BaalChatzaf Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 I wanted to share my blog with you. I've had it up for some time now, but i wanted to get quite a bit of content added before i started linking it it is at http://templeofthehu....wordpress.com/here is an example of the contentLet me know what you think Why not the Large Hadron Collider? It is built for a greater purpose (to find out how the universe works), it is built better by better people. But no. You chose a badly built Rocket Ship because its is so Romantic and so Heroic. Tell me sport, did a Romantic, Heroic adventure get us a base on the Moon (I am referring to Apollo)? What did STS ever produce except a near circular orbit. The only good thing that ever came of the STS mission was the repair on the Hubble Space Telescope which is closer to an artifact for the Temple of the Spirit of Man.Ba'al Chatzaf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiaer.ts Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 Bob, can you make a helpful, constructive criticism? Do you think a picture of Venter's lab will provide a dramatic image? Or that the space shot, however crappy the shuttle program, isn't dramatic? Do you get such a high from bitching about things that you cannot understand the goal here and contribute towards it rather than kvetching? Or are you just an average, run of the mill Objectionist?Image. How about the reality? I do not object to first rate accomplishments at all. I do object to the cheap, the mendacious and the ill thought out and the ill done. I refuse to apologize for having standards. The disasters befalling the STS were rewrites of the R101 disaster. The British airship R101 designed by government fiat for the sake of glorifying the government is so like the Shuttle story. The R101 was a true camel. Do you know what a camel is? It is a horse designed by the government. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R101So, in other words, no. Misery is your natural state and you are not happy unless you are miserable. Got it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 So, in other words, no. Misery is your natural state and you are not happy unless you are miserable. Got it.I am not happy with low quality doings. I have standards. Do you?The ironic thing as that the STS had as much free board lifting capacity as did the R101 before they "improved" it to death. Ba'al Chatzaf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 Everybody's a critic reminds me of a quote from Roosevelt "It is not the critic who counts: not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again, because there is no effort without error or shortcoming, but who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, who spends himself for a worthy cause; who, at the best, knows, in the end, the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat."James:Good quote. Mine is "I never met a critic who built a bridge." I do not know the author. Mr. Anon will have to work.I think your images and written comments are excellent. Damn the aspergers, full speed ahead!Sorry Bob, but this is a critique to far in my opinion.Adama little bridge theme shall lead them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiaer.ts Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 I am not happy . . .Yes, Bob, you have made it eminently clear that you are not happy unless you are unhappy. Good luck with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philip Coates Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 > I am not happy with low quality doings. I have standards.I love how people who can only see the negative always proudly claim it's because they have "standards"!Baal, your standards are -false- standards. They don't reflect what is actually prominent or of major importance in reality: the positive things in a sunlit universe.Please reread my detailed post above on this. Did you not get the part about the doughnut and the doughnut hole? I don't know how I could make it any clearer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 Baal, your standards are -false- standards. They don't reflect what is actually prominent or of major importance in reality: the positive things in a sunlit universe.A piece of shit space vehicle that killed two of its crews is not a positive thing in a sunlit universe. The results from the large hadron collider will be better remembered than the wreck prone STS.If there is a space vessel to be remembered, better the Apollo space vehicle which carried the first men to the moon.The J-5 first stage lifter never had a mishap. Ba'al Chatzaf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greybird Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 (edited) Reminds me of a quote from [Theodore] Roosevelt [which I won't repeat, for it disgusts me that T.R.'s primary "arena" was war and preparation for war ... and that, as has been done too often since, was obviously not any sort of a hindrance to giving him the Nobel Peace Prize ... but I digress ~ SR]That would be a good description of Richard Feynman, the physicist. One of his last performances in the Arena (as you put it) was to point out the effect of cold on the rubber seals of the solid-fuel boosters of the STS. It turned out that the management of NASA, afraid to offend the Reagan administration on the matter of putting a "teacher in space," okayed the launch of Challenger under conditions that were in direct violation of safety standards set by NASA and against the best judgment of engineers of Morton Thiokol, who built the boosters. It seems kissing the asses of the politicians takes precedence over the safety of crews. It seems.So Feynman in the Arena made that plain. Now that was a worthy cause and was the triumph of a high achievement. To wit, to show that the management at NASA consists of mendacious, cowardly, lying bastards. Feynman knew he was a dead man, and he had nothing to fear, so he put his impending doom into good public use. Now THAT is being in the Arena. Yes?I very, very rarely agree with Bob Kolker, nor do I wish to reward his usual over-withering cynicism, nor do I typically quote-and-affirm, but here I have to say: YES. I agree with every word Bob wrote here. Annus mirabilis.Oh, and by the way, one speculation that I've long heard about Challenger is that part of the rush to launch was made to give Reagan a video moment from the orbiting crew, to accompany his State of the Union address later that week. I'm not sure how well that's corroborated ... but I wouldn't put it at all past Reagan's own mendacity and bad judgment.And another side note: Every thread drifts, and being perturbed about it is pointless. Preserving an uncluttered focus has never happened and never will. (I'll go back to my winged-art thread soon, for example, now that side discussions have run their apparent course.) Edited February 13, 2011 by Greybird Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiaer.ts Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 It's actually Bush's fault. LOL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellen Stuttle Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 (edited) Why not the Large Hadron Collider? It is built for a greater purpose (to find out how the universe works), it is built better by better people. [....][....]The results from the large hadron collider will be better remembered than the wreck prone STS. [....]The Large Hadron Collider might have been built "for a greater purpose" and "by better people," but be very wary of the results from a project involving enormous sums in government financing, with further enormous sums possible depending on the results, with many livelihoods and reputations entangled with the results.Corruption is spreading in physics -- not "Kantian" corruption, the corruption from old-fashioned greed and prestige desires.As a physicist friend of mine who's well familiar with what's happened on the AGW issue and related funding recently remarked:"They're going to find the Higgs boson -- whether they find it or not."Cynical? Maybe. Likely true? Unfortunately. I figure we'll only be able to trust the findings reports if we're told that the Higgs boson *isn't* found.Ellen Edited February 13, 2011 by Ellen Stuttle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 James,I'm late to this thread, but let me congratulate you on a really good start.I like the concept and I like how you are gathering cool stuff with cool visuals right now.I hope it grows and you get lots and lots of visitors.Best luck to your venture. May your acorn become an oak.Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 FYI:"God particle (physics)" redirects here. For other uses, see God particle. Higgs boson A simulated event, featuring the appearance of the Higgs boson Composition: Elementary particle Particle statistics: Bosonic Status: Hypothetical Theorized: F. Englert, R. Brout, P. Higgs, G. S. Guralnik, C. R. Hagen, and T. W. B. Kibble 1964 Mass: between 115 and 185 GeV/c2 (model-dependent upper bound[1]) Spin: 0 The Higgs boson is a hypothetical massive elementary particle predicted to exist by the Standard Model of particle physics. The existence of the particle is postulated as a means of resolving inconsistencies in current theoretical physics, and attempts are being made to confirm the existence of the particle by experimentation, using the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN and the Tevatron at Fermilab (soon to be closed down).Wijipedia LinkAdamOL = learning on line from a dyslexic perspective Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 "They're going to find the Higgs boson -- whether they find it or not."Cynical? Maybe. Likely true? Unfortunately. I figure we'll only be able to trust the findings reports if we're told that the Higgs boson *isn't* found.EllenNot so fast. If anyone claims to have found the Higgs there are going to be a dozen who will attempt to falsify the claim (by experimental means, of course, or showing there is an error in the original finding). Falsification in science yields as many rewards as verification. Case in point: the Michelson - Morley interferometer experiment. M and M expected to detect motion with respect to the aether (a hypothetical visco elastic space filling substance that carries light waves). What they showed was no indication of aether at all. In effect M and M falsified the kind of aether that Maxwell and others assumed to exist. So Michelson and Morley are now immortal for a falsification, even if it was not their intention to falsify aether. Anyone who claims to have found the Higgs will have a lot of work to do defending his position.It is the process of falsification that keeps physical science honest in the long run.Ba'al Chatzaf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDS Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 It's actually Bush's fault. LOL!I question the timing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 It's actually Bush's fault. LOL!Ted: Hell, you might be right, apparently the Egyptian revolution is also his fault!Egypt Revolution is Bush's Fault!Adam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthony Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 Baal, your standards are -false- standards. They don't reflect what is actually prominent or of major importance in reality: the positive things in a sunlit universe.A piece of shit space vehicle that killed two of its crews is not a positive thing in a sunlit universe. The results from the large hadron collider will be better remembered than the wreck prone STS.If there is a space vessel to be remembered, better the Apollo space vehicle which carried the first men to the moon.The J-5 first stage lifter never had a mishap. Ba'al ChatzafConsquentialism - that which works is better than that which doesn't - is all very well in context, but it's logical outcome is 'don't try, 'cos it might fail.'Can't we not lose sight of the fact that it is the Human Spirit that James is celebrating here, not nuts and bolts, or one engineer's reprehensible error?Tony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 Consquentialism - that which works is better than that which doesn't - is all very well in context, but it's logical outcome is 'don't try, 'cos it might fail.'Can't we not lose sight of the fact that it is the Human Spirit that James is celebrating here, not nuts and bolts, or one engineer's reprehensible error?TonyThe human spirit (brain + muscle) is actualized and instantiated with nuts and bolts. We are the nuts and bolts primate on this planet.Show me a machine that works and I will seek the Hero that made it.Ba'al Chatzaf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiaer.ts Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 It's actually Bush's fault. LOL!Ted: Hell, you might be right, apparently the Egyptian revolution is also his fault!Egypt Revolution is Bush's Fault!AdamWell, I am sorry, but I am just plain sick and tired of liberals like Greybird not giving Bush his due. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthony Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 Consquentialism - that which works is better than that which doesn't - is all very well in context, but it's logical outcome is 'don't try, 'cos it might fail.'Can't we not lose sight of the fact that it is the Human Spirit that James is celebrating here, not nuts and bolts, or one engineer's reprehensible error?TonyThe human spirit (brain + muscle) is actualized and instantiated with nuts and bolts. We are the nuts and bolts primate on this planet.Show me a machine that works and I will seek the Hero that made it.Ba'al ChatzafOh well, that rules out Leonardo da Vinci, and anyone else who had creative vision that didn't come to fruition.The human spirit is not ruled by failure or success, but by endeavor.Check out James' blog, and "IF" by Kipling: the two imposters, triumph and disaster.(James, I sympathize with any bemusement you may feel at the turn this topic has taken.)Tony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiaer.ts Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 Show me a machine that works and I will seek the Hero that made it. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greybird Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 (edited) [...] I am just plain sick and tired of liberals like Greybird not giving Bush his due.It's hard to tell when or if you're being arch, but taking you straight here ...I'd be happy to give Bush (senior or junior, doesn't matter) his due. Just show me which courtroom at The Hague is to be used to try him for war crimes, and where to set up the firing squad upon his conviction.Obama, as well, for that matter, when his time comes to be called to account.In the meantime, none of them (without an armed escort) can leave the U.S., which is fine by me.Anyway, you're admirably exact, as to what most have called it and what most of the world still calls it, if one prefixes the proper word (and the necessary one, these days): I am a classical liberal. Or libertarian. Edited February 14, 2011 by Greybird Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 Show me a machine that works and I will seek the Hero that made it. ?Just find the Rabbi who wants to circumcise Italians...Adam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 Show me a machine that works and I will seek the Hero that made it. ?Dr. Joseph-Ignace Guillotin produced the most painless form of capital execution yet devised. He is a benefactor to that portion of mankind that favors capital execution.It was unfortunate that creatures such as Maximillian Robespierre co-opted it.Ba'al Chatzaf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caroljane Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 Show me a machine that works and I will seek the Hero that made it. ?Dr. Joseph-Ignace Guillotin produced the most painless form of capital execution yet devised. He is a benefactor to that portion of mankind that favors capital execution.It was unfortunate that creatures such as Maximillian Robespierre co-opted it.Ba'al ChatzafThe guillotine has always seemed to me a too-rational pragmatic, unintended =consequence reality of all revolution, all ideas carried to their logical conclusions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiaer.ts Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 (edited) Show me a machine that works and I will seek the Hero that made it. ?Dr. Joseph-Ignace Guillotin produced the most painless form of capital execution yet devised. He is a benefactor to that portion of mankind that favors capital execution.It was unfortunate that creatures such as Maximillian Robespierre co-opted it.Ba'al ChatzafThe guillotine has always seemed to me a too-rational pragmatic, unintended =consequence reality of all revolution, all ideas carried to their logical conclusions.I was going to post a picture of an oven from Auschwitz, but then Bob would have waxed rhapsodic about pizza. Edited February 14, 2011 by Ted Keer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now