Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Exploration (Score 2) 562

You will never be able to top the humankind to explore. You could delay it, but never stop it. So probably we will be in space, even if on Earth the famine, and pollution, and war, and... will be present.This is the human nature. So why not try to allocate some resources and set some ambitious goals? Like going to Moon and Mars? Like colonizing Moon and/or Mars? Like mining the asteroid belt? On this day there are a lot of private companies and venture capitalist interested in space. NASA has the knowhow, they have the money. Lets do it!

Comment General atitude (Score 1) 292

I have noticed that the writers of sci-fi, fantasy and the same have more or less some scientific or engineering background. This exclude them for the "mainstream" literature. There lives the opinion that only the classic education makes you a "real" writer. I am very curious how many "real" writers could mend their own computers? One more thing. Just ask how many from the Apollo crew got in to engineering because Asimov or C. Clarke. The face of today was molded by the sci-fi writers of the '50s, '60s and '70s.

Comment cost of non-metric (Score 1) 2288

I believe there are a LOT of hidden costs, and a lot of cost because of mistakes. I think this scenario has happened a lot of times: A US company receive a order for spare parts. A big one, for some equipment produced somewhere in Europe, but the US company has a good price and solid know-how. The parts are produced, packed and shipped, lets say in Africa. At destination the engineers are unable to use them because the original equipment is metric, and the parts are imperial (think only of nuts and bolts). The US company scrambles and in under 2 weeks fixes the problem, but has to pay for 2 weeks delay and shipment, and is keeping the parts nobody can use. Sounds familiar?

Comment Re:And I pray the opposite... (Score 1) 735

I have to this point, never seen science prove evolution; we look at effects and think we know the cause, but we never recreate the cause and prove the effect. Until I see that, it is just another theory in footing with any other that has the same weakness.

Antibiotic resistant bacteria? The beauty of science is that not one single model or theory is absolute. Science is evolving! In my opinion one can be a religious scientist. It is a little schizoid but it is possible to be a very good scientist. Please goggle Guy J. Consolmagno. "Religion needs science to keep it away from superstition and keep it close to reality, to protect it from creationism, which at the end of the day is a kind of paganism – it's turning God into a nature god."

Comment Re:And I pray the opposite... (Score 1) 735

Hmmm. Do not remember now, but i believe that some court decided that creationism is nor science, is a form of religion. Science is something you can proof, experiment, validate, test, repeat, modify.... Religion is dogma. The two are things totally separate. In the science field one can not operate only with beliefs. The models used in science can be inaccurate, or wrong, or stupid and you abandon them when they tested wrong and you construct another model better suited with reality. Religion is a conscience matter. And i believe that one of the fundamental liberties is the liberty of conscience. If somebody tries to force on me some religious beliefs, i get nervous... :| And which creationism theory is the "real" one, Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist (incomplete list...)?

Slashdot Top Deals

An authority is a person who can tell you more about something than you really care to know.

Working...