 | | Re: And now for something completely different... —Leonard Hoffman
|
| | | (...) Umm.. Excuse me? You mean Columbus who kidnapped a native child to bring back as a trophy to his queen? You mean the discovery that launch the largest genocide in the history of humanity? The destruction of so many cultures and people that we (...) (22 years ago, 4-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: And now for something completely different... —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | (...) Can you provide a cite for that 9 to 1 ratio? Education is good, if that's what you get for the money. But public education money doesn't seem to actually deliver education. (...) Who said anything about transporting the infrastructure from (...) (22 years ago, 5-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: And now for something completely different... —Leonard Hoffman
|
| | | | | | | (...) (URL) money, education is substantially more difficult to achieve. with proper funding, drawing more motivate personel and updated equipement.. not to mention properly feeding the children/teens.. education becomes something more akin just (...) (22 years ago, 5-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: And now for something completely different... —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) www.jpl.nasa.gov Then you won't be saying things like there is nothing in space now... :-) -->Bruce<-- (22 years ago, 5-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: And now for something completely different... —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) Try this search string at Google: "moonbase cost estimates" The Artemis project may be all wet, but given the several orders of magnitude difference in their estimates (using commercial grade assumptions) from NASA's, maybe these numbers of (...) (22 years ago, 7-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: And now for something completely different... —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | | | | | | In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes: <snip> (...) And that's different for you... ;) Dave K (22 years ago, 7-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: And now for something completely different... —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) We are alike in kind, my friend, as far as digression goes. We differ only in degree. My digressions are short, while yours... what was it J2 said? "novella" I believe. Oh, and by the way, when I said I was going to let you have last word on (...) (22 years ago, 7-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: And now for something completely different... —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) I gotta dig up an old article about defining "inverse hyperbolic co-tangent" that I wrote years ago--I think you'd appreciate it. At the very least, you'll say it's pure Dave K :) (...) Ow, shot right in my heart--I'll take that ;) That said, (...) (22 years ago, 7-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: And now for something completely different... —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | | | | | | (...) Rather than simply restating the claim; perhaps you should just say why you think he is a "luddite"? Scott A (22 years ago, 10-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: And now for something completely different... —Leonard Hoffman
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) okay.. let me get this straight. You *demand* cites from me, but then expect me to do research to support *your* claims. Maybe you think your time is much more valuable than mine or something, but this doesn't seem to be rational to me. and, (...) (22 years ago, 11-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: And now for something completely different... —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) No. You asked me what research *you* should have done. I gave you a search string you could use if you like. It doesn't matter to me whether you use it or not. (22 years ago, 11-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: And now for something completely different... —Leonard Hoffman
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) ACTUALLY, that question was in responce to the statement: "You haven't done your research." Implying I should have already done some research on "what's being proposed," whatever that means. (22 years ago, 11-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: And now for something completely different... —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) Lets try to go all the way back to the beginning. Dave K started a thread asking a hypothetical about whether a person would want to know if an asteroid was coming. Some people responded to that question but mostly we've got off track. We're (...) (22 years ago, 12-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: And now for something completely different... —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | | | | | | (...) ACTUALLY, you do need to do your research! You are not the first person to note Larry’s willingness to demand others “provide a cite” whilst leaving his own arguments unsubstantiated. Nor is this the first time that Larry has resorted to (...) (22 years ago, 12-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: And now for something completely different... —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) The deal with research is that you never know what ancillary technologies will crop up from it. You can smirk at Coke in space all you want, but the "test the feasibility of creating...carbonated beverages in space" part sounds like (...) (22 years ago, 12-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: And now for something completely different... —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Though I've said before that I support space exploration in its own right (without needing a penny-for-penny justification), I'm not sure about the 1000 fecund technologies bred by the space program. Am I just being dense? I mean, are these (...) (22 years ago, 12-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: And now for something completely different... —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | | | | | In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes: <snip> (...) Very true "(URL) you want to know if a giant 'planet killer' asteroid was heading straight for earth? Tough question for me. If I knew, I'd probably quit my job and spend my last few (...) (22 years ago, 12-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Schooling dollars (was: And now for something completely different...) —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Money doesn't seem to draw more motivated personnel. By maybe better personnel, sometimes. As a grad student in education a few years ago, I polled a small sample of teachers (~40) to determine what one thing would be most likely to help them (...) (22 years ago, 11-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: And now for something completely different... —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | (...) My understanding, which I'm happy to modify if presented with contrary evidence, is that much of the spending allotted for public schools has not gone toward "education" per se, but has instead been used to support lunch programs for low (...) (22 years ago, 5-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: And now for something completely different... —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | (...) (URL) Dave! (22 years ago, 7-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: And now for something completely different... —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | | (...) Why do we climb a mountain? Why do we explore the depths of the sea? Never underestimate the merit of 'The Cool Factor'! ;) Why should be go into space? Because it's the next step We came out of the caves and wondered at the possibilities... (...) (22 years ago, 7-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: And now for something completely different... —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) It certainly does. I think less of that particular source each time I see it cited. He has no idea what he's talking about in this case, and his collection of assertions is just that, a collection of assertions with bias (but no cites) behind (...) (22 years ago, 7-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: And now for something completely different... —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | (...) If by "assertions with bias (but no cites)" you're referring to the listed citations of statements by the American Society for Cell Biology, Bob Park, and Joel Achenbach, I'm afraid the burden is on you to establish that these are biased (...) (22 years ago, 7-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: And now for something completely different... —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | (...) No. If two sources come to the same conclusion about something and one is biased and unworthy of further consideration that does not so tar the other source. (...) But I am not, in fact arguing that at all. I'm arguing for private exploitation (...) (22 years ago, 7-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: And now for something completely different... —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | | (...) But if you're dismissing the conclusion of Source A because it is flawed, then you must dismiss the same conclusion from Source B. If you're dismissing the conclusion from Source A because you believe that Source A is biased (which still (...) (22 years ago, 7-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: And now for something completely different... —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) Note that neither of these statements dismiss the conclusion. They merely deride the source. (22 years ago, 10-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: And now for something completely different... —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) Just to make sure we're clear here. Are you saying it would have been better had no one ever discovered North America? Are you saying that you'd rather that the western hemisphere forever remained the domain of its then current inhabitants? (...) (22 years ago, 7-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
