Moveon.org is a successful attempt by one rich man (George Seros) to get around campaign finance laws by donating to a cause that has the same results as donating to campaigns, without donating to the campaigns.
Swift Vote Veterans for Truth is not grassroots either. A number of common people with a cause getting together to get their message out is a start of grassroots, but they were not working the system locally, they were working nationally.
Normally grassroots is when you start working your friends and neighbors to build support for something, before going to your local political party meetings (those "smoke filled back rooms" are open to the public and they even tell you when they are meeting), and working the issue.
Actually your post gives us no information about the political parties involved. It could be 3 democrats, 3 republicans, or any mixture of the above. All we know is that the spouses are composed of 1 democrat and 2 republicans.
I personally know many married couples, where both are politically active, and one is a democrat and the other a republican. I also know many instances where both belong to the same party (with plenty of instances of each party). It is completely incorrect to draw any conclusion about someones party based solely on their souses' party.
It costs money to print a paper. In theory I can print up advertising and send it to every home in the US, in practice I don't have enough money. However there are people who do have that kind of money. By taking away their right to send that advertisement with their own money you are restricting their free speech rights.
To the major parties - the democrats and the republicans - this is good. They have enough mind share that they can collect all the money they need in tiny amounts from everyone. To a fringe candidate (who could be better than either), it is bad, because the fringe candidate has no ability to counter that. They don't have mind share, and they cannot get it by convincing one rich person to spend money on their advertisements.
There is good reason campaign finance reform is often called "incumbent protection act" - it makes it much harder to get someone elected out of office.
The US constitution say nothing about what color or race slaves must be. According to the constitution if I captured a German I could make him my slave (if I was in an area that allowed slavery), even though that person would be white. There were even 1 or 2 cases of this in history, but there was a large supply of slaves coming out of Africa, and no Government to object. In my example the German government would object (though back when slavery was legal in the US, Germany as we know it isn't exist) and it is likely the US government would make me send my slave back.
Color was never a requirement for slavery. It just happened that black slaves were in supply, so blacks became slaves.
Many on the far right would claim that fox's slogan is in fact a play on the rest of media claiming it is fair and balanced, while in fact biased to the left. (Witness CBS releasing and standing by fake documents in the last election)
These are the same people who will call Fox mid left, and everyone else extreme left. That most of Europe would consider the US media mid right is not important to them.
No, but if you read the article, and the links it shouldn't be a surprise. They said they were betrayed by their own side (this doesn't say which side is theirs, you have to read more to guess). In other links from that page the listed all the democrats who voted for this, and asked supporters call and thank them - no mention of republicans. There was no mention that most republicans supported this.
All that is fair, but I wish people who be honest when they are betrayed by their own side and defended by the other, and thank the other side. Their call though, most people don't have the guts to admit that the other side isn't 100% evil. At least they didn't spread lies about republicans in any of the links I spread.
I have the manual for my GM car. Not the owners manual, the official maintenance that tells me everything about the car (except the source code to the computer, an oversite in my opinion). I do all my own work on my cars, so it is important to me that I have this book.
I'm not asking for a free car or video car (though of course I'd like to have one), I'm asking for the information I need to make it work. Nvidia will not give me that information so I don't have a Nvidia card.
There are efforts to make an open source video card, but they have not yet produced.
Who cares? Just keep a few backup gas plants around for when the wind doesn't blow.
There is only so much gas in the world. If the gas plant has to operate 1 day per year because there isn't enough wind, than is 364 extra years of gas supplie to run that plant.
Yes you need to maintain that gas plant even when idle, but even with that, I'd prefer to save gas where we can.
A corporation can spend a lot more time and money on the political process than can an individual. They also have certain advantages, such as most of the rights of a person with few of the disadvantages (death, for instance....) Sure they get a lot of power by getting people to give them money but they invest a lot in encouraging that behavior too.
You are forgetting the most important disadvantage: they cannot vote. Sure I can't put as much into politics as a compnay, but I have more power because with just a little research I can know who to vote for. (though sadly most people don't research. Even on intellectual slashdot I see a lot of outright lies[1])
I'm not sure the corporations are as powerful as you think. The two most powerful lobbies in the US are the NRA, and the AARP, which are both groups of common people who have pooled their money. Sure companies have more money, but those two groups have voters who move in step. Many politicians (particularly in rural areas) cannot vote against the NRA often because doing so means they will not be re-elected. This is also shy no politician is willing to fix Social Security - it cannot be done without pissing off the AARP.
[1]I was going to say lies about Bush, but I'm going to be generous and say that if a democrat was in office it would be lies from the other side about that president.
Getting more out of ethanol than the fuels you used is easy: just use 1990s production techniques or better.
That means on the farm you have things like diesel tractors that get better use of the fuel, hybrid crops that yield nearly twice as much. Precision fertializer application so you don't waste it where the ground is fertil.
At the plant you use a dry milling process, your total return is about 167% of the energy input. Or you wet milling, but use all the other results from wet milling, and call ethanol a by-product that would otherwise be waste, so you don't count all the costs (though this is a bogus argument - but even without it you are looking at about a 110% payback of energy)
In the lab 250% payback has been done, but not all of this is ready for production use.
By federal law you cannot get a hunting license unless you give your SSN to the clerk, which is then checked against a list of those not paying their child support. (This is one of those complex laws that get around the federal government not being allowed to make such a law - the states have to have such a law or they don't get federal funds)
For many financial transactions your are required to give your SSN.
In theory social security is optional. However once I'm in I can't get out. My parents signed me up when I was 2 (or before, I'm not sure - today most parents sign their kids up when they are born, but the law was slightly different back then). It is a big scam that I want out of - I'd prefer to put that money in my own retirement and insurance plans.
Gypsum does not put out the fire. Gypsum stops the spread of fire through it. It is a firewall, one side can burn, but the other will not for about an hour.
Cementboard is worse. It won't burn, but you still have to cover it with paint (most people do not want tile in their livingroom), which burns just the same as gypsum.
I think we will have to agree to disagree on this:
What I tried to convey (and obviously failed in) is whether the main group of people trying to convey evolution believe in it as "faith". I believe they don't - the information around evolution is fairly easily available and fairly easy to test.
In my experience, while the information is available, the majority of the people who believe in, and defend evolution, do not understand it. Their reasoning is something like "Christianity doesn't allow me to sleep around, and I want to sleep around, so I reject Christianity. Since I'm not a Christian, that much be the wrong religion, so how can I attack them? Evolution doesn't prohibit sleeping around, so I'll join that religion, and attack Christians because they don't believe it." Note that no consideration of science, or facts have really entered into the picture.
There are scientists who believe in evolution because it fits the facts. I am not referring to these people. I'm referring to your average person on the street who isn't really interested in science other than what it can do for him. The scientist are a minority.
And I have seen videos of demos where a fire starts on a couch, then burns hotter and hotter, then the paint and paper on the walls and ceiling catches fire.
If the walls were cement boards like those used in bathrooms in the shower area, covered with plaster or tiles or flame-resistant paint, they would not ignite in such a situation.
False. Your normal wall is made from gypsum, which does not burn! In fact it actually resits fire because it contains water (which is chemically trapped in the molecules) which will boil out when you try to burn it, thus tending to put out the fire. 5/8 inch gypsome walls are rated as a 1 hour firewall.
Obviously you know little about fire in the real world.
Wood is one of the better materials to have in a fire. Yes it burns, but it has the rare characteristic that it gives warning before it fails. A steel floor feels perfectly stable underfoot while the firefighters are rushing around, and then suddenly reaches the fail point and falls. A wood floor starts feeling softer and softer underfoot until it suddenly fails. Fire fighters can estimate how much time they have left before the building goes by feel. (though odds are this building did not have wood floors)
Wood is a good insulator, while steel conducts. A wood door will resist fire longer than a solid steel door, which will start whatever is on the other side of the door on fire. (steel fire doors have insulation inside that is better than solid steel, so this is a non-factor, but it is important to consider)
Paper covered drywall is a great thing to have in a fire. 5/8inch drywall is good for 1 hour in a typical home fire. Multi-unit dwellings have drywall between all units for this reason.
While smoke is always harmful, the smoke from a wood fire is much less harmfull than most other things that burn.
Wood desks do not burn easily. The heat tends to spread too fast to catch the rest of the desk on fire. If the building is on fire the wood desks will make it worse, but if you start a wood desk on fire in the middle of a room (where nothing else will burn) it is unlikely to spread to the next desk. (note that I'm talking solid wood, composites behave differently in fire)
Proper construction is much more complex than you realize.
Gravity is a bunch of stuff (that we will ignore as constants) M1M2, where M1 and M2 are the masses of the objects in question. On earth M1 is normally taken as the earth itself, which is so much larger than any M2 that you can discount the difference. However as M2 changes, the force itself changes.
Now the hard part: setting up an experiment that actually shows this result. This is more complex than you might think.
If you observe from some point in outer space, where the earth is not a frame of reference, then changes in M2 effect the speed the earth falls to the object, not the speed the object falls. So first we need a frame of reference that calls the earth 0. (The gravitational theory works on acceleration, which you can measure)
If you drop your hammer and feather at the same time, arbiterly close to each other, your M2 is the mass of the hammer plus the mass of the feather, and not the mass of each separately.
You might think that you can just put the hammer on the floor, but then the hammer becomes part of the mass of the earth. Better not risk it, put the hammer far enough away that it won't affect anything. (next room should be good for the small masses involved, though you can also rig your experiment to eliminate these effects)
Alternatively you can do both experiment far enough apart that they do not effect one another - but make sure the local constants are the same first. (The earth is not a perfect sphere, local variations of mass can change things you want to hold constant)
Did you notice I specified a feather and a hammer? You need to do this experiment in a vacuum or otherwise account for wind resistance. Even if you just have two rocks, the wind resistance will not be exactly the same between them.
Even if you correct for all the above it may not be enough. We are talking about very slight differences. I'm not sure if science has anything sensitive enough to measure the difference. Even if you have that perfect measuring device, eliminating all the other variables it will measure will be hard. I didn't mention things like space dust, but they could matter (or maybe not). I'm content to look at the math.
There might be some plants/stars you can look at with a telescope that will show the same results, but I'm not sure how to eliminate all the variables there either.
First, let me start with saying that the entire label "evolutionist" is (in my opinion) wrong. The label implies that there is a faith based belief in evolution, and that that's the core.
Look at how non-scientist people defend evolution, and then tell me it isn't fail based. I'm not talking about the theory of evolution as science understands it, I'm talking about the real world man on the street's view. I've seen people use outright lies to defend it.
In truth there are two evolutions. There is the theory that seems well supported by science. It seems nearly a fact, but it could be disproved in some unknown way. Then there is the religious following trying to convert everyone in the world to evolution, or (some way to say "you will go to hell", but without using hell itself since that is a concept of the religion they want to kill)
That is because everyone else needs to compete with Walmart or go under. There used to be a Pamida "discount store" in my home town, there isn't anymore because Walmart charged much less, had more inventory, and provided better service.
Last I looked Best Buy had higher prices for TV/radios. Of course the Walmart stuff looked cheap, while Best Buy had some reasonable quality gear.
I would much prefer these problems solved before we go. I'd hate to be on a trip to mars, and die on the way because nobody knows how to do some surgery that I unexpectedly need. I want all bases covered, with enough redundancy that if something goes wrong it isn't fatal.
Remember Apollo 13? Something like that could not be recovered from on the way to mars, so they have to have other way to recover. There are plenty of other disasters that could happen that need to be planed for. (with enough supplies that the unplanned can be dealt with from those)
I don't think there is anyone on earth that doesn't have some rare disease. Most a minor, but there are so many of them that the total is everyone has something wrong.
Besides this can be used on earth, and could be better than standard surgery.
Would you want to get surgery from a doctor who hasn't done any surgery in 40 months? (18 there, 18 back, plus several months on Mar - emergency comes up just before you get back home, too urgent to wait) Particularly if the surgeon is not a specialist in that area?
These device seem like a much better idea, particularly if they come up with an "AI" that can do the more common surgeries without help once inserted.
Not exactly, you re-do them and your theories until the two match. Sometimes that means you correct your mistake, sometimes not.
In a class setting I would expect any differences between results and theory is noise within the margin of error. If your results are not within the margin of error (for instance if you find f=ma^2), then you should examine your setup to see where you went wrong. In a class setting we can assume that the error is in the experiment, and the student should find that error. In fact finding the errors is likely to be more educational than the experiment and a good teacher should find some way to introduce them (I can't think of any though), just to force the students to think.
In a real lab setting you are not sure about your hypothesis, so when your results don't match, you need to examine both. Your error could be in your theory in which case you need a new one, but it could also be in the experiment. Accidentally putting liquid nitrogen in the liquid helium tanks for instance would drastically affect experiments, so if you discover such a switch in the experiment, correct it, and your second run results in the right answer you can be confident your theory is correct (to the limits of the experiment of course)
When a scientific experiment yields unexpected results, you need to re-do it. First you figure out why you got those results, and fix that problem. If you can't find a problem, and don't get the same (unexpected) results you need to do it yet again.
So school science needs to give you enough lab time to re-do the experiment if you don't get the expected result. (Remember you always start with a hypothesis, so you know when you data doesn't fit) Then you need to turn in all your results, both the good and the bad, along with a writing on why those bad results are wrong.
Slashdot Mirror
Moveon.org is a successful attempt by one rich man (George Seros) to get around campaign finance laws by donating to a cause that has the same results as donating to campaigns, without donating to the campaigns.
Swift Vote Veterans for Truth is not grassroots either. A number of common people with a cause getting together to get their message out is a start of grassroots, but they were not working the system locally, they were working nationally.
Normally grassroots is when you start working your friends and neighbors to build support for something, before going to your local political party meetings (those "smoke filled back rooms" are open to the public and they even tell you when they are meeting), and working the issue.
Actually your post gives us no information about the political parties involved. It could be 3 democrats, 3 republicans, or any mixture of the above. All we know is that the spouses are composed of 1 democrat and 2 republicans.
I personally know many married couples, where both are politically active, and one is a democrat and the other a republican. I also know many instances where both belong to the same party (with plenty of instances of each party). It is completely incorrect to draw any conclusion about someones party based solely on their souses' party.
It costs money to print a paper. In theory I can print up advertising and send it to every home in the US, in practice I don't have enough money. However there are people who do have that kind of money. By taking away their right to send that advertisement with their own money you are restricting their free speech rights.
To the major parties - the democrats and the republicans - this is good. They have enough mind share that they can collect all the money they need in tiny amounts from everyone. To a fringe candidate (who could be better than either), it is bad, because the fringe candidate has no ability to counter that. They don't have mind share, and they cannot get it by convincing one rich person to spend money on their advertisements.
There is good reason campaign finance reform is often called "incumbent protection act" - it makes it much harder to get someone elected out of office.
The US constitution say nothing about what color or race slaves must be. According to the constitution if I captured a German I could make him my slave (if I was in an area that allowed slavery), even though that person would be white. There were even 1 or 2 cases of this in history, but there was a large supply of slaves coming out of Africa, and no Government to object. In my example the German government would object (though back when slavery was legal in the US, Germany as we know it isn't exist) and it is likely the US government would make me send my slave back.
Color was never a requirement for slavery. It just happened that black slaves were in supply, so blacks became slaves.
Many on the far right would claim that fox's slogan is in fact a play on the rest of media claiming it is fair and balanced, while in fact biased to the left. (Witness CBS releasing and standing by fake documents in the last election)
These are the same people who will call Fox mid left, and everyone else extreme left. That most of Europe would consider the US media mid right is not important to them.
No, but if you read the article, and the links it shouldn't be a surprise. They said they were betrayed by their own side (this doesn't say which side is theirs, you have to read more to guess). In other links from that page the listed all the democrats who voted for this, and asked supporters call and thank them - no mention of republicans. There was no mention that most republicans supported this.
All that is fair, but I wish people who be honest when they are betrayed by their own side and defended by the other, and thank the other side. Their call though, most people don't have the guts to admit that the other side isn't 100% evil. At least they didn't spread lies about republicans in any of the links I spread.
I have the manual for my GM car. Not the owners manual, the official maintenance that tells me everything about the car (except the source code to the computer, an oversite in my opinion). I do all my own work on my cars, so it is important to me that I have this book.
I'm not asking for a free car or video car (though of course I'd like to have one), I'm asking for the information I need to make it work. Nvidia will not give me that information so I don't have a Nvidia card.
There are efforts to make an open source video card, but they have not yet produced.
Who cares? Just keep a few backup gas plants around for when the wind doesn't blow.
There is only so much gas in the world. If the gas plant has to operate 1 day per year because there isn't enough wind, than is 364 extra years of gas supplie to run that plant.
Yes you need to maintain that gas plant even when idle, but even with that, I'd prefer to save gas where we can.
A corporation can spend a lot more time and money on the political process than can an individual. They also have certain advantages, such as most of the rights of a person with few of the disadvantages (death, for instance....) Sure they get a lot of power by getting people to give them money but they invest a lot in encouraging that behavior too.
You are forgetting the most important disadvantage: they cannot vote. Sure I can't put as much into politics as a compnay, but I have more power because with just a little research I can know who to vote for. (though sadly most people don't research. Even on intellectual slashdot I see a lot of outright lies[1])
I'm not sure the corporations are as powerful as you think. The two most powerful lobbies in the US are the NRA, and the AARP, which are both groups of common people who have pooled their money. Sure companies have more money, but those two groups have voters who move in step. Many politicians (particularly in rural areas) cannot vote against the NRA often because doing so means they will not be re-elected. This is also shy no politician is willing to fix Social Security - it cannot be done without pissing off the AARP.
[1]I was going to say lies about Bush, but I'm going to be generous and say that if a democrat was in office it would be lies from the other side about that president.
Here is my source
250% in the lab means nothing on the road, but 167% means a lot in reduced oil imports.
Getting more out of ethanol than the fuels you used is easy: just use 1990s production techniques or better.
That means on the farm you have things like diesel tractors that get better use of the fuel, hybrid crops that yield nearly twice as much. Precision fertializer application so you don't waste it where the ground is fertil.
At the plant you use a dry milling process, your total return is about 167% of the energy input. Or you wet milling, but use all the other results from wet milling, and call ethanol a by-product that would otherwise be waste, so you don't count all the costs (though this is a bogus argument - but even without it you are looking at about a 110% payback of energy)
In the lab 250% payback has been done, but not all of this is ready for production use.
By federal law you cannot get a hunting license unless you give your SSN to the clerk, which is then checked against a list of those not paying their child support. (This is one of those complex laws that get around the federal government not being allowed to make such a law - the states have to have such a law or they don't get federal funds)
For many financial transactions your are required to give your SSN.
In theory social security is optional. However once I'm in I can't get out. My parents signed me up when I was 2 (or before, I'm not sure - today most parents sign their kids up when they are born, but the law was slightly different back then). It is a big scam that I want out of - I'd prefer to put that money in my own retirement and insurance plans.
Gypsum does not put out the fire. Gypsum stops the spread of fire through it. It is a firewall, one side can burn, but the other will not for about an hour.
Cementboard is worse. It won't burn, but you still have to cover it with paint (most people do not want tile in their livingroom), which burns just the same as gypsum.
I think we will have to agree to disagree on this:
What I tried to convey (and obviously failed in) is whether the main group of people trying to convey evolution believe in it as "faith". I believe they don't - the information around evolution is fairly easily available and fairly easy to test.
In my experience, while the information is available, the majority of the people who believe in, and defend evolution, do not understand it. Their reasoning is something like "Christianity doesn't allow me to sleep around, and I want to sleep around, so I reject Christianity. Since I'm not a Christian, that much be the wrong religion, so how can I attack them? Evolution doesn't prohibit sleeping around, so I'll join that religion, and attack Christians because they don't believe it." Note that no consideration of science, or facts have really entered into the picture.
There are scientists who believe in evolution because it fits the facts. I am not referring to these people. I'm referring to your average person on the street who isn't really interested in science other than what it can do for him. The scientist are a minority.
Even if wooden furniture is made of solid wood there is the problem of glues, varnishes and polishes giving off toxic fumes.
Agreed. Though the amount of the above is typically much less than anything in the alternatives.
The part that is false is that cement boards are better for walls that drywall.
The video of the couch is a real world situation.
And I have seen videos of demos where a fire starts on a couch, then burns hotter and hotter, then the paint and paper on the walls and ceiling catches fire. If the walls were cement boards like those used in bathrooms in the shower area, covered with plaster or tiles or flame-resistant paint, they would not ignite in such a situation.
False. Your normal wall is made from gypsum, which does not burn! In fact it actually resits fire because it contains water (which is chemically trapped in the molecules) which will boil out when you try to burn it, thus tending to put out the fire. 5/8 inch gypsome walls are rated as a 1 hour firewall.
Obviously you know little about fire in the real world.
Wood is one of the better materials to have in a fire. Yes it burns, but it has the rare characteristic that it gives warning before it fails. A steel floor feels perfectly stable underfoot while the firefighters are rushing around, and then suddenly reaches the fail point and falls. A wood floor starts feeling softer and softer underfoot until it suddenly fails. Fire fighters can estimate how much time they have left before the building goes by feel. (though odds are this building did not have wood floors)
Wood is a good insulator, while steel conducts. A wood door will resist fire longer than a solid steel door, which will start whatever is on the other side of the door on fire. (steel fire doors have insulation inside that is better than solid steel, so this is a non-factor, but it is important to consider)
Paper covered drywall is a great thing to have in a fire. 5/8inch drywall is good for 1 hour in a typical home fire. Multi-unit dwellings have drywall between all units for this reason.
While smoke is always harmful, the smoke from a wood fire is much less harmfull than most other things that burn.
Wood desks do not burn easily. The heat tends to spread too fast to catch the rest of the desk on fire. If the building is on fire the wood desks will make it worse, but if you start a wood desk on fire in the middle of a room (where nothing else will burn) it is unlikely to spread to the next desk. (note that I'm talking solid wood, composites behave differently in fire)
Proper construction is much more complex than you realize.
Gravity is a bunch of stuff (that we will ignore as constants) M1M2, where M1 and M2 are the masses of the objects in question. On earth M1 is normally taken as the earth itself, which is so much larger than any M2 that you can discount the difference. However as M2 changes, the force itself changes.
Now the hard part: setting up an experiment that actually shows this result. This is more complex than you might think.
If you observe from some point in outer space, where the earth is not a frame of reference, then changes in M2 effect the speed the earth falls to the object, not the speed the object falls. So first we need a frame of reference that calls the earth 0. (The gravitational theory works on acceleration, which you can measure)
If you drop your hammer and feather at the same time, arbiterly close to each other, your M2 is the mass of the hammer plus the mass of the feather, and not the mass of each separately.
You might think that you can just put the hammer on the floor, but then the hammer becomes part of the mass of the earth. Better not risk it, put the hammer far enough away that it won't affect anything. (next room should be good for the small masses involved, though you can also rig your experiment to eliminate these effects)
Alternatively you can do both experiment far enough apart that they do not effect one another - but make sure the local constants are the same first. (The earth is not a perfect sphere, local variations of mass can change things you want to hold constant)
Did you notice I specified a feather and a hammer? You need to do this experiment in a vacuum or otherwise account for wind resistance. Even if you just have two rocks, the wind resistance will not be exactly the same between them.
Even if you correct for all the above it may not be enough. We are talking about very slight differences. I'm not sure if science has anything sensitive enough to measure the difference. Even if you have that perfect measuring device, eliminating all the other variables it will measure will be hard. I didn't mention things like space dust, but they could matter (or maybe not). I'm content to look at the math.
There might be some plants/stars you can look at with a telescope that will show the same results, but I'm not sure how to eliminate all the variables there either.
First, let me start with saying that the entire label "evolutionist" is (in my opinion) wrong. The label implies that there is a faith based belief in evolution, and that that's the core.
Look at how non-scientist people defend evolution, and then tell me it isn't fail based. I'm not talking about the theory of evolution as science understands it, I'm talking about the real world man on the street's view. I've seen people use outright lies to defend it.
In truth there are two evolutions. There is the theory that seems well supported by science. It seems nearly a fact, but it could be disproved in some unknown way. Then there is the religious following trying to convert everyone in the world to evolution, or (some way to say "you will go to hell", but without using hell itself since that is a concept of the religion they want to kill)
That is because everyone else needs to compete with Walmart or go under. There used to be a Pamida "discount store" in my home town, there isn't anymore because Walmart charged much less, had more inventory, and provided better service.
Last I looked Best Buy had higher prices for TV/radios. Of course the Walmart stuff looked cheap, while Best Buy had some reasonable quality gear.
I would much prefer these problems solved before we go. I'd hate to be on a trip to mars, and die on the way because nobody knows how to do some surgery that I unexpectedly need. I want all bases covered, with enough redundancy that if something goes wrong it isn't fatal.
Remember Apollo 13? Something like that could not be recovered from on the way to mars, so they have to have other way to recover. There are plenty of other disasters that could happen that need to be planed for. (with enough supplies that the unplanned can be dealt with from those)
I don't think there is anyone on earth that doesn't have some rare disease. Most a minor, but there are so many of them that the total is everyone has something wrong.
Besides this can be used on earth, and could be better than standard surgery.
Would you want to get surgery from a doctor who hasn't done any surgery in 40 months? (18 there, 18 back, plus several months on Mar - emergency comes up just before you get back home, too urgent to wait) Particularly if the surgeon is not a specialist in that area?
These device seem like a much better idea, particularly if they come up with an "AI" that can do the more common surgeries without help once inserted.
Not exactly, you re-do them and your theories until the two match. Sometimes that means you correct your mistake, sometimes not.
In a class setting I would expect any differences between results and theory is noise within the margin of error. If your results are not within the margin of error (for instance if you find f=ma^2), then you should examine your setup to see where you went wrong. In a class setting we can assume that the error is in the experiment, and the student should find that error. In fact finding the errors is likely to be more educational than the experiment and a good teacher should find some way to introduce them (I can't think of any though), just to force the students to think.
In a real lab setting you are not sure about your hypothesis, so when your results don't match, you need to examine both. Your error could be in your theory in which case you need a new one, but it could also be in the experiment. Accidentally putting liquid nitrogen in the liquid helium tanks for instance would drastically affect experiments, so if you discover such a switch in the experiment, correct it, and your second run results in the right answer you can be confident your theory is correct (to the limits of the experiment of course)
When a scientific experiment yields unexpected results, you need to re-do it. First you figure out why you got those results, and fix that problem. If you can't find a problem, and don't get the same (unexpected) results you need to do it yet again.
So school science needs to give you enough lab time to re-do the experiment if you don't get the expected result. (Remember you always start with a hypothesis, so you know when you data doesn't fit) Then you need to turn in all your results, both the good and the bad, along with a writing on why those bad results are wrong.