Is the Scientific Process, Standards of Proof ignored by NASA Supporters?

[Luke Pemberton]

A little politeness can go a long way towards making an otherwise dreary day a little bit brighter.

Absolutely, which is why I found the manner with which Romulus entered the forum so frustrating, and it is becoming typical of many CTs I have encountered. I know that I am looking at this through reasonable eyes, I just can't understand their bad manners (his bigotry aside). Can they not see that they are letting their side down? As LO says, he would never censor anyone for expressing hoax beliefs, but what thought processes go through the heads of people like Romulus? To barge in, refuse to be accountable for his claim and throw a tantrum because no one accepts his argument without question. Was he layering himself in a protective cloak because he knew that he would not stand up to scrutiny and be out of his depth? Is that what all the bluster and claims of super-intelligence was about?

[Zakalwe]

To barge in, refuse to be accountable for his evidence and throw a tantrum because no one accepts his argument without question. Was he layering himself in a protective cloak because he knew that he would not stand up to scrutiny and be out of his depth? Is that what all the bluster and claims of super-intelligence was about?

IMHO, almost certainly. It's the tactic of the bully...trying to use force to make others accept his argument.  Most normal people when presented with this approach will recognise the trouble-maker and quietly retreat. Which allows the bully to, incorrectly, assume that his argument is in order, instead of realising that he is getting no responses because 99% of normal people will not converse with people like that.

The same thing happens in real-life. If you are walking down the street and you see a guy who's obviously drunk and being obnoxious or violent then you will cross the street to avoid an encounter, safe in the knowledge that reasoned debate will not be listened to and you are likely to end up in a scuffle for your efforts. It's left to the Police (in this case Lunar Orbit) to remove the individual to prevent him ruining the pavement (or forum) for everyone else. The only place that such people get attention is in a room full of other drunken idiots (aka GLP). The obnoxious drunk can then carry the delusion in his head that he is the smartest/wittiest/toughest baddass in town, up to the point that he finds himself pinned to the floor with the handcuffs being applied.

To a normal person, GLP is like walking sober into a room full of these drunks whilst wearing a suit of armour. You can poke and prod them and then watch them explode into a fit of incoherent rage and spittle-flecked apoplexy safe in the knowledge that a black-eye will not be the result. OK, you might get chucked out every now and then, but the room will still be full of loons.

 

[Luke Pemberton]

That is an excellent analogy. I had heard GLP mentioned a few times before Romulus's entry, but never gave the place much thought. I have taken a sneaky look at it over the last few days given IDW/Romulus's foray here. It really is like a bar full of drunks spouting whatever thought enters their head. Suffice to say, I will observe from a distance. 

[Zakalwe]

That is an excellent analogy. I had heard GLP mentioned a few times before Romulus's entry, but never gave the place much thought. I have taken a sneaky look at it over the last few days given IDW/Romulus's foray here. It really is like a bar full of drunks spouting whatever thought enters their head. Suffice to say, I will observe from a distance. 

I dropped in a couple of times to poke IDW in the eye. It's a bit like badger-baiting except that it's a lot kinder to dumb animals....

[Dr.Acula]

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”. Obvious it would make much more sense to send an animal before man. The NASA used some monkeys* but they didn’t go beyond low Earth orbit, as far as the public information goes. The Russians did sent a tortoises* around the moon in September 1968. The following 1968 American news article confirms what Titov said in 1966. Were is the record of NASA landing animals* on the moon? Wake up people the whole Apollo project is losing all common sense.
Translation Dutch clipping 1966,
“Meanwhile, President de Gaulle, Harold Wilson and the Indian President congratulated the Russians with their amazing technical achievement. During a press conference in Moscow are numerous assumptions expressed about what the Russians plans are now. Cosmonaut Titov pointed to the possibility that dogs will send to the moon before there letting people land. Presumably, the Soviets also plan a manned flight around the moon, before people do land.”
* We do strongly disagree that animals are used for these kind of experiments.

[Zakalwe]

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”. Obvious it would make much more sense to send an animal before man. The NASA used some monkeys* but they didn’t go beyond low Earth orbit, as far as the public information goes. The Russians did sent a tortoises* around the moon in September 1968. The following 1968 American news article confirms what Titov said in 1966. Were is the record of NASA landing animals* on the moon? Wake up people the whole Apollo project is losing all common sense.
Translation Dutch clipping 1966,
“Meanwhile, President de Gaulle, Harold Wilson and the Indian President congratulated the Russians with their amazing technical achievement. During a press conference in Moscow are numerous assumptions expressed about what the Russians plans are now. Cosmonaut Titov pointed to the possibility that dogs will send to the moon before there letting people land. Presumably, the Soviets also plan a manned flight around the moon, before people do land.”
* We do strongly disagree that animals are used for these kind of experiments.

Argument from incredulity.
So Adrian reckons that unless you landed an animal first then you couldn't land a man? What nonsense! Where were the first chimps to break the sound barrier? Why was there no elephants sent to the bottom of the Marianas Trench before Piccard and Welsh went down? heck, you could play that game about any scenario. Why were there no trained parrots in the room before the first computer was switched on?   

Sheesh...does that boy have nothing better to do with his time than spew drivel 24/7??? 

[Dr.Acula]

Argument from incredulity.
So Adrian reckons that unless you landed an animal first then you couldn't land a man? What nonsense! Where were the first chimps to break the sound barrier? Why was there no elephants sent to the bottom of the Marianas Trench before Piccard and Welsh went down? heck, you could play that game about any scenario. Why were there no trained parrots in the room before the first computer was switched on?   

Sheesh...does that boy have nothing better to do with his time than spew drivel 24/7??? 

It's his life. He wants to be a hero by uncovering a worldwide hoax.

[frenat]

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”. Obvious it would make much more sense to send an animal before man. The NASA used some monkeys* but they didn’t go beyond low Earth orbit, as far as the public information goes. The Russians did sent a tortoises* around the moon in September 1968. The following 1968 American news article confirms what Titov said in 1966. Were is the record of NASA landing animals* on the moon? Wake up people the whole Apollo project is losing all common sense.
Translation Dutch clipping 1966,
“Meanwhile, President de Gaulle, Harold Wilson and the Indian President congratulated the Russians with their amazing technical achievement. During a press conference in Moscow are numerous assumptions expressed about what the Russians plans are now. Cosmonaut Titov pointed to the possibility that dogs will send to the moon before there letting people land. Presumably, the Soviets also plan a manned flight around the moon, before people do land.”
* We do strongly disagree that animals are used for these kind of experiments.

Argument from incredulity.
So Adrian reckons that unless you landed an animal first then you couldn't land a man? What nonsense! Where were the first chimps to break the sound barrier? Why was there no elephants sent to the bottom of the Marianas Trench before Piccard and Welsh went down? heck, you could play that game about any scenario. Why were there no trained parrots in the room before the first computer was switched on?   

Sheesh...does that boy have nothing better to do with his time than spew drivel 24/7??? 

That argument comes up on GLP often.  They seem to think it is some kind of safety issue.  They don't realize that by that time the conditions were either already known, and could be found out/had been found out by probe and that developing an automated craft to send monkeys first was just a waste of time and money.

[JayUtah]

So Adrian reckons that unless you landed an animal first then you couldn't land a man? What nonsense!

Indeed, it's cargo-cult reasoning.  "The Russians used animals a certain way, therefore the Americans should use them in the same way."

And while he says it's obvious that animals should be sent before humans, he morally objects to it.  I'm having a hard time reconciling that.  It either makes sense or it doesn't.  He can't have both his line of reasoning and his indignance, because his indignance provides one reason he doesn't consider for perhaps not having used animals for further testing.  But in my experience, such a rebuttal is far too complex for Adrian to grasp.

[JayUtah]

That argument comes up on GLP often.  They seem to think it is some kind of safety issue.

I'm not sure how that would work.  If you send a spacecraft aloft and it malfunctions, it will do so with or without a tortoise or chimpanzee aboard.  In fact, you might needlessly harm an animal by putting it in an untried ship.  The spacecraft itself isn't any safer somehow with a passive living specimen aboard, and the testing of the equipment for eventual use by humans doesn't require an animal being present in order for its operators to detect a hazardous condition.  Indeed, in some cases mission safety and success is enhanced by having a highly-trained, creative pilot on board to deal with unexpected conditions.

MR-2 was indeed the final qualification flight, but Ham wasn't aboard to test the spacecraft -- which incidentally malfunctioned and would have killed him had he not been in his own isolated environment.  Ham was there to test primate physiology in space, the ability to carry out complex tasks in microgravity.  That's only tangentially related to safety, and doesn't need to be done repeatedly.

[gillianren]

Lets not even consider the dreaded toilet seat conundrum other than to say that if it's up and you need it down, then just put it down. And, if it's down and you need it up, then just put it up. Life's too short to be worrying about such things.

I flush with the lid down completely.  More sanitary.

But you know, I'm generally a very polite person.  I joke that the reason I say, "You're welcome!" to the card reader machines at the store is that it says thank you first, 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.

[ka9q]

Lets not even consider the dreaded toilet seat conundrum other than to say that if it's up and you need it down, then just put it down. And, if it's down and you need it up, then just put it up. Life's too short to be worrying about such things.

Yeah!

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...

[ka9q]

And we won't even mention how Newton's First Law of Motion is repealed when you live together...

[Luke Pemberton]

...but I impressed a friend with my parenting because I say please and thank you and so forth to Simon all the time.

Fantastic parenting, I wish all parents would show the same investment. Children are shaped the moment they arrive in this world, every reaffirming smile, teaching them shapes and colours, counting with them, playing games, reading to them and so forth. Every little investment helps.

[gillianren]

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.