Queen Prawn

I think it has two do with the second line of the rhyme. Since it was only the first line and wasn't used in any racist way, I am not sure I understand where the basis for the lawsuits stems... (I deleted the wrong post of mine above)

That was the harsh thing, their best chance of survival was trying to fly back in since they weren't equiped to do a space walk or to dock at the station and even if they could do either, there was nothing available to them to repair the situation. As you stated, a rescue operation would never have happened in time due to the amount of time preparig for a launch takes...

No, no I meant temps 40F and below - sorry if I misworded that. below those temps, the material could develop cracks and thusly break apart (or something along those lines).

That's the one I saw Donkey. Thanks for reminding me of the details!

My parents together make less than that.

This isn't toward you steff, just general thoughts... Just because it didn't fail in previous missions didn't mean they were used properly. I saw a couple specials that talked about how NASA was warned about lifting off when temps were below 40F that something like what happened could happen. The mateial used for the o-rings had a specific temp spec. Just because they got it to work outside that spec doesn't mean it is guaranteed to work everytime outside the spec. This is something I deal with on a near daily basis. I get a customer telling me they can put more juice through our parts than what they are rated. That's nice and dandy, but when it fails don't come crying to us since it was used outside of our guaranteed spec.

Previous thread: Dale Torborg

Exactly - heat/cold repetatively cycled on the o-ring material is very dangerous. But they were still being used outside the 'guaranteed' range of operation in regards to temp. Any engineer worth their salt that is working on something that involves human lives knows better than to do something that stupid.

Considering the way they are applied to the ship, not surprised they fall off during lift off and re-entry.

I agree, I've read a bit and seen a few specials on them. The thing is with Challenger, they should never have been allowed to liftoff because the temperature was outside the temperature range where they would properly function (which as you said was already in question and still is), thusly almost guaranteeing something terrible would happen.

Sad thing about Challenger is that it shouldn't have happened and could have been avoided. There should have never been a liftoff due to the temperature that day. They had already scrapped a few liftoff tries and because they didn't want anymore delays (costs and such) they went ahead. From some things that have come out, it was known that the o-rings were porblematic to start with and worse with temperature.

Have they ever explained the shiny object that was near the Columbia upon re-entry over (I think) California? I saw the pictures that were taken, but couldn't tell if it was a piece that had fallen from Columbia or going towards it and I don't recall NASA ever stating what that was. I remember that they going theory was that it was either a satelite or a piece of space junk, but nothing official was ever stated (unless I missed something which is highly likely).

I wasn't alive for the Apollo Pad fire, but it brought me to tears when I watched a special on it a few years ago. As for Challenger, I was in 4th grade and we were on our morning trip to the bathroom when our teacher lined us up and told us to pray for the astronauts. They wouldn't expound on what happened, but my mom explained it all to me and allowed me to watch some of the coverage. It wasn't easy for her to explain as I had wanted to be an astronaut in the worst way and she didn't want to take that dream away from me. As for Columbia, I found out by going on the WSI message boards when I woke up that morning - I thought something happened in the country, not to the ship. When it dawned on me what really happened, it shook me up a bit.

We're not married yet (shooting for 5/14/05), but have been living together for a year and a half. We've been through and might be going through a financially challenging time (I was laid off last year, but got a job right away and this year, the plant he works at looks like they might close down). For the most part, we do tend to cling to somewhat traditional roles - I do the cooking and laundry, he tends to the cars and we both do household chores. As to the last part - VERY TRUE - that's what I say about my nephew's father, but in that case, my sister agrees.

I doubt it (as long as the bills are paid, food is on the table, clothes on our back and we have a few dollars towards sporting events, I'm a happy camper), but I guess I'll have to wait and see. The money gets pooled in any sense, but I kinda understand where you are coming from. EDIT - (forgot) my mom made a bit more than my dad at the beginning of their marriage, then after 5 years, dad made more and then 12 years later (from then 'til now) mom makes more. I guess I've seen it flip-flop a bit, it never struck me that who made more was important.

About what?

Not arguing with ya, just saying this is the first I heard of this story, or as it seems, non-story.

This is the first I've heard of it. Then again, who the hell am I, might I ask...

I think this is the reason (and only reason) this story needed to come out - it would eventually come out that he was banished in Japan and sooner or later some writer would have 'broken' the story so the player beat him to it. Somewhat similar to what happen to Tim Allen and his drug conviction (writer threatened to come out with the story so he beat the writer to it and told the world, so to speak).

That's pretty much what Brian told me. My only point with that post is that there will always be someone to 'look down' or take issue with a situation.

The thing I found funny is how men feel like less of a man if 'their woman' makes more than them. Not all men are like that (I am marrying one that was, by his own admission like that, but has changed his mind since meeting me) granted, but I have known many men that thought that way and often said they would never date a woman who makes more money than they do. Brian says that for him, it was a self-esteem thing - but he realized that because I make what I do doesn't make him less of a man (and now because he received better raises than I have, thanks to a union contract, he makes $1.50 an hr more than me).

Mr Bill Putz: Please hold on to Sutter until after the Canes play them in March. Thank you, FanOfCanes

No, I am a woman. Haven't been a girl since I was 18 .

I watch NASCAR. I enjoy watching the passing the wrecks (when there are no injuries, which is most of the time due to all the improvements in safety gear), the science of cars and aerodynamics that's covered during the race and I enjoy the end of race coverage where there is inevitably one racer who loses his cool and tries to deck another racer. It's an acquired taste.

This thread reminds me of how my first car was stolen and chopped...the guy had his buddies steal it because I wouldn't date him or return his calls.