I thought we were done with this.
eric SV Menader
--- In electricboats@yahoogroups.com, Julian Webb <julian.proto@...> wrote:
>
> hi
>
> - sub 4 minute mile, a great example. in 1770 james parrot ran a measured
> sub 4 minute mile. his time was measured by a new chronometer, accurate
> enough to easily measure the time. the route and time were checked by
> current 'qualified officials' who duly accepted the time. then 'we' came
> along.
> - as later officials 'knew better' parrots time was struck off the records
> as modern officials 'knew' it wasn't possible! the sublime arrogance of the
> educated.
> - i'm not saying he did it or not but it was checked by accepted people of
> the day and ratified by those trusted to do so, but i guess they didn't
> belong to a body we 'accept' so it had to be bogus.
> - we'll not be around to see what future folk decide about things we've
> written into the records, and decide must have been an error.
>
> - the biggest critics used to be ill educated know alls, and then we got
> education for the masses, (well in developed countries anyway) an now i
> think you'll find the biggest critics are those 'who know better'.
>
> - as no institution (or student for that matter) has the time to let us
> mess around and prove/disprove things for ourselves, we accept what we're
> told, carry out a few selected experiments (to prove what we've just been
> taught is correct), and hope we can remember it so we can pass the exam and
> prove we're qualified.
>
> - it was estimated around 20 years ago years ago that the "average person"
> actually had 20-25% personal experience in the things that they said they
> "knew", e.g. most people will tell you that "a Rolls Royce is a good car"
> without themselves or anyone they knew first hand having ever owned one.
>
> - as long as the information comes from an a trusted or dominant peer e.g.
> friend, boss, aunty etc, an "authority figure" e.g. doctor, someone in the
> pertinent uniform etc, or media e.g. television, Wikipedia, a well put
> together presentation etc we are happy to trust and repeat that wisdom.
>
> - that is fine though and has always been, and must remain a/the major part
> of our "learning" as we are simply not capable of experiencing anything but
> a tiny portion of what life and others have to offer. The necessity of
> intellectual progress makes it a fundamental to be "like dwarfs on the
> shoulders of giants". How far would we have got along our path so far if we
> had to reprove every step, experiment, law, tenet etc.
> - what's not fine though is that those who 'know better' actually don't
> 'know' at all, as their empirical/hands on experience (if any) is usually
> narrow, limited and job or carrer specific.
>
> - so you're overly kind when you say "scientists and engineers who have
> arrived at their opinions by way of research and experience." i number
> amongst them and have worked with and employed both over many years and if
> you look at company surveys and research conducted, both classes of people
> invent little but both specialise in perfecting the work of others.
>
> - ici before it divisionalised (to limit the effect of looming law suits)
> conducted such a survey and found that innovation was inversely
> proportional to the level of qualification, i.e. the more you know what can
> be done, the less you bother with what you know you can't be, and who wants
> failures on his resume/c.v. anyway.
>
> - so the qualified or those who know better don't even need to waste their
> time thinking about nonsense, and so just cut'n'paste laws, copy formulas
> from wikipedia, and quote them to the poor dumb sods who waste their time
> thinking about stupid things like the sea of energies we walk around in
> still to be discovered or tapped, the near perpetual motion that is the
> universe we live in e.g. a lab version of the atomic or planetary model
> where the momentum of the object is thousands of times stronger than the
> slowing effect caused by the friction in the system, but hey that nonsense
> is for ill-educated fools like Faraday etc.
>
> cheers
>
>
>
>
> On 31 May 2013 02:18, John Kohnen <jhkohnen@...> wrote:
>
> > Rolls Royce made a V-8 engine in 1904, and V-8s from other makers were
> > pretty common by the time Henry Ford introduced his flathead V-8 in the
> > 1930s. Ford didn't "invent" the V-8, his innovation was putting one in a
> > low-priced car. Sometimes the stories that you think are true just aren't:
> > only Columbus thought the world was round in 1492; Henry Ford invented the
> > automobile; Edison invented the light bulb (he just perfected it), and
> > many more...
> >
> > Who said, "it is humanly impossible for a man to run a mile in less than
> > four minutes?" I don't doubt that somebody could have said that, but it
> > seems unlikely that it was the accepted "fact." There are always naysaying
> > crackpots. They're different from sceptical scientists and engineers who
> > have arrived at their opinions by way of research and experience.
> >
> > On Thu, 23 May 2013 22:58:43 -0700, james wrote:
> >
> > > Well said.
> > > If I remember my history correctly.... "it is humanly impossible for a
> > > man to run a mile in less than four minutes" Roger Banister did it when
> > > he was told it couldn't be done.
> > > "A v8 engine can not be made, the theory is illogical" Henry Ford knew
> > > it could be done and he made it.
> > > "Man is meant to go through life with Kerosene lanterns" Thomas Edison
> > > even failed 10,000 time trying to invent the electric light.... but he
> > > did it.
> > > "Man cannot fly" but we do.
> > > Traveling to the moon was fantasy... now it's a reality.
> > > "Anything a man can see in his mind and believe whole heatedly... He can
> > > achieve" quoted from the bible, written over 2000 years ago.
> > > ...
> >
> > --
> > John (jkohnen@...)
> > It s a damn poor mind that can think of only one way to spell a word!
> > (Attributed to Andrew Jackson)
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> www.proto.eu.com ltd
>
> unit 9 Somerton Industrial Estate, Belfast, BT3 9JP, U.K.
> Phone; (+44) 02895 811251 - Mobile; (+44) 07427 696 796 - Fax;
> (+44) 0871 9898296
> Company number; NI067673 VAT number; GB975375474
>
| Reply via web post | Reply to sender | Reply to group | Start a New Topic | Messages in this topic (83) |
No comments:
Post a Comment