SpaceX is the only private crewed orbital company. BlueOrigin, Virgin Galactic and technicaly Scale Composites have delivered people to suborbital. With the other suborbital flights being government (X15 and Redstone).

As for non crewed, then you have to pick and chose between your definitions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_private_spaceflight_companies

About 7 or 8 if you include ULA and Orbital OKT that were government funded.

Starship will fly Dear Moon and the other private mission before SLS Artemis are ready to land on the Moon.

Its going to be a match in a fireworks factory in terms of how the public will react.

Increasing CO2 makes the upper atmosphere more efficient at radiating heat to space. Its a key fingerprint of greenhouse gasses as opposed to other sources of heating. First predicted by the famous Manabe and Wetherald 1967 paper, one that really introduced computational modelling of the atmosphere.

My "hotter than Venus" hot take is Starship will not ferry crew to Mars. We will need to build something bigger and with partial gravity, perhaps a cycler of some kind.

Though if Starship is a fraction of what it is being claimed in terms of costs and speed of reuse, that would be relatively cheap. Relatively doing more heavy lifting than an olympic powerlifter here.

Or reusable first stage, Falcon Heavy, Dragon, Crew Dragon etc.

>self driving cars, the roadster, the cybertruck and solar roofs

They are all Tesla not SpaceX products. Not sure what your beef with the roadster is either.

Musk is a hype man with hits and misses. The best approach is to look at things form a technical perspective. He is slotted to place crew on the Moon in 2024. But SpaceX is known for slippage and the whole of Artemis is years behind. That would give him about 4 years to turn Starship into something that could last a journey to Mars and back. Technically plausible. But I would place it in the unlikely. Not because "Musk" because the timelines are too short for solving over two years in microgravity, for something as short as a flag and photos mission.

People often do not understand other dialects of their own language.

In terms of individual words, languages will often take loan words from other languages, so for example Turkish has a lot of Persian words as the ruling class used to speak Persian. Or English is something like 1/3 loan words from French due to the ruling class speaking it. But if you go to pre Norman English (Anglo Saxon) it is much closer to early forms of Dutch (Friesian).

This is why when you have ancient forms of languages you can see more clearly the connections.

Also with Indo European the languages likely started to split about 6000 years ago when the various people migrated east towards India and Iran and west into Europe. So there is a huge amount of time for the languages to diverge. The similarities are in the shortest and oldest words, words for things like father, mother that kind of thing.

Similarities in words especially root words and grammar structures. Especially when you have more ancient forms preserved as for Latin, Greek and Sanskrit that was used to tease the first scientific theories of language groups.

Hungary, Finno Urgic thought to be from near the Urals. They were one of many nomadic peoples from the central Asian steppes (though often they were from the European parts as well) who swept through Europe and they were one of the few to leave a lasting kingdom and language that survived to the modern world.

>Shelley Wright is an associate professor of physics at the University of California, San Diego’s Center for Astrophysics and Space Studies. She specializes in galaxies, supermassive black holes and building optical and infrared instruments for telescopes using adaptive optics such as integral field spectrographs.
>
>Warren Randolph is the deputy executive director of the Federal Aviation Administration’s Accident Investigation and Prevention for Aviation Safety department. He has an extensive background in aviation safety at the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and is currently responsible for setting and implementing safety management system principles and using data to inform the assessment of future hazards and emerging safety risks.

Experience in IR. And by a long way the most important, an expert in understanding the problems with witness testimony in air crashes. But no specialist in the video equipment or aerial photography these images often come from (F-18 FLIR). Hopefully they can request expert testimony.

People misunderstanding mis remembering what they see in aerial crashes etc is a major issue for FAA investigations.

SpaceX is the dominant provider of commercial launch services. Its a pretty solid revenue stream that would be there "clout" or no.

>What "rocket scientist" refers to themselves as a "rocket scientist"?

Ones without engineering degrees.

Or jobs in the sector.

Or degrees.

Etc.

>I'm a rocket scientist

That dont impress me much.

​

>And yet... I don't see the point in the Mars missions

What Mars missions? Which rockets do you work on again? The only Mars missions are things like the NASA rovers etc.

>I suspect that the real reason is Elon Musk trying to force America to pay for something they don't need

Which rocket do you scientist for again? SpaceX won the HLS program, most did not give them a chance. So its the other way round, they are providing services that the US needs.