LANDSLIDE? Hidden Vote?

**Ranger10** · 11-03-12, 08:29 PM

Originally Posted by WickedTribe

They're not comparable except on a very simplistic level (both had a high probability of failure). One was risky and difficult because of the small tolerances involved and the repercussions for failure. The other is risky because it's a unsupported shot in the dark.

Exactly! Both are wild, outlandish ideas with a high probability of failure, of which the evidence which exists is flimsy at best. Yet when Kennedy does out on a limb and goes with his gut, he's a national hero, when Laz does it here, he's attack mercilessly for having the gall to step out and make an impossible prediction based on what HE considers evidence based on his criteria.

I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy, hopefully this analogy will make my point.

And I have to get simplistic around here to make a point.

**WickedTribe** · 11-03-12, 08:55 PM

Originally Posted by Ranger10

Exactly! Both are wild, outlandish ideas with a high probability of failure, of which the evidence which exists is flimsy at best. Yet when Kennedy does out on a limb and goes with his gut, he's a national hero, when Laz does it here, he's attack mercilessly for having the gall to step out and make an impossible prediction based on what HE considers evidence based on his criteria.

I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy, hopefully this analogy will make my point.

And I have to get simplistic around here to make a point.

The space program wasn't about anyone going with their guts. It was about training, and really, really solid math.

**gehn** · 11-03-12, 09:52 PM

Laz can't decide what a landslide is since we already determined what it means for a landslide in a much earlier thread.

Oh and Laz, I'm just going to leave this here to present an example. I couldn't believe how many of the things you said sounded so much like this. Thanks for the laugh.

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/electoral_precedent.png

Sample size is way small dude.

**deathgodusmc** · 11-03-12, 11:24 PM

Originally Posted by Fovezer

Gliders and hot-air balloons were around long before which proved heavier-than-air flight was possible. This was based on research.

And the glider was around before the hot air balloon. It just didn't work. Neither did the first few tests by the wright brothers. In fact one of then did work for 14 ft which they disqualified as flight due to damage and using gravity to add in take off. You can talk science but when it comes to inventors its not about science. Its about the idea and the gut instinct they can make it work even if it goes contrary to the science.

**deathgodusmc** · 11-03-12, 11:31 PM

Originally Posted by WickedTribe

The space program wasn't about anyone going with their guts. It was about training, and really, really solid math.

Not it wasn't. Man had the idea they could go into space. They used science to accomplish what their gut already told them they could do. Now by all means go tell someone that sits on top of enough solid rocket fuel, jet fuel, and liquid oxygen to make a MOAB crater look small if something goes wrong that its all about the math and their gut instinct has nothing to do with it.

**Fovezer** · 11-04-12, 12:38 AM

Originally Posted by deathgodusmc

And the glider was around before the hot air balloon. It just didn't work. Neither did the first few tests by the wright brothers. In fact one of then did work for 14 ft which they disqualified as flight due to damage and using gravity to add in take off. You can talk science but when it comes to inventors its not about science. Its about the idea and the gut instinct they can make it work even if it goes contrary to the science.

This is one of the nuttiest things I've ever read. Nothing they did ran contrary to science and has everything to do with science. Lift was already a scientific concept that was understood, for instance, and the Wright Brothers built a goddamn wind tunnel to test their model in before their flight. It was ALL science. For someone who claims to not be religious, you sure are willing to take a hell of a lot on faith and spit in the face of science.

Wright 1901 Wind Tunnel

Originally Posted by deathgodusmc

Not it wasn't. Man had the idea they could go into space. They used science to accomplish what their gut already told them they could do. Now by all means go tell someone that sits on top of enough solid rocket fuel, jet fuel, and liquid oxygen to make a MOAB crater look small if something goes wrong that its all about the math and their gut instinct has nothing to do with it.

Are you just playing the contrarian troll now? Their gut didn't tell them that would work, science did. They put their trust in science, not invisible feelings in their digestive tract.

**~BigTymer~** · 11-04-12, 12:46 AM

Originally Posted by Fovezer

This is one of the nuttiest things I've ever read.

You both are nutty so LOSE LOSE. You both over play each side.

Not u Death. Mr. Fov and Ole Landslide

**~BigTymer~** · 11-04-12, 12:48 AM

Originally Posted by ~BigTymer~

You both are nutty so LOSE LOSE. You both over play each side.

Not u Death. Mr. Fov and Ole Landslide

though I hope Ole Landslide is right

**deathgodusmc** · 11-04-12, 01:28 AM

Originally Posted by Fovezer

This is one of the nuttiest things I've ever read. Nothing they did ran contrary to science and has everything to do with science. Lift was already a scientific concept that was understood, for instance, and the Wright Brothers built a goddamn wind tunnel to test their model in before their flight. It was ALL science. For someone who claims to not be religious, you sure are willing to take a hell of a lot on faith and spit in the face of science.

Wright 1901 Wind Tunnel

Are you just playing the contrarian troll now? Their gut didn't tell them that would work, science did. They put their trust in science, not invisible feelings in their digestive tract.

Are you serious with this shit? Lift was NOT a understood scientific concept at the time. Hence why they figured out pitching the wing gave additional lift. If it was an understood concept at the time they would not have discovered it. They built the wind tunnel because they did not understand lift well and used it to find out why they were not getting the lift they expected.

Now go tell your trust in science bs to the crew of the Challenger mission. While your at it go grab those failed rocket launches out in the atlantic. Maybe even a small discussion with the apollo mission astronauts. If it was all about the science we would never have a failed experimental aircraft, rocket, or invention.

Instincts comes before the science and again after it. Also another reason astronauts and test pilots are carefully screened. Their faith is not in the science. Its in their ability to come thru when the science fails. They do that by prior experience and instincts.

No one is saying science is worthless. All thats being said is science does not replace instincts. A simple example of that is we still put pilots in fighter aircraft not because we have to but because we as of yet can not replace gut instincts with science.

**WickedTribe** · 11-04-12, 07:13 AM

Originally Posted by deathgodusmc

And the glider was around before the hot air balloon. It just didn't work. Neither did the first few tests by the wright brothers. In fact one of then did work for 14 ft which they disqualified as flight due to damage and using gravity to add in take off. You can talk science but when it comes to inventors its not about science. Its about the idea and the gut instinct they can make it work even if it goes contrary to the science.

It didn't go contrary to the science.