http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/01/29/1770484.aspx N.Y. Times: Elevating science, elevating democracy Slashdot: Doomsday debate resurfaces with bizarre twist  Technology Review: Fewer calories = better brains? Discover Magazine: Virtual tour of 8 strange exoplanets en-USCommunityServer 2.0 (Build: 60608.1)http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/01/29/1770484.aspx#1772562Thu, 29 Jan 2009 21:22:05 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:1772562Chris EldridgeHi Alan, never believed a particle collider could ever create a mini black hole...  I mean that requires mass I almost wish the people from the science channel and all the other doomsday sayers would focus on much more real dangers instead of far flung ones like a gama ray burst which we couldn't do anything about anyway.  I forget the name, but in one of those doomsday movies, the answer was for a self-sufficient city for a million people.  Self-sufficiency is the absolute key to coping with nearly any kind of power outage, pandemic, war, economic collapse or disaster.  It's also good for global warming and our free time and expenses because if we did have each small community as self-sufficient as possible (not underground... but just more robust), we'd truly be able to endour almost anything!http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/01/29/1770484.aspx#1773094Fri, 30 Jan 2009 00:50:17 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:1773094ddsYour are an complete ignorant on the topichttp://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/01/29/1770484.aspx#1774648Fri, 30 Jan 2009 20:15:20 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:1774648ChrisParticle physics and why they speculate a black hole of all things can be formed is not my topic... I guess some sort of singularity is possible?http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/01/29/1770484.aspx#1777897Mon, 02 Feb 2009 21:54:29 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:1777897R. Gilbert II, Modesto, CA.A posible hinderance to the space program is the fact that NASA may have to scrub space flight for a few years, due to the shuttle program being discarded for its obsolescence. I think that this is a terrible waste of the project. Which was, I believed, when the shuttle program was presented, supposed to be dedicated to a reusable vehicle with some tech to support the upgrading of the vehicle as a primary principle. Whether this upgrading were to be revising and adapting new technology to the vehicle or the building of higher order, less costly, space capable vehicles, cannot be readily seen as a committed perspective of the grant and private dollars which have been presented to the program. Not withstanding, the red tape invoked, that conservativism and safety issues present. Though we could posibly be able to be shuttled into space by another space faring country, we should have foreseen the instance which we may not. What should we do? We can and should have built vehicles which are what was supposed to be presented when the shuttle program was conceived; a lateral take-off atmospheric vehicle, capable of space-flight, life support charateristics. The payloads would not be as great, but assem,bling components in space should not be the issue. Experience and experiment is the issue for growth as a space faring entity.