Jump to content

New Scientific Discoveries, Part Deux


Pidesco

Recommended Posts

well, ef that, I thought last year was bad enough, now we lost last man standing on different object than Earth :(

 

sob

 

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/16/us/eugene-cernan-dies/index.html

Edited by Chilloutman

I'm the enemy, 'cause I like to think, I like to read. I'm into freedom of speech, and freedom of choice. I'm the kinda guy that likes to sit in a greasy spoon and wonder, "Gee, should I have the T-bone steak or the jumbo rack of barbecue ribs with the side-order of gravy fries?" I want high cholesterol! I wanna eat bacon, and butter, and buckets of cheese, okay?! I wanna smoke a Cuban cigar the size of Cincinnati in the non-smoking section! I wanna run naked through the street, with green Jell-O all over my body, reading Playboy magazine. Why? Because I suddenly may feel the need to, okay, pal? I've SEEN the future. Do you know what it is? It's a 47-year-old virgin sitting around in his beige pajamas, drinking a banana-broccoli shake, singing "I'm an Oscar Meyer Wiene"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You beat me to it Chilloutman. Of all the Apollo astronauts who walked on the moon only Buzz Aldrin, Alan Bean, David Scott, Harrison Schmitt & Charlie Duke are still with us. And they are all well past 80. It is likely they will all pass on before a human steps on another body other than Earth again. If you had told me that in 1972 when Apollo was cancelled I wouldn't have believed it.

 

Actually in 1972 I was one year old so if you told me that I wouldn't have understood it.

"While it is true you learn with age, the down side is what you often learn is what a damn fool you were before"

Thomas Sowell

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

You've heard the theory that our universe is actually a computer simulation being run by an advanced race? Well I think I've finally figured out what they are trying to simulate. It's our distant ancestors trying to answer the question: "what would have happened if Donald Trump had won the 2016 presidential election?"

 

Heh.  :cat:

  • Like 1

"It has just been discovered that research causes cancer in rats."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I found this pretty interesting. Quality of journalism is a somewhat subjective standard but accuracy of journalism seldom is. Realclearscience.com has ranked science news sources by accuracy and quality. Some of the results are surprising, some are not. I am glad to see my magazine of choice National Geographic was in the top category: http://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2017/03/06/ranked_the_best__worst_science_news_sites.html

 

ACSH-RCS%20infographic%20v8.jpg

  • Like 1

"While it is true you learn with age, the down side is what you often learn is what a damn fool you were before"

Thomas Sowell

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm the enemy, 'cause I like to think, I like to read. I'm into freedom of speech, and freedom of choice. I'm the kinda guy that likes to sit in a greasy spoon and wonder, "Gee, should I have the T-bone steak or the jumbo rack of barbecue ribs with the side-order of gravy fries?" I want high cholesterol! I wanna eat bacon, and butter, and buckets of cheese, okay?! I wanna smoke a Cuban cigar the size of Cincinnati in the non-smoking section! I wanna run naked through the street, with green Jell-O all over my body, reading Playboy magazine. Why? Because I suddenly may feel the need to, okay, pal? I've SEEN the future. Do you know what it is? It's a 47-year-old virgin sitting around in his beige pajamas, drinking a banana-broccoli shake, singing "I'm an Oscar Meyer Wiene"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is Pure Garbage a denotation or an actual news source? Also am I blind, or is Brietbart missing? Bit surprised how far over TIME is.

 

edit: Ok, the focus is just science. Maybe Brietbart doesn't qualify?

Edited by Hurlshot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm perhaps a little surprised that Scientific American falls into the "mixed record" camp. They do include some editorials, but for the most part it seems pretty sound. Somebody's opinion, I guess.

"It has just been discovered that research causes cancer in rats."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's derived by judging ideological bias, but that is highly influenced by the judge's ideological bias. Although the chart seems fairly reasonable as far as I know.

"Moral indignation is a standard strategy for endowing the idiot with dignity." Marshall McLuhan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think they were a little unfair to Wired. It's really more a giant ad brochure for current technology rather than a news source for the theoretical or of broad interest. The don't really write about "science" other than tech trends whose commercial availability is either already here or is imminent.

"While it is true you learn with age, the down side is what you often learn is what a damn fool you were before"

Thomas Sowell

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While true that Wired focusses mostly on technology rather than science there are a lot of general publications on there- the Daily Fail is mostly focussed on blaming immigrants for all Britain's ills, for example, and only really carries science stories incidentally to that.

 

I'm perhaps a little surprised that Scientific American falls into the "mixed record" camp. They do include some editorials, but for the most part it seems pretty sound. Somebody's opinion, I guess.

 

A lot of people don't like Scientific American because it kind of has pretensions towards being a 'proper' journal, when it's really a popular science magazine. And that means that when it puts out incorrect information it tends to be taken more seriously than when a non specialist site (say, the BBC) does so.

 

I'd be more surprised at how well the Economist is regarded, personally. Even leaving aside its blogs/ opinion pieces which are frequently ideologically driven spiels bereft of connection to reality I've read plenty of actual Economist articles which are not accurate. Suppose their specifically science coverage could be better though, I've never thought to separate their articles by type. Same for Wired, actually, never bothered to specifically separate their tech articles from science ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know what would be a cool name for a burger joint? Robo-Burger. No humans, no cash, drive through or walk up only. No need to engage anyone in small talk and no one spits in your food. I can see it coming. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2017/03/09/genius-burger-flipping-robot-replaces-humans-first-day-work/

"While it is true you learn with age, the down side is what you often learn is what a damn fool you were before"

Thomas Sowell

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

 

"They suggest that for a long period of Earth’s early days, the planet was covered by one solid plate, like an eggshell. Scientists still aren’t sure how we might have gotten from an early solid crust to our present-day tectonic plates."

 

Much in the same way an egg's shell cracks when boiled I would assume? That internal heat build-up, creates a pressure build-up, which cracks the hard surface.

egg%2Bcracked-this%2Btips%2Bfor%2Bit-rec

 

I'll send my account information for those 64k$ 

  • Like 2

Fortune favors the bald.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...