Why in the hell are they

[Arcadia]

too busy in other facts to be too much interested in NASA plans on the moon, I guess! but I heard on tv that it will be a kind of scientific-induced crash in order to provoque a dust-cloud in order to investigate water issues

[hester_prynne]

I am nonplussed at you Barry, assuming that the nasa site was not looked at, when it fact it was along with the scientific american site and a few others. How many did you look at? Just the one?
I encouraged people to look at both sites where I work and also encouraged them to look for more information and pass on any interesting sites.
Most times there are no concrete answers in any subject, and those that condescendingly profess that there are concrete answers are missing out. You've missed the mark here, I think that is clear, and I would wager that you have been at the center of many other discourses thinking you have the answers and you are the bringer of the source, unaware of how distastefully it comes across and how nonconstructive it is. I am sure that you have heard words like mine before from others.
I stand with my statement that you need to tone this attitude down. People often share their emotional reactions here at the studio and it has led sometimes to some very insightful and stimulating communications, from which all participants have grown. Indeed, I was very emotional when I first heard about this act of stupidity they are subjecting the moon to. I still am upset about it, and your driveling about the "source" in a sort of cocky know it all tone was not constructive. It was rather indulgent and highly insensitive.
I'm sure you have heard this before too. You deserve better.
Hopefully you will take this in the friendly tone I offer it, listen, and learn.
H

[Barry]

Doreen says:

I do believe that calling me a "sheep" and part of the "herd" was a condescending statement and uncalled for. It implies that I'm stupid and can't think for myself. I don't appreciate it, honestly.

You're wrong. I'm NOT stupid. And I DO think for myself. AND I read various sources about stories I find interesting. I'm not a "sheep," I'm not part of a "herd," and I don't follow anybody blindly.

After Barry said:

Herd mentality is herd mentality no matter which herd you're in.
If my refusing to be in a herd makes me an "authority" in someone's eyes, an "authority" to be "toned down a bit," in their opinion, so be it.

Where do you see your name in the above-quoted statement of mine, Doreen? Where do you see anyone's name? What I said was, I don't practice herd mentality. If you took that to imply that you do, well, I have no control over how you think of yourself, and I wouldn't use it if I did. Not even to make you think better of yourself, make you a "better person." That ain't my job. As far as calling you or anyone else stupid, same deal. See above.

the purpose of the enterprise is to relay ACCURATE scientific information to the public.

Then why did they choose to use the word "bomb"? It's not ACCURATE.

Including people who have an "authoritarian" attitude, if that's what you think you're doing

You're not my authority. LOL

authority:
5. an accepted source of information, advice, etc.
6. a quotation or citation from such a source.
authoritarian:
1. favoring complete obedience or subjection to authority as opposed to individual freedom
(from Dictionary.com)
Two different words. Two completely different words.

I'm not too thrilled about this, though perhaps I don't feel such a strong cosmic moon-connection as some others do. Logically, I suppose it's only a relatively minor "impact" on a notable heavenly body. But is it setting a troubling precedent? Also, what do we ultimately intend to do with or to the moon? Build colonies to provide home to the earth's overflowing human population to a significant degree? Is that realistic on such a desolate orb? Or do we intend to poke, prod, blast and stripmine it for any useful resources we might find? I hope not.

I totally appreciate your input on this point, Nazz. It's very considered and even-toned. There are plans on the drawing boards, however, to completely dismantle asteroids to make use of their raw materials as the resouces they are. No doubt in that future day there will be bands of space-eco-warriors cruising around damaging property if not taking lives to thwart this effort, no? Which is right? Which is wrong?

Barry.

Instead of initially posting this comment:

"I don't even know what to say to this."

then following up with :

Quote:
I once saw a comic doing a bit about the "Save the Earth" campaign.
It was hilarious.
His point was, it's probably the greatest human conceit to think we could actually destroy the Earth.
He said we better hope the Earth doesn't go on a "Lose the Humans" campaign.

We all disappear and everything returns to normal in a couple hundred years at most. Everything about our "civilization" requires constant maintenance.
Yeah, let's hope the Earth does not go on that campaign.

Maybe it's already happened?
Global Warming?
Oh, that's right. We caused that.

So we say.

[10.07.09]

...which did absolutely nothing to clarify your own position on this topic (but did invite some differing opinions on GW, for what reason I'm not quite sure).

then you add fuel to the fire by this reply -


Quote:
This is ridiculous, this outrage at the moon being "shot." It's ridiculous, like being outraged at a child being bitten by a mosquito in Panama. Are we all so knee-jerk we just clamor for things to be outraged about?

Who got upset when NASA "shot" that comet for the same reason they are about to "shoot" the moon?

Not one of you. And for good reason.


From where I sit and read this thread, all three of your comments were totally unreasonable and useless for the thread.

But you again persisted in inciting some folks by posting but yet another long and drawn out reply to Doreen which went on and on, unnecessarily, IMHO.

If you had given the first line of your forth reply -

Quote:
The facts of the mission are available here, if anyone's interested in facts.
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LCROS ... index.html


... just think how much of this unsettling thread would have been alleviated in the first place.

Knowing as you did, I sure, the NASA mission and their link, it seems to me you may have gone way out of your way to drag this subject on and on creating an atmosphere not unlike an explosion on the moon. For what reason I find puzzling.

Thanks, mtmynd, for your studied and considered opinion. Doesn't read like you find any of this puzzling. Reads like you think you know. The fact is, though, that you don't, do you?;) The NASA link in my fourth post was within the overall context of the thread. Maybe if you read through the whole thing with objectivity, rather than selectively, you might have seen that.

Peace,
Barry

[Doreen Peri]

Barry,

I find this thread to be entirely disconcerting.
There's absolutely no communication here.

I spoke to exactly what was being said to ME and to others. Where did I see my name? In the accusations that those who were replying to the thread didn't bother to READ, or THINK for themselves, and as such were "sheep" and had "herd mentality." I saw my name because you were talking to ME as well as all the others who replied to this thread. Everyone except for yourself.

Yeah, I know "authority" and "authoritarian" are different words and mean different things. I play scrabble. I'm a word genius. Haha. That was a joke. That's why I added the "haha". The scrabble reference was the funny part.

But seriously, don't treat me like I'm stupid. I hate that!

It's upsetting to me that I spent so much time on this thread. I hate these type of circular confrontations for nothing more than what? I don't know what they're for but I'm done with it. I hate conflict without any purpose other than for the sake of conflict.

I'd rather discuss IDEAS. And truths. And explore the thoughts others are expressing without personalized argument. It's stressful and non-productive and bores me, too.

Peace out.

[hester_prynne]

Doreen, I took his comments exactly the same way you did, that herd comment.
I can't decide if he is just playing us or seriously unaware.
Meanwhile, I took the dayoff work tommorrow to be with the moon.
Irratiional?
Some sources might think so but I don't.
People are on different levels for sure.
Still looking around for a mike so we can duet. Let's write a song too.
Peace and love,
H

[mtmynd]

Reads like you think you know. The fact is, though, that you don't, do you?

What I do know is you don't know what I know.

Let me make this more clear for you, Barry. Your fourth post began with this comment -

The facts of the mission are available here, if anyone's interested in facts.
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LCROS ... index.html

It took you three posts before you posted this comment/link. Had you posted this in the very beginning we more than likely would not be here discussing this as we are.

The reason you did not go to the core of this in the beginning disturbs me solely because I detect an arrogance on your part given the lowly comments you made prior to your fourth reply. Had you not implied what you did to the members here that were involved with your comments, there would not be any further discussion as we are having, but you continued riling the emotions of others who commented to you regarding your unnecessary derogatorily tinged comments which obviously upset these folks.

Again, Barry, this is another examples of your not using care in your choice of words prior to firing them of into the cyberspace which the members of this board inhabit.

Do you understand this now?

[Nazz]

why so much arguing?

[mtmynd]

why so much arguing?

is it better to ignore?

[sooZen]

is it better to ignore?

yep.

[Doreen Peri]

I got a little defensive, I guess. For that I apologize.

[mtmynd]

yep.

next time. i'll know better next time.

[Barry]

I would wager that you have been at the center of many other discourses thinking you have the answers and you are the bringer of the source, unaware of how distastefully it comes across and how nonconstructive it is

(bold font mine)
(italics mine)
(underscore mine)

Here's how I see this working: someone reads what I write and makes a judgement of what I was thinking when I wrote it and what my intention was(bold font), and then has an emotional response (italics). They then form an opinion of my overall character (underscore) based on their emotional response following from their judgement made while reading what I wrote.

To be clear...I did not do this on purpose. I was not following some kind of evil plan. It is not a game. None of this has in any way been fun for me. What I did do was be utterly and completely genuine and true to myself. And I am faulted and subtly maligned or derided for this.

What's the problem here?

The problem is in the assumptive judgement as to my purpose or intention leading to the emotional response resulting in a false assessment of my character, IMHO.

That's the last thing I'm going to say on this subject. This time.

Peace,
Barry

[hester_prynne]

"The problem is in the assumptive judgement as to my purpose or intention leading to the emotional response resulting in a false assessment of my character, IMHO.

That's the last thing I'm going to say on this subject. This time. "

Ditto.
H

[Barry]

While you may have felt pretty cool, hester (cool emoticon), when you posted that, it's really not very cool, or very intelligent. It's simple word twisting. While my post alluding to the ridiculousness of NASA shooting a rocket at the moon was emotional in tone (something I didn't deny; why would I?), it in no way was assumptive as to your intent in starting the topic, nor did it make any assessment of your charcter, false or otherwise. Try again.

Peace,
Barry

[Doreen Peri]

Barry, I guess we felt like you were calling us "sheep" and "the herd" and unable to think for ourselves. That's how it read to me. That's how I felt anyway. I really thought you were talking to us.

But this is the internet and maybe I read it wrong. Maybe you didn't mean US, the people you were talking to when you were talking about the sheep and the herd and the people who can't think for themselves.

Maybe those judgments about people were directed toward people who weren't even here in the room, the generalized crowd out there somewhere in the world. Other people. Not us.

OK. If that's the case, then please forgive me for reading it as if you were talking to US, the people who you were talking to., saying we were the sheep, the herd, and unable to think for ourselves. It very well could be that I read it wrong.

That would be a character judgment and also a judgment of our intelligence (or more precisely, the lack thereof) and certainly you didn't mean to do that. I just read it wrong, I guess.

Sorry.

Damn internet. Stupid words are all we have. I hate it when shit like this happens. The internet is really a ridiculous place to try to communicate.