Discussion in 'Community' started by Jabbadabbado, Sep 26, 2012.
I AM THE SCIENCE POPULARIZER GOTHAM DESERVES
Lesser of two evils, and stuff
The difference between cautionary skepticism and cynical snobbery is tone, not content.--Souderwan
I could care less what education he has, he stopped being nice to me long ago so pardon us for bickering. On top of that as I pointed out people with far greater education have funding to research the matter, on top of that all the "'not gonna happen" reasons are known, accepted, pointed out, understood, we know it, we get it etc etc.
But that's the point you never seem to grasp. They aren't getting funding to research what you are talking about. They are getting funding to research a legitimate scientific issue that, in the warped flights of fantasy of some basement-dwelling internet blogger, is the keystone to whatever wild invention they saw on the last episode of Star Trek. It's not. It has nothing to do with that, despite whatever tenuous chains of maybes you can string out for the next two centuries worth research and fringe theories you can use to build some sort connection.
They aren't related. At all. That's really been the main thrust of Vivec's fiery dismissals, and Morella's more restrained objections.
That "quote" doesn't even fit as a rebuttal to any one of our posts.
Since when was outdated Cold War posturing more fitting of science funding than doing science?
all vlm was saying is that he wants us to go the moon again. i don't see what the big deal is...
After years of posting on the same forum as Ramza, I think I finally understand a correct situation to use this in.
VLM et al: Your spaghetti is getting everywhere.
The big deal is.... why? What goals would going back to the moon achieve, in terms of science, compared to what we can do by other means? And what is the opportunity cost of that, given how many science projects are being scrapped due to budgetary constraints right now?
There's absolutely nothing right now that humans can achieve from a scientific point of view by going to the moon ourselves rather than sending robots. In addition, there are plenty of scientific questions that NASA can and should (and sometimes does) spend money on. Like the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer, for example.
NASA should be devoting all it resources toward faking a manned mission to Mars.
I don't think vlm was making an argument for why we should go to the moon. He was just saying that he wants us to go the moon.
He also wants a yacht...
No, he was, largely as he's contending that NASA is being run wrong because it's not. So that implicitly carries with it the argument that we should be doing that with our limited budget.
Well, if Montie wants to go to the moon, I support that 100%.
We probably won't be going back to the Moon until there's some benefit in it for us.
Like mining, or solar energy that can then be transmitted to Earth for power. Or perhaps for military defense purposes, if the threat of space warfare materializes. Or maybe if there was some real need for it, for scientific advancement.
In other words, there's no real benefit to us going back to the Moon now. Just sci-fi fantasies.
VLM just wants us to hurry up and become an intergalactic civilization of posthuman immortals with android sex toys already, and he's tired of waiting and asking nicely.
Yeah, VLM has seen and read a lot of science fantasy technologies and his want for them is trumping good science. Anyone who proceeds to even try to counter it gets told to "let the adults talk."
I could understand getting upset if you were countering his arguments and he told you to "let the adults talk," but what happened was that you started talking about "scientific priorities" and attacking him personally, when he was only sharing with us his desire for NASA to return the moon.
So i think he was quite right to tell you to "let the adults talk". You were being impertinent.
You put scientific priorities in quotes as if I just made that up on the spot.
I used to try to explain things to him in a calm and reasonable matter. You think the Chicago pile thread was the first time we discussed the alcubierre drive? Months ago it was posted, and months ago I explained why it wouldn't work. Go back to page 6 of this thread and then tell me who is being impertinent.
4D printing has been created... printed objects that change over time, after certain activation (such as water, heat, vibration, etc.)
All things change over time. Entropy. Bam.
....I'm sorry, but calling it "4-D printing" is just dumb. It's not as if 3-D printers print objects that do not have a t value.
It's just a cool way to advertise the technology
The machines are coming.
They have now 3D-printed an entire gun, and it works:
(another reason why I think the stricter gun reform that some Democrats want is doomed to fail)
Really? Because I'm pretty sure this is going to result in privately owned 3D printers being banned. Way to ****ing go, dip****.