Re: Manmade earthquakes

SKD <sherkd@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

Ok I am guilty of missing out chronologically but you are plain
pathetic harping on about it.

Actually, the real problem is that the statements were wrong and
symptomatic of a disdain for careful attention to facts and reasoning.
That makes your argumentation suspect from the outset.


Here is the proof, let's rephrase and
see anything changes materially: If man can make round trips to moon
in tin cans in late 60s and 70s, what is it so remarkable with manmade
quakes?

Well, first off, this is a fallacious argument*, because the two feats in
question have no relation to each other. One can apply this argument
schema to any number of things without shedding any light on the
subject. Here are just two examples:

If we can make round trips to the moon, why can't we hover in mid-air
by will power alone?

If we can make round trips to the moon, why can't we grow younger?

There are many more ways in which this can be instantiated.

But in your particular case, I can propose an answer. I will, however,
object to your characterization of the spacecraft as "tin cans", a
perjorative description that I think is merely present to advance the
cause of the fallacious reasoning.

The space flight to the moon was the culmination of a line of
technological development that arose over many centuries, starting with
the invention of rockets in ancient China. It was an out growth of
missile technology that advance during World War II. There is a clear
line of scientific discoveries and engineering solutions that explain
why such a flight was possible.

On the other hand, there is no supporting facts or evidence to suggest
any mechanism or technology that can be used to trigger earthquakes in
the general case. I will ignore the small earthquakes that have
accompanied the filling of large lakes behind dams. There is good
evidence for that, but I believe that that is not the sort of man-made
earthquake you mean.

So, on the one hand, we have a long history of technologic advancement
in an area in which there was success, and you seek to connect that to
an area in which there is no evidence of anything. So why is there any
sort of connection?

--
Thomas A. Russ, USC/Information Sciences Institute
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Apollos Laser Reflecting Corner Cubes
    ... Note to Guth: ... Our moon is both, sufficiently radioactive and otherwise rather nicely ... pool of evidence. ... You talk about hard science, ...
    (sci.skeptic)
  • Re: Moon Landing a Hoax??!! Real Evidence here>>>
    ... > | America's Moon Expedition a Fake? ... > good sources on what that technology can and cannot do. ... > NASA administrator Jim Webb into the Oval Office and reminded him to keep ... Here the conspiracy theorists try to manufacture a discrepancy. ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Re: Your tests are untestable
    ... Your general assertion is falsified by the available evidence. ... Z: This is my scientific hypothesis: There are Martian cities on the Moon. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: National Space Intelligence Center proposed
    ... NOT WALKED UPON THAT NASTY GAMMA AND HARD-X-RAY NASTY MOON, ... Mining Technology can be realized, ... where much of the actual construction of an Asteroid cargo vessel ... steel framing surrounding the core. ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: moon landings were a hoax
    ... > Not like we imagine you actually care what the Russians think about ... The problems happen when evidence of veracity is ignored. ... > to the Moon, you can be made to believe anything. ... I watched an Apollo capsule/CSM cross the early morning sky, ...
    (sci.space.history)
Loading