars of new funding, thousands more young scientists, etc, just so maybe they could have a chance to goof off with the next generation of the most expensive toys evah. Another example? Nethack on early mainframes...young auto engineers ripping up the closed track in prototypes,,, stuff like that...golf on the moon, and dune buggy rides...if you look at our history, there has to be cool perks for real science and technology to go forward!</p><p>(only half joking, too..)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...if we had put both of them together..way in the middle of the night into their mission..when no big bosses were around..the intern techs could have had ROBOT FIGHTS ON MARS !
..now , how cool is * that * ?
And even when they got busted for it , the news would have inspired another generation of young geeks 100 times more than now , leading to..one buhzillion dollars of new funding , thousands more young scientists , etc , just so maybe they could have a chance to goof off with the next generation of the most expensive toys evah .
Another example ?
Nethack on early mainframes...young auto engineers ripping up the closed track in prototypes,, , stuff like that...golf on the moon , and dune buggy rides...if you look at our history , there has to be cool perks for real science and technology to go forward !
( only half joking , too.. )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...if we had put both of them together..way in the middle of the night into their mission..when no big bosses were around..the intern techs could have had ROBOT FIGHTS ON MARS!
..now, how cool is *that*?
And even when they got busted for it, the news would have inspired another generation of young geeks 100 times more than now, leading to..one buhzillion dollars of new funding, thousands more young scientists, etc, just so maybe they could have a chance to goof off with the next generation of the most expensive toys evah.
Another example?
Nethack on early mainframes...young auto engineers ripping up the closed track in prototypes,,, stuff like that...golf on the moon, and dune buggy rides...if you look at our history, there has to be cool perks for real science and technology to go forward!
(only half joking, too..)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909644</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911564</id>
	<title>Re:Defeat? Nah.</title>
	<author>TropicalCoder</author>
	<datestamp>1264508760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Even in a stationary state, Spirit continues scientific research...</p></div></blockquote><p>The biggest experiment it is going to do now is seeing how fast it will die when the martian winter arrives without the northerly tilt it needs to fully illuminate its solar panels.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Even in a stationary state , Spirit continues scientific research...The biggest experiment it is going to do now is seeing how fast it will die when the martian winter arrives without the northerly tilt it needs to fully illuminate its solar panels .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even in a stationary state, Spirit continues scientific research...The biggest experiment it is going to do now is seeing how fast it will die when the martian winter arrives without the northerly tilt it needs to fully illuminate its solar panels.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30918420</id>
	<title>Re:Oblig. chauvinism</title>
	<author>SynthaxError</author>
	<datestamp>1264611960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sorry to nitpick but the first (and main) meaning of "chauvinism" is an excessive patriotism (see <a href="http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/chauvinism" title="wiktionary.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/chauvinism</a> [wiktionary.org] for details)
I think you're more like a "macho" ( <a href="http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/machismo" title="wiktionary.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/machismo</a> [wiktionary.org] )

You're welcome!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry to nitpick but the first ( and main ) meaning of " chauvinism " is an excessive patriotism ( see http : //en.wiktionary.org/wiki/chauvinism [ wiktionary.org ] for details ) I think you 're more like a " macho " ( http : //en.wiktionary.org/wiki/machismo [ wiktionary.org ] ) You 're welcome !
: - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry to nitpick but the first (and main) meaning of "chauvinism" is an excessive patriotism (see http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/chauvinism [wiktionary.org] for details)
I think you're more like a "macho" ( http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/machismo [wiktionary.org] )

You're welcome!
:-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909552</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909830</id>
	<title>Re:Free as... ?</title>
	<author>maxume</author>
	<datestamp>1264500060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Free as in bird.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Free as in bird .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Free as in bird.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910666</id>
	<title>picture of it stuck</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264503660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/345730main\_mer-20090511-226.jpg</p><p>You can see the circles in the sand where the wheels have tried to get free.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.nasa.gov/images/content/345730main \ _mer-20090511-226.jpgYou can see the circles in the sand where the wheels have tried to get free .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/345730main\_mer-20090511-226.jpgYou can see the circles in the sand where the wheels have tried to get free.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909484</id>
	<title>Re:Defeat? Nah.</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1264498800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The thing is WAY past its warrantee period. Anybody who isn't impressed is nuts. And being stationary allows some stuff tha it couldn't do while moving around. From TFA:</p><blockquote><div><p>Even in a stationary state, Spirit continues scientific research.</p><p>One stationary experiment Spirit has begun studies tiny wobbles in the rotation of Mars to gain insight about the planet's core. This requires months of radio-tracking the motion of a point on the surface of Mars to calculate long-term motion with an accuracy of a few inches.</p><p>"There's a class of science we can do only with a stationary vehicle that we had put off during the years of driving," said Steve Squyres, a researcher at Cornell University and principal investigator for Spirit and Opportunity."</p></div></blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The thing is WAY past its warrantee period .
Anybody who is n't impressed is nuts .
And being stationary allows some stuff tha it could n't do while moving around .
From TFA : Even in a stationary state , Spirit continues scientific research.One stationary experiment Spirit has begun studies tiny wobbles in the rotation of Mars to gain insight about the planet 's core .
This requires months of radio-tracking the motion of a point on the surface of Mars to calculate long-term motion with an accuracy of a few inches .
" There 's a class of science we can do only with a stationary vehicle that we had put off during the years of driving , " said Steve Squyres , a researcher at Cornell University and principal investigator for Spirit and Opportunity .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The thing is WAY past its warrantee period.
Anybody who isn't impressed is nuts.
And being stationary allows some stuff tha it couldn't do while moving around.
From TFA:Even in a stationary state, Spirit continues scientific research.One stationary experiment Spirit has begun studies tiny wobbles in the rotation of Mars to gain insight about the planet's core.
This requires months of radio-tracking the motion of a point on the surface of Mars to calculate long-term motion with an accuracy of a few inches.
"There's a class of science we can do only with a stationary vehicle that we had put off during the years of driving," said Steve Squyres, a researcher at Cornell University and principal investigator for Spirit and Opportunity.
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909328</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910104</id>
	<title>Re:Nevertheless, still doing science!</title>
	<author>Arancaytar</author>
	<datestamp>1264501380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> we're still doing science</p></div></blockquote><p>And we're still alive!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>we 're still doing scienceAnd we 're still alive !</tokentext>
<sentencetext> we're still doing scienceAnd we're still alive!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910968</id>
	<title>Huge Success</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264505100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's doing science and it's still alive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's doing science and it 's still alive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's doing science and it's still alive.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909406</id>
	<title>Well done, Spirit!</title>
	<author>Iphtashu Fitz</author>
	<datestamp>1264498440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Considering it was originally designed to only operate for 90 days and now has 2200+ days under it's belt, I'd say it's done a stellar job.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Considering it was originally designed to only operate for 90 days and now has 2200 + days under it 's belt , I 'd say it 's done a stellar job .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Considering it was originally designed to only operate for 90 days and now has 2200+ days under it's belt, I'd say it's done a stellar job.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30915806</id>
	<title>So what will it do now?</title>
	<author>RichiH</author>
	<datestamp>1264599720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can someone with actual knowledge of the matter at hand explain what the concrete differences will be? That it can't reach anything outside the crater is obvious, but other than recording the weather, what can it do, now? And how long will the solar panels give enough energy in this less-than-ideal position?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can someone with actual knowledge of the matter at hand explain what the concrete differences will be ?
That it ca n't reach anything outside the crater is obvious , but other than recording the weather , what can it do , now ?
And how long will the solar panels give enough energy in this less-than-ideal position ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can someone with actual knowledge of the matter at hand explain what the concrete differences will be?
That it can't reach anything outside the crater is obvious, but other than recording the weather, what can it do, now?
And how long will the solar panels give enough energy in this less-than-ideal position?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910604</id>
	<title>The one thing I don't understand...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264503300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...is why they haven't built and launched a dozen more of them to Mars already. They don't even need to change the design, proof is that they're still up there doing useful science. For something with an expected lifespan of 90 days that lasts a good 2200 or so, it seems stupid not to. Between the two of them it cost less than $1 billion to develop, launch and an operate them to this day from what I've read ($820 million to create them and get them there, and four mission extensions at $104 million total plus a fifth in the works). In other words, they were cheap by many standards, exceeded their mission goals and then some and still provide useful scientific data to this day.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...is why they have n't built and launched a dozen more of them to Mars already .
They do n't even need to change the design , proof is that they 're still up there doing useful science .
For something with an expected lifespan of 90 days that lasts a good 2200 or so , it seems stupid not to .
Between the two of them it cost less than $ 1 billion to develop , launch and an operate them to this day from what I 've read ( $ 820 million to create them and get them there , and four mission extensions at $ 104 million total plus a fifth in the works ) .
In other words , they were cheap by many standards , exceeded their mission goals and then some and still provide useful scientific data to this day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...is why they haven't built and launched a dozen more of them to Mars already.
They don't even need to change the design, proof is that they're still up there doing useful science.
For something with an expected lifespan of 90 days that lasts a good 2200 or so, it seems stupid not to.
Between the two of them it cost less than $1 billion to develop, launch and an operate them to this day from what I've read ($820 million to create them and get them there, and four mission extensions at $104 million total plus a fifth in the works).
In other words, they were cheap by many standards, exceeded their mission goals and then some and still provide useful scientific data to this day.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911424</id>
	<title>Re:Nevertheless, still doing science!</title>
	<author>Hairy1</author>
	<datestamp>1264507800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agreed right up to the point you suggested the Moon as a good training ground. The Moon is far more harsh than Mars. The gravity is lower, with no atmosphere and no water. Mars has an atmosphere of carbon dioxide which with the help of a little water can be turned into methane or methanol which can be used to drive around or lift off from the surface. None of these possibilities exist on the Moon. The Gravity, while still low is much more than the moons. The Moon is a terrible place to waste money on. Mars Direct all the way<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agreed right up to the point you suggested the Moon as a good training ground .
The Moon is far more harsh than Mars .
The gravity is lower , with no atmosphere and no water .
Mars has an atmosphere of carbon dioxide which with the help of a little water can be turned into methane or methanol which can be used to drive around or lift off from the surface .
None of these possibilities exist on the Moon .
The Gravity , while still low is much more than the moons .
The Moon is a terrible place to waste money on .
Mars Direct all the way : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agreed right up to the point you suggested the Moon as a good training ground.
The Moon is far more harsh than Mars.
The gravity is lower, with no atmosphere and no water.
Mars has an atmosphere of carbon dioxide which with the help of a little water can be turned into methane or methanol which can be used to drive around or lift off from the surface.
None of these possibilities exist on the Moon.
The Gravity, while still low is much more than the moons.
The Moon is a terrible place to waste money on.
Mars Direct all the way :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909904</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909516
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909476
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909904
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30912868
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911154
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909646
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910348
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909476
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909904
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911460
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909478
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909572
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909476
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909904
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30915410
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909648
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911408
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909422
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909830
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909818
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30912892
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909476
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909954
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30913110
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909958
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911230
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30916808
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909476
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909954
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30913030
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909476
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30914466
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30914146
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909476
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909654
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910870
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909412
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909476
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909904
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30915704
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909478
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911272
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910104
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909648
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909912
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909648
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30916230
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909476
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909904
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30912936
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909518
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909476
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909904
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30912450
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910582
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909478
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909644
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30916314
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909552
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30918420
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911570
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909476
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909904
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910722
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909592
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911564
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909648
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910602
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911316
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909476
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30915792
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30912628
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909476
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909904
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910888
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909476
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909904
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910822
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909552
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911116
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909476
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909904
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910294
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909646
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30915478
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909648
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30912914
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_26_1927228_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909604
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1927228.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910048
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1927228.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909478
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911272
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909644
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911060
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30916314
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909572
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1927228.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909328
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909484
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910582
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911564
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911154
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1927228.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910052
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1927228.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909356
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911570
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909830
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911316
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1927228.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909408
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1927228.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30913520
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1927228.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30913324
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1927228.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909648
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911408
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909912
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910602
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30912914
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30916230
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1927228.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909552
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30918420
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911116
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1927228.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30914504
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1927228.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909958
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911230
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1927228.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910662
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1927228.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909340
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1927228.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909406
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909818
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909518
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30912628
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1927228.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909382
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1927228.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910004
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911208
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1927228.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909520
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1927228.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909318
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30912892
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909646
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30915478
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910348
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909476
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909904
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910822
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30915410
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911460
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910888
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30911424
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30915704
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30912868
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30912450
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910294
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910722
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30912936
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30915792
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909954
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30913110
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30913030
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30914466
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909654
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910870
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909604
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909516
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910104
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30916808
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30914146
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909422
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909412
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909592
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1927228.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30910210
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_26_1927228.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_26_1927228.30909378
</commentlist>
</conversation>
