How come no one told these guys astronomy was "ruined"?
Light pollution makes things harder, but nothing is "ruined" as you cliam. I only bring this up because seeing rampant hyperbole like your modded up pisses me off and requires an honest, non-hyperbolic refutation.
If you hit your head really hard, then close your eyes, you'll see "stars". That doesn't mean there are "stars" inside your eyelids, it means your brain is interpreting stimulus as "stars".
The fact that this guy smells something says absolutely nothing. His brain could be misinterpreting a sensory input as this smell and processing it accordingly.
"My "argument" is that we could (and should) be doing a lot more than we are...nothing more."
You said "what a waste". That is in no way equivalent to "we should be doing more". Your own failure to elucidate your "argument" notwithstanding, the satellite was not a "waste", so your statement was false.
Why say "what a waste" when you weren't making that point?
You were trolling and got called. Now you're just backpedaling because you know you were wrong.
"Your weather satellite example disproves nothing."
Are weather satellites a waste? If not, your argument (the one you really made, not the one you're trying to change it into because I disproved the first one) is worthless. Saying "no it isn't" doesn't make you right, it makes you stubborn and reticent.
"If you want to discuss this further, I'd be happy to"
What's to discuss, you were wrong. I've demonstrated it it twice. The only thing left to discuss is why you can't admit you're wrong.
"It's too early for that sort of nonsense"
Funny, I thought the same thing when I read your "argument".
Re:What a waste is right, why be so hard on yourse
on
The Shadow Space Race
·
· Score: 1
"Uh huh...and I suppose none of these advances would be realized from a project other than a spy satellite?"
Can you prove otherwise? And the fact is, they were developed from a spy satellite and WERE NOT a waste, so your attempt to argue that they were is empty.
"Sure, I realize that warfare is the spur that traditionally drives technological development, but if all you're going to use the development for is more warfare, what exactly is the point?"
Is Hubble "warfare"? And you're conveniently ignoring my weather satellite example because it disproves your argument completely.
What a waste is right, why be so hard on yourself
on
The Shadow Space Race
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
"So many ways we could be utilizing space for the benefit of the human race...and this is what we come up with?"
Yeah, I can't believe we dared to try and develop high end optics, image correction software, gyroscopes, or any of the other myriad technologies that are required for a satellite like this. THE HORROR!
I wonder how many weather satellites have benefited from this "waste"...
Slashdot Mirror
"I mean, just see Mizon's Light Pollution [amazon.com] about not only how it has ruined astronomy"
WHAT WHAT WHAT!!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble_space_telescope
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arecibo_Observatory
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keck_telescopes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_African_Astronomical_Observatory
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paranal_Observatory
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RATAN-600
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Bank_Telescope
How come no one told these guys astronomy was "ruined"?
Light pollution makes things harder, but nothing is "ruined" as you cliam. I only bring this up because seeing rampant hyperbole like your modded up pisses me off and requires an honest, non-hyperbolic refutation.
"They didn't need me to care in order for it to be an effective strike/protest...they just needed me to not be watching when the commercials came on."
Why weren't you watching? Oh because something made you not watch. Something you cared about. You viewing habits could not have changed for no reason.
So when you say "They didn't need me to care" then follow it up with your claim, you are contradicting yourself.
"Organized labor has managed to mount an effective protest against executive management and work out a deal that favors both parties."
I'm not sure I'd call "striking while the world fails to notice or care" an effective protest.
If you hit your head really hard, then close your eyes, you'll see "stars". That doesn't mean there are "stars" inside your eyelids, it means your brain is interpreting stimulus as "stars".
The fact that this guy smells something says absolutely nothing. His brain could be misinterpreting a sensory input as this smell and processing it accordingly.
Whatever man. You made a dumb statement and got called on it.
You were trolling and got caught.
Nothing really left to discuss.
"I don't know why I expected better of someone who goes by the moniker of "FUCK-U-MODS"..."
OOOH an ad hominem. You might as well have written "you were right and I know it" and gotten this over with.
"My "argument" is that we could (and should) be doing a lot more than we are...nothing more."
You said "what a waste". That is in no way equivalent to "we should be doing more". Your own failure to elucidate your "argument" notwithstanding, the satellite was not a "waste", so your statement was false.
Why say "what a waste" when you weren't making that point?
You were trolling and got called. Now you're just backpedaling because you know you were wrong.
"Your weather satellite example disproves nothing."
Are weather satellites a waste? If not, your argument (the one you really made, not the one you're trying to change it into because I disproved the first one) is worthless. Saying "no it isn't" doesn't make you right, it makes you stubborn and reticent.
"If you want to discuss this further, I'd be happy to"
What's to discuss, you were wrong. I've demonstrated it it twice. The only thing left to discuss is why you can't admit you're wrong.
"It's too early for that sort of nonsense"
Funny, I thought the same thing when I read your "argument".
"Uh huh...and I suppose none of these advances would be realized from a project other than a spy satellite?"
Can you prove otherwise? And the fact is, they were developed from a spy satellite and WERE NOT a waste, so your attempt to argue that they were is empty.
"Sure, I realize that warfare is the spur that traditionally drives technological development, but if all you're going to use the development for is more warfare, what exactly is the point?"
Is Hubble "warfare"? And you're conveniently ignoring my weather satellite example because it disproves your argument completely.
"So many ways we could be utilizing space for the benefit of the human race...and this is what we come up with?"
Yeah, I can't believe we dared to try and develop high end optics, image correction software, gyroscopes, or any of the other myriad technologies that are required for a satellite like this. THE HORROR!
I wonder how many weather satellites have benefited from this "waste"...