The tenth planet...

[Paradroid]

xane, your previous post smelled of racial stereo-typing so I felt compelled to address the point, I find your response rather bland and agreeable - we can indeed play blame-games for an eternity saying "they did it first", we know this doesn't solve anything. My whole point was a response to your comment that "they" live in the dark-ages, which you reiterated. The "cerebrally challenged" and "religious zealots" are pandemic and could render any country foul to the criticisms of a keen observer, you only have to look state-side for clarification of that. I'm sure many Muslims look at the decadent west and see our populous as "living in the dark-ages"...and they're probably right.

We should colonise as many parts of the solar system as possible and make earth a religion-free zone (much to the annoyance of all religions). Like that Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy story where they send all their middle-men on a fake voyage? Send them closer to God? I suppose, when you think about it, they're the "most likely to be encouraged" group - being so susceptible to suggestion.

And I still want that planet to be named Belend !!!

PS You want Nuns?

Nun with Mouse

Nuns with Guns

 

[GekuL]

You tried to argue against the claim that "they" still live in the dark ages by posting a lot about the past. How does that work then?

 

[amobea]

You tried to argue against the claim that "they" still live in the dark ages by posting a lot about the past. How does that work then?

cause of the fried potatoes o' course

 

[xane]

xane, your previous post smelled of racial stereo-typing so I felt compelled to address the point,

The same kind of "racial stereotyping" you impose of Americans maybe ? You can note my post made no specific mention of Muslim terrorists, the religiously inspired terrorism happens on all sides, from the Arab to the Irish.

My beef is with religionists, who throughtout history have opposed scientific progress, and I found it rather galling that the original post took a dig at Bush/America.

America is a secular country (or tries to be), it invests huge amounts in science and discoveries such as this one are a direct result of American investment. America also supports a free thinking society, one where science goes ahead based on rationality not preconceived ideas. Countries ruled by religionists do not consider science to be as important, every thing is the work of god(s).

You mentioned Al-Biruni, who also challenged the Ptolemic geocentric system of astrology centuries before Copernicus, yet his ideas where no more accepted by the Islamic church than Galileo's confirmations of Copernicus were by the Latin church. Thus, just as Arab Muslims may have discovered the Earth goes round the Sun and not the other way round, before Western Christians, it doesn't mean the religion itself did.

 

[Wij]

Aristarchus beat them both to the Geocentric theory so the best religion is obviously Olympianism

 

[Wij]

Isn't it open season on Wij-abuse every night?

Why... I... ...

 

[amobea]

Why... I... ...

surely you're used to it by now wij ?

 

[Wij]

The phrase welly-top springs to...

HEY !!!

 

[Mazling]

Sorry for going back on-topic again.

For douglas Adams fans: You are HERE

 

[Paradroid]

The same kind of "racial stereotyping" you impose of Americans maybe ? You can note my post made no specific mention of Muslim terrorists, the religiously inspired terrorism happens on all sides, from the Arab to the Irish.

My beef is with religionists, who throughtout history have opposed scientific progress, and I found it rather galling that the original post took a dig at Bush/America.

America is a secular country (or tries to be), it invests huge amounts in science and discoveries such as this one are a direct result of American investment. America also supports a free thinking society, one where science goes ahead based on rationality not preconceived ideas. Countries ruled by religionists do not consider science to be as important, every thing is the work of god(s).

You mentioned Al-Biruni, who also challenged the Ptolemic geocentric system of astrology centuries before Copernicus, yet his ideas where no more accepted by the Islamic church than Galileo's confirmations of Copernicus were by the Latin church. Thus, just as Arab Muslims may have discovered the Earth goes round the Sun and not the other way round, before Western Christians, it doesn't mean the religion itself did.

heh
xane, I appologise for assuming your reference "they don't know the earth revolves round the sun" was a Muslim dig, I was confused by the threads' mention of the recent bombings and your defence of Bush/Blair by saying it's the "terrorists" who are blowing us up - again, I assumed you were referring to Muslim terrorists (...as opposed to the CIA/Mossad). But a cursory glance does confirm that you did infact say the M-word first (heh). I also agree that religionists (as you put it) are an obsticle to scientific progress, and exist everywhere on all sides ("religious zealots" are pandemic) - who doesn't?

I wouldn't agree though that just pointing out that the USA are war-mongering profiteers is racial stereo-typing, that's just the facts. An army equal to all other countries combined? An economy that depends on war? More foreign "interests" that you can comfortably shake a large stick at?

I'm sorry you find it gualling that there was a dig at Bush/Blair. So, yes, the USA is a secular society, they invest in science, are free thinking, and yada yada yada, but look at wtf they've done, and are still doing! So much for enlightenment, they seem to have missed the basics. So, hail the USA for building a cool telescope - whilst standing on the remains of the obstacles to their interests. Regarding the USA in general, I'll take the parental approach and say to them "you should know better than that", "grow up", and the indespensible, "stop mucking about you idiot!".

Side note: Didn't Bush deliberately not budget for the war on Iraq, then he went cap-in-hand for emergency funds - when he had already signed the orders to attack Iraq, and he just didn't want the increase in his budget to show-up on his projected spending for that year? If Bush had to do that in order to mobilise his own troops whilst staying in favour with the American public, imagine what astronomers have to go through for project funding! Burglary, kidnap, extortion, the list is endless.


One last thing, xane, you said earlier:

My beef is with religionists

heh



...Where's the beef?

 

[Braggart]

Does anyone actually get excited by this though? I mean space is just so boring now.

 

[xane]

but look at wtf they've done, and are still doing! So much for enlightenment, they seem to have missed the basics. So, hail the USA for building a cool telescope - whilst standing on the remains of the obstacles to their interests.

How is that different from your example or Islamic scholars ? Why don't you read up on the bloody history of Islamic conquest that attained that knowledge in the first place ?

I was going to refute your anti-USA rhetoric but probably to the relief of other posters I'll decide this is not the thread to do it in, I suggest you refrain from doing so as well as it gets a bit boring at times (and that's saying something from me).

The fact remains that scientific enlightenment is, and has always been, thwarted by extremist religion. It may be one opinion that Bush/America are happily destroying the world on one hand whilst holding a telescope up to discover new worlds in the other, sadly I don't quite share that view. America leads the world in military spending, but it also leads the world in scientific and medical spending too, especially space exploration.

Terrorism, and the religions that support it, is bad news, they directly oppose liberal throught and scientific progress, in their world view we should be happy with the one planet we have, they froth at the mouth every time a small discovery like this shows once again how insignificant the human race really is on its little blue-green lump of rock, rather than being "god's chosen ones" in the centre of the universe.

 

[gmloki]

How is that different from your example or Islamic scholars ? Why don't you read up on the bloody history of Islamic conquest that attained that knowledge in the first place ?

I was going to refute your anti-USA rhetoric but probably to the relief of other posters I'll decide this is not the thread to do it in, I suggest you refrain from doing so as well as it gets a bit boring at times (and that's saying something from me).

The fact remains that scientific enlightenment is, and has always been, thwarted by extremist religion. It may be one opinion that Bush/America are happily destroying the world on one hand whilst holding a telescope up to discover new worlds in the other, sadly I don't quite share that view. America leads the world in military spending, but it also leads the world in scientific and medical spending too, especially space exploration.

Terrorism, and the religions that support it, is bad news, they directly oppose liberal throught and scientific progress, in their world view we should be happy with the one planet we have, they froth at the mouth every time a small discovery like this shows once again how insignificant the human race really is on its little blue-green lump of rock, rather than being "god's chosen ones" in the centre of the universe.

You go away for a month and all hell breaks loose.

 

[amobea]

I wouldn't agree though that just pointing out that the USA are war-mongering profiteers is racial stereo-typing, that's just the facts. An army equal to all other countries combined? An economy that depends on war? More foreign "interests" that you can comfortably shake a large stick at?

equal to all other armies combined heh....
you've not hear of that little place they call China then???

As fo the economy depending on war
I can't argue that it doesn't benifit but i think you'd find that if they weren't invloved in war for a significant amount of time the US economy wouldn't actually cease to exist as you make it seem...

 

[Tinky]

hmm

An army equal to all other countries combined?

hmm, ignoring the rest of your inane drivel for the moment, you really need to tighten up on your facts. The USA doesn't have the largest military force by a long shot. Certainly not in terms of active and/or reservist forces, certainly not in terms of available and suitable population and certainly not in terms of the "military-industrial" complex.

go take a chill pill and come back when you've calmed down.

 

[Driwen]

hmm, ignoring the rest of your inane drivel for the moment, you really need to tighten up on your facts. The USA doesn't have the largest military force by a long shot. Certainly not in terms of active and/or reservist forces, certainly not in terms of available and suitable population and certainly not in terms of the "military-industrial" complex.

go take a chill pill and come back when you've calmed down.

I do think the USA spend the most money on their military though and it spends more on military than the EU countries combined do.

 

[Paradroid]

hmm, ignoring the rest of your inane drivel for the moment, you really need to tighten up on your facts. The USA doesn't have the largest military force by a long shot. Certainly not in terms of active and/or reservist forces, certainly not in terms of available and suitable population and certainly not in terms of the "military-industrial" complex.

go take a chill pill and come back when you've calmed down.

Sorry peeps, I should have referred to the military budget and not the army size (frightening thought).


(*anti-US rhetoric and inane drivel tba*)

xane, once again I find myself agreeing with your comments on science/extremist religions etc (as I did before? twice?). As you put it, your beef is with the religionists, and mine is with the current actions of the US/UK. I completely agree with most of your beef, but I feel you don't care at all about my beef. But my beef is hurting lots of people, which is fuelling the fire for more unneccessary beef for us in the future. I just think my beef is more pressing.



They called the planet Sedna?!
I know it has meaning, but ... Sedna?!
Dave would have been more fitting. (local planets for local systems)

 

[xane]

Sorry peeps, I should have referred to the military budget and not the army size (frightening thought).

(Couldn't resist) As a percentage of GDP its about average (3-3.5%) for most countries, way below North Korea (33%) and a lot of Middle Eastern countries, also US military equipment is not exactly the least expensive option.

Strange how when criticising the US military spending its always an absolute figure, but when criticising US foreign aid (the non-military aid part which still runs over $1 billion) it suddenly becomes GDP %age to put the US as the "worst" country. I think figures are spun according to what you want to represent.

Your "50% tax" figure includes the "past military" spending, a bulk of which is military pensions and debt interest on war loads (going back to WW2).

In don't understand your "beef" in the context of this thread. The US provided the funds to find this planet and supports a free thinking scientific community to explore more, which is why I think it's ironic to consider the US as a threat to new discoveries.

 

[amobea]

nods @ what xane said

 

[Paradroid]

Sorry (again) xane, I think you've picked me up totally wrong. I don't have any beef with the topic of this thread (new planet, is that right? ) and I don't believe the US are a threat to new discoveries, per say (not directly anyway).

My beef is about current US/UK military actions/policy in the middle-east.
Which, btw, was spawned form Xavier's (the fire starter!) comment:

Fingers crossed Dubya and co don't blow us all to kingdom come and we get a chance to learn a little more.

And your response to that:

I find it interesting you say this as was demonstrated last week it's the terrorists who are blowing us all up. In fact being religionists they'd probably have a bit of explaining to do if we found evidence of life on another plant, they still haven't got over the whole "earth goes round sun" bit yet.

I then went off-on-one believing your comments were a Muslim/Arab dig, which - after discovering they weren't - I apologised for. But, like a dog with a bone, I continued with my beef that "Dubya & co" could indeed "blow us all to kingdom come". To which, you seemed happy to defend - citing examples of how the Arab/Muslim world are equally capable of this aggresive behaviour. I then said that I agree with you, but that the US/UK should know better ("so much for enlightenment"), and nothing said has either explained or justified our current actions/policies towards the middle-east (etc). (Thanks, Xavier!)

What I mean is that I just don't like the double standards we have, the inequality we display, pioneering "this" - whilst shafting "that". We talk about creating democracies - whilst destroying them (Iraq-Hiati). As I said earlier "they(/we) seem to have missed the basics", there is (rightly) public outrage that these terrorists have killed westerners, but we've killed (and continue to kill) far more of them than they do of us - which is a fact that so few westerners seem to believe and/or accept. So you must see (in this light) why a misunderstood comment about Arabs/Muslims spurned me to respond (unneccessarily), and, a debate surrounding the complicity of the US/UK in terrorism is one I'm quick to engage in (aka my "beef"). You appear to have interpreted my postings in a completely different light. Put that all together and we've got a 4 page thread where we still don't know wtf each others arguments are about. Well, until now.


And, yes, we can use stats in a variety of creative ways to promote anything we want (too true). The telling-tale is policy, and the current US policies are mental.

Almost on topic; I'm sure I read somewhere that the US Bush admin have the worst track-record in history of lying/distorting the truth about scientific/environmental issues.

I dunno about you, but I would classify Bush as one of your "religionists" - look what happened recently in the US with gay marriages. I don't think he's religious himself, just another tool that can be used by the US admin (this, incidently, is my view on all religions - they're just a control mechanism, a populism).

:touch:

 

[Tom]

Since when was Iraq a democracy?

 

[GekuL]

And haiti isn't exactly a shining example of democracy either, lol. Your beef isn't infected with CJD by any chance is it?

 

[xane]

We talk about creating democracies - whilst destroying them (Iraq-Hiati).

We are talking about the same planet here ? Haiti has been "influenced" at least three times by the Americans, on all occasions it was to depose a tyrant and leave a democracy. Iraq has never, ever, been a democracy in its entire history.

there is (rightly) public outrage that these terrorists have killed westerners, but we've killed (and continue to kill) far more of them than they do of us - which is a fact that so few westerners seem to believe and/or accept.

So the idea is to let the terrorists kill more of us ? I though the whole idea was to kill more of them ? Far from being "outraged" as you suggest I am bloody glad to see my hard-earned tax that was spent on shiny military hardware actually being put to a useful purpose for once; ridding the world of terrorists and their supporters.

I'm sure I read somewhere that the US Bush admin have the worst track-record in history of lying/distorting the truth about scientific/environmental issues.

I'm sure you did read it somewhere, doesn't make it a fact though.

I dunno about you, but I would classify Bush as one of your "religionists"

Well, at least our merrie paths merge at the end, but Bush can do what he likes as long as he doesn't overrule the constitution, and as long as that stays then America is a truly secular country, praise be to the Lord for that !

 

[Tom]

I'm sure you did read it somewhere, doesn't make it a fact though.

Greenpeace are probably more guilty of that.

 

[Wij]

Even on the furthest planet from us we still have politix :/

Less religion ! More goatse !

*lube*

*mosh*

I'm flyin Gina, fuckin flyin !

Woooohoooohoohoohooohooo

PiddlypiddlyddlyiddlyPiddlypiddlyddlyiddlyPiddlypiddlyddlyiddlyTaDaDaDeeeEEEE !!!

Carpet;

 

[Paradroid]

We talk about creating democracies - whilst destroying them (Iraq-Hiati).

erm...Iraq applies to the former (creating democracies), and, Hiati to the latter (destroying democracies). Look what happened to Chile on another 9/11, in 1973.

And, no, the idea isn't to let the terrorists kill more of us. Everyone wants the terrorists to stop killing, it's the ultimate goal that we all share, however, our ideas to resolve the matter differ greatly. I think the reasoning behind the suggestion that "the whole idea was to kill more of them" has no real logic. It's a (knee-jerk) reactionary instinct that only leads to perpetuate the situation, thereby, queuing more of us up to be killed in the future. If your ultimate goal is to stop the attacks, then focus on that and don't get sidelined by animal instincts for revenge. Break the cycle of killing. Violence begets violence. (etc etc)

ridding the world of terrorists and their supporters.

I agree, whoever and wherever they are...





...assuming our ammo arrives before the war starts!

/topic
PLANET!
topic/

heh

 

[Doh_boy]

Since when was Iraq a democracy?

Technically it was, but since you were killed if you voted against saddam it was a bit of a joke.

 

[xane]

I agree, whoever and wherever they are...

Ah the old chestnut - the CIA were involved in insurgencies in Soviet occupied Afghanistan, bin Laden was also in Afghanistan, therefore CIA supports bin Laden, a fallicy in the argument. If you actually read that article you will find the only reference to a _possible_ link between the CIA and bin Laden comes from an Egyptian professor, hardly a reliable source !

Read John Simpson's account of his time with the Mujahadin, he actually encountered bin Laden who was opposed to western intervention in the holy war, bin Laden wanted Simpson killed on the spot because he was a westerner, bin Laden was a devoted anti-American and a religious nutcase, the fact that his aims coincided with American interests in the region at the time does not conclude they were allies.

As regards Chile, technically Pinochet did not become a dictator until 1977 when he proposed an authoritarian regime, by which time the US had withdrawn support for that government. The Americans were against the previous Allende government because they nationalised American owned industries, only the far reaching conspiracy theories point to direct American involvement in the coup that followed, Allende had made his own set of enemies in the military without the American's help.

I honestly suspect you take a lot of this anti-American rhetoric on face value without even questioning it or the motives of its author or the true history of how it relates, it's very close to the "blind faith" of religion really

The Mises Institute link is interesting because it discusses, on a more rational level, the whole issue of American interventionist policy. On this score the Americans are damned if they do and damned if they don't, so that's an argument that will run and run. If you read other articles from that website instead of just picking it up on Google you'll find they are basically opposed to American intervention anywhere, even in WW1 and WW2, quite happy to leave us Brits to the mercy of the Germans and let facism make its mark on the world.

As to the logic behind "killing terrorists", well, on this score I am open to suggestions. Remember that bin Laden and al-Quaeda are fundemental Wahhabist Islamics, they see no other ultimate goal than the complete domination of Islam over the entire world. Tell me how you reconcile with that strain of extremist thinking and maybe we can work out a strategy of compromise, my bet is you'll have a tough job on your hands.

I'm as liberal and peace-loving as the next man, but if some religiously inspired maniac wants to go on a killing spree in the name of god I'm still inclined to blow his brains out before he gets the chance.

 

[Paradroid]

Some interesting points in there, firstly, the question of reliable souces of info. Who can we trust for the truth? How do we know if it's the truth or propaganda? I don't think we'll ever know, unless you're an eye-witness to specific events. And I suppose it's completely down to us as individuals to decide if it's true or not. The more convincing the info seems to us, the more truth we tend to install in it. Indeed, I have no first-hand knowledge of CIA/SIS/Afghan connections (honestly, I don't), I just think the info available is convincing enough for me to believe it could be (or probably is) the truth.

I saw John Simpson on the telly talking about that particular story - I'm certainly not arguing that Bin Laden is anything other than what's been described (Simpson survives again!).

I think that web-link I posted described Bin Ladens relationship with the CIA as unwitting. But following the money does makes sense, why didn't/don't we do that with 911? What's happened to that investigation? (underfunded and blocked?)

I'm all for kicking terrorist-ass (not the civies), but I just want to make sure it's the right terrorists'-ass that I'm kicking. And when I say kick-ass I mean arrest, trial, jail, key & drain (if guilty). And I don't see anything wrong with an international law, and enforcement, to curb terrorist activities (to enable the arrests etc). But basically, isn't that what we had before Iraq was attacked? (however creaky) I think the UN should have evolved at that point (or now!) to address the issues, but instead our old system has been replaced with a new one - which is determined by the financial-political interests of one country.

We'd go a long way in solving our problems if we changed our foreign policies. For the middle-east, the key is obviously Israel. Israel is our model of the future (in that sense). If Arabs/Muslims could live peacefully with the state of Israel (on both sides), there would be far less ill-feeling towards the west. But how do we do that, when the UN appears to be useless, and, the US appear to be financeers for Israel?


I can't really suggest anything more than you've probably already heard or thought of, except, Terrorist Island? (the most unpopular gameshow in the world!)