Slashdot Mirror
Astrologer Sues NASA Over Comet Probe
0110011001110101 writes "NASA's mission that sent a space probe smashing into a comet raised more than cosmic dust -- it also brought a lawsuit from a Russian astrologer. 'Bai is seeking damages totaling $300 million -- the approximate equivalent of the mission's cost -- for her "moral sufferings," Izvestia said, citing her lawyer Alexander Molokhov. She earlier told the paper that the experiment would "deform her horoscope." ' "
Is this why she's suing? Because, thanks to NASA, she doesn't have any morals, and therefore is absolutely fine with the idea of frivolous lawsuits?
Is this what happened to Jeffrey Vernon Merkey too?
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
The whole Zodiac system was made up 2000 years ago, on the idea that your 'sign' was the one that the sun rose into on your birthday. At the present time, the Earth has precessed something like 15 degrees, so the sun actually rises 1 sign away from where it originally did. (thanks Bill Nye!)
Fuck these goddamn superstitious idiots anyway, we left the caves a long time ago.
It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
Yeah, the next thing you know a bunch of fundamentalist christians will be trying to force through laws to push their form of creationism into public classrooms.
Nope, not a chance. The publicity would just legitimize astrology. When the suit was finally decided in NASA's favor, believers would just spin it that NASA had better lawyers.
People who believe in astrology don't do so because of logic. They cling to the hope that the universe is not just a giant machine, that they are somehow made unique among humans by their keen intelligence, inside knowledge, and special placement in it.
Raise your children as if you were teaching them to raise your grandchildren, because you are.
People who believe in astrology don't do so because of logic.
People who believe in anything that isn't objectively verifiable, do not believe because of logic. This includes religious belief, since it is, by definition, faith-based. Faith is not rational or logical- it is merely a manner in which we choose to structure our worldview.
Nope - but telling people in AIDS-stricken regions that using condoms is a sin... not so cool.
Education is the silver bullet.
Heres a hint. Making up numbers does not legitimize your point. In my experience, but then im from northern florida, the vast majority of the time its someone trying their best to convince me that I am going to hell because im an athiest. IF it were just a matter of "live and let live", that would be FINE. However, the religious zealots are most of the problem (again, from MY experience). I cant remember ever hearing of atheists assaulting religous people's person or property because they had a god sticker on it. However, I see and hear the reverse all the time. Happened to my wife (back when she was just my girlfriend). She had a pro Wicca bumper sticker and some god nut busted her windshield and wrote nasty stuff on her car with a magic marker, stuff along the lines that they should bring back witch burning. Kind and wonderful people, they are.
I've seen astrolgers that don't know me but have written up complete reports about who I am and what I feel, think, and believe -- without ever having met me.
James Randi did an experiment where he handed out horoscopes to a class of (college) students and had them rate how closely they matched reality. Most of the students said the horoscopes were accurate. He then had them swap horoscopes, and they found out that they all had the exact same horoscope. Now, how could ONE horoscope match everyone? Because it was filled with generalities and vague statements, that's how. The students themselves filled in the details where they were missing, and sub-consciously remembered the 'hits' more than the 'misses'.
Now, without knowing the exact circumstances behind your case, I can't tell you for sure that's what happened. Only you can, if you choose to look at what happened objectively.
I've seen people healed by faith healers,
Really? If you can prove that, you might win $1,000,000! Go to www.randi.org for details.
I've met psychics who can vividly describe situations and people that later become part of my life.
I sense a... man, or maybe a woman. He is tall, maybe short. BLond hair, maybe brown or black. You'll like this person, or maybe hate them.
How'd I do??
And before you start talking about "cold reading", I have a solid background in psychology, and did not give these people a chance to meet me or be exposed to me to cold read me.
You may "have a solid background in psychology", but you don't understand what 'cold reading' is. Cold reading does NOT depend on meeting the victim before hand, or even knowing anything about them before hand. That would be 'hot reading'.
From Wikipedia: "Generally, the cold reader will make a series of vague statements, will observe the subject's reactions, and then will refine the original statements according to those reactions"..."even without prior knowledge of a person, a psychic could still obtain a great deal of his subject's history by carefully analysing his or her look and other background information, such as gender, religion, race, education level and place of origin."
So, let's apply Occams Razor. Either there are people in this world who can 'speak to spirits', 'read minds', and have other paranormal powers (but choose to eke out a living reading palms instead of, say, getting the winnign lottery numbers). OR, there are people in this world who are frauds. Fakers. Con men.
WHich is more likely?
Scientology, my friend, sciencefictionology...
Maybe it isn't wildly successfull among the people, but it seems to attract som wildly successfull people.
I choose to remain celibate, like my father and his father before him.
Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.
My understanding of the KS debate was whether to explicitly deny that no form of creation other than evolution was possible or not.
Bad understanding.
Evolution theories are NOT creation theories. Whether current scientific theories of the evolutionary processes are complete and/or 100% correct is one thing. Feeling the need to say that, because the science is incomplete, creation dogmas might be valid is quite another thing.
https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
an shy-looking astronomer was interviewed and she said something to the effect of "you know, that experiment is sort of interesting, but we regret this "american buckaroo-style" (sic) way of doing space research, as a probe that could land and latch on the comet, then drill and study things would have done a better job for not much more money."
Sorry. If that's what she honestly said (and meant), she's a loony.
1: It's not easy to land on a comet or asteroid. The gravity's quite weak, and not regular either. Especially as you don't know the composition or internal structure.
2: It's not like the comet was going to stay pristine. Comets travel through very harsh environments. It's unlikely that if we went back to Tempel I on its next orbit that we'd see the same surface features. There's no "preservation" really needed.
3: The impactor created an explosion equivalent to about 5 tons of TNT. That would've taken a lot of drilling, and it still would've only given localized information.
4: Finally, and most importantly, it's simply ludicrous to believe that this mission could've been replaced with one with a controlled, long duration landing probe for nearly equivalent money. We know very little about the surface of a comet. It's entirely possible had we tried to design a lander, we would've sent it there and then said "well, um, we found out all of its instruments are useless on comets!"
The other comment I've heard, from a friend who studies all kinds of space things, is that he hoped NASA picked their comet-target right, because they probably changed its trajectory in minute ways
Do the math. Any change in its orbit is unmeasurable. Comets are still very big - Tempel 1 is in the 10^13 kg range. The impactor was 370 kg. Relative velocity was 10 km/s. That means you're talking about a delta-V in the neighborhood of a tenth of a micron per second.
It's just completely and totally pointless.
Flamebait.
Joke:
*Something silly to enjoy
*Having a laugh at someone elses expense
*Having a laugh even though it may offend something slightly.
Taking things too seriously:
*Reading a joke and taking serious offense and getting all riled up.
*Not enjoying something silly just to make people laugh and be happy
*General Asshattery
Lighten up dude... sheesh.
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
Hmm... What do you call it when you are warned that your coffee is dangerously hot by the state safety officials but you decide to go ahead and do it anyway because it allows you to squeeze out more juice per grind?
Negligence maybe?
And yet a significant proportion of the students said that the horoscope matched them. This is the entire point - that it wasn't a genuine horoscope, but people believed it fit them. It was written in horoscope style - full of vague waffle that could fit just about anyone. And of course people will generally remember the hits and ignore the misses. It's just human nature - and professional con-artists are very well aware of how to take advantage of human nature.
Wow. Just.... wow.
And you seriously just accept that? The notion that, for a very small expenditure of time on their part, they could walk away with one million dollars.... one million dollars that they could donate to any charity in the world (if they weren't interested in the money themselves)... and yet they say they're not interested?
Bullshit. Sheer undiluted bullshit.
Oh, and by the way - I can turn invisible and fly through the air. I just don't feel like demonstrating it to anyone, not even for money. You see, money's not that important to me, so that's why I make my living working an eight-to-six office job. So... what do you mean, I'm talking crap?? Don't be so close-minded!
Just out of interest, why don't you ask your psychic pals exactly how much money would have to be offered to make it worth their while? Ten million? A hundred million? A billion? Ten billion? If they just keep saying that "it's not worth their effort"... at some point you just have to realise that it's bullshit.
If I could earn (cue Dr Evil voice) "one meeeellion dollars" simply by demonstrating an ability I possess, you can bloody well be certain that I'd do it.
The reason your "psychic" acquaintances don't take up the Randi challenge is because they know it's incredibly unlikely that they'd pass, and it'd be an embarrassing waste of time for them... though I suspect the embarrassment factor would be the biggest component.
Pot, meet kettle.
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." -- Philip K. Dick.
If your psychic acquaintances had any genuine abilities, they shouldn't disappear just because they're faced with a sceptic. The reality is that very few "psychics" have enough faith in their own abilities to put them to a genuine test.
A touchstone to determine the actual worth of an "intellectual": find out how he feels about astrology. -- Robert A. Heinlein
- Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum.
The sad thing about sick minds is that they can pervert any belief system. That's not the fault of the belief system, that's the fault of the minds.
"He who would learn astronomy, and other recondite arts, let him go elsewhere. " -- John Calvin, commenting on Genesis 1
The coffee spilled while she was removing the lid, as a passenger in a stopped car, in an attempt to add cream and sugar -- something very common among coffee drinkers. While many jurors did not originally feel that the case was warranted, after seeing the evidence, they were particularly struck by McDonald's callousness in the case. The plaintiff received third-degree burns on 6% of her body as a consequence of the spilled coffee and initally requested compensation for her medical bills, which for such extensive burns are significant. McDonald's knew that the risk existed, as they served their coffee very hot. They'd seen cases of this happening before (from first to third degree burns), settling out of court but not changing their policies.
As a long-time coffee drinker, I frequently have a cup of coffee in the car. It spills. But third-degree burns are not part of any rational person's expectations of the consequences of spilled coffee. If you're going to serve something that carries that sort of danger -- one beyond normal expectations for the product -- to a place where it's well-known that spills will occur, at the very least there should be clear warnings. Maybe you disagree, but twelve people who actually listed to all the facts (and were not predisposed one way or the other) didn't.
Of course, now you often can't get McDonald's coffee that's hot enough and they put warnings on their cups, which isn't necessary (though to do otherwise may make them guilty of not protecting their stockholders). So it seems silly in retrospect, as the beverage is just as hot as you'd expect, but with warnings. Still, warnings never hurt anyone.