Thank you for taking those steps Neil, I'm sorry mankind couldn't go the rest of the way. I hope one day we will.

A small proportion of those would have died in failed, yet inventive attempts to cross.

Odd projection. No Europe and therefore no Hurricane Bawbag. No flying trampolines. I'm dissapointed.

Wouldn't be that as we get older the replenishment of cells creates errors as we get older which multiply exponentially?

And Mr. Freeze said, "FREEEZE" and it was so. And he saw that it was good.

A regional variation in Lincolnshire where I live is "wouldn't" becomes "wunt". Shouldn't becomes "shunt". "Couldn't" becomes....

Expectations exceeded.

I think.. I love this disembodied voice..

Game of Thrones, Ned putting a sword through someones neck. That got me all wet and tingly.

The point that confuses me then, primarily because we've seen it in action in other parts of the rover, is why could they not have a disposable 'lens cap' over the surface of the circuit boards during descent?

We have a sample size of 1. Any answer is equally debunkable.

Are you a victim shamer in other areas?

'Jubbly'. There be only one.

For it to work as a telescope it would require a housing with a collector (secondary mirror). Otherwise you have orbit's largest mirror, not a telescope.

Then let me phrase it another way; would we be able to see 'the edge' of it.

They were on the Pan-Am flights to the moon

Agreed, I'm a bit shocked that they're ready to scrap them that are only from the early 90s. They should build on existing platforms, or at least plan these to have an 80 year lifecycle in which they can be gutted, or extra things attached to the sides.

Can someone tell me why we can't: When we look further away, we look further back in time. Will this, or some other future telescope allow us to physically watch the beginning of the universe? Can we develop a telescope that will look to 14.6bn light years away?

It was a political stance. Distance itself from everything British, which is seen as the old order, Monarchy and everything an Australian socialist should avoid.

I stand by what I said. It is a criticism of the profession made by Dawkins and Tyson among others. Specific doctors may contribute to research but it is not a job requirement. Research publications themselves ARE however crucial to the advancement of our species.