Author Topic: Is the Scientific Process, Standards of Proof ignored by NASA Supporters?  (Read 109753 times)

Offline Luke Pemberton

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1823
  • Chaos in his tin foil hat
Re: Is the Scientific Process, Standards of Proof ignored by NASA Supporters?
« Reply #585 on: February 17, 2015, 07:30:30 PM »
Adrian and his newest nonsense on his playground Planet Infowars:

The following quote is from a 1966 Dutch news clipping Russian:

“Cosmonaut Titov pointed to the possibility that dogs will send to the moon before there letting people land”.

Another example of Adrian citing a source to back his conspiracy views, yet the same source confirms space travel beyond the van Allen belts is possible. Clearly Titov states that man and dogs could land on the moon. Does Adrian realise that the LD50 for a dogs is generally considered less than for a man? When will he throw in the towel?
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former - Albert Einstein.

I can calculate the motion of heavenly bodies, but not the madness of people – Sir Isaac Newton.

A polar orbit would also bypass the SAA - Tim Finch

Offline Halibut

  • Mercury
  • *
  • Posts: 4
Re: Is the Scientific Process, Standards of Proof ignored by NASA Supporters?
« Reply #586 on: February 17, 2015, 11:13:57 PM »
In computer science we call this lazy evaluation. You defer doing some operation until it's actually needed. Many times it's not, so it can save a lot of useless effort. So if you (assuming a male) leave the seat up and you're the next one to use it, you've just saved two useless operations. Why can't women understand this?

Edit: it's actually three avoided useless operations: down at the end of the previous usage interval, plus the up and down operations during the current usage interval...


If you live with a woman, you are asking her to do the extra effort, and probably more often, since women have smaller bladders.

Plus, she is reversing in, probably in the dark. I only had to accidentally drop my wife in the toilet a couple of times before I realized that it's SUPPOSED to be down. I know better now

Offline Sus_pilot

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 337
Re: Is the Scientific Process, Standards of Proof ignored by NASA Supporters?
« Reply #587 on: February 18, 2015, 12:21:54 AM »

In computer science we call this lazy evaluation. You defer doing some operation until it's actually needed. Many times it's not, so it can save a lot of useless effort. So if you (assuming a male) leave the seat up and you're the next one to use it, you've just saved two useless operations. Why can't women understand this?

Edit: it's actually three avoided useless operations: down at the end of the previous usage interval, plus the up and down operations during the current usage interval...


If you live with a woman, you are asking her to do the extra effort, and probably more often, since women have smaller bladders.

Plus, she is reversing in, probably in the dark. I only had to accidentally drop my wife in the toilet a couple of times before I realized that it's SUPPOSED to be down. I know better now

If you really want to learn a lesson, have your sopping wet three-year old daughter come stomping into the kitchen saying "Dad, you did it again!"

Offline Echnaton

  • Saturn
  • ****
  • Posts: 1490
Re: Is the Scientific Process, Standards of Proof ignored by NASA Supporters?
« Reply #588 on: February 18, 2015, 07:08:41 AM »
My answer to the toilet seat debate is two fold.  1. It it polite when dealing with essentially trivial matters, to defer to the person that has the most emotional investment in the issue.  2. Strategically, if one defers to one's wife on such issues, she will recognize that you are thinking of her and the response will be more than adequate to make up for the minor inconvenience.

Finally, if number one and number two don't work for you, see a professional. 
The sun shone, having no alternative, on the nothing new. —Samuel Beckett

Offline Peter B

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 868
Re: Is the Scientific Process, Standards of Proof ignored by NASA Supporters?
« Reply #589 on: February 18, 2015, 07:17:50 AM »
...but I impressed a friend with my parenting because I say please and thank you and so forth to Simon all the time.  Even for little things.  But hey, manners start early.  I'm polite to people in part by nature and in part because I really do feel you get more out of life if you're nice to people.  It usually makes them want to be nice to you in return.

We do the same with our three. My figuring is that if we went to a restaurant, I wouldn't say "Thank you" to the waiter just the once, I say it every time (s)he performs a service at the table. So with the children - if they do something for us we say thank you.

It has to be said it's a work in progress. Our oldest is now seven, and he and his younger brother (four) both occasionally have to be reminded to say thank you when we give them food, although the younger one usually says "Excuse me" before he starts another round of incessant talking. In public, however, their manners are pretty good - it's gratifying having teachers and other parents congratulate us on their manners.

I'm one of the group who holds a door open for anyone who's near, and who doesn't mind if a woman holds the door open for me if I'm near.

And as for toilet seats - at home the seat goes down completely for flushing, but at work in the gents' it stays up.

Offline gillianren

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1840
    • My Letterboxd journal
Re: Is the Scientific Process, Standards of Proof ignored by NASA Supporters?
« Reply #590 on: February 18, 2015, 02:21:30 PM »
It does get tedious to thank him for handing me lint every time, especially since he will occasionally hand me imaginary lint, but still.  He is giving me something, so I say, "Thank you, Simon!"
"This sounds like a job for Bipolar Bear . . . but I just can't seem to get out of bed!"

"Conspiracy theories are an irresistible labour-saving device in the face of complexity."  --Henry Louis Gates

Offline Abaddon

  • Saturn
  • ****
  • Posts: 1092
Re: Is the Scientific Process, Standards of Proof ignored by NASA Supporters?
« Reply #591 on: February 18, 2015, 03:27:16 PM »
It does get tedious to thank him for handing me lint every time, especially since he will occasionally hand me imaginary lint, but still.  He is giving me something, so I say, "Thank you, Simon!"
Mmm. If only I had a buck for every time this happens. In reality, it is like trying to hop on a moving bus, you are sprinting just to keep up, let alone jump aboard. I have entirely lost track of the many "wait, what?" moments with my own. Goes with the territory I'm afraid.