Sounds commendable anyway.

I am taking a step forward to avoid any loss of entertainment value so that I won't feel like shit about not playing with a charlatan who has second world ethics.

What kind of wine would you like with your cheese?

Traceur, you should have seen us trying to get TW to admit that Vise-Grips are a hand tool...:lol2:

loving this thread almost more than a trip to mars.

Oh yea, fucking "enlightened" culture of ethics you have there :rolleyes:
http://dontpaniconline.com/media/mag...2015_35_39.png
Sure, I'll adapt temporarily for your comfort of mind.

Trigger warning:
Suicide, euthanasia, entitlement, hypocrisy, grammar nazi, racism, self-love, sexobonic masturbation, solipsism.

Last time we argued it was because you felt entitled to make your loved ones suffer in ridicules amounts of pain even when there is little to no chance of it getting better just so that you can procrastinate a feeling of loss. Luckily for you, that post had a grammar mistake, which magically made the hypocrisy it pointed out in your ethics go away by the same rule with which old people feel entitled that every taxi driver will "Learn some god damn english" whenever they hear an accent.

This time, you were fighting to defend a compliment you gave yourself based on a conclusion you've claim to have reached yourself after your very own post has quoted that very conclusion, all while whining about how other people's self love is interfering with the date your trying to have with yourself.

What you have demonstrated so far is that your ethics is contextual and the specific contextual rule is... As long as it doesn't apply to you or anything you feel do or say that contradicts said ethics. The problem with that rule is that other people's "you" is not the same person, your ethical framework would work fantastically if you were the only human being in the universe and there was only one subjective perspective to account for, but doesn't work in any universe that has other people... Which kind of misses the point of ethics altogether.

It also puts you in a position where it would be impossible for you to actually understand my ethics at all, which to a large extend revolve around the understanding of how destructive self-deception of your kind can be, and how vital it is to understand the overall dynamic people put themselves in and break away from simple narratives that serve to sooth the ego at the expense of reality and all it's other inhabitants.

....I don't even....

I kind of want to see that if you have a link. What was even the counter argument? Are they the mandibles of robotic amputees?

[Paraphrasing mine]

You're so needy. The rumination continues long after everyone else has moved on. Continued vying for attention by putting egocentric spin on regurgitated conversations while knowing your folly is just someone else's entertainment is just pathetic. I pity the fool. You can take the traceur out of the second world; but, you can't take the second world out of the traceur.

Long after? Like... 27 hours after? ;)


You know what, I am not going to even explain that one - if someone understands it they understand it and if they don't then they are probably you. Go and pet yourself on the back, do whatever it is you do on such wonderful occasions in your life. Whatever you do, make sure you do not accidentally develop a rudimentary understanding of time. I think you are safe, but just in case.

Why yes, I do. That's why you keep coming back, to find out what; because, your second world ethics prevent you from having a clue. You are unable to interpret your perceptions accurately. That leaves you in need.

What, science at the ISS???

The wine is less important than the cheese for me.
I expect a mixture including blue, soft, hard, goats' or ewes', and flavoured.

Oh, sorry, wrong thread ;)

... because it does not attack someone.

The ISS has had some of the most disappointing scientific discoveries of the century. Like finding that chicken hatched in space are born normal.

I had high hopes for this when I was a kid, but seems they did not pan out: No problems forming a skeleton, no embryo-like legless chicken or difficulties breathing, just... Normal freaking chicken. Screw you nature.

We had two choices - each for $8 billion. A Super Collider in TX or the ISS. As more politicians become less knowledgeable, more emotional and more driven by rhetoric, then glory was in an ISS. So people who advance science had to go to France and Switzerland to perform science.

The LHA is not as powerful as the Super Collider would have been. But one of the great discoveries occurred there - Higgs Bosom. Meanwhile the ISS can do no science until a fourth person is deployed. By that time, the US no longer had any vehicles to carry men into space - due to myopic and extremists rhetoric that pushed Orion, Ares, and Constellation - all examples of bad science.

An $8 billion ISS has cost more than $80 billion. In part, because its purpose was glory - an emotion; not science.

When I was growing up, a transistor was clearly the future for everyone. As the car, light bulb, and electric motor was the future for everyone in 1900. Today, everyone's future is in quantum physics. When a Tevatron in Fermilab in IL closed in 2011, the US no longer had any major quantum science machines. The contempt for science has grown that large. Stanford Linear accelerator is only used for other low power experiments. So who will see the jobs generated by fundamental science (invention)? The transistor developed in 1948 created massive jobs in the 1970s and 1990s because America was driven by science - not profits.

Today, great sources of innovation (and wealth, jobs, power, etc) such as the RCA Sarnoff Labs, HP labs, Xerox Palo Alto Research, Bendix labs, and of course the most famous Bell Labs were sold off for profits. Because what creates jobs and profits does not appear on spread sheets for ... well how many decades did it take for transistors, lasers, communication satellites, fiber optic communication, Shannon's communication theory (that make digital communication possible), PCM, C programming language, etc to finally create jobs and products? According to business school graduates, those were all costs - not profitable.

It is not foolishly spending money on ISS or Mission Accomplished that created problems. It is what got quashed and driven out of America that resulted from directing our resources towards emotional (extremists) and much less productive activities. At the expense of what actually made America great.

ISS is simply another example - created at the expense of the Super Collider.

Well the ISS does one useful experiement. AMS was canceled when extremists canceled much science to redirect funds to Mission Accomplished. The AMS, that could have been carried by most unmanned science vehicles, was finally mounted outside of the ISS.

For the most part I agree with that.

I don't think "contempt to science" is quite the right description of that - while that does exist as a growing social trend on it's own right (Currently believing that the entire scientific community has met one Monday to coordinate their conspiracy plans to lie about environmental data and fighting against the teaching of evolution in schools), but I doubt how much weight that has on those in power. I think the actual problem is the weight placed on a short term gain model at the expense of long term gains, which are - as you expressed yourself - a lot more difficult to model on a spreadsheet.

As of right now, the industries that stand to gain the most out of scientific progress have the difficult problem of, well... Not existing yet, which makes it very difficult for them to form a strong lobby.