<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Genesis Probe</title>
	<atom:link href="http://robert.williamsonline.us/2004/09/genesis-probe/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://robert.williamsonline.us/2004/09/genesis-probe/</link>
	<description>I am crucified with Christ, and yet I live</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 17 Jan 2010 13:28:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Phil in CA</title>
		<link>http://robert.williamsonline.us/2004/09/genesis-probe/#comment-808</link>
		<dc:creator>Phil in CA</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://robert.williamsonline.us/?p=731#comment-808</guid>
		<description>[*phil enters, hanging head*]  On the one hand, I&#039;d like to pat our engineers on the back for designing a craft that can survive reentry and impact and still have some semblence of usable cargo.  But it&#039;s hard to gloat about building a study craft when we can&#039;t get a chute to open.  Maybe next time we should try that air bag approach like on the Mars Sojourner.  For a variety of physics reasons, it might work on Earth, too.

On the other hand, I kept thinking that we&#039;ve spent $260 million on another hunt to validate &quot;evolution.... origin of the solar system&quot; yadda yadda.  It&#039;s the same thing with the &quot;water on Mars&quot; thing.  It just gets tiring to hear every space story these days go on about &quot;evolution&quot; and &quot;origins&quot; as the mission behind every probe or lander.  But I see more and more NASA missions failing, too.  I can&#039;t help but wonder if this is a &quot;God thing,&quot; since we&#039;ve gone from wishing &quot;God&#039;s speed, John Glenn!&quot; to now shooting off landers and probes in every direction to disprove God.  I know, we had failures in throughout space exploration, but not like the embarassments we&#039;ve had.  Just my $0.02</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[*phil enters, hanging head*]  On the one hand, I&#8217;d like to pat our engineers on the back for designing a craft that can survive reentry and impact and still have some semblence of usable cargo.  But it&#8217;s hard to gloat about building a study craft when we can&#8217;t get a chute to open.  Maybe next time we should try that air bag approach like on the Mars Sojourner.  For a variety of physics reasons, it might work on Earth, too.</p>
<p>On the other hand, I kept thinking that we&#8217;ve spent $260 million on another hunt to validate &#8220;evolution&#8230;. origin of the solar system&#8221; yadda yadda.  It&#8217;s the same thing with the &#8220;water on Mars&#8221; thing.  It just gets tiring to hear every space story these days go on about &#8220;evolution&#8221; and &#8220;origins&#8221; as the mission behind every probe or lander.  But I see more and more NASA missions failing, too.  I can&#8217;t help but wonder if this is a &#8220;God thing,&#8221; since we&#8217;ve gone from wishing &#8220;God&#8217;s speed, John Glenn!&#8221; to now shooting off landers and probes in every direction to disprove God.  I know, we had failures in throughout space exploration, but not like the embarassments we&#8217;ve had.  Just my $0.02</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

