At the risk of gaining the attention of Mr Foust, >Mr. Rogers personally shaped the minds of millions of kids during the >70s, 80s and 90s with his show "Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood" - a show >dealing with life from a child's point of view. It was an extremely >popular show on PBS (still is). > >If you have never seen a show, I would suggest trying to. It explains a >great deal of the culture we have come to know and love.
Being an Aussie, I've never seen a show - or heard of it, but as I sit struggling with my Masters' thesis, I am watching the NBC Today show (awfully early in the morning my time) and there was a fairly heartfelt article on him. So, I'm a full bottle now and understand your loss - like Pioneer is for me. I were a young teen when that launched. Thank you all, on & off list, for responding to my query. and I also understand Larry's original post more clearly now as well. Regards to all (& apologies to our dear list manager) Keira > >Joe Latrell > >P.S. It's still a beautiful day in the neighborhood, even though Mr. >Rogers has moved on. > > >On Thu, 2003-02-27 at 16:25, Keira McKenzie wrote: >> Who is Mister Rogers & why is he a dark portent? >> I agree with everything else, & will be sad to see Galileo go as well. But Mister Rogers? >> -----Original Message----- >> From: LARRY KLAES <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: europa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Date: Thursday, 27 February 2003 3:14 >> Subject: Our long-term future on Earth and beyond >> >> >> My personal recommendation for a space-rock-threatens >> to-wipe-out-Earth film is 1998's Deep Impact. While not >> perfect, it was far more realistic in showing how a comet >> could destroy humanity and our potential reaction to having >> some advance notice of the news. >> >> http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/movies/di.html >> >> Of course Armageddon might resonate better with a public >> that is not very discriminatory when it comes to science >> accuracy in films - or bad acting and plotting: >> >> http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/movies/armageddon.html >> >> >> But I heartily agree with Robert about the need to preserve >> humanity in some form beyond Earth. With the way we are >> going now, who needs a giant space rock to destroy us. >> >> I don't care what the masses think of the idea. Their >> thoughts are too narrowly focused in space and time to >> see the big picture and know what is truly good for them. >> If I worried about public opinion, I never would have >> suggested Icepick or dealt with space all my life at all. >> >> http://www.longnow.org/ >> >> Columbia tears apart in space, Pioneer 10 stops transmitting >> to Earth, and now Mister Rogers dies. You tell me these >> aren't the signs of something bad coming (said only half >> facetiously). >> >> Larry >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Gary McMurtry >> Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 1:30 AM >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Subject: Re: Columbia analysis and space exploration >> >> >> Robert, et al., >> >> I am among the billions of Earthlings that have not yet seen the movie >> "Armageddon", but I know from previews that it stars Bruce Willis and the >> Space Shuttle (I think). However, I know what you are referring to as NEO >> impacts are indeed nasty events, with devastating consequences for our >> civilization, or at least parts of it, depending on the size and location >> of the impact. I believe the small ones typically hit Earth on the order >> of every 100,000 years, on average. Big ones, like the K-T Impactor, on >> the order of every 30 million years or so. Just look at a Geologic Time >> Scale--about every Period boundary has probably recorded a major impact >> event, with sudden and significant changes in the flora and fauna--the >> boundary catastrophies that Georges Cuvier first noted about 200 years ago. >> >> Anyway, as some of you who have seen the Discovery Channel program "Mega >> Tsunami" may know (co-starring Yours Truly--blush), we also have "a little >> problem" right here on Earth, namely the flank collapse of oceanic island >> volcanoes. They also occur on the order of every 100,000 years, on >> average. We can predict where, but presently not exactly when or how, >> future collapses will occur. Like the NEO threat, it has been difficult to >> obtain sufficient funds to study this problem, although the threat is >> clearly there, and the consequences severe. >> >> Anyway, I tend to agree with the trend that we will all look foolish >> indeed, if once we establish the cure for cancer or that bacterial life >> flourishes and even octopuses swim in the Europan Ocean, one day the sky >> goes bright and suddenly our home in Kansas is awash in seawater. >> >> Gary >> >> At 08:35 PM 2/26/2003 -0800, you wrote: >> >> >> >(I wrote much of this first to Bruce and John offlist, >> >but I realized upon re-reading that it might have general >> >list significance.) >> > >> >I would tend to agree with John that we may want to simply >> >let the investigation run its course. >> > >> >Unfortunately the news media seem to be turning up revealing >> >details. >> > >> >In Intense Debate, Engineers Predicted Extent of Liftoff Damage >> >Matthew L. Wald and William J. Broad. >> >NY Times, Feb. 27, 2003: >> >http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/27/national/nationalspecial/27SHUT.html?page wanted=print >> > >> >To NASA's credit, they are being very open and quick about >> >revealing details of internal discussions. >> > >> >But it would appear that before the shuttles can fly again >> >some significant refinement is going to be required to both >> >the external tank bipod attachment as well as the wheel well >> >areas. Not trivial upgrades. >> > >> >(Yes, Bruce, I know you would probably like to scratch the >> >whole mess (shuttles, ISS, etc.) but being realistic, I >> >really doubt that is likely to occur.) >> > >> >To really push that concept you (Bruce) need to present a really >> >good alternative to not "how do we explore the solar system?" >> >but "how do we save humanity?". There are people who inherently >> >grasp the priorities. The "exploration" part is pointless without >> >the "saving" part. >> > >> >There are just *too* many people that have seen Armageddon and >> >the very best argument one could make in the world (peer reviewed, >> >signed and stamped by numerous experts, etc.) doesn't carry *any* >> >weight against Liv Tyler's tears. >> > >> >It doesn't matter that the risks (to humanity) are low, and perhaps >> >going lower (cite many of Larry Klaes's recent msgs). What matters >> >is that every single human being knows that if they end up on the wrong >> >side of the dice roll that everything that they have ever done, >> >worked for, hoped for, desired, etc. would be pointless. >> > >> >I'll freely admit that probably billions of humans are not up >> >to that level of awareness (perhaps all those that haven't >> >seen Armageddon) -- but they would all appreciate the concept. >> >Hope & desire seem likely to be key aspects of what gets us >> >out of bed in the morning. Remove those (say through the discovery >> >of an incoming NEO that we cannot prevent) and it seems probable >> >that one destroys key aspects of humanity if not humanity itself. >> > >> >Robert >> > >> > >> >== >> >You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/ >> >> >> == >> You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/ >> > > > >== >You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/ > > == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/
