Lol at my iPhone and the broken encoding of my message. Oh the ironyâ¦

Apparently they assume thereâ(TM)s no encoding in the message. Iâ(TM)d like to see their algorithm tackle even the simplest codings of image, video or audio. I donâ(TM)t see them obtaining a JPEG decoder or HEVC decoder just by simply âtesting combinationsâ. A good encoding looks like noise without the decoder and I assume communicating interstellary without a robust encoding is a little bit silly idea. Even Voyager communicates with error correcting codes, however that might be âcrackableâ after a bit of studying.

Regarding my comment on Mars, there is less drag not zero drag. Sorry.

Itâ(TM)s absolutely not irrelevant. Approaching at 24,500 mph means nearly 7 miles per second. Even a small variation in atmospheric conditions or timing means a lot of drift. There is not much you can do when atmospheric breaking starts. Towards the end you can glide of course like the shuttle or starship. The moon capsule is not really a glide vehicle though. You could design it that way if a nice landing on Earth is the primary target. I believe Moon an Mars landings are more accurate because there is no drag. Retro rockets would help but is the added complexity really worth it? Interesting to see how SpaceX deals with it though.

You do understand the difference between landing a deep space mission and a low earth orbit mission? The speed difference is gigantic. SpaceX has yet to land a deep space mission so thereâ(TM)s currently no way of knowing how it will go.

You still need temperature differential to do the work. How would that work with just some pipes running around in the atmosphere? Whereâ(TM)s the cold and the hot?

Good God you are stupid. Nowhere did I claim that two species need to have identical features or behaviour. Also, bats are great swimmers. Humans lost their fur due to a number of reasons, and our better swimming ability is mostly a by-product of our weaker and less robust physique.

The aquatic ape theory is based on an observation that some physical attributes of humans seem to have been optimized with respect to aquatic surroundings. However, isn't the atmosphere a fluid just as any liquid? Fluid dynamics are pretty much the same, it's just the density that changes. Plus there's definately everyday interactions with liquids such as water, rain and sweat. Evolution optimizes everything it can, even the faintest traces of interactions with water become efficiently optimized and that's why we don't need to dwell in oceans to obtain "aquatic" features.

I love it how Dorminey IS CONSTANTLY YELLING HIS QUESTIONS AT BERNSTEIN. Oh good God I can't even get this post past Slashdots caps filters!

I assume '100 Year Vision of Greatness' will be followed by '1000 Year Vision of Nuclear Winter'.