Yeah, it kinda is the point.
That's one of its missions. But it isn't the only, or even the first thing that it does.
And that isn't what was said, or done. Outreach is about meaningful engagement, not how the other party feels.
What are the main challenges facing Mankind today?
- Thread starter chair
- Start date
Yeah, it kinda is the point.
That's one of its missions. But it isn't the only, or even the first thing that it does.
And that isn't what was said, or done. Outreach is about meaningful engagement, not how the other party feels.
Because they dont want it to work.
Quetzal
New member
That may be true, but inspiring their scientists and mathematicians may have long reaching benefits.
International collaboration is in our own interest. That's why we do it.
What surplus?
Meaning?
Quetzal
New member
This isn't a race, there isn't a first, second; whatever. It is about allowing our research and findings reaching as many people as possible. It is about an exchange of ideas that can inspire the next great feat. We can't do that if don't invest in outreach.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
how many wars has Saddam Hussein started lately?
these are the guys who build rockets and send americans (and selected foreigners) into space, right?
NASA?
Neil Armstrong?
moon landings, space stations, hubble telescope?
all on my tax dollars?
the guys who are constantly whining that they don't have enough money to do what they want to on their mars missions?
they have enough money to suck up to camel jockeys, but they can't afford an extra photodiode array and the fuel too put it in orbit?
gimme a break
it's about limited funds and where we, as a nation, choose to spend them
personally, I'd rather spend less on accommodating perverts (homosexuals) and foreign mooslims and more on solving our inner city issues
flood, drought, ice age, global warming.
and WWIII will be world wide hand to hand combat -
and WWIII will be world wide hand to hand combat -
Quetzal
New member
Thankfully you are not in an position of power to make such short sighted decisions. Interestingly, the budget for this kind of research is incredibly small in comparison to the rest of the budget.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
how much do they spend to get inner city kids interested in math and science and space?
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
so, somebody left me a neg rep for this post with the comment "simply inaccurate"
don't be a coward - come right out and tell me what you found inaccurate
don't be a coward - come right out and tell me what you found inaccurate
Quetzal
New member
Quetzal
New member
Your racial slurs are adorable. That aside, you have a drastic misunderstanding as to how this all works. You assume they have this surplus, it simply isn't the case. They have undergone drastic budget cuts, mainly due to politicians who share your limited point of view.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
but not inaccurate
i suspect you're wrong, but let's see
Where are they finding the money for the mooslim outreach?
Obama?
He's the guy who's been signing the budget cuts into law
so, once again, what was inaccurate about my post?
Cowardly indeed. They need to debate in the open.
Personally I have come to the conclusion that negging a well written post like this instead of debating is cowardly.
Dan Emanuel
Active member
Then your giving up because you cannot convince a reasonable voice that all you're clamoring is justified by the fact's, and all of them.
Contrarily, I shall be shown, when and only when it is apparent. (Right now, if it is true, it is hidden. Make it known! if you can see it.) For my part, I don't see what your pointing at. (And when I engage you, you insult my intelligence, developmental stage and moral character, and refuse to offer solution's to the very reasonable problem's I bring to you're attention.)
Your suggesting that we use force --violence, just to make it clear what you're idea is; its violence --to manipulate everybody on earth to do you're bidding, all the while being unwilling and uncooperative when we ask you for a more convincing case.
Nobody is going to deny a looming disaster if its clear as day. Nobody would doubt that the Titanic was going down, once the chamber's were already breached by the iceberg. But beforehand, it would take somebody who saw the danger when nobody else did, and communicate it, so that we can all perceive the threat that to us just look's like Chicken Little syndrome right now, which is a terrible reason to use violence.1
Prove it. Reason is amenable to verbal communication. As opposed to, say, voodoo and ghost's.
Thats why I said "Our planet is not our body," Eisenstein.
I already told you that the threat of global nuclear annihilation and the threat of man-made climate change are only distantly related. Its murder versus smoking, and I don't buy that smoking kill's. And your prepared to use violence against me and my sympathizer's, who disagree that smoking kill's, and for that reason only.
Violence! Isn't that what your trying to avoid Purex! Have the decency would you, to at least admit, that your idea is a violent investment; an escalation in our use of state violence against ourselve's; we're banking on, in you're idea, that exerting a little violence against ourselve's now, will result in less violence from the earth itself, against us, in the future. Is that correct?
Petroleum itself is 100% biodegradable. Its safe for the environment. You don't have to clean it up, the environment will eat it up. No hard feelings.
I'm with you they're. Your just sputtering out platitude's that I heartily agree with already. :e4e:
I did this whole thing with "prototautology." In every tautology, and especially when cleverly disguised in plain sight like you'res is here, I'd see that upon which language itself is built, much like how the Church is built upon Peter. Its never adding anything to the discussion though, to offer tautology's, unless offering the tautology is making some sort of subtle point. If it is, making some sort of subtle point, then the argument is automatically implied, that its passive aggressive to make a point subtly when clarity is a reasonably available option. Passive aggression is unacceptable in any discussion between equal's. But, additionally, also, its possible to answer the subtle point, subtly, right on back at them; those who sputter out cleverly disguised tautology's like how you like to do. Its rigorous, to subject you're thinking to such a high standard, admittedly. I don't admire you though. But I like you a lot.
Nah, I do admire you Purex. I like how you wage written war. 't's inspiring.
You literally just forcefully agreed with me, and insulted me, all at once. That was awesome.
Its logic and reason that we can thank for being able to craft the optimal permanent state government's; constitutional federalist republic's. This form of government is not an obstacle in this matter. Our government help's us handle it wisely and fairly. When we use violence against ourselve's, through our government, it should be because of not Chicken Little syndrome or O'Reilly syndrome.
DJ
1 --It isn't lethal violence. It is like when schoolyard bullies' force there prey into doing something. Its not pleasant but its not crippling or fatal either. Better to do something of value for the bully, if your the prey, I.M.O., than to fight. Its not right that I had to give lunch money away. But it was my fault for not having a more valuable option available, which automatically increase's the value of money in you're eye's. Thats natural. Its my fault, for not preparing properly.
2.1
Dan Emanuel
Active member
They'res method to my madness.
Correct, mainly. I think it will be a very big deal if we use our governments's monopoly on force against ourselve's, for something that isn't all that bad even if it does happen. People migrate. Almost all of the America's are inhabited by people who either migrated themselve's, or who are descended from migrant's. We know how to do it, especially when we have to do it. And if it come's to the point where people are migrating in drove's away from rising coast's and sea level's, then we through our governments's will help them --we'll help ourselve's, through our governments's.
Curious as to which is which.
I keep bringing up ice age's because I'm looking at the geological record. Geologically speaking, we have just emerged from an ice age (7,000 year's ago?), and ice age's are bad for just about everybody and everything on this planet.
You're profile say's your on a farm. I'm no farmer, but I can't imagine a farm is much good if its covered in snow and ice for 10-11 month's each year. The ice age's run equatorial land into what we now have in 40-45 degree's latitude, in the mountain's --six month's of winter and six month's of summer. Everybody is going to have to live around the equator, and I for 1 perceive that the migration's and death's that would occur from that scenario make's you're comment about me being "flippant" seem . . . I don't know --flippant?
I have no ill will toward you.
DJ
1.0
It's the pizza