10 questions to ask Joe Fugate
- Thread starter kafka47
- Start date
Originally posted by JoeFugate:
Thanks. It was for MegaTraveller Journal#2 & #3. I will certainly treasure both...plus, who likes eBay?If I missed the autographs, just let me know what you wanted me to autograph and I'll send you one that's been signed.
Then keep the other for an extra copy, or sell it on ebay. If I missed the autograph we'll assume it's my boo-boo and so I'll just send you out another one gratis.
Me for one. It's nice for selling stuff I'd get pennies for at garage sales or used stores and I've gotten some great deals on stuff I just can't find locally. Yes that includes Traveller items, even DGP. I got Villani & Vargr for cheap recently with a tear on the cover. The rest of the book was fine. Worked for me.
They've also really improved the tracking info on both sides lately.
As always, YMMV.
Casey
You can credit the great artwork to Rob Caswell's art direction. We were never much for "just filling a hole" with some piece of art.Originally posted by Casey:
They remind me of the best of the Star Trek fan pubs/ship & design books at the time in style (that's a compliment) though with an arguably cleaner look. Great artwork esp. for a mag.
Casey
We almost never used filler art. Each piece was made to order, with Rob carefully directing the artist on what to draw. Rob would often write several paragraphs of art direction meticulously specifying what the piece needed to include, sychronized with the text.
And Rob would only use artists he knew could deliver the "look" he wanted.
I think it was that kind of attention to detail that helped make our products good enough that people really liked them and complimented us on our efforts.
daryen
SOC-14 1K
In the OTU? No.
The EW was created for TNE. To drive the point home, the book that gives the most expansive explanation of the EW (Regency Sourcebook) specifically states that the EW has nothing to do with the primordials/sparklers.
In a way, you can look at the EW as a literary replacement of the primordials.
Next question!
25. Since DGP products took the Traveller gaming world by storm when they were first introduced, rather than wonder what happened, why not pull a Steve Jobs, come back, and do it again?
26. 4) Have you considered doing more work in the gaming industry? Perhaps more for Traveller?
==================================================
I'm actually going to do these two questions since they are so similar.
I find the wording "took the Traveller gaming world by storm" to be interesting. Our first product, TD1, only had a print run of 1000 copies and it took us over 6 months to sell them all.
That hardly qualifies as "taking the Traveller gaming world by storm". And we quickly found out most distributors are not gamers, they are business people, so they don't know a good gaming product from a bad one.
However, they can tell whether or not you know the distribution channel ropes, and if your product is small, black and white, and looks like it was printed on a dot matrix printer, they smell "wanna be" all over you and the product, and they are not a charity case. Most said "no" when we approached them with our first year's B&W Traveller's journals.
So we didn't take any market by storm ... it was a lot of persistant hard work and pouring any profits back into improving the "shelf appeal" of our products.
Now on to the second part ... why not come back and do it again, or write more for the gaming business.
Well, as I have mentioned, I pretty much burnt myself out on Traveller during the 10 years DGP was in operation, and haven't looked at anything published for the game since, nor have I even thought of running a session.
And that's still pretty much true. It's fun to speak with you all and catch up on the game, and if I was to come into some of the modern materials for the game at the right price, I might pick up some of the products just for an interesting read.
But as to writing for Traveller, I'm done. The 10 DGP years fully satisfied my curiosity about the background and the game. Plus I really am more interested these days in getting away from mounds of rules and having the computer do all the heavy lifting.
Which means I'm also not especially interested in rules design any more.
Having said all that, I am still interested in developing concepts for games, and have been kicking around a concept for a prehistoric game.
I'm intrigued by all the out of place artifacts and fossils that are found in the geological record. There are hundreds of such things that don't fit into the popular evolutionary time scale, and they are mostly being ignored, because they do not fit the theory ... they should not be there.
What kind of things? Very advanced metallic artifacts found all the way down to the cambrian layer, as well as fossil evidence of humans all the way to the cambrian as well.
Fossilized human foot prints, fossilized sandle prints, etc.
Now if there were less than a dozen such out-of-place finds, then perhaps they could be explained, but there are hundreds!
I'm not about to go off the deep end with this information, but it does make you wonder. And it makes a great foundation for a game of fantastic adventure in Earth's distant past.
Here's an excerpt from one of the books on this subject, "Hidden History of the Human Race".
==================================================
In The Hidden History of the Human Race [the authors push back] ... the horizons of our amnesia not just 12,000 or 20,000 years, but millions of years into the past, and showing that almost everything we have been taught to believe about the origins and evolution of our species rests on the shaky foundation of academic opinion, and on a highly selective sampling of research results.
The two authors then set about putting the record straight by showing all the other research results that have been edited out of the record during the past two centuries, not because there was anything wrong or bogus about the results themselves, but simply because they did not fit with prevailing academic opinion.
Anomalous and out-of-place discoveries reported by Cremo and Thompson in The Hidden History of the Human Race include convincing evidence that anatomically modern humans may have been present on the Earth not just for 100,000 years or less (the orthodox view), but for millions of years, and that metal objects of advanced design may have been in use at equally early periods.
Moreover, although sensational claims have been made before about out-of-place artifacts, they have never been supported by such overwhelming and utterly convincing documentation as Cremo and Thompson provide.
In the final analysis, it is the meticulous scholarship of the authors, and the cumulative weight of the facts presented in The Hidden History of the Human Race, that really convince. The book is, I believe, in harmony with the mood of the public at large in the world today, a mood which no longer unquestioningly accepts the pronouncements of established authorities, and is willing to listen with an open mind to heretics who make their case reasonably and rationally.
Never before has the case for a complete re-evaluation of the human story been made more reasonably and rationally than it is in these pages.
==================================================
Kind of gives you goose bumps, doesn't it? It's an "underground" movement in the geologic scientific community, and it could be fun to speculate about.
Think of it: Humans with metallic artifacts of advanced design living on the earth during the time of the dinosaurs! Done properly, what an interesting adventure setting that could make!
So that's my latest "gaming" idea, such as it is. We'll see if it turns into anything ...
25. Since DGP products took the Traveller gaming world by storm when they were first introduced, rather than wonder what happened, why not pull a Steve Jobs, come back, and do it again?
26. 4) Have you considered doing more work in the gaming industry? Perhaps more for Traveller?
==================================================
I'm actually going to do these two questions since they are so similar.
I find the wording "took the Traveller gaming world by storm" to be interesting. Our first product, TD1, only had a print run of 1000 copies and it took us over 6 months to sell them all.
That hardly qualifies as "taking the Traveller gaming world by storm". And we quickly found out most distributors are not gamers, they are business people, so they don't know a good gaming product from a bad one.
However, they can tell whether or not you know the distribution channel ropes, and if your product is small, black and white, and looks like it was printed on a dot matrix printer, they smell "wanna be" all over you and the product, and they are not a charity case. Most said "no" when we approached them with our first year's B&W Traveller's journals.
So we didn't take any market by storm ... it was a lot of persistant hard work and pouring any profits back into improving the "shelf appeal" of our products.
Now on to the second part ... why not come back and do it again, or write more for the gaming business.
Well, as I have mentioned, I pretty much burnt myself out on Traveller during the 10 years DGP was in operation, and haven't looked at anything published for the game since, nor have I even thought of running a session.
And that's still pretty much true. It's fun to speak with you all and catch up on the game, and if I was to come into some of the modern materials for the game at the right price, I might pick up some of the products just for an interesting read.
But as to writing for Traveller, I'm done. The 10 DGP years fully satisfied my curiosity about the background and the game. Plus I really am more interested these days in getting away from mounds of rules and having the computer do all the heavy lifting.
Which means I'm also not especially interested in rules design any more.
Having said all that, I am still interested in developing concepts for games, and have been kicking around a concept for a prehistoric game.
I'm intrigued by all the out of place artifacts and fossils that are found in the geological record. There are hundreds of such things that don't fit into the popular evolutionary time scale, and they are mostly being ignored, because they do not fit the theory ... they should not be there.
What kind of things? Very advanced metallic artifacts found all the way down to the cambrian layer, as well as fossil evidence of humans all the way to the cambrian as well.
Fossilized human foot prints, fossilized sandle prints, etc.
Now if there were less than a dozen such out-of-place finds, then perhaps they could be explained, but there are hundreds!
I'm not about to go off the deep end with this information, but it does make you wonder. And it makes a great foundation for a game of fantastic adventure in Earth's distant past.
Here's an excerpt from one of the books on this subject, "Hidden History of the Human Race".
==================================================
In The Hidden History of the Human Race [the authors push back] ... the horizons of our amnesia not just 12,000 or 20,000 years, but millions of years into the past, and showing that almost everything we have been taught to believe about the origins and evolution of our species rests on the shaky foundation of academic opinion, and on a highly selective sampling of research results.
The two authors then set about putting the record straight by showing all the other research results that have been edited out of the record during the past two centuries, not because there was anything wrong or bogus about the results themselves, but simply because they did not fit with prevailing academic opinion.
Anomalous and out-of-place discoveries reported by Cremo and Thompson in The Hidden History of the Human Race include convincing evidence that anatomically modern humans may have been present on the Earth not just for 100,000 years or less (the orthodox view), but for millions of years, and that metal objects of advanced design may have been in use at equally early periods.
Moreover, although sensational claims have been made before about out-of-place artifacts, they have never been supported by such overwhelming and utterly convincing documentation as Cremo and Thompson provide.
In the final analysis, it is the meticulous scholarship of the authors, and the cumulative weight of the facts presented in The Hidden History of the Human Race, that really convince. The book is, I believe, in harmony with the mood of the public at large in the world today, a mood which no longer unquestioningly accepts the pronouncements of established authorities, and is willing to listen with an open mind to heretics who make their case reasonably and rationally.
Never before has the case for a complete re-evaluation of the human story been made more reasonably and rationally than it is in these pages.
==================================================
Kind of gives you goose bumps, doesn't it? It's an "underground" movement in the geologic scientific community, and it could be fun to speculate about.
Think of it: Humans with metallic artifacts of advanced design living on the earth during the time of the dinosaurs! Done properly, what an interesting adventure setting that could make!
So that's my latest "gaming" idea, such as it is. We'll see if it turns into anything ...
M
Malenfant
Guest
I really hope you don't take that stuff seriously.
It's "underground" in the geologic community in the sense that the Face on Mars is "underground" in the planetary science community, or the fake moon landing is "underground" in the astronautical community. i.e. it's pseudo-scientfic wacko fiction based on false assumptions and bad research and an uncritical mind, touted as fact.
Scientists have no agenda to hide things like this or engage in "cover ups" - I know, because I am one.
Malenfant:
I don't take the speculation seriously, but the fact there are hundreds of out of place artifacts and fossils is fact and documented.
You can ignore the artifacts and fossils if you want, but they do exist and need to be reckoned with. They suggest that the current popular theory of evolution has problems and is not completely correct.
The book I mentioned is a carefully researched accounting of these items. You can call the off-the-wall theories of *why* these things exist crackpot -- and I agree with you here most of the time -- but the out of place artifacts and fossils remain.
An honest accounting of the evidence says you need to look at *all* the evindence, not just what supports the popular theory. That's the part I don't see today's scientific community doing.
I don't take the speculation seriously, but the fact there are hundreds of out of place artifacts and fossils is fact and documented.
You can ignore the artifacts and fossils if you want, but they do exist and need to be reckoned with. They suggest that the current popular theory of evolution has problems and is not completely correct.
The book I mentioned is a carefully researched accounting of these items. You can call the off-the-wall theories of *why* these things exist crackpot -- and I agree with you here most of the time -- but the out of place artifacts and fossils remain.
An honest accounting of the evidence says you need to look at *all* the evindence, not just what supports the popular theory. That's the part I don't see today's scientific community doing.
M
Malenfant
Guest
No, it's not. I checked some of those accounts, and a lot seem to date from the 1800s, and reported by people who have little grounding in geological science. I saw a picture of the "footprint" in the shale and frankly that could be anything. And the metal pot from the precambrian is somewhat risible - apparently the evidence for this comes from the fact that someone blew up a rockface and found some shattered pot debris afterwards. That could mean ANYTHING (most likely, someone buried a pot in the soil, that got caught in the explosion). Far more likely that these things have been misidentified or hoaxed.
Never mind the fact that these "artifacts" would have to survive millions of years of chemical weathering, geothermal heating, rock folding, and metamorphism - yet they're still even recognisable?! For starters, a metal pot would at the very least be squashed into a flat sheet by overpressure of rock layers deposited above over the billions of years since it was "deposited" in the Precambrian.
Again, it doesn't. They suggest more that people don't do their research properly, make false assumptions, leap to conclusions that are not necessarily valid, and are generally gullible (if the reader) or out to make a quick buck by exploiting their readers ignorance of the subject matter (if they're the author).
Evolutionary theory is sound and has been proven time and time again. There are still gaps in our knowledge, sure, but nothing on the scale of "gee, humans have been around for billions of years because they left pots behind in the precambrian".
These books are always touted as "carefully researched", because the authors want to add credibility to their cause. The fact that they are not accepted by the scientific community means that they are in fact not carefully researched at all. These artifacts are undoubtedly modern items that have been misidentified as "ancient artifacts" - if nothing else because there is flat out no way that anything artificial (at least, that isn't made of wacky scifi material) could survive for millions or even billions of years buried under tons of rock at geological temperatures and pressures.
What saddens me is that people leap to defend some wackos with crackpot ideas, and cheerfully believe that some "cover up" is going on in the scientific community. Frankly that's an insult to all scientists - how would you like to have some random nutbag come along claiming that he knows more about your field of interest than you do when he obviously doesn't and is clearly spouting garbage? And what's worse, people believe him in preference over you? Again, I can tell you most emphatically and from direct personal experience that there is no "cover up" in these matters. These peoples' ideas are not accepted by the scientific community because they have not been rigorously researched, checked and verified and cross-examined and their assumptions are not based on fact and have not been backed up.
Then you don't know much about the scientific community. I am a scientist - with a strong background in geology, astrophysics and planetary science - and if there's one thing that scientists do, is consider all the facts that are available. What these authors - and their believers - seem to be lacking is Occam's Razor and the ability to critically and objectively assess evidence. These are the same people who see a hill that looks like a face when viewed from above at a certain height and a certain angle at a certain resolution in a certain illumination angle, and then claim that this is indisputable evidence that intelligent civilisation thrived on Mars and left us a message - and who still claim that even when newer images reveal that it's very obviously just a hill.
Are there gaps in human history? You bet there are. I believe that the ancient historical civilisations were very advanced (EDIT: At least to the point that the Egyptians might have known something about electricity, and that astronomical knowledge among ancient civilisations was very refined, all things considered...), and that a lot of knowledge has been lost (and rediscovered) over the several thousand years BC. But there is no solid evidence to support any claims that humankind has been around on Earth for billions of years - and anyone who claims that this is the case is leaping to conclusions that fly in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary from a variety of other scientific fields.
FlightCommanderSolitude
SOC-13
But just think: if they had been around that long ago, we'd be pouring them into our gas tanks right now for $2 a gallon!
Malenfant:
Yes, you are probably right in many cases that the evidence *may* have been discovered in a rather hap-hazzard manner and poorly evaluated. Yet some of it could be legit. We'll probably never know.
My point here is not to defend this evidence one way or the other. It is merely to point out that at least *some* of the evidence is very well documented by reputable people, that it does not fit with the popular theory, and is largely being ignored.
For example:
One of these important finds is the footprints found in Laetoli, Tanzania, by Mary Leakey in 1977. These footprints were found in a layer that was calculated to be 3.6 million years old, and more importantly, they were no different from the footprints that a contemporary man would leave.
http://www.darwinismrefuted.com/origin_of_man_11.html
--------------------------------------------------
While studying the Bay of Naples, German sedimentologist Johanus Walther noticed that the banks were being FORMED SIDEWAYS, and not in successive vertical layers as had been assumed.
Recent experiments by French sedimentologist Guy Berthault have demonstrated these findings in the laboratory. He has shown that sand flowing continuously (in air, water or a vacuum) sorts itself out into deposits of small, medium and large particles that LOOK like successive strata, but are not. The layers were formed all at the same time, SIDEWAYS.
Since experimental evidence shows the layer sequence of sediments may be in question, this suggests the accepted approach to dating rock layers could be incorrect, meaning the entire geological column dating system may need to be re-examined.
http://geology.ref.ac/berthault/
--------------------------------------------------
And this is probably getting way off topic on this list, so we'd probably better wrap this up and get back to gaming and Traveller.
My main point is this leads to an interesting hypothesis that could make for a fun gaming setting. And if you like conspiracy theories (black helicopters are watching us, the Russians are behind UFOs, etc), there's even some "evidence" in the real world to support it.
Yes, you are probably right in many cases that the evidence *may* have been discovered in a rather hap-hazzard manner and poorly evaluated. Yet some of it could be legit. We'll probably never know.
My point here is not to defend this evidence one way or the other. It is merely to point out that at least *some* of the evidence is very well documented by reputable people, that it does not fit with the popular theory, and is largely being ignored.
For example:
One of these important finds is the footprints found in Laetoli, Tanzania, by Mary Leakey in 1977. These footprints were found in a layer that was calculated to be 3.6 million years old, and more importantly, they were no different from the footprints that a contemporary man would leave.
http://www.darwinismrefuted.com/origin_of_man_11.html
--------------------------------------------------
While studying the Bay of Naples, German sedimentologist Johanus Walther noticed that the banks were being FORMED SIDEWAYS, and not in successive vertical layers as had been assumed.
Recent experiments by French sedimentologist Guy Berthault have demonstrated these findings in the laboratory. He has shown that sand flowing continuously (in air, water or a vacuum) sorts itself out into deposits of small, medium and large particles that LOOK like successive strata, but are not. The layers were formed all at the same time, SIDEWAYS.
Since experimental evidence shows the layer sequence of sediments may be in question, this suggests the accepted approach to dating rock layers could be incorrect, meaning the entire geological column dating system may need to be re-examined.
http://geology.ref.ac/berthault/
--------------------------------------------------
And this is probably getting way off topic on this list, so we'd probably better wrap this up and get back to gaming and Traveller.
My main point is this leads to an interesting hypothesis that could make for a fun gaming setting. And if you like conspiracy theories (black helicopters are watching us, the Russians are behind UFOs, etc), there's even some "evidence" in the real world to support it.
M
Malenfant
Guest
Some of it may well be anomalous - but either way, one or two anomalies does not mean that evolution and darwinism is bunk - if anything it just means that a mechanism for creating the rare exceptions needs to be accounted for. Bypassing the standard scientific method, in most of these cases, and going straight for the pop psuedoscience bookstand does not make the evidence any more believable or credible.
Oh, and 3.6 million year old hominid footprints aren't particularly unbelieveable - maybe we have to jiggle around with the timeline a little bit, but that happens all the time anyway. It certainly doesn't "refute darwinism" as that website seems to claim. And you'll note that Berhault's ideas got a pretty sound refuting on his own website (and his defence is very very weak).
I won't argue that it makes for interesting fictional settings - but when people tout things as "facts" that supposedly show that everything we know and are discovering and researching today is wrong then that crosses the line. If that really is the case, then the scientific community will accept it. But the vast majority of these cases are not, and seem to be presented by people who think they know science better than scientists do.
Now personally, I think it's all down to the Great Race of Yith. But that's another game entirely
(oh, and in case you wonder what my background is: Geology O and A levels at secondary school, Exploration Geophysics BSc degree at university, MSc Astrophysics, PhD in planetary science, currently doing a post-doc in planetary oceanography. Plus I've been to and presented at seven planetary science conferences and know a lot of the people high up in the field. Plus a strong interest in AI Research, genetics and memetics and most things scientific).
Oh, and 3.6 million year old hominid footprints aren't particularly unbelieveable - maybe we have to jiggle around with the timeline a little bit, but that happens all the time anyway. It certainly doesn't "refute darwinism" as that website seems to claim. And you'll note that Berhault's ideas got a pretty sound refuting on his own website (and his defence is very very weak).
I won't argue that it makes for interesting fictional settings - but when people tout things as "facts" that supposedly show that everything we know and are discovering and researching today is wrong then that crosses the line. If that really is the case, then the scientific community will accept it. But the vast majority of these cases are not, and seem to be presented by people who think they know science better than scientists do.
Now personally, I think it's all down to the Great Race of Yith. But that's another game entirely
(oh, and in case you wonder what my background is: Geology O and A levels at secondary school, Exploration Geophysics BSc degree at university, MSc Astrophysics, PhD in planetary science, currently doing a post-doc in planetary oceanography. Plus I've been to and presented at seven planetary science conferences and know a lot of the people high up in the field. Plus a strong interest in AI Research, genetics and memetics and most things scientific).
I think this is the key point on which we disagree.
If the changes are incremental and serve as "course adjustments" to the current thinking, as in the case of the evidence that humans 3 million years ago are unchanged from modern man, then yes, the scientific community will come to embrace it.
But history shows that "revolutions" in science are fought tooth and nail by the "establishment". It doesn't matter how right the revolutoin may eventually prove to be, it is vehemently resisted, and the originators of the new theory are maligned, called crazy, disbarred, etc. And many in the establishment fear for their reputations with their peers *more* than they want to consider the alternative that might, just might be closer to the truth.
That's just human nature, and all our modern scientific advancement hasn't changed that.
My contention is that will probably happen again some day in science, and the current establishement will fight it just like those in power fought Darwin when he proposed *his* notion originally. Or Pasteur. Or Copernuicus. Or Galileo. Or Newton. The list goes on and on.
I often refered to thinking clearly on how things *really work* in my Traveller Q&A, and this is a case in point. If you truly want the truth, then no position, no matter how dear it may be to you, should be held to with a total exclusion to all other outside views. Be willing to entertain contrary views, even to the point that you could pretend to hold that view so you can better understand it.
It is the height of arrogance for a society to decide that because it is technological, that it has the corner on truth.
Because of this aspect of human nature, I can take a perverse pleasure in watching people's reactions when presented with contrary evidence to their "sacred cow" views. Doesn't mean I even believe any of the contrary view, I just like to see if people will honestly consider alternatives, or throw up walls, get angry, and so on.
Me, I like to unemotionally consider all the angles, and admit that no one has all the answers.
Excuse me, but how do you prove something that you say happens over millions of years? The best we can surely do is state that it is a theory ... and that we haven't been convinced that it has been disproved yet. Then in a million or two years we can look back and state categorically whether it was proven.
Good point! With historical events, you cannot prove beyond all doubt that they did or did not in fact happen.
Science depends on events being repeatable to be fact. I can take water, lower its temperature below 0 degrees C and turn it into ice. There! I can repeatedly demonstrate that ice and water are the same substance, just at different temperatures.
Historical events are unique, they happened only one time. By analogy you can demonstrate an event in the present, and say that its outcome leaves similar evidence, so it is reasonble to assume a similar process must have caused what we find as evidence from this one-time historical event.
But it is not beyond all doubt like liguid water and ice being the same compound. Especially if there were no eye witnesses to the historical event, then all you have are guesses. They may be educated guesses, but without eye witnesesses they will always just be a guess (called a "hypothesis" or "theory" to use scientific terminology).
But *not* a scientific fact.
Science depends on events being repeatable to be fact. I can take water, lower its temperature below 0 degrees C and turn it into ice. There! I can repeatedly demonstrate that ice and water are the same substance, just at different temperatures.
Historical events are unique, they happened only one time. By analogy you can demonstrate an event in the present, and say that its outcome leaves similar evidence, so it is reasonble to assume a similar process must have caused what we find as evidence from this one-time historical event.
But it is not beyond all doubt like liguid water and ice being the same compound. Especially if there were no eye witnesses to the historical event, then all you have are guesses. They may be educated guesses, but without eye witnesesses they will always just be a guess (called a "hypothesis" or "theory" to use scientific terminology).
But *not* a scientific fact.
M
Malenfant
Guest
Yes, but those footprints don't say that. If they say anything, then assuming the prints have been correctly measured and identified it says that something with feet that appear to have been very much like modern human feet walked across that surface. It does NOT say that something exactly like modern man must therefore have walked across that surface - that is a huge jump to make based on one small piece of evidence.
What, like how a random patent clerk proposed Relativity and put Newtonian physics on a backburner at the start of the last century? I seem to recall that was a somewhat painless transition. But then there were actually tests and evidence that could be found for Einstein's hypotheses.
Again, you show your ignorance of the scientific community. New ideas are being proposed all the time. If those ideas fail to pass the peer-review process, then it's up to the authors to find more convincing evidence. Scientists are not out to "crush new ideas" or "malign" people. All we want is solid evidence to support ideas that are proposed, based on fact and reality - not faith, belief, or supposition.
Most often, you'll find that "those in power" when Galileo or Copernicus or Darwin were around were religious, not scientfic. Of course they defended their worldview ferociously, because science was totally at odds with the religious view. The Sun did not revolve around the Earth, the Earth revolved around the sun, and other worlds revolved around the sun too and had their own satellites. It was the religious establishment that saw science as a threat - but ultimately science won the argument, because the evidence was irrefutable.
The problem is that these pseudoscientists and creationists do not do that. A good scientist has an open mind. And most scientists do have that - but that doesn't mean that one should accept anything anyone says at face value. A critical mind is also necessary, to weed out the wheat from the chaff. Again, you have a very odd, paranoid, and incorrect view of how science actually works - probably from reading too many pseudoscience books. I don't know if you do read actual science texts, but I would strongly recommend that you do in order to get a much more balanced viewpoint.
So basing your worldview on rational, repeatable, and predictable proof and evidence is "the height of arrogance"? What else are we to do, base everything on faith and magic?
I don't think science has the "corner on truth" because there are still things that cannot be explained in the current paradigm. But I've no doubt that the scientific paradigm will expand to be able to explain them.
I'm glad this amuses you so. I'm guessing that your profession isn't regularly called into question by people who know little about it. So you'll forgive me if I get pissed off when this happens.
I don't admit that science has all the answers... but I'm pretty sure that it will, because so far our understanding of the universe and the world around is almost infinitely greater compared to the ignorance humanity was wallowing in before a few hundred years ago. And I for one do not want to see a return to those days.
Similar threads
