The MECA story, A place for speculation |
The MECA story, A place for speculation |
Jul 31 2008, 10:22 PM
Post
#1
|
|
The Poet Dude Group: Moderator Posts: 5551 Joined: 15-March 04 From: Kendal, Cumbria, UK Member No.: 60 |
Seriously, hasn't anyone else got any thoughts (dismissive or otherwise) on the "Have you briefed the President's Science Advisor?" (re MECA) question by C Covault? I am NOT going all woo-woo here, don't worry, I just thought it was an odd thing to ask... To my ears it sounded like C C was suggesting, subtly, to the panel that he had heard "something" about the MECA analysis and wanted them to comment. The question was brushed aside - rather uncomfortably I thought - and the discussion quickly moved on, but it seemed like a bit of a Moment to me. He actually began, if I remember correctly, by asking where the "MECA guys" were, asking if they had "been hidden under the table"... cue uncomfortable laughs from the panel...
Again, I have to stress, in case anyone thinks I'm 'suggesting' anything, I'm not getting all Muldur here, I was just struck by how out of the blue the question was, and wondered if anyone has any thoughts on it... -------------------- |
|
|
Aug 2 2008, 07:15 PM
Post
#2
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 1591 Joined: 14-October 05 From: Vermont Member No.: 530 |
I was enjoying both the speculation and the meta conversation until I read the NASA watch post. I agree with the point, but there's no reason to be ad hominem.
The speculation's been interesting, just because it gets folk's thoughts out there on what some really cool results would be. And we know it's just speculation. The meta-conversation about Aviation Leak has been interesting as well. Can't really get ticked at anyone doing their job. And the non-photo instruments could actually hold their cards less closely it might help the public understand that there's a scientific method before these scientific pronouncements. Far too many people think that scientists shake up their facts like a boggle game and find only exactly what they're looking for. Global warming denialists especially. For the team to flat out say "We aren't sure yet, but we're excited," just rams home the skeptical nature of science. On the other hand, announcing that NASA scientists have some exciting results but they're unsure might be fodder for conspiracy theorists--AWST always has been--but they're lost souls anyways. |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 20th September 2024 - 10:06 PM |
RULES AND GUIDELINES Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting. IMAGE COPYRIGHT |
OPINIONS AND MODERATION Opinions expressed on UnmannedSpaceflight.com are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of UnmannedSpaceflight.com or The Planetary Society. The all-volunteer UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderation team is wholly independent of The Planetary Society. The Planetary Society has no influence over decisions made by the UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderators. |
SUPPORT THE FORUM Unmannedspaceflight.com is funded by the Planetary Society. Please consider supporting our work and many other projects by donating to the Society or becoming a member. |