<sigh> If you're nit-picking over details, it's definitely the new HN. I've had people attack me vociferously over "back of the envelope" calculations being off by a factor of 2. This isn't really much different.
And what would be your reaction if my previous comment had said "I'm just explaining that Mars is expensive and likely not feasible" instead of why?
Given the level of outrage you're showing, I'll bet you would have had a pretty similar response, as you showed here
The point is that you're not arguing against the "substantive false claim" I made. You're arguing from an emotional position that I said bad things about your dreams. A subject which is emotionally important to you.
> And anyway, pleanty of things that were once called "pipe dreams" have become reality.
And as I said earlier, most pipe dreams haven't become reality. Appealing to "dreams can become reality" is just false logic. People who down-vote counter-arguments, or argue in favor of such statements are just upset that a cynic like me points out most dreams don't become reality.
So... will you admit that your argument is based on nonsense? Or can you only see the speck in someone else's eye, while ignoring the plank in your own eye?
> Also, it's ridiculous to use "engineering reality" as the benchmark
Ah yes, because no one has any idea how to to it today, we will rely on magical technology (i.e. pipe dreams) which will be available in 100 years.
I like hope as much as the next person, but you're pretty much admitting that colonizing Mars is a dream, and isn't based in reality.
It's clear you have no intention of actually engaging with what people have said or playing by the standards of fair argumentation. I'm not going to waste any more of my time trying to engage with you
i.e. I engage with what you've said, admit your point that I mispoke, and point out errors in your position.
Your counter-argument is then "No YOU'RE a bad man! I'm taking my toys and going home".
That's... not convincing. And pretty much proves my point that I've hit an emotional position. One which can't be addressed rationally. And which provokes an irrational response.
<sigh> If you're nit-picking over details, it's definitely the new HN. I've had people attack me vociferously over "back of the envelope" calculations being off by a factor of 2. This isn't really much different.
And what would be your reaction if my previous comment had said "I'm just explaining that Mars is expensive and likely not feasible" instead of why?
Given the level of outrage you're showing, I'll bet you would have had a pretty similar response, as you showed here
The point is that you're not arguing against the "substantive false claim" I made. You're arguing from an emotional position that I said bad things about your dreams. A subject which is emotionally important to you.
> And anyway, pleanty of things that were once called "pipe dreams" have become reality.
And as I said earlier, most pipe dreams haven't become reality. Appealing to "dreams can become reality" is just false logic. People who down-vote counter-arguments, or argue in favor of such statements are just upset that a cynic like me points out most dreams don't become reality.
So... will you admit that your argument is based on nonsense? Or can you only see the speck in someone else's eye, while ignoring the plank in your own eye?
> Also, it's ridiculous to use "engineering reality" as the benchmark
Ah yes, because no one has any idea how to to it today, we will rely on magical technology (i.e. pipe dreams) which will be available in 100 years.
I like hope as much as the next person, but you're pretty much admitting that colonizing Mars is a dream, and isn't based in reality.