Coming from a man that wants to see dinosaurs and robots fighting!Dave Burr wrote:Why would a traveller with the ability move through time be interested in either a vulcan base or a couple of anglers? I should think that neither would stretch their brain power very much.
There are strange sights to be seen around the planet, many are difficult to comprehend but the human imagination does tend to fill in any gaps that it can't put easily into place. Call me an old cynic but I don't believe in ghosts, aliens, time travellers or honest politicians and until I see one in the flesh I shall continue with my belief
Hear, hear!Dave Burr wrote:Why would a traveller with the ability move through time be interested in either a vulcan base or a couple of anglers? I should think that neither would stretch their brain power very much.
There are strange sights to be seen around the planet, many are difficult to comprehend but the human imagination does tend to fill in any gaps that it can't put easily into place. Call me an old cynic but I don't believe in ghosts, aliens, time travellers or honest politicians and until I see one in the flesh I shall continue with my belief
Well Dave, it might just be old fashioned curiosity, - that word again; to ask me why is a bit like asking a chimp to explain why it's just been chipped by David Attenborough...Dave Burr wrote:Why would a traveller with the ability move through time be interested in either a vulcan base or a couple of anglers? I should think that neither would stretch their brain power very much.
There are strange sights to be seen around the planet, many are difficult to comprehend but the human imagination does tend to fill in any gaps that it can't put easily into place. Call me an old cynic but I don't believe in ghosts, aliens, time travellers or honest politicians and until I see one in the flesh I shall continue with my belief
"Afternoon" Chaps,Richard C wrote:Knew one once, could hear the noise from the explosion from my house.Dave Burr wrote:Why would a traveller with the ability move through time be interested in either a vulcan base or a couple of anglers?
Funny you should say that as my Easter holiday projects are to start making biodiesel and do some experimenting with making solid state rocket fuel.... best not mix the two!Maggot's Dad wrote:....are you sure that it wasn't anything to do with Snape?
i thought distilling at home was illegal???????Snape wrote:Funny you should say that as my Easter holiday projects are to start making biodiesel and do some experimenting with making solid state rocket fuel.... best not mix the two!Maggot's Dad wrote:....are you sure that it wasn't anything to do with Snape?
My personal view is that most scientists 'toe the party line' because if they don't then they get cold shouldered by their peers. If this happens they suddenly find that funding opportunities dry up. That funding is both the scientists income and passion. Scientists are human. The need to bring home the food that goes on their family's table so they can't afford to go against the grain. Privately, they may engage in conversation that does not tie in with what they may say in public. It will no doubt remain private thoughBluedun wrote:Probably not the place to discuss science and scientists. But anyway, I don't think all scientists are following a party line, if you like to call it that, although certain ideas do become part of the furniture of course, generally for good reason. The problem for science these days is lack of funding, and the demand to produce - hence the name of the game is to churn out papers; never mind the quality, count the pile. Much of this is to do with govt policy in recent years, which of course is down ultimately to the electorate. So don't blame the scientists so much as everyone else. Hard to be original when someone's cracking a whip over you.FarliesBirthday wrote: Returing to my last post, - if there are two things that dismay me about modern science: one is the determination of the majority to follow the received, current "party line" on most topics, coupled with an almost complete lack of genuine curiosity. The "what if" factor - it seems to me - is almost invariably missing, as science turns into a secular religion, with list of things you must and must not countenance. It is, increasingly, no longer a useful methodology to explore existence and discover new things. It seems, now, that most things have been discovered, to listen to many science buffs.
Anyone can seem wise, and clever, by saying yes in a crowd of others saying exactly the same thing, at the same time, in much the same way that anyone can seem holy by merely singing along to the hymns in a church service.
Muskieman, I agree that life almost certainly will have evolved elsewhere in the galaxy (99.99999999999999999% likely) let alone elsewhere in the universe but the chance of an intelligent 'alien' race building a space craft and visiting Earth seems highly unlikely. I do think it is an interesting story and I wasn't suggesting that you were drunk etc but that there is an overwhelmingly likely chance that it is explainable in a 'normal' way rather than resorting to aliens. Still it makes a good mystery...Muskieman wrote:I never thought that this would cause this much debate. I can safely say that at the time I was neither drunk, stoned or hallucinating. Four of us saw the object in question. I do believe that we are not on our own. There is every possibility that life evolved in other areas of the universe. The one I do know, the agility and speed of the object was something else.
