Kylie's Pluto Challenge

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Who knows?

Scientists have to look busy at times, or they'll lose 1) their funding, and 2) public interest.

Why do you think Scientific American and Popular Science come out with new and/or improved stuff every month?

That's why our mailboxes get bombarded with all these nonsense mailings from the hospital, or AAA, or AARP or wherever.

They have to look busy.

OR they could actually BE busy and are investigating and inventing new stuff and want people to know about it. And no, I am not talking about thalidomide!

 

[AV1611VET]

OR they could actually BE busy and are investigating and inventing new stuff and want people to know about it.

I'm sure they were in a hurry to tell us ... I really am.

Else we would have heard it from the planetary astronomers who were excluded from voting.

We sure got Hesperopithecus Haroldcookii in a hurry, didn't we?

By the time scientists corrected their own error (assuming it was an error, and not deliberate), the damage had been done to the minds of the general public.

It wouldn't surprise me if we got Hackel's Embryos that fast.

Assuming it wasn't done on purpose.

 

[Speedwell]

Who knows?

Scientists have to look busy at times, or they'll lose 1) their funding, and 2) public interest.

Why do you think Scientific American and Popular Science come out with new and/or improved stuff every month?

That's why our mailboxes get bombarded with all these nonsense mailings from the hospital, or AAA, or AARP or wherever.

They have to look busy.

I'm beginning to get the impression that you think "scientist" means anybody who finished high school and owns a pair of shoes.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I'm sure they were in a hurry to tell us ... I really am.

Else we would have heard it from the planetary astronomers who were excluded from voting.

We sure got Hesperopithecus Haroldcookii in a hurry, didn't we?

By the time scientists corrected their own error (assuming it was an error, and not deliberate), the damage had been done to the minds of the general public.

It wouldn't surprise me if we got Hackel's Embryos that fast.

Assuming it wasn't done on purpose.

I repeat: OR they could actually BE busy and are investigating and inventing new stuff and want people to know about it.

 

[AV1611VET]

I'm beginning to get the impression that you think "scientist" means anybody who finished high school and owns a pair of shoes.

That's actually more accurate than you think.

Just replace "shoes" with "computer," and you're almost there.

I used to call them SLIENTISTS, INTERNET SCIENTISTS, ARMCHAIR SCIENTISTS, SSSCIENTISTS, and SCIENTIFIC METHODISTS; until I got tired of it.

Now I just generally call them all scientists and let the LORD sort them out.

 

[AV1611VET]

I repeat: OR they could actually BE busy and are investigating and inventing new stuff and want people to know about it.

I agree.

I think, right now as we speak, scientists somewhere are coming up with something that they'll end up retracting after the damage is done.

Incidentally, I always thought it interesting that their junk is plastered all over the front cover of those magazines, but then corrections and retractions are found in one or two paragraphs around page 16.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I agree.

I think, right now as we speak, scientists somewhere are coming up with something that they'll end up retracting after the damage is done.

Incidentally, I always thought it interesting that their junk is plastered all over the front cover of those magazines, but then corrections and retractions are found in one or two paragraphs around page 16.

You have a strange and twisted view on the way the world works.

 

[AV1611VET]

You have a strange and twisted view on the way the world works.

Check this oldie-but-goodie of mine out:

I've GOT to get to Wal-Mart!

I'll see if I can find the image and repost it.

ETA: Here it is:

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Check this oldie-but-goodie of mine out:

I've GOT to get to Wal-Mart!

I'll see if I can find the image and repost it.

ETA: Here it is:

Not really the same thing as what you were describing before.
ETA: Also, no-one is forcing you to read Scientific American. If you get upset over something your yourself decided to read, you've got no-one else to blame but yourself.

 

[Astrophile]

Because if there is no Oort cloud or other source of new comets, the argument is conclusive. Comets created with the Solar System billions of years ago should all be gone. If there is one, the Solar System could still be ancient, even if the presently observed comets were jostled out of the Oort cloud since 4004 BC.

Just as a small correction, one can show from simple celestial mechanics that a comet in a parabolic orbit that reaches perihelion in the inner planetary this year would have been only about 1900 AU from the Sun in 4004 BC.

This distance is less than the distance to the Oort cloud, so that a comet that started from the Oort cloud would take more than 6000 years to reach perihelion. Any comet that we observe now coming from the Oort cloud must have been jostled out of the cloud more than 6000 years ago.

 

[Speedwell]

Thanks, I hadn't thought that through--the Oort Cloud is even more dangerous to Creationism than I figured.

 

[AV1611VET]

--the Oort Cloud is even more dangerous to Creationism than I figured.

Ya.

That's the one thing I can't account for.

The Oort cloud.

I may just become a [cosmic] evolutionist yet!

 

[aachen_hexagon]

I agree.

I think, right now as we speak, scientists somewhere are coming up with something that they'll end up retracting after the damage is done.

And right now there's a pastor out there coming up with a version of God that he or she will ultimately leverage to do some real damage to people either intentionally or unintentionally.

There's another Jim Jones or David Koresh out there slowly going mad or there's another Jim Bakker out there preparing to take money from cash-strapped retirees to install a gold toilet in his mansion.

Incidentally, I always thought it interesting that their junk is plastered all over the front cover of those magazines, but then corrections and retractions are found in one or two paragraphs around page 16.

OR, as is more likely a SUPERIOR hypothesis will come out on the cover of the next one thus displacing the old hypothesis.

 

[AV1611VET]

And right now there's a pastor out there coming up with a version of God that he or she will ultimately leverage to do some real damage to people either intentionally or unintentionally.

No argument there.

 

[aachen_hexagon]

No argument there.

Why did you strike out "real" in my post? If you do that you aren't agreeing with my post.

I would say that the damages done by people who make errors in their theology can do just as much real damage as anything a scientist could do.

For all the horror of atomic bombs and failed drugs there's a crusade in which people slaughtered others without mercy precisely because they thought it was God's desire that they do so.

 

[AV1611VET]

Why did you strike out "real" in my post?

Because I didn't want someone coming back and saying:

"I'm glad you agree your point wasn't real."

If you do that you aren't agreeing with my post.

Actually I am.

I'm just springing the trap before I take the bait.

I would say that the damages done by people who make errors in their theology can do just as much real damage as anything a scientist could do.

Then you don't know abortion statistics, do you?

Either that, or you No True Scotsman anything that associates abortion with science.

For all the horror of atomic bombs and failed drugs there's a crusade in which people slaughtered others without mercy precisely because they thought it was God's desire that they do so.

With respect to the Bible, or in spite of It?

 

[HitchSlap]

Because I didn't want someone coming back and saying:

"I'm glad you agree your point wasn't real."Actually I am.

I'm just springing the trap before I take the bait.Then you don't know abortion statistics, do you?

Either that, or you No True Scotsman anything that associates abortion with science.With respect to the Bible, or in spite of It?

Why is abortion such an important issue for you, AV?

 

[AV1611VET]

Why is abortion such an important issue for you, AV?

It's a holocaust.

 

[aachen_hexagon]

I'm just springing the trap before I take the bait.

You are overly paranoid. I set no trap.

Then you don't know abortion statistics, do you?

What do abortion statistics have to do with frauds in the pulpit or madmen in the pulpit who lead people astray? My point being only that science has no corner on the market for doing harm to people. It can do as much good or as much evil as religion can do.

Either that, or you No True Scotsman anything that associates abortion with science.

I have no doubt that scientists have been involved in the abortion debate (on both sides mind you).

With respect to the Bible, or in spite of It?

With respect to the Bible. I am not saying that Jesus if he existed would have approved of the behavior but there were MANY people in the past who thought God gave them permission, even wanted them to kill off those whom they disagreed with.

I can even find a place where God's prophet told people to do that very thing. And when they failed to carry out the slaughter to the letter God punished the leader.

1 Sam 15:3

Genocide pure and simple. (Unless of course the Bible isn't true on every single point...)

 

[HitchSlap]

It's a holocaust.

How so?