AD Posted February 4, 2003 Report Share Posted February 4, 2003 And the Space Program is the stuff that dreams are made of. Everyone I know wanted to be an astronaut. I'm sure many many people still want to travel in space. Not to mention space exploration may answer countless questions about ourselves, our situation, the rest of the universe, etc... To the person whowas saying they wanted good news once in a while; I've noticed lately that local news stations are conciously trying to work more positive stories into their telecasts, but the easiest way to avoid the bad news is to ignore it. Not that I suggest that in any way; Stuff can be learned in any situation, even if the lesson is critical thinking and how to distrust media (a very healthy trait). ad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Low Roller Posted February 4, 2003 Report Share Posted February 4, 2003 I wouldn't blame American sensationalism on the coverage of the Columbia disaster Willy. Not to discount the avalanche in B.C. that killed 7 high school students or the train crash that killed 34 people, those are tragedies all on their own, but I think we're dealing with a different beast entirely with this shuttle crash. In the entire history of the space program an aircraft has never burned up on re-entry. We're no longer talking about human loss, but we're also talking about massive technological failure. Even the constant bombardment of American warmongering propaganda, that will results in thousands of deaths until the US has their way, took a backseat to the news coverage of the space shuttle (albeit Bush got his chimp face on TV to spew a catchphrase as a reminder of his staggering care for the US citizens for years to come.) I think here in Canada, CBC and Newsworld covered both the avalanche and the shuttle disasters very well. On CNN the avalanche in BC probably got the same press coverage as a tornado in Texas would get up here. I don't know, I'm tired, maybe I'm just rambling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Low Roller Posted February 4, 2003 Report Share Posted February 4, 2003 Imagine if the debris had scattered over the middle east instead of Texas... Anybody think that the war would've already started? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arcane Posted February 4, 2003 Report Share Posted February 4, 2003 That's assuming you trust the buggers in the first place. I don't, partly because the science can't have been tested fully in the first place; partly because there are too many people and moving parts involved in this project; partly because during twenty years, the continuity of operation is going to be spotty at best; partly because the people with enough brain power to make this thing happen are more likely to be too arrogant to admit the possibility of failure; partly because in general, people deliberately try to sweep their own errors under the rug; partly because people won't fix something that's Not Their Problem; partly because I have a good gut feel for everyday statistics (including MTBF); and partly because above and beyond the possibility of routine screw-ups, I believe in the existance of Murphy particles, and they're partisan players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arcane Posted February 4, 2003 Report Share Posted February 4, 2003 (That having been said, trusting in complicated science and engineering is an act of faith, just like any other religion. The shuttle astronauts trusted the technology, but they had no way of knowing for sure if that bird would land safely. That's the case for every shuttle mission. The one thing they could count on as undeniable fact is that humans can't breathe vacuum. My darlings, it was faith, pure and simple, whether they prayed to God or prayed to NASA to bring them down alive and whole.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieDon'tSurf Posted February 4, 2003 Report Share Posted February 4, 2003 quote:Originally posted by arcane: My darlings, it was faith, pure and simple, whether they prayed to God or prayed to NASA to bring them down alive and whole.)funny thing is, this god in question wrote the equations that were meant to get them there and back again... on the other hand, she/he only provided the inspiration for The Book that garners so much faith... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
h Posted February 4, 2003 Report Share Posted February 4, 2003 i'm a little lost. i dont trust them ofcourse not, but i do believe i've felt secure with them as neighbours - at least from the outside world - deservedly or not - though ofcourse i'm always wary of the invasion of the south - though i dont think they want to inherit our problems haha. re space travel - i was under the impression that it's all math and i have a lot of faith in math - (probably cuz i cant do it) though yeah, there are a lot of egos tossing that math around - but i hope that their brightest rocket scientists work together better than the 'high tech' computer companies ive seen running in ottawa. As that is my only point of reference i do think that i'll take the blind faith step to believe they can work together as a team better than that. I mean if you bring it down to faith that they'll get home - isnt that the same simple faith you have every time you step out of your house that you arent going to get run over by a car? have i lost the point? i dont think i disagree with you - i'm think i was just too dumb (tired?) to follow you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weezy Posted February 5, 2003 Report Share Posted February 5, 2003 I like how the first reports (and the second and third) all felt the need to mention "...we don't think terrorism was involved, but we haven't discounted the possibility yet..." Weren't they at 200,000 feet when it broke-apart? Does Al-Quaida have fucking spaceships now? Are they looking for an excuse to bomb the shiat out of the estradosphere? Why even mention terrorism, when it clearly is an impossibility? Same with the explosion in N. Carolina - all the reports had to mention a small plane was in the area, but they don't think terrorists were flying it and it probably didn't cause the explosion ...but maybe. I gotta go, my doorbell just rang - I better hide.... it might be terrorists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Low Roller Posted February 5, 2003 Report Share Posted February 5, 2003 Well, it clearly is an impossibility for anybody with a shred of common sense, but this is the american press we're talking about. Besides all the big stories that have been happening in the past year and a half have been the work of "terrorists": WTC and the Pentagon, bomb in Bali, the shoe bomber, DC snipers, COUNTLESS suicide bombers in Israel, COUNTLESS missile attacks in Palestine, not to mention the destruction of Afganistan with the second largest weapon ever used by mankind. I think that the media is so used to using "terrorist" as a punchline for everything, that they were simply caught unprepared over the shuttle disaster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AD Posted February 5, 2003 Report Share Posted February 5, 2003 quote: Originally posted by arcane: partly because the people with enough brain power to make this thing happen are more likely to be too arrogant to admit the possibility of failure; That is the last thing I'd say about a NASA engineer. They have enough failsafes to catch flaws; it has nothing to do with the perceived arragance. They put a man on the moon! They're building a skyscraper in space! They're hugely careful; It's not the same as driving to 7-11. We (the laypeople) have no idea what goes into the space program! As such, we have no right to be name-calling any of the engineers who built the program from dreams, especially now. Think if you had a car accident, and everyone stopped and yelled that it was your fault... Dissent is fine, but not based on speculative emotion alone. On the other hand, this is the Internet; everyone's an expert.. ad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vermontdave Posted February 5, 2003 Report Share Posted February 5, 2003 Being the only person from the States who seems to post I gotta say I agree on the bashing we deserve for being arrogant and blowing up or invading anyone who disagrees with us. This is THE scariest administration in my lifetime ( which means scarier than Reagan) and I live in a state that sends a socialist to D.C. so W. doesn't like us much anyway.The media are putting the word terrorist in front of all their reports and the general mood of the public is downright ugly (They're not listening to the right music I think ). Whether or not it's right to spend all that money on space when it could be spent on helping people here on earth, those people were fucking brave to strap themselves onto tons of explosives, ignite it, and shoot into outer space. Anyway, thanks for letting me rant. Peace Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arcane Posted February 5, 2003 Report Share Posted February 5, 2003 quote:Originally posted by AD: They have enough failsafes to catch flawsI'd say the ground caught the ones that didn't burn up in the atmosphere this time. quote:We (the laypeople) have no idea what goes into the space program! As such, we have no right to be name-calling any of the engineers who built the program from dreams, especially now. One, I'm not pointing fingers at anyone in particular. I didn't mention engineers. Two, it takes more than just engineers to pull off this trick. A lot more. Three, I've met rocket scientists, and from what I've seen, they're as neurotic as the rest of us, maybe more. Four, I *am* an engineer. Anyone stuck in that position is going to be prone to arrogance, pure and simple. This isn't to say that it must happen to all individuals. It's a crap shoot every time one of those birds goes up. Failsafes are there because things DO fail. The laws of probability say that sometimes improbable things will happen. Good grief. I don't trust my car, much less a space shuttle. That doesn't mean I don't respect the efforts involved--it just means that I recognize human limitations, including the potential for one small feat of ignorance, arrogance, stupidity or improbability to destroy several lives and millions, if not billions, of dollars of effort in one fell swoop. It happened with the Challenger--the fact that the breakdown history was not presented clearly to the appropriate people led to a bad decision to launch. That was a simple (and well documented) act of human ignorance. quote:They're hugely careful; It's not the same as driving to 7-11.And look at the problems we get into just driving to the 7-11. If anything, that idea just strengthens my point. Not everyone that causes a car accident is an idiot. If they were, we'd have a great way of chlorinating the gene pool. (This is fallacy, really--smart people don't always breed true; neither do stupid people. And smart people can show some really bad judgement.) Engineers, scientists, project managers, politicians, financiers, purchasers, technicians, janitors ... all human, all fallible. NOBODY understands the shuttle well enough to guarantee that nothing can slip through the cracks (so to speak). If they did, there would be no invention, no innovation, no improvement. Failure teaches us to avoid doing the same dumbass thing twice. Again to the failsafes--they didn't all evolve out of lab tests. There is no way to play out every scenario in a lab. Even if there were, there is no way that a lab can replace the real operational environment, unless that environment *is* a lab. And then we add Factor X--The Human Factor. If something is designed to operate three ways, someone will find a fourth. Who reads the manuals? Even better, who memorizes the manuals? I don't, and I write the damned things. Are the people that write the documentation perfect? Heck no, and the Challenger explosion proved that. Technology is not perfect. Communication is not perfect. Humans are not perfect. Always question the process. Always question the system. It is not necessarily an act of malice to point out flaws in the work of others. *That* is how engineers must and do work together. But even mutual QA does not guarantee perfection. We are not gods, and we must never make the mistake of assuming infallibility in each other. Neither should we make the mistake of confusing malice or incompetence with curable or understandable errors of process or judgement. Experts are neither omnipotent nor machines. I'm not inclined to dehumanize them, as much as they or others might try to do so. Perhaps that is why I have so few heroes. Perhaps that is why I have so many heroes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arcane Posted February 5, 2003 Report Share Posted February 5, 2003 h, when you're more awake, see if you can sort out an answer to your question in my monologue. Now *I'm* the tired one. By the way, I wasn't drawing any national lines. When it comes to tossing big machines into the sky, I'm interested in the people and the machines, not the politics. People are basically the same everywhere, modulo idiosyncracies that come out of socialization. Sure, this is reflected in design approach and execution, but I'd like to think that that doesn't make a thing good or bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AD Posted February 5, 2003 Report Share Posted February 5, 2003 Arcane, Good points, I agree with everything you said (I think...) My point of view is just that I wouldn't have said what you said. If there's one branch of science right now I do trust, it's the space program. Biotech scares the crap out of me; flying a rocket, now that's cool! Society needs these failures, let's not forget. How much safer are airplanes, cars, trains, space shuttles, pop cans, etc.. because of past accidents? Like you said, improbable things are always possible. Sucks when they happen, but neccesary and important when they do. So tired...... ad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arcane Posted February 5, 2003 Report Share Posted February 5, 2003 And then there is this "HOLY SHIT!!! That thing could have landed on my pickup truck!!" factor. Avalanches and train wrecks are Over There, but no matter where you go, the sky is still over your head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
h Posted February 5, 2003 Report Share Posted February 5, 2003 and like it or not canadians do enjoy a certain sense of security having those huge bastards next door to us - and in a time like this when suddenly they're being totally war hungry and we're feeling a little more vulnerable - when something like this happens - when their "manhood" fizzles out in the sky like a cheap fire cracker - infront of the whole world's eyes - i think canadians stop to take notice - not only for the humanitarian reasons, but for a slightly different "holy shit" factor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
h Posted February 5, 2003 Report Share Posted February 5, 2003 i'm still lost. i like rockets. astronaughts are hot. not as hot as irish farm boys. um go team? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gentlemonkey Posted February 5, 2003 Report Share Posted February 5, 2003 I'm second that!! Irish farm boys are the shit! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
h Posted February 5, 2003 Report Share Posted February 5, 2003 oh this is the bath rooom - well now things are starting to make some sense! There's a Crichton on Farscape ? interesting! when i first read it i jumped straight to red dwarf (and then to junkyard wars) and that Crichton i'm sorry is not hot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradm Posted February 5, 2003 Report Share Posted February 5, 2003 quote: Originally posted by h: oh this is the bath rooom - well now things are starting to make some sense! There's a Crichton on Farscape ? interesting! when i first read it i jumped straight to red dwarf (and then to junkyard wars) and that Crichton i'm sorry is not hot. Do you mean Robot Wars rather than Junkyard Wars? Aloha, Brad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arcane Posted February 6, 2003 Report Share Posted February 6, 2003 Oi! The Crichton on Red Dwarf is actually a Kryton (I believe); the guy on Robot Wars is Craig Charles, who plays Dave Lister on Red Dwarf. On Farscape, astronaut John Crichton is played by Ben Browder, whom I would like to undress with my teeth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arcane Posted February 6, 2003 Report Share Posted February 6, 2003 quote:Originally posted by AD: Biotech scares the crap out of meThat could have been handy a few years ago. Back in grad school (ummm, biotech), the guy in the lab next door to mine had a project brewing human solid waste. The frightening thing is that it was by no means the worst smelling stuff in the building (and I have a pretty good sense of smell). Biotech is fascinating, but it sure can smell funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arcane Posted February 6, 2003 Report Share Posted February 6, 2003 quote: Originally posted by h: i'm still lost. There you are, in the bathroom. Go on, have a look. See yourself? You're there, right? quote: astronaughts are hot. not as hot as irish farm boys. The guy that plays Crichton on "Farscape," now he's smokin'. Mmmm, mmm, SciFi goodness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
h Posted February 6, 2003 Report Share Posted February 6, 2003 ok i'll bump this up - i'm not afraid to proclaim my Red Dwarf nerdiness Right - Kryten for sure - he does cohost Junkyard wars - it's just hard to recognize him. Robert Llewellen? something like that oh heres a link... http://tlc.discovery.com/fansites/junkyard/bio/host_03.html I had NO IDEA that Lister was on Robot Wars! I'll have to check that out. I only see that show if i'm walking through the room when doug has the tv control. i find that other Crighton's eyes a little odd, but i've never seen farscape. I'm still stuck on Dirk Benedict anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
h Posted February 6, 2003 Report Share Posted February 6, 2003 oh wow. ok thanks arcane - glad to see you've had some time to come post lately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.