Mike Combs: Saw your debate with Zubrin's Spawn

I would love to see you add the section on how to Argue with
Martians. :) I think I would enjoy reading it, as well as the otehrs
in this group, and it may actually save you some grief: you could
just refer the Martians to your page and ask them to refute with
facts, the arguments that you present. Otherwise, their positions
are just wishful thinking or personal opinions.

Mike, the force is strong within you. Keep up the good fight.

--- In spacesettlers@y..., "Combs, Mike" wrote:
> From: victoriatangoman [mailto:tango_dancer@h...]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 4:11 AM
> To: spacesettlers@y...
> Subject: [spacesettlers] Mike Combs: Saw your debate with Zubrin's
Spawn
>
> Just spent a few hours reading one thread in the sci.space.policy
> group archive from October 2000 where you were trying to get
> Christopher M. Jones to back up with data his wild assertions.
>
> He never did and the thread just died.
>
> I'm surprised you didn't have a stroke from dealing with guy. I
> would have just given up. Talk about people having blinders on.
> Using arguments to shoot down the HF concept but exempting Mars
> Direct from the same criteria, then applying a generous government
> largess to Mars Direct but not allowing the same for High Frontier.
>
> Made for interesting reading. Did anybody ever send you the data
you
> requested which "proved" that High Frontier is bunk?
>
> No. I frequently find it to be the case that when someone says
they have
> ironclad reasons why High Frontier won't work, or maybe a list of
10 or more
> advantages Mars habitats would have over orbital ones, when I ask
for it,
> they say that work/school commitments keep them from investing the
time
> needed. In the weeks and months to follow, though, I continue to
see many
> dozens of postings from them on various areas of space trivia.
>
> I'm currently going round and round with Chris Vancil, which I've
done
> before.
>
> I'm almost thinking about adding a new page to my Space Settlement
site
> titled "How to Argue With Martians". I keep seeing the same
invalid
> arguments being presented again and again. Most of the time, this
debate is
> a battle against oft-repeated conventional wisdoms. I think
there's a lot