Human-buttons

and try, when appropriate, to inculcate awareness of
the SSI agenda, ie, defusing planatary chavinism,
space colonies,etc, . It's amazing how seldom my
comments about space colonies elicit a response,
either pro or con. Maybe I'm just not agravating
enough,,, I post to newsgroups, and I've found that I've gotten my most vigorous response whenever somebody proposes industry on the moon, but for the purpose of making products for use in places other than the moon. I'll ask why not place the ore refineries and manufacturing facilities in HEO and I'll get back a stream of answers which don't really stand up to scrutiny (you can't process ores in orbit because you need gravity to do that, it would be a complete waste to lift anything other than the aluminum you want into space, etc.). One of the more interesting recent exchanges was with someone for whom I had made the point that we will be able to provide a full 1-G via rotation in orbit, but wouldn't be able to do same on the moon. He insisted that something very much like a Stanford Torus could be built on the moon to provide the other 5/6ths of a G needed. I told him that such ahabitat would require a massive bearing to support the weight of the structure against the gravity of the moon. He angrily insisted that this would need no bearing. He had been describing the structure as being like a maglev on a banked track, and I told him that simplyimplied a magnetic bearing, but that it was still needed, and was a complexadditional system unneeded in the orbital case. I told him I could see a maglev the size of a small gymnasium, where you might go to work out (especially if scheduled for a return to Earth), but I just couldn't see a maglev the size of a city of 10,000. He was one of those who said you can't process ores without gravity. Then after several day's worth of discussion on rotating systems and centrifugal force, he was right back to repeating this assertion.