To Mars Or Not To Mars?

That is the question at this Oxford debate this evening (in a couple hours, sorry about the short notice).

[Update toward the end of the debate]

As I’ve noted in the past, debates like this are pointless, because they are a false choice based on a false premise. We don’t have to choose between populating Mars and saving the planet; we have abundant resources for both. The false premise is that this is going to be a collective decision whose outcome will be determined by an Oxford debate. People who go to Mars will be doing so with their own money, so people on Earth who oppose it are going to have to make it illegal to prevent it. There is a word for people like that: jailers.

Feds Make Tesla Remove Rolling Stops

Why that’s a really bad idea.

I’m putting this post up late tonight, because we just got back from the launch/landing at Vandenberg. I’m sure I’ll have more thoughts tomorrow, because I consider this a very important topic.

I will say, though, that the only moving ticket I’ve ever gotten other than speeding tickets, is for a rolling stop, and I consider it stupid.

Leaded Aviation Fuel

How to survive the transition to unleaded.

As more airfields adopt this policy, it could cause affect flight plans and significantly impact aircraft owners and pilots, especially those operating high-performance models.

Much like Tesla owners who now plan road trips based on the availability of charging stations along the route, flight plans will need an additional layer of forethought to ensure refueling at an airport still distributing 100LL.

The stakes are considerably higher with aircraft, as one does not simply pull over and wait for AAA to arrive with a portable charger when reserves dip dangerously low.

You don’t say.

Biting Commentary about Infinity…and Beyond!