I didn't say we can't disrupt nature, we have already done that with the closest thing we have to grey-goo, ie: pollution. My point is that nature will disrupt grey-goo no matter how intellegent or efficient it's design. In fact most, if not all, of said designs will be inspired by observing their natural conterparts.
Question: I have a picture of the LAST man on the moon in my screensaver - can you name him without looking it up?
While your raking your brain on that, let's go with your entertainment theory and assume people are not interested in science and just want to watch heroics. My prediction is that these people would not be interested in a Mars landing for the same reason they were not interested in the last man on the moon.
Why? - Because it's a rerun, they would simply shrug and say something like "what's the point, we've been to the moon already". The enourmous technological gap between a moon landing and a mars landing would be lost on them because they are not interested in men on Mars anymore than they are currently interested in men on the ISS. I was born the year after sputnik and grew up in the 60's, the Moon landing did indeed make the world stand with their collective jaws on the ground, but for the type of people you are describing the show ended with Apolo 11's return to Earth.
As for the shuttle, Hubble, ect, I always feel like I'm betraying an old freind when I trade in my car but the smell of fresh leather more than compensates.
In it's broadests sense "to evolve" means to continually change over time but the popularity of that meme is a tribute to the power of Darwin's idea not an explaination of it. I agree that this could be seen as analogous to "creationism", just as deliberately breeding cows for more milk could be seen analogous as "intelligent design", but analogies are made to assist in understanding they are not meant to be taken literally.
"Why not go so far out on a limb that it breaks under our (mankind) massive ego and assume that evolution had to create the chemicals first?"
As Sagan put it, "we are made of star stuff". I have no problem with the analogy that all elements naturally evolved from hydrogen and that the universe is itself is evolving, I also have no trouble in recognising that they are analogies that in no way describe what the theory of evolution actually states. To continue arguing otherwise after being repeatedly corrected is to let one's massive ego get in the way of facts.
Why do ludites (not accusing you) think artifical nanotech would NOT be eaten by the natural nanotech found around and within us? The people who think scientists can build such a machine are the ones who are guilty of hubris, not the scientists.
"I know I feel no compunction about pirating Microsoft products because they have made my life hell and have gotten their pound of flesh back out of me with all the pain and suffering."
Did they send the boys around to knee-cap you, cut off your fingers, beat you up with a chair? If so why do you continue to use their products? - is Bill holding a gun to your head?
"But if I am enjoying the service they provide then it would be polite of me to contribute."
By that measure the converse is also true, if you're not enjoying or contributing to the service then it would be polite not to use it. You do realise it's possible to be polite to people you disagree with, right?
Politics is a strange world, Conroy was put in charge of this so that it could be killed when the time was right. What better way can you think of to do that than to expand the list until it includes issues dear to the heart of the puritanical moron who's vote the government of the day was trying to buy.
"In this case a politician got behind the scheme because they felt it increased their popularity in their electorate."
I hate to burst your bubble but this is not the case. It has nothing to do with the government wanting to control the population or for that matter Conroy and/or Xenophon wanting to be popular.
It's about one nutcase called Senator Fielding who only got into the senate because the two major parties wanted to keep the Greens out of that seat, nobody expected him to actually win. Yes, Fielding is a "control freak" and the fact he only got 2% of the primary vote shows how many Aussies both inside and outside of parliment share his views.
I and many other Aussies on slashdot predicted this Machevelian crap would go nowhere as soon as it appeared in the press. Why? - because we have seen it all before.
The Top Grear crew are not exactly a bunch of tree-huggers, yet even they have repeatedly called it the most important car in 100yrs.
Re:Parents choose their baby's name
on
Designer Babies
·
· Score: 1
Trade is a very apt word since these traditions hark back to the days when kids/wives/concubines were considered one's property.
Re:So then you argue in favor
on
Designer Babies
·
· Score: 1
"It would be cool if they could be selective against thick ankles in chicks."
It would be much cooler if they could select against thick-heads who think they are perfect. Yes, I know thick-ankled chicks do that already but it seems insufficient to completely eliminate that particular recessive gene.
The twists and turns of history are facinating. Jared Diamond has pointed out that the Chinese had a large navy that managed to explore most of the Indian Ocean (well the edges anyway). They lost interest in seafaring just as the Europeans were starting to find their way around the cape. Random link
Nelson was nobody's fool, he used that tactic because it favoured his technology.
The brits had shorter guns that when fired would roll back into the ship ready to be reloaded. The spanish had guns that had to be loaded by climbing over the side of the ship. This new information that the british guns were powerfull enough make two holes with one shot makes the technological gap even wider and thus more effective.
You may also be interested in the facts behind the Sheahans.
The council minutes can be found here (bulky pdf), the interesting bit (sans formating) is reproduced below. I don't know what happened to the felled trees but my estimation is that they would have yeilded at least 5000 tons of timber after processing. Seems odd that with a few mouse clicks I could find what every so called journalist on the planet seems to have missed...
ORDINARY COUNCIL MINUTES 12 SEPTEMBER 2005
Page 12174
9.6 COUNCIL SIGN AND SEAL SECTION 173 AGREEMENT -
L & D SHEAHAN
Author David Huxtable - Environmental Services Manager
File No: 9538560930
Reference: Item 9.13 - 14 June 2005
Summary
This report seeks that Council resolve to sign and seal a Section 173
Agreement under the Planning and Environment Act 1987 between the
Council and L & D Sheahan of 93 Thompson Spur Road Reedy Creek relating
to a cost settlement in the matter, Mitchell Shire Council v LP & DE Sheahan.
Background
On the 6 November 2002, Council's Planning and Development Enforcement
Officer, responding to telephone complaints, attended at 93 Thompson Spur
Road Reedy Creek. The Officer recorded that approximately 3 to 4 acres of
native vegetation had and was in the process of being felled and removed.
No owners were present at the property. The Officer returned to the Council
Offices and searched Council's property and Planning databases. It was
established that the current owners of the property were LP & DE Sheahan
and that a Planning Permit would be required for the works undertaken. It
was further established that no Planning Permit existed for the removal of
native vegetation. Officers made contact with the owners of the property and
arranged for an inspection and meeting onsite for the 7 November 2002.
This commenced the investigation into the alleged destruction of native
vegetation. On the 8 November 2002 further evidence was collected in the
form of photos etc. An initial evaluation of the evidence collected over the 3
days concluded that a breach of the Mitchell Planning Scheme (MPS) may
have occurred and a 'Notice to Show Cause' letter was sent by the Chief
Executive Officer. This letter was forwarded to Mr and Mrs Sheahan. Council
received a reply to that letter on the 21 November 2002 refuting the
allegations and advising that the works had been conducted with regard to fire
prevention and therefore they were exempt from obtaining a permit under the
Scheme. The evidence collected rebutted the reasons put forward by the
Sheahan's. However, Council engaged an aborist to provide independent
and expert advice specifically in the following areas:
Species and number of felled trees
Assessment of the felled trees - Health and Structure
If the trees presented a danger to owners or animals
Value of felled trees
An expert in the field of Fire Prevention was also engaged to provide Council
with independent and expert advice with regard to:
ORDINARY COUNCIL MINUTES 12 SEPTEMBER 2005
COUNCIL SIGN & SEAL SECTION 173 AGREEMENT - L & D SHEAHAN (CONT'D)
Page 12175
Establishing if the nature of the clearing was exempt as prescribed by
the MPS
Was the extent of the clearing excessive in terms of Fire Prevention
Following receipt of the independent advice, which confirmed all the evidence
collected by Officers, a Brief of Evidence was prepared and submitted as per
Council's Prosecution Policy.
It had been established that 259 old growth Eucalyptus trees had been
destroyed over a 4 acre site. The Brief was duly authorised and charges were
submitted to the Seymour Magistrate Court on the 20 February 2003 and a
Summons issued to the owners of the property. The matter was listed for
Mention at the Seymour Magistrate Court on the 7 March 2003. On the 27
February 2003 a request on behalf of the Sheahans by Legal representatives
Puglisi, Heffey & Pavlidis w
"Remember the real power of any theory is not in the power of explanation ("God did it" is a perfectly good explanation for a lot of people), it's in the power of prediction. What I describing is the currently-accepted standard theory of the universe, and it has proven its worth by predicting a few astronomical phenomena before they were actually observed."
Good point about predictions but you are "preaching to the choir" here. I knew of the quantum fluctuations (also backed up by super-computer simulations), and that WMAP had shown the universe to be 'flat'. I admit I pulled the lopsided idea out of my arse and that I also missed the implications that a flat universe has for a common frame of reference, ie: I'm now willing to put a deposit on the idea.:)
"Let me guess the moron in the SMH would be Andrew Bolt"
No he's the moron from the Sun here in Melb, the SMH is one of Australia's better rags except for the ironically named Ms Devine. I won't link to her in case I inadvertantly bump up her hit count.;)
"Big Bang is important from this point of view only in that it is the source of CMB, which gives a reference frame for comparison from *anywhere* *anytime* in the universe."
Just as you are (incorectly) assuming things about me and what I have or haven't seen and understood, you are also assuming the CMB is a reference frame that is the same for everyone inside it, I think that assumption is wrong. Neither of us has any evidence other than what we observe from our own (vitually identical) reference frame. If I can add super-luminar expansion to the big-bang to make it fit the observations what's stopping me from saying it could have been lopsided exansion?
As I said I think you have a good argument, I just don't buy it.
"At any rate it's a real tragedy for everyone; knowing much more about where CO2 comes from and goes would have been a huge leap forward for the study of global warming."
Yes it is a tradgedy for everyone, even those who don't want to know about global warming. If we are to introduce a global ETS via international treaty then this would have been a not only a great reseach tool but a great way to monitor said treaty.
I'm sure with the scientific and political interest in this, NASA will have another go. I'm not from the US but I would like to see ESA, Japan, India, China and whatever other space agencies that are included in "everyone" chip in to make it happen as quickly as practicable.
Nice argument but.... Observing the CMBR I can deduce I am at the 'center of the universe' (big-bang's ground-zero). Another observer 10 billion light years away would observe the same thing and is therefore also at the 'center of the universe'.
ie: The big-bang only accounts for the observable universe, it does not account the entire Universe unless you assume universe = Universe.
Slashdot Mirror
Good points but either way my ass is covered :o
The picture is of Cernan but if you look carefully you can see the reflection of Schmitt in the center of his visor.
I didn't say we can't disrupt nature, we have already done that with the closest thing we have to grey-goo, ie: pollution. My point is that nature will disrupt grey-goo no matter how intellegent or efficient it's design. In fact most, if not all, of said designs will be inspired by observing their natural conterparts.
How silly of me to think that humans are not the only life form. /sarcasm
Question: I have a picture of the LAST man on the moon in my screensaver - can you name him without looking it up?
While your raking your brain on that, let's go with your entertainment theory and assume people are not interested in science and just want to watch heroics. My prediction is that these people would not be interested in a Mars landing for the same reason they were not interested in the last man on the moon.
Why? - Because it's a rerun, they would simply shrug and say something like "what's the point, we've been to the moon already". The enourmous technological gap between a moon landing and a mars landing would be lost on them because they are not interested in men on Mars anymore than they are currently interested in men on the ISS. I was born the year after sputnik and grew up in the 60's, the Moon landing did indeed make the world stand with their collective jaws on the ground, but for the type of people you are describing the show ended with Apolo 11's return to Earth.
"Continued funding of robotic exploration of everything outside of the Earth/Moon"
The grownups are also bringing back Earth science.
As for the shuttle, Hubble, ect, I always feel like I'm betraying an old freind when I trade in my car but the smell of fresh leather more than compensates.
In it's broadests sense "to evolve" means to continually change over time but the popularity of that meme is a tribute to the power of Darwin's idea not an explaination of it. I agree that this could be seen as analogous to "creationism", just as deliberately breeding cows for more milk could be seen analogous as "intelligent design", but analogies are made to assist in understanding they are not meant to be taken literally.
"Why not go so far out on a limb that it breaks under our (mankind) massive ego and assume that evolution had to create the chemicals first?"
As Sagan put it, "we are made of star stuff". I have no problem with the analogy that all elements naturally evolved from hydrogen and that the universe is itself is evolving, I also have no trouble in recognising that they are analogies that in no way describe what the theory of evolution actually states. To continue arguing otherwise after being repeatedly corrected is to let one's massive ego get in the way of facts.
"Now where can I get some mind-controlling synthetic life forms?"
Synthesize this
Why do ludites (not accusing you) think artifical nanotech would NOT be eaten by the natural nanotech found around and within us? The people who think scientists can build such a machine are the ones who are guilty of hubris, not the scientists.
"I know I feel no compunction about pirating Microsoft products because they have made my life hell and have gotten their pound of flesh back out of me with all the pain and suffering."
Did they send the boys around to knee-cap you, cut off your fingers, beat you up with a chair? If so why do you continue to use their products? - is Bill holding a gun to your head?
"But if I am enjoying the service they provide then it would be polite of me to contribute."
By that measure the converse is also true, if you're not enjoying or contributing to the service then it would be polite not to use it. You do realise it's possible to be polite to people you disagree with, right?
Politics is a strange world, Conroy was put in charge of this so that it could be killed when the time was right. What better way can you think of to do that than to expand the list until it includes issues dear to the heart of the puritanical moron who's vote the government of the day was trying to buy.
"In this case a politician got behind the scheme because they felt it increased their popularity in their electorate."
I hate to burst your bubble but this is not the case. It has nothing to do with the government wanting to control the population or for that matter Conroy and/or Xenophon wanting to be popular.
It's about one nutcase called Senator Fielding who only got into the senate because the two major parties wanted to keep the Greens out of that seat, nobody expected him to actually win. Yes, Fielding is a "control freak" and the fact he only got 2% of the primary vote shows how many Aussies both inside and outside of parliment share his views.
I and many other Aussies on slashdot predicted this Machevelian crap would go nowhere as soon as it appeared in the press. Why? - because we have seen it all before.
The Top Grear crew are not exactly a bunch of tree-huggers, yet even they have repeatedly called it the most important car in 100yrs.
Trade is a very apt word since these traditions hark back to the days when kids/wives/concubines were considered one's property.
"It would be cool if they could be selective against thick ankles in chicks."
It would be much cooler if they could select against thick-heads who think they are perfect. Yes, I know thick-ankled chicks do that already but it seems insufficient to completely eliminate that particular recessive gene.
While I think the phrases "lost interest" and "turned their back" are the same thing, I agree there is a lesson to be leaned.
"Why not just shoot them?"
Here in Australia the authorities also try to avoid shooting problem crocs, instead they send them to a croc farm for handbag breeding.
The twists and turns of history are facinating. Jared Diamond has pointed out that the Chinese had a large navy that managed to explore most of the Indian Ocean (well the edges anyway). They lost interest in seafaring just as the Europeans were starting to find their way around the cape. Random link
Nelson was nobody's fool, he used that tactic because it favoured his technology.
The brits had shorter guns that when fired would roll back into the ship ready to be reloaded. The spanish had guns that had to be loaded by climbing over the side of the ship. This new information that the british guns were powerfull enough make two holes with one shot makes the technological gap even wider and thus more effective.
You may also be interested in the facts behind the Sheahans.
The council minutes can be found here (bulky pdf), the interesting bit (sans formating) is reproduced below. I don't know what happened to the felled trees but my estimation is that they would have yeilded at least 5000 tons of timber after processing. Seems odd that with a few mouse clicks I could find what every so called journalist on the planet seems to have missed...
ORDINARY COUNCIL MINUTES 12 SEPTEMBER 2005 Page 12174 9.6 COUNCIL SIGN AND SEAL SECTION 173 AGREEMENT - L & D SHEAHAN Author David Huxtable - Environmental Services Manager File No: 9538560930 Reference: Item 9.13 - 14 June 2005 Summary This report seeks that Council resolve to sign and seal a Section 173 Agreement under the Planning and Environment Act 1987 between the Council and L & D Sheahan of 93 Thompson Spur Road Reedy Creek relating to a cost settlement in the matter, Mitchell Shire Council v LP & DE Sheahan. Background On the 6 November 2002, Council's Planning and Development Enforcement Officer, responding to telephone complaints, attended at 93 Thompson Spur Road Reedy Creek. The Officer recorded that approximately 3 to 4 acres of native vegetation had and was in the process of being felled and removed. No owners were present at the property. The Officer returned to the Council Offices and searched Council's property and Planning databases. It was established that the current owners of the property were LP & DE Sheahan and that a Planning Permit would be required for the works undertaken. It was further established that no Planning Permit existed for the removal of native vegetation. Officers made contact with the owners of the property and arranged for an inspection and meeting onsite for the 7 November 2002. This commenced the investigation into the alleged destruction of native vegetation. On the 8 November 2002 further evidence was collected in the form of photos etc. An initial evaluation of the evidence collected over the 3 days concluded that a breach of the Mitchell Planning Scheme (MPS) may have occurred and a 'Notice to Show Cause' letter was sent by the Chief Executive Officer. This letter was forwarded to Mr and Mrs Sheahan. Council received a reply to that letter on the 21 November 2002 refuting the allegations and advising that the works had been conducted with regard to fire prevention and therefore they were exempt from obtaining a permit under the Scheme. The evidence collected rebutted the reasons put forward by the Sheahan's. However, Council engaged an aborist to provide independent and expert advice specifically in the following areas: Species and number of felled trees Assessment of the felled trees - Health and Structure If the trees presented a danger to owners or animals Value of felled trees An expert in the field of Fire Prevention was also engaged to provide Council with independent and expert advice with regard to: ORDINARY COUNCIL MINUTES 12 SEPTEMBER 2005 COUNCIL SIGN & SEAL SECTION 173 AGREEMENT - L & D SHEAHAN (CONT'D) Page 12175 Establishing if the nature of the clearing was exempt as prescribed by the MPS Was the extent of the clearing excessive in terms of Fire Prevention Following receipt of the independent advice, which confirmed all the evidence collected by Officers, a Brief of Evidence was prepared and submitted as per Council's Prosecution Policy. It had been established that 259 old growth Eucalyptus trees had been destroyed over a 4 acre site. The Brief was duly authorised and charges were submitted to the Seymour Magistrate Court on the 20 February 2003 and a Summons issued to the owners of the property. The matter was listed for Mention at the Seymour Magistrate Court on the 7 March 2003. On the 27 February 2003 a request on behalf of the Sheahans by Legal representatives Puglisi, Heffey & Pavlidis w
"Remember the real power of any theory is not in the power of explanation ("God did it" is a perfectly good explanation for a lot of people), it's in the power of prediction. What I describing is the currently-accepted standard theory of the universe, and it has proven its worth by predicting a few astronomical phenomena before they were actually observed."
:)
Good point about predictions but you are "preaching to the choir" here. I knew of the quantum fluctuations (also backed up by super-computer simulations), and that WMAP had shown the universe to be 'flat'. I admit I pulled the lopsided idea out of my arse and that I also missed the implications that a flat universe has for a common frame of reference, ie: I'm now willing to put a deposit on the idea.
"Let me guess the moron in the SMH would be Andrew Bolt"
;)
No he's the moron from the Sun here in Melb, the SMH is one of Australia's better rags except for the ironically named Ms Devine. I won't link to her in case I inadvertantly bump up her hit count.
"Big Bang is important from this point of view only in that it is the source of CMB, which gives a reference frame for comparison from *anywhere* *anytime* in the universe."
Just as you are (incorectly) assuming things about me and what I have or haven't seen and understood, you are also assuming the CMB is a reference frame that is the same for everyone inside it, I think that assumption is wrong. Neither of us has any evidence other than what we observe from our own (vitually identical) reference frame. If I can add super-luminar expansion to the big-bang to make it fit the observations what's stopping me from saying it could have been lopsided exansion?
As I said I think you have a good argument, I just don't buy it.
"At any rate it's a real tragedy for everyone; knowing much more about where CO2 comes from and goes would have been a huge leap forward for the study of global warming."
Yes it is a tradgedy for everyone, even those who don't want to know about global warming. If we are to introduce a global ETS via international treaty then this would have been a not only a great reseach tool but a great way to monitor said treaty.
I'm sure with the scientific and political interest in this, NASA will have another go. I'm not from the US but I would like to see ESA, Japan, India, China and whatever other space agencies that are included in "everyone" chip in to make it happen as quickly as practicable.
"If these maps are correct, and there was no ice in the 1500's... how were these ice cores found?"
Excellent question, perhaps you could use an encyclopedia to find out more about these so called "ice cores".
Nice argument but.... Observing the CMBR I can deduce I am at the 'center of the universe' (big-bang's ground-zero). Another observer 10 billion light years away would observe the same thing and is therefore also at the 'center of the universe'.
ie: The big-bang only accounts for the observable universe, it does not account the entire Universe unless you assume universe = Universe.