Science says stop complaining

Quote Originally Posted by Robin Davies

Quote Originally Posted by Nirvana In Karma Quote Originally Posted by Robin Davies Quote Originally Posted by gveranon Quote Originally Posted by Robin Davies I can't get used to feathered dinosaurs. I still prefer to think of them as majestic scaly reptilian monsters rather than overgrown turkeys. Do not underestimate turkeys! OK, they may be dangerous but they're still not as cool as old-school dinosaurs! Please, the first Megalosaurus restoration looked pretty dopey. Not that old-school! I meant the work of Charles R. Knight and Zdenek Burian.

Knight and Burian dinosaurs still irk me, primarily because of the dinosaurs' postures. Especially the postures of the theropods. Later findings aside, they remind me too much of kangaroos for me to be impressed with them.

[Robin Davies]

Quote Originally Posted by Nirvana In Karma

Knight and Burian dinosaurs still irk me, primarily because of the dinosaurs' postures. Especially the postures of the theropods. Later findings aside, they remind me too much of kangaroos for me to be impressed with them.

I suppose I like them partly because those were the images that captured my imagination when I was a child. Certainly the more balanced posture of the theropods in modern reconstructions makes more sense. But some of them look unconvincing to me. For example Robert Bakker's artwork tried so hard to overturn the old perception of dinosaurs as cold-blooded plodders that he ended up making them look like lightweight ballet dancers. And I'll take a sombre-coloured Stegosaurus over this any day:
https://luisvrey.files.wordpress.com...gosaurus11.jpg

[qcrisp]

This article might be appropriate to a number of different threads, but I'll put it here in acknowledgment of a point made here previously:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...P=share_btn_tw

[Comrade Tulayev]

Quote Originally Posted by qcrisp

This article might be appropriate to a number of different threads, but I'll put it here in acknowledgment of a point made here previously: http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...P=share_btn_tw

What a particularly strange approach taken by the British government. Is this for real? We are about 17 days out from April fools.

What would be the point of investing public funding into scientific research, yet then not want to actually have those researchers talk about the applications of their work and the consequences of what they found? I can some what understand if there are specific confidential/top secret research projects being funded that cannot be show cased to the public, but this appears to apply to ALL gov funded research.

Is there some sort of fear that certain gov policies will be demonstrated to be perfectly idiotic and need to change? I would consider that a good thing, not a bad thing that we need to be protected from.

Again... sorry to sound dense... but is this for reals?

[qcrisp]

Quote Originally Posted by Comrade Tulayev

Quote Originally Posted by qcrisp This article might be appropriate to a number of different threads, but I'll put it here in acknowledgment of a point made here previously: http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...P=share_btn_tw What a particularly strange approach taken by the British government. Is this for real? We are about 17 days out from April fools. What would be the point of investing public funding into scientific research, yet then not want to actually have those researchers talk about the applications of their work and the consequences of what they found? I can some what understand if there are specific confidential/top secret research projects being funded that cannot be show cased to the public, but this appears to apply to ALL gov funded research. Is there some sort of fear that certain gov policies will be demonstrated to be perfectly idiotic and need to change? I would consider that a good thing, not a bad thing that we need to be protected from. Again... sorry to sound dense... but is this for reals?

Apparently it is. I'd heard about it a little from the person previously mentioned who is in a similar line of work to you, and then saw this article. I can't remember the rationale behind the policy - apparently there is one. I'll try and get more information.

Quote Originally Posted by qcrisp

Quote Originally Posted by Comrade Tulayev Quote Originally Posted by qcrisp This article might be appropriate to a number of different threads, but I'll put it here in acknowledgment of a point made here previously: http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...P=share_btn_tw What a particularly strange approach taken by the British government. Is this for real? We are about 17 days out from April fools. What would be the point of investing public funding into scientific research, yet then not want to actually have those researchers talk about the applications of their work and the consequences of what they found? I can some what understand if there are specific confidential/top secret research projects being funded that cannot be show cased to the public, but this appears to apply to ALL gov funded research. Is there some sort of fear that certain gov policies will be demonstrated to be perfectly idiotic and need to change? I would consider that a good thing, not a bad thing that we need to be protected from. Again... sorry to sound dense... but is this for reals? Apparently it is. I'd heard about it a little from the person previously mentioned who is in a similar line of work to you, and then saw this article. I can't remember the rationale behind the policy - apparently there is one. I'll try and get more information.

I hope this gets resolved. This is extremely worrying, coming from a region whose economic driving force happens to be emitting unprecedented levels of CO2 into the atmosphere, which opens up a slew of policies that ignore the findings of climatologists and the general promotion of anti-science, anti-intellectual rhetoric.

[teguififthzeal]

<<What a particularly strange approach taken by the British government. Is this for real? We are about 17 days out from April fools.>>

Deny the British empire's crimes? No, we ignore them | George Monbiot | Opinion | The Guardian

[Acutely decayed]

my favourite George Moonbat

George Monbiot: The worst of times | Politics | The Guardian

It has Versaille, and the glorious Dickens quote "the leprosy of unreality disfigured every human creature in attendance." I have aspired to be leprously unreal ever since



looking forward to the time science slips these feeble reins - we have nothing on our side but - truth and beauty

[Robert Adam Gilmour]

Quote Originally Posted by Acutely decayed

looking forward to the time science slips these feeble reins - we have nothing on our side but - truth and beauty

Not sure what you're saying here. Is that about the article, the Dickens quote, this thread or all of it?

[Acutely decayed]

Quote Originally Posted by Robert Adam Gilmour

Not sure what you're saying here. Is that about the article, the Dickens quote, this thread or all of it?

Not about the article or Dickens quote - more about science being true despite it's degree of communication (and politically applied rheostats on this) ...potentially devastatingly so (so yeah the thread I guess, or more immediately Quentin's post in it)

the Dicken's quote and article are enjoyable pageantry - but distractions are very very important