Following consensus is vastly different from following a leader.HiYoSilver wrote:... Seriously thoughscience should be about investigating .. not following a leader. Suit yourself though.
Rob
Following consensus is vastly different from following a leader.HiYoSilver wrote:... Seriously thoughscience should be about investigating .. not following a leader. Suit yourself though.
My first reaction to your comment was: Once a person has decided he/she is incapable of original thought and discovery he/she should perhaps leave their interest in science behind. However .. I remind myself that not all science is focused on discovery.rstevenson wrote:Following consensus is vastly different from following a leader.HiYoSilver wrote:... Seriously thoughscience should be about investigating .. not following a leader. Suit yourself though.
Rob
Hi Geck,geckzilla wrote:Ok, science is a broad, broad field of study, and astronomy is still broad, and astrophysics itself is a specialty with specialties, and people tend to stick to one particular specialty and get really good at it. For everything else, they have to rely on others, because there just isn't enough time in one's life to know everything and be good at everything. And how can we tell who to trust on these matters, and who not to trust? Accreditation, work history, personal contacts... any number of things you fail to offer us, HiYo. It's hard to trust you, and we don't have time for you, and you get so worked up that we don't just automatically accept what you have to say. It's really annoying.
Thanks for correcting my misconception.geckzilla wrote:There is plenty of room here for creative thought, but not the kind where it's presented as The Truth (tm) or without a very clear disclaimer that one is not an expert, or it's just a quick idea, back of the envelope calculation, etc. I personally do not have time for masses of text, especially as a moderator needing to read through just about everything to do the job. And no, it's not the "royal we" when I'm using the pronoun for a plural, collective group. The "royal we" is, by definition, in reference to singular individual.
It has been discussed more than you realize.HiYoSilver wrote:I guess what I was trying to say, Geck, was, regarding opinion, without a majority vote on opinion, the use of 'we' should perhaps be 'me and those who think like me.'
This is just wrong! There is no call for this kind of sniping, HiYoSilver. Please ask for forgiveness. Chris labors through the posts to provide relevant information and educate people on the forum. Education is with respect to what is known. He does an amazing job.HiYoSilver wrote:You've decided that someone else is smarter than you Chris?Chris Peterson wrote:We'll know it's worth investing some study time when it passes sufficient peer review in mainstream journals and acquires a degree of consensus as a viable theory. A good rule for all non-specialists.BDanielMayfield wrote:I don't have the time to look into tired time.
Doesn't every court need a jester tho?rstevenson wrote:Thank you. We -- and that's the royal we in my case -- value the work of the moderators, and especially so in this case.
HRH Rob
Of course m'lady.geckzilla wrote:It's just a web forum.
That's what the Black Widow said...geckzilla wrote:It's just a web forum.
Welcome back dude. Glad you haven't faded out entirely.THX1138 wrote: ↑Sun May 20, 2018 7:06 am Coming from a simple cabinet maker with virtually no schooling in any kind of or type of astrobiology type stuff I can only give you the most simplest explanation for planet formation but sometimes the simplest explanation turns out to be the correct one.
After stars have formed if the left over matter is very small in size then no planets will form as the particles just bounce off each other.
On the other hand if after the star has formed there are very large chunks of matter left over then the process of moon or planet forming may begin.
In a manner something like the tiny moonlets and the shepparding (I know that’s spelled wrong) moonlets are doing in Saturn’s rings.
Who’s to say that a large moon will not form from all that matter floating the rings of Saturn.
Laugh if you will but that’s my two cents where planet formation is concerned
Good day all
I'm certainly not brilliant, but I read a lot (and remember some of it). I ask my own and answer questions of others in an attempt to put what I think I know to the test.
Off topic, but I'm glad that you are not a dungeon dweller any more, Bruce!BDanielMayfield wrote: ↑Thu Nov 23, 2017 8:12 pmDoesn't every court need a jester tho?rstevenson wrote:Thank you. We -- and that's the royal we in my case -- value the work of the moderators, and especially so in this case.
HRH Rob
But then again, the royals here do have the right to consign pranksters to the dungeon, or even to declare "off with his head!"
Bruce, (former dungeon dweller)