Technology, Science and the Environment.

[Guest worth_the_wait]

1 hour ago, jgtuk said:

The rationale for these is purely profit. 
The science is out there and very clear. 
One of these is a massive contributor to global warming, the other is a tree. 
Science not symbolism. 

I think you've missed my point.   I wasn't defending at all deforestation or anything else that harms the planet.

 

I was pointing out why people might hate those two idiots.

[jgtuk]

1 hour ago, worth_the_wait said:

I think you've missed my point.   I wasn't defending at all deforestation or anything else that harms the planet.

 

I was pointing out why people might hate those two idiots.

Apologies, I misinterprated your words, you sounded as though you were saying that that particular rationale justified the ends.

This sort of proves a point though, why can some people focus on the symbolism of a tree over the destruction of a rainforest (and every other ecosystem we come across) when it's so blatantly obvious that the latter is already wreaking havoc...

Actually, I'm not going to pursue this topic anymore, I've seen  @leicsmac debate in a really diplomatic way (with science backed facts) and people still deny or downplay it.

 

 

[The Bear]

You can be angry at both. 

 

A couple of complete weapons destroying local history will obviously cause more immediate online fury that something which has been going on for decades, and which world governments have been letting happen. 

[leicsmac]

2 minutes ago, The Bear said:

You can be angry at both. 

 

A couple of complete weapons destroying local history will obviously cause more immediate online fury that something which has been going on for decades, and which world governments have been letting happen. 

Yeah.

 

Even if the latter will, in the end, be responsible for a toll of misery orders of magnitude higher than the former.

 

Edit: and that's the true art of science communication; you can't sidestep that lack of rationality, so you have to account for it and make things work in spite of it.

Edited 10 May 2025 by leicsmac

[leicsmac]

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/robert-kennedy-jr-swimming-park-water-high-bacteria/story?id=121734979

 

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. shared photos of himself submerged in Washington, D.C.'s Rock Creek with his grandchildren, despite longstanding warnings that high bacterial levels make the Potomac River tributary unsafe.

"Mother's Day hike in Dumbarton Oaks Park with Amaryllis, Bobby, Kick, and Jackson, and a swim with my grandchildren, Bobcat and Cassius in Rock Creek," RFK Jr. wrote alongside four photos from the outing posted to X on Sunday.

The photos show the 71-year-old member of President Donald Trump's administration both sitting in the water and completely submerging in the shallow creek.

 

Turns out that even if you don't believe in naegleria fowleri, it may believe in you, Mr Kennedy. I guess we'll find out.
 

[dsr-burnley]

On 13/05/2025 at 08:18, leicsmac said:

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/robert-kennedy-jr-swimming-park-water-high-bacteria/story?id=121734979

 

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. shared photos of himself submerged in Washington, D.C.'s Rock Creek with his grandchildren, despite longstanding warnings that high bacterial levels make the Potomac River tributary unsafe.

"Mother's Day hike in Dumbarton Oaks Park with Amaryllis, Bobby, Kick, and Jackson, and a swim with my grandchildren, Bobcat and Cassius in Rock Creek," RFK Jr. wrote alongside four photos from the outing posted to X on Sunday.

The photos show the 71-year-old member of President Donald Trump's administration both sitting in the water and completely submerging in the shallow creek.

 

Turns out that even if you don't believe in naegleria fowleri, it may believe in you, Mr Kennedy. I guess we'll find out.
 

If he's lived a lifetime of contact with bacteria, he'll be more resistant to it than someone who hasn't.  Chances are he'll be fine.

[leicsmac]

13 minutes ago, dsr-burnley said:

If he's lived a lifetime of contact with bacteria, he'll be more resistant to it than someone who hasn't.  Chances are he'll be fine.

The key word in this sentence. He'll, he, himself, singular. Self being the only important thing.

 

He may well be fine (naegleria being something that will mess you up regardless of immunity to other things notwithstanding), but it's not exactly the best example to set to follow for other people, is it?

Edited 14 May 2025 by leicsmac

[dsr-burnley]

50 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

The key word in this sentence. He'll, he, himself, singular. Self being the only important thing.

 

He may well be fine (naegleria being something that will mess you up regardless of immunity to other things notwithstanding), but it's not exactly the best example to set to follow for other people, is it?

You can't live your life doing everything with a view to what other people will think.  If he's happy, and the parents of the children are happy, anyone else can make up their own minds.

[leicsmac]

14 minutes ago, dsr-burnley said:

You can't live your life doing everything with a view to what other people will think.  If he's happy, and the parents of the children are happy, anyone else can make up their own minds.

The man isn't a private citizen off the street.

 

He's the Secretary for Health and Human Services for the United States of America.

[SpacedX]

2 hours ago, dsr-burnley said:

You can't live your life doing everything with a view to what other people will think.  If he's happy, and the parents of the children are happy, anyone else can make up their own minds.

Absolutely ludicrous post. He's in the public eye and high accountability - side from being the US Health Secretary ffs. This is grossly irresponsible.

 

Because much of the American populace have a great track record when it comes to "making up their own minds" don't they - particularly when it comes to public health.. 

 

By your flawed logic it would be perfectly fine for him to continue to deter parents rom vaccinating their children due to a claimed link to autism. Because, y'know, you ca't live yur life doing everything with a view tor what other people will think.

 

Pure populist drivel. 

 

 

[blabyboy]

Stux-like virus infiltrated into NatGrid. Just leaving that here.

[dsr-burnley]

2 hours ago, SpacedX said:

Absolutely ludicrous post. He's in the public eye and high accountability - side from being the US Health Secretary ffs. This is grossly irresponsible.

 

Because much of the American populace have a great track record when it comes to "making up their own minds" don't they - particularly when it comes to public health.. 

 

By your flawed logic it would be perfectly fine for him to continue to deter parents rom vaccinating their children due to a claimed link to autism. Because, y'know, you ca't live yur life doing everything with a view tor what other people will think.

 

Pure populist drivel. 

 

 

Are you so aggressive in real life, or just on the internet?  There are ways to disagree that don't need to involve abuse.  And also there are ways to disagree without inventing something I haven't said and disagreeing with that too.  

[SpacedX]

1 hour ago, dsr-burnley said:

Are you so aggressive in real life, or just on the internet?  There are ways to disagree that don't need to involve abuse.  And also there are ways to disagree without inventing something I haven't said and disagreeing with that too.  

It's a forum - my apologies if it comes across that way - and there was no "abuse". I remarked on your flawed logic, called your comment ludicrous and populist drivel, which is was. There was no personal or ad hominem attack, rather a rebuke of your opinionated, rather needless post. I'm genuinely sorry if that offends you. Perhaps however, as suggested previously, you shouldn't be such a contrarian purely for the sake of it. 

 

Reread what you wrote. It's absurd. 

[dsr-burnley]

4 hours ago, SpacedX said:

It's a forum - my apologies if it comes across that way - and there was no "abuse". I remarked on your flawed logic, called your comment ludicrous and populist drivel, which is was. There was no personal or ad hominem attack, rather a rebuke of your opinionated, rather needless post. I'm genuinely sorry if that offends you. Perhaps however, as suggested previously, you shouldn't be such a contrarian purely for the sake of it. 

 

Reread what you wrote. It's absurd. 

OK, if that's what passes for politeness in your world.

[Grebfromgrebland]

 

https://www.theguardian.com/society/ng-interactive/2025/may/17/uk-government-drops-healthy-eating-push-after-lobbying-by-ultra-processed-food-firms

[leicsmac]

Reading a particular sci fi novel right now, and this paragraph stood out.

 

"Fleshers [humans as they are right now] used to spin fantasies about aliens arriving to ‘conquer’ Earth, to steal their ‘precious’ physical resources, to wipe them out for fear of ‘competition’…as if a species capable of making the journey wouldn’t have had the power, or the wit, or the imagination, to rid itself of obsolete biological imperatives. Conquering the Galaxy is what bacteria with spaceships would do – knowing no better, having no choice."

 

I do think a lot of our preconceived ideas about alien spacefaring civilisation, if indeed there is such thing any out there, is based on our own (relatively) primitive mindset towards life and so is in all likelihood totally bullshit.

[blabyboy]

You might be right because how could we know what aliens think like, it is alien to us after all.

 

Relative to what...?

 

[leicsmac]

55 minutes ago, blabyboy said:

You might be right because how could we know what aliens think like, it is alien to us after all.

 

Relative to what...?

 

Exactly.

 

And relative to a civilisation that has managed - by whatever method - to master travel over hundreds or thousands of light years, I think it's highly likely that our more tribal concepts and viewpoints on life would be considered entirely backwards to them.

[leicsmac]

Not a great showing on Starship Flight 9.

 

That's three bad goes in a row.

[Jon the Hat]

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

Not a great showing on Starship Flight 9.

 

That's three bad goes in a row.

"Move fast, break things" in action.  In theory they learn ,more this way, lets hope they are sensible enough to pull back to safety when they put people in them to the moon.

[leicsmac]

1 hour ago, Jon the Hat said:

"Move fast, break things" in action.  In theory they learn ,more this way, lets hope they are sensible enough to pull back to safety when they put people in them to the moon.

It's a long time since they've taken this many attempts to get something totally right, though.

 

That being said, they are now moving into rocket engineering that is higher in terms of power - and therefore complexity - than anything our species has done before.

[SpacedX]

21 hours ago, leicsmac said:

It's a long time since they've taken this many attempts to get something totally right, though.

 

That being said, they are now moving into rocket engineering that is higher in terms of power - and therefore complexity - than anything our species has done before.

Precisely, and this in infinitely more complex that the same rapid prototyping and hardware rich philosophy that was so successful in the development of Falcon. They will continue to learn, iterate, and iterate over and over again until they figure it out. I think one of the most challenging aspects of Flight 9 was the higher angle of attack on the descent of Super Heavy. By increasing the amount of atmospheric drag on the vehicle through this, they can achieve a lower descent speed, which in turn requires less propellant for the initial landing burn. Rather than risking a launch tower, they opted for a hard splashdown - unfortunately, it broke apart at the start of the landing burn. 

[ajthefox]

Most of swiss village wiped out by glacier collapse. Most of the village had been evacuated already thankfully as they had been monitoring this and knew it was coming. One person still missing though.

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/swiss-alps-glacier-collapse-switzerland-blatten-b2759715.html

 

As you were - business as usual.

[leicsmac]

17 hours ago, ajthefox said:

Most of swiss village wiped out by glacier collapse. Most of the village had been evacuated already thankfully as they had been monitoring this and knew it was coming. One person still missing though.

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/swiss-alps-glacier-collapse-switzerland-blatten-b2759715.html

 

As you were - business as usual.

The laws of thermodynamics are neither fair nor can be reasoned with. 

 

Far too many people take the way things are now for granted at their own - and everyone else's - extreme peril. 

[leicsmac]

"Say hello, Wernher von Braun and all of Operation Paperclip."