RE: Recreating people [was: renaissance people]

From: xllb (
Date: Wed May 17 2000 - 17:01:48 MDT

The limits of my science education are easily defined. Outside of an
ultra-lite b.a. in 1970s Social "sciences", I watch Discovery Channel, and
read Sci American and Nature at Chapters Bookstore each month, (lately they
don't have Nature). I was a host at the Moody Bible Institoot Sermons from
Science Pavilion at the 1967 World's Fair in Montreal. That should count
for something. I must have seen those movies 100 times.

Besides the above I've read "A Brief History of Time" twice, "Black Holes
and Baby Universes" once, the first third of "The Physics of Immortality",
and Kaku's "Hyperspace". As a layman my benefit from each of these books,
and this mailing list is mostly a thrilling stimulation of imagination.


-----Original Message-----
[]On Behalf Of
Sent: May 16, 2000 6:40 PM
Subject: Re: Recreating people [was: renaissance people]

Yes. With every human comes an Ego and yes, Michio Kaku is no different.
Science is not independent of culture because even though a measurement may
be independent of 'values', the interpretation of such measurements seem
always to be subject, ultimately, to the majoritarian view, within a field
of study.

In a message dated Tue, 16 May 2000 2:23:16 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
"Michael S. Lorrey" <> writes:

<< Well, considering that some half dozen or so of these units have survived
re-entry (every one that did reenter), and a few have even be recovered and
reused on other spacecraft, there should be plenty of confidence in our
technology. Instead, he pointed at the one incident of a Russian nuclear
generator device re-entering in Canada that was not designed with anywhere
the level of relaibility that ours were, and using that incident to tar all
of nuclear power in space, much as our own light water reactors get tarred
people comparing them to Chernobyl, when the Chernobyl technology was a)
reliable and b) intentionally put into near meltdown condition. Kaku knows
all of
these things, he is more interested in getting media face time to make
into the Carl Sagan of the 21st century than in scientific objectivity. wrote:

> In a message dated 5/16/00 5:40:16 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
> writes:
> << Thats primarily my concern. Anyone who calls themselves a scientist
> should have the integrity to acknowledge that a) the chances of it
> hitting earth were infinitesimal, b) if they did hit earth, they were
> designed to survive reentry and impact intact without leakage. His tv
> lobbying over that issue was disgusting and dishonest >>
> He was dishonest IF he could see beyond his own personal prejudices which
> usually blind a person (all of us) into thinking beyond the current
> If he really knew better (had confidence in the reentry shielding
> engineering) he might've given thought to changing his mind. Similarly, a
> of the best scientists had a prejudice in Favor of uranium 235,BWR style
> power plants, before the practical testing and evaluation had been
> Again its a matter of people discovering the truth and deciding what is
> important.
> Mitch


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:11:20 MDT