Change we just can't believe in

In sci.space.policy there has been a consistent debate about NASA
management, Ares etc. I think that the issue may be a lot more
fundamental.

http://www.livescience.com/culture/0...ce-debate.html

As "Bad Science" says science is what underpins the success of both
the US and the West generally. Take away science and you are left with
very little.

It has always been a truism that a first class individual will appoint
first class subordinates. In other words a first class President will
have a first class director of NASA who will in his turn create a
first class engineering team.

An Intelligent Designer will not immediately destroy NASA or any other
public body yet new appointments will certainly not be "first class".
The only way to being about believable change is to have a first class
President (in scientific terms) who will make first class
appointments. I have made remarks on the connections between
Relativity, Arabic and Stability Theory. The basic problem is that
Bush will not seek first class advice.

Will this situation change with a new President? Neither candidate has
given us any reason to suppose it will.


- Ian Parker

On Aug 27, 9:23 am, Ian Parker wrote:
In sci.space.policy there has been a consistent debate about NASA
management, Ares etc. I think that the issue may be a lot more
fundamental.

http://www.livescience.com/culture/0...ce-debate.html

As "Bad Science" says science is what underpins the success of both
the US and the West generally. Take away science and you are left with
very little.

It has always been a truism that a first class individual will appoint
first class subordinates. In other words a first class President will
have a first class director of NASA who will in his turn create a
first class engineering team.

An Intelligent Designer will not immediately destroy NASA or any other
public body yet new appointments will certainly not be "first class".
The only way to being about believable change is to have a first class
President (in scientific terms) who will make first class
appointments. I have made remarks on the connections between
Relativity, Arabic and Stability Theory. The basic problem is that
Bush will not seek first class advice.

Will this situation change with a new President? Neither candidate has
given us any reason to suppose it will.

- Ian Parker

Waxing political, are we Ian?

--Mike Jr

On Aug 27, 6:23 am, Ian Parker wrote:
In sci.space.policy there has been a consistent debate about NASA
management, Ares etc. I think that the issue may be a lot more
fundamental.

http://www.livescience.com/culture/0...ce-debate.html

As "Bad Science" says science is what underpins the success of both
the US and the West generally. Take away science and you are left with
very little.

It has always been a truism that a first class individual will appoint
first class subordinates. In other words a first class President will
have a first class director of NASA who will in his turn create a
first class engineering team.

An Intelligent Designer will not immediately destroy NASA or any other
public body yet new appointments will certainly not be "first class".
The only way to being about believable change is to have a first class
President (in scientific terms) who will make first class
appointments. I have made remarks on the connections between
Relativity, Arabic and Stability Theory. The basic problem is that
Bush will not seek first class advice.

Will this situation change with a new President? Neither candidate has
given us any reason to suppose it will.

- Ian Parker

Unless they fear not for their own life, you can bet they will not
make the same mistake as JFK.

~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth

.... ahahahaha.. AHAHAHA... ahahahaha, Ian,
Henry Kikissinger, your brother-in-ilk would say
---------- Change is that hand ------------
not, "Change we just can't believe in"

"Ian Parker" wrote in message
...
I have made remarks on the connections between
Relativity, Arabic and Stability Theory. The basic
problem is that Bush will not seek first class advice.

hanson wrote:
.... ahahahaha.. AHAHAHAHAHAHA... ahahahaha...

The basic problems that YOU, Ian Parker, have not
stood up and given to Bush your 1st class advice
"on the connections between Relativity, Arabic and
Stability Theory". Bush needs that & you badly, Ian.

Thanks for the laughs, Dreidel,... ahaha... ahahanson

On Aug 27, 9:23*am, Ian Parker wrote:
In sci.space.policy there has been a consistent debate about NASA
management, Ares etc. I think that the issue may be a lot more
fundamental.

http://www.livescience.com/culture/0...ce-debate.html

As "Bad Science" says science is what underpins the success of both
the US and the West generally. Take away science and you are left with
very little.

It has always been a truism that a first class individual will appoint
first class subordinates. In other words a first class President will
have a first class director of NASA who will in his turn create a
first class engineering team.

An Intelligent Designer will not immediately destroy NASA or any other
public body yet new appointments will certainly not be "first class".
The only way to being about believable change is to have a first class
President (in scientific terms) who will make first class
appointments. I have made remarks on the connections between
Relativity, Arabic and Stability Theory. The basic problem is that
Bush will not seek first class advice.

Will this situation change with a new President? Neither candidate has
given us any reason to suppose it will.

No. Since NASA is like most large governemnt organizations.
They've already passed a law that E Street is the center of all
things.
Which is why the people with aeronautics brains have switched
over almost entirety to drones, robots, PV Cells, microcomputers,
fiber optics, HDTV, and laser-guided bombs.
And the people with space brains have gone entirely over to XML,
Logic,
Science, Blogs, Ebooks, CD, DVD, On-line Publishing,
and people who understand how non NSA computers work.




* - Ian Parker

On Aug 27, 6:23*am, Ian Parker wrote:
In sci.space.policy there has been a consistent debate about NASA
management, Ares etc. I think that the issue may be a lot more
fundamental.

http://www.livescience.com/culture/0...ce-debate.html

As "Bad Science" says science is what underpins the success of both
the US and the West generally. Take away science and you are left with
very little.

It has always been a truism that a first class individual will appoint
first class subordinates. In other words a first class President will
have a first class director of NASA who will in his turn create a
first class engineering team.

An Intelligent Designer will not immediately destroy NASA or any other
public body yet new appointments will certainly not be "first class".
The only way to being about believable change is to have a first class
President (in scientific terms) who will make first class
appointments. I have made remarks on the connections between
Relativity, Arabic and Stability Theory. The basic problem is that
Bush will not seek first class advice.

Will this situation change with a new President? Neither candidate has
given us any reason to suppose it will.

* - Ian Parker

Um, this "situation" won't change with Ka-rock Obama Insane, I can
assure you. This imbecile is juat about the dumbest **** to ever run
for County Dogcatcher, let alone president of the United States.

Ian Parker wrote:

In sci.space.policy there has been a consistent debate about NASA
management, Ares etc. I think that the issue may be a lot more
fundamental.

http://www.livescience.com/culture/0...ce-debate.html

As "Bad Science" says science is what underpins the success of both
the US and the West generally. Take away science and you are left with
very little.

(physical reality) - (empirical reality) = faith
GOD remains! Was anything about the Dark Ages undesirable?

http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/reality.png

Faith is destroyed if it works. If you have faith you can only be
denied. Test of faith!

It has always been a truism that a first class individual will appoint
first class subordinates. In other words a first class President will
have a first class director of NASA who will in his turn create a
first class engineering team.

An Intelligent Designer will not immediately destroy NASA or any other
public body yet new appointments will certainly not be "first class".
The only way to being about believable change is to have a first class
President (in scientific terms) who will make first class
appointments. I have made remarks on the connections between
Relativity, Arabic and Stability Theory. The basic problem is that
Bush will not seek first class advice.

GOD! Eternal Truth, Inerrant Wisdom! Pi is in the bible, twice.
Challenge God's value and be damned.

Will this situation change with a new President? Neither candidate has
given us any reason to suppose it will.

Obama is ignorant, McCain is stupid. Obama.

First rate people hire first rate people, second rate people hire
third rate people, mud suckers hire teachers. The Challenger
"tragedy" was a discovered to be cost-ineffective tenure withdrawal.
The business model was sound if the Space Scuttle had been insured.

--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2

On Aug 27, 1:04*pm, Uncle Al wrote:
Ian Parker wrote:

In sci.space.policy there has been a consistent debate about NASA
management, Ares etc. I think that the issue may be a lot more
fundamental.

http://www.livescience.com/culture/0...ce-debate.html

As "Bad Science" says science is what underpins the success of both
the US and the West generally. Take away science and you are left with
very little.

(physical reality) - (empirical reality) = faith
GOD remains! *Was anything about the Dark Ages undesirable?

http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/reality.png

Faith is destroyed if it works. *If you have faith you can only be
denied. *Test of faith!

It has always been a truism that a first class individual will appoint
first class subordinates. In other words a first class President will
have a first class director of NASA who will in his turn create a
first class engineering team.

An Intelligent Designer will not immediately destroy NASA or any other
public body yet new appointments will certainly not be "first class".
The only way to being about believable change is to have a first class
President (in scientific terms) who will make first class
appointments. I have made remarks on the connections between
Relativity, Arabic and Stability Theory. The basic problem is that
Bush will not seek first class advice.

GOD! *Eternal Truth, Inerrant Wisdom! *Pi is in the bible, twice.
Challenge God's value and be damned.

Will this situation change with a new President? Neither candidate has
given us any reason to suppose it will.

Obama is ignorant, McCain is stupid. *Obama.

Just goes to show you that "scientific" types are not all that
bright. Most of them are little socialist street urchins who will vote
for the Dali Bama like he's some sort of savior, perhaps Jesus Christ
reincarnated - and they call Christians stupid!

In article
,
wrote:

On Aug 27, 1:04*pm, Uncle Al wrote:
Ian Parker wrote:

In sci.space.policy there has been a consistent debate about NASA
management, Ares etc. I think that the issue may be a lot more
fundamental.

http://www.livescience.com/culture/0...ce-debate.html

As "Bad Science" says science is what underpins the success of both
the US and the West generally. Take away science and you are left with
very little.

(physical reality) - (empirical reality) = faith
GOD remains! *Was anything about the Dark Ages undesirable?

http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/reality.png

Faith is destroyed if it works. *If you have faith you can only be
denied. *Test of faith!

It has always been a truism that a first class individual will appoint
first class subordinates. In other words a first class President will
have a first class director of NASA who will in his turn create a
first class engineering team.

An Intelligent Designer will not immediately destroy NASA or any other
public body yet new appointments will certainly not be "first class".
The only way to being about believable change is to have a first class
President (in scientific terms) who will make first class
appointments. I have made remarks on the connections between
Relativity, Arabic and Stability Theory. The basic problem is that
Bush will not seek first class advice.

GOD! *Eternal Truth, Inerrant Wisdom! *Pi is in the bible, twice.
Challenge God's value and be damned.

Will this situation change with a new President? Neither candidate has
given us any reason to suppose it will.

Obama is ignorant, McCain is stupid. *Obama.

Just goes to show you that "scientific" types are not all that
bright. Most of them are little socialist street urchins who will vote
for the Dali Bama like he's some sort of savior, perhaps Jesus Christ
reincarnated - and they call Christians stupid!

Noticing that for the last two terms, W and company have screwed up
royally is something even the stupid are capable of.

Why should anyone want to continue down that primrose path?

"Uncle Al" wrote in message
...


(physical reality) - (empirical reality) = faith
GOD remains! Was anything about the Dark Ages undesirable?


You have far too much Faith in science.

Please show me the equations for a 'market force'?
How much to they weigh? How many are they?
Where can I find one to measure?

You can't quantify them, you can't even see them.
They are emergent system properties.
Yet such emergent system properties ....define....the
system behavior and structure. The self tuning properties
of such ethereal system tendencies are the most
important variable of all is determining the future
of the system.

Yet they are unknowable in any real detail.

And a market force is little different then the
forces of natural selection which shape and
define life and intelligence.

The most important information of all concerning the
most important aspects of reality, life, will always
stand outside your beloved objective scientific
method.

You have far too much Faith in science.


"As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are
not certain, and as far as they are certain, they do not
refer to reality." ~Albert Einstein




..com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2