|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#181
|
|||
|
|||
Americans - Insane in the Membrane
Ian Parker wrote:
On 22 Feb, 11:59, jmfbahciv jmfbahciv@aol wrote: That's really too bad. You could have had a really interesting thread here yakking with Ms. Douglas. I think you have to think whether or not people want a serious answer or not. Ms Douglas clearly does not. I think it would indeed be arrogant of me to claim that my ideas were the only ones, or the best. I am not claiming that. What I am claiming is that people who are clearly intent on causing mischief and doing nothing more should be dealt with in short time. She does not want a proper discussion, she has in fact said so. So any nonsense about way out ideas etc. is way off beam. NO ideas, way oout or not have actually been presented. snip Of course she would like a proper discussion. She's curious. However, it is impossible to have one with you. The fact that she figured this out in two posts or less indicates that she has an ability to think well. You, apprently, don't have that ability and don't want to have that ability. /BAH |
#182
|
|||
|
|||
Americans - Insane in the Membrane
Deirdre Sholto Douglas wrote:
jmfbahciv wrote: That's really too bad. You could have had a really interesting thread here yakking with Ms. Douglas. I don't think that was ever an option with Ian...he makes outrageous statements...a veritable tsunami of prose...but when it's pointed out to him that said statements are flawed, instead of defending or sup- porting his claims scientifically, he takes off on an obfuscating tangent and/or attacks the person challenging him. IMHO, the only thing interesting here is his conceit of himself. Some inane posts produce interesting discussions because other readers get curious and start posting, leaving the ahem think-challenged behind. /BAH |
#183
|
|||
|
|||
Americans - Insane in the Membrane
Deirdre Sholto Douglas wrote:
jmfbahciv wrote: Deirdre Sholto Douglas wrote: kT wrote: snip Honestly, if science wasn't fun, the tedium would drive you insane ... Got _that_ in one. And the pay usually sucks...no one does this to get rich...but the toys can make up for a lot of tedium and late hours...at least they have so far. What I don't understand is why the crackpots avoid all lab work. The reason to take science classes is to be able to play in the labs. The lab class times were never long enough. Their loss, our gain. :-) I suspect it might have something to do with ego...the few I've run across aren't (and haven't) actually worked in science and so they seem to think there's something demeaning about doing benchwork...especially ghasp! in a wet lab. In their minds, the hands-on stuff is done to order (their order) by a technician while they sit at a deck and think Big Ideas. But that is no fun at all. Testing your ideas and seeing if they work, or more interestingly not work, is part of the fun. I don't know about you, but I didn't go into this field to sit behind a desk or rot in meetings (which is not to say I don't have to do both on occasion)...I chose this path so I could get paid for satisfying my own curiosity while playing with some of the most expensive toys in town. So far, that plan has panned out nicely. :-) Very nice :-). I was going to grow up to be a marine biologist but got side-traced and stumbled into the computer biz. In order to get things fixed "right", I went to work for a computer manufacturer. Every machine room was a lab. /BAH |
#184
|
|||
|
|||
Americans - Insane in the Membrane
jmfbahciv wrote: Deirdre Sholto Douglas wrote: I suspect it might have something to do with ego...the few I've run across aren't (and haven't) actually worked in science and so they seem to think there's something demeaning about doing benchwork...especially ghasp! in a wet lab. In their minds, the hands-on stuff is done to order (their order) by a technician while they sit at a deck and think Big Ideas. But that is no fun at all. Testing your ideas and seeing if they work, or more interestingly not work, is part of the fun. I don't know if it's "more interestingly", but it's certainly "more likely"...particularly if one is working with living entities with their own agendas. Microbes can be such notional wee things. :-) Deirdre |
#185
|
|||
|
|||
Americans - Insane in the Membrane
jmfbahciv wrote: Deirdre Sholto Douglas wrote: jmfbahciv wrote: That's really too bad. You could have had a really interesting thread here yakking with Ms. Douglas. I don't think that was ever an option with Ian...he makes outrageous statements...a veritable tsunami of prose...but when it's pointed out to him that said statements are flawed, instead of defending or sup- porting his claims scientifically, he takes off on an obfuscating tangent and/or attacks the person challenging him. IMHO, the only thing interesting here is his conceit of himself. Some inane posts produce interesting discussions because other readers get curious and start posting, leaving the ahem think-challenged behind. My guess is that this particular think-challenged soul is the sort who will interrupt and disrupt any discussion that takes place without him...rather like having a toddler in the room. While I agree in theory with your premise, I suspect that given the living entities involved, it's impossible to pull off in prac- tice. :-( Deirdre |
#186
|
|||
|
|||
Americans - Insane in the Membrane
On 23 Feb, 12:03, jmfbahciv jmfbahciv@aol wrote:
Deirdre Sholto Douglas wrote: jmfbahciv wrote: That's really too bad. *You could have had a really interesting thread here yakking with Ms. Douglas. I don't think that was ever an option with Ian...he makes outrageous statements...a veritable tsunami of prose...but when it's pointed out to him that said statements are flawed, instead of defending or sup- porting his claims scientifically, he takes off on an obfuscating tangent and/or attacks the person challenging him. IMHO, the only thing interesting here is his conceit of himself. Some inane posts produce interesting discussions because other readers get curious and start posting, leaving the ahem think-challenged behind. The real interest in this, I mean to sensible poaters not the "beni Al- kalb", is in terms of the Singularity University. What it is doing, why NASA is involved, why Google is involved. Can the SU advance technology? The SU is offerering short graduate courses. No doubt these are going to be open for NASA/Google employees. I have one coment that anyone reading this thread will have. If I work for Google what I will learn at the SU will be respected and put into practice in some way or other. No real doubt about that. I though I work for NASA will a layer or "bin(t) Al-kalb" moronity make it a black mark against me? This to me is a real question. Another real question in the wider political arena is the loyalty that Obama can command in the military. You see I don't think all this fact is directed exclusively to me. Obama has produced a "stimulus package" and has talked at the same time about narrowing the budget deficit (about 10% of GDP currently) http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/92d8a656-d...nclick_check=1 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...t-1629344.html Where is the money coming from? Taxes on wealthy, closing of hedge fund loopholes etc. etc. No my friend there is only one large untapped source and that is MILITARY SPENDING. He has not spelled it out in as many words, but that is as inevitable as night follows day. Will the SU produce really useful results? I am sure it will in a number of areas. NASA must have a "schwerpunkt" a point of reference, a main program. I think the "schwerpunkt" should perhaps be the mining of asteroids. Platinum is BTW "schwer" with a density of 21.46. Google by contrast has as its main interest in the application of AI for searching. Recently one of the Google team has married someone who owns a biotech company. Thus although the Google interest is in searching they now have a much wider interest of DNA, DNA therapies etc. I think it is important for us to take a look at where everyone is coming from. We can see the Google motive, the motive of the new NASA management. What I can't see is where the military are coming from. The only thing I can think of is that the gravy train both for the military and for manned spaceflight is about to dry up. I will repeat. A manned trip to Mars WITH PRESENT DAY TECHNOLOGY is the craziest scheme out. - Ian Parker |
#187
|
|||
|
|||
Americans - Insane in the Membrane
Ian Parker wrote: I think it is important for us to take a look at where everyone is coming from. Ian, most people _know_ where you're coming from...and, being sensible sorts, they don't wish to go there. Deirdre |
#188
|
|||
|
|||
Americans - Insane in the Membrane
Deirdre Sholto Douglas wrote:
: :My guess is that this particular think-challenged soul is the :sort who will interrupt and disrupt any discussion that takes lace without him...rather like having a toddler in the room. : So you know our Ian Parker, do you? That's precisely what this particular Artificial Stupidity System (A.S.S.) known locally as 'Ian Parker' does. It will try to hijack any discussion, inject its own loony spew, then claim that nobody else wants a 'serious discussion' when his loonytoon views are rightly pilloried. Note that I posted the same serious response TWICE to his "we should go after asteroidal platinum" tirade and we've seen no response. Note that he's been asked multiple times for his list of professional publications or even a list of "scientific conferences" he's presented at, with a deafening silence the only response. Dealing with Ian Parker is what some police departments refer to as an NHI situation - No Human Involved. -- "Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is only stupid." -- Heinrich Heine |
#189
|
|||
|
|||
Americans - Insane in the Membrane
Ian Parker wrote:
:On 23 Feb, 12:03, jmfbahciv jmfbahciv@aol wrote: : Deirdre Sholto Douglas wrote: : : jmfbahciv wrote: : : That's really too bad. *You could have had a really interesting : thread here yakking with Ms. Douglas. : : I don't think that was ever an option with Ian...he : makes outrageous statements...a veritable tsunami : of prose...but when it's pointed out to him that said : statements are flawed, instead of defending or sup- : porting his claims scientifically, he takes off on an : obfuscating tangent and/or attacks the person : challenging him. : : IMHO, the only thing interesting here is his conceit : of himself. : : Some inane posts produce interesting discussions because other : readers get curious and start posting, leaving the ahem : think-challenged behind. : : :The real interest in this, I mean to sensible poaters not the "beni Al- :kalb", is in terms of the Singularity University. What it is doing, :why NASA is involved, why Google is involved. Can the SU advance :technology? : Well, let's look at this 'sensible' remark by Ian. What is it doing? Nothing so far. Why is NASA involved? It isn't, except as a landlord. Why is Google involved? Because they've gotten way more than $250,000 in publicity out of a miniscule investment. Can the SU advance technology? Anything is possible, but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for it. It seems long on touchy feely vision and short on actually touchable output. : :The SU is offerering short graduate courses. No doubt these are going :to be open for NASA/Google employees. I have one coment that anyone :reading this thread will have. : No doubt they'll be open to anyone willing to pony up the preposterously high fees required to take them. : :If I work for Google what I will learn at the SU will be respected and ut into practice in some way or other. No real doubt about that. : LOTS of doubt about that, Ian. Just what do you think said hypothetical Google employee would learn? Be specific. : :I :though I work for NASA will a layer or "bin(t) Al-kalb" moronity make :it a black mark against me? This to me is a real question. : Lots of silly things are, to you, "a real question". : :Another :real question in the wider political arena is the loyalty that Obama :can command in the military. : You really don't understand the US system at all, do you, Ian. The military isn't 'loyal' to a particular person. They're loyal to the US Constitution. : :You see I don't think all this fact is :directed exclusively to me. : Are we all ready for the paranoid delusions now? : :Obama has produced a "stimulus package" and has talked at the same :time about narrowing the budget deficit (about 10% of GDP currently) : :http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/92d8a656-d...nclick_check=1 :http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...t-1629344.html : :Where is the money coming from? Taxes on wealthy, closing of hedge :fund loopholes etc. etc. No my friend there is only one large untapped :source and that is MILITARY SPENDING. He has not spelled it out in as :many words, but that is as inevitable as night follows day. : What's that got to do with anything, Ian? It's wrong, but let's disregard that for a moment. What does this little interlude have to do with anything? Hint: The Defense Budget is around $600 billion. You could eliminate it entirely and not get the amount Obama says he's going to shrink the deficit by. : :Will the SU produce really useful results? I am sure it will in a :number of areas. : Of course you are, and for no particular reason you can name or identify. You DO understand that SU does no research, right? You DO understand that it doesn't teach any real courses, right? : :NASA must have a "schwerpunkt" a point of reference, :a main program. : I'd suggest you need to not use terms like "schwerpunkt" when you do not know what the word means. : :I think the "schwerpunkt" should perhaps be the mining f asteroids. : I've already posted in detail (twice) why this is a bad idea. : :Platinum is BTW "schwer" with a density of 21.46. : Go look up "schwer". It has nothing to do with density. If it did, you would be quite "schwer", since you are quite dense. But you're not. You're merely weak and loony. : :by contrast has as its main interest in the application of AI for :searching. Recently one of the Google team has married someone who wns a biotech company. Thus although the Google interest is in :searching they now have a much wider interest of DNA, DNA therapies :etc. : I think it's time for another A.S.S. reset, Ian. You're making even less sense than usual. : :I think it is important for us to take a look at where everyone is :coming from. We can see the Google motive, the motive of the new NASA :management. What I can't see is where the military are coming from. :The only thing I can think of is that the gravy train both for the :military and for manned spaceflight is about to dry up. : Yes, we can see the Google motive - publicity. Yes, we can see the NASA motive - rental income. Yes, we can see that you're blind and can't see anything real, so have to come up with loony remarks to 'cover'. : :I will repeat. A manned trip to Mars WITH PRESENT DAY TECHNOLOGY is :the craziest scheme out. : Ian, repetition without reason or support merely makes you look even loonier than we all know that you are. -- "Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is only stupid." -- Heinrich Heine |
#190
|
|||
|
|||
Valeev is by no means the worst offender
Third time is the charm.
Ian is still going on and on about platinum mining in the asteroids. Ian still has not responded to this post, which is now being put up for the third time. For someone who claims to want rational discussion, Ian Parker is real short on the 'rational' part and his idea of 'discussion' apparently means that he spews what he wants and disregards anything anyone posts pointing out that he's wrong. Ian claims not to have seen the following, so I thought I'd submit it again. The very first paragraph demonstrates Ian's ignorance of fuel cell technologies and it's downhill from there. Personally, I think Ian claims not to have seen it because if he admitted to seeing it he would have to respond to the questions raised in it and he is simply unable to do that. Ian Parker wrote: : :Actually I would have a number od selling pitches. The first of these :would be Platinum. Mr. Obama - you want green cars. A fuel cell :demands a platinum catalyst. : No it doesn't. Use an alkali anion exchange membrane and replace the platinum with nickel. What would you like to use your other nine minutes and forty-five seconds for? I hope whatever it is is better informed than this. : :Lithium - well that powers electronics :but there ain't enough lithium for cars. Imagine every car in the :world with a hydrogen fuel cell. Figure too that in a developing world :there will be many more cars. Is there platinum? I don't think there :is. What you need therefore is for NASA to be given a priority in :emergent technology. That priority should be PLATINUM. : Asteroid mining is too far out. You need a nearer term goal. There is also the problem of cost. If you go straight from nothing to platinum mining in the asteroids you need to show cost recovery numbers that include all your development costs plus launch costs plus equipment costs plus.... Now price your platinum. You'll find that there's no way you can sell it at the prices you'd have to charge for it. : :Now asteroids are the richest source of Pt. The abundance on Earth is :the same, but it is all in the center of the Earth - not very :accessible. Genetic engineering, nanotech. This approach could help :you to get it. : So might magic and wishing real hard, Ian. Just how does "genetic engineering, nanotech" help you in getting to the point of asteroid mining for costs that aren't preposterously higher than those on earth? You must be specific. That it "could" just doesn't cut any ice in a real discussion. What do you need? How does it help? What's the development timeline? Why is it better than other paths? And I DON'T mean your usual gibberish about nonexistent technologies. : :SSP - can be sold but I think Platinum should be the number one. This :is what I was hoping someone or other would say. One you have an :asteroid with galleries (technical mining term) you can then think :about human spaceflight in the linger term. Galleries give wonderful :radiation protection. : That's not how you'd mine asteroidal platinum, Ian. There wouldn't be any 'galleries'. What's the radiation flux that far out? Why do you think you need massive rock shielding to block it? SSP is closer to practicality than mining platinum in the asteroids and it isn't quite economically viable, either. : :This is what people really should have been saying. I was in fact :hoping someone else would come out with that before I did. : Answer the preceding issues. I think you're obviously wrong, which you will learn for yourself if you run the numbers involved. I suspect no one has "come out with that before you did" because they know that wanting to leap from essentially nothing to platinum mining in the asteroids is a silly and unworkable idea, no matter what 'magic technologies' you care to imagine. -- "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man." --George Bernard Shaw |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Valeev is by no means the worst offender | Ian Parker | Policy | 280 | March 3rd 09 04:27 PM |
~ * Morning Wood means Ways & Means, Too ~ ! | Twittering One | Misc | 0 | May 2nd 05 06:58 AM |
Copyright means NOTHING in the real world ( GPL means NOTHING in Germany!) | Kelsey Bjarnason | Space Shuttle | 0 | August 11th 03 03:38 PM |