james-watson

I enjoy that you had the courage to bring "factually incorrect" into this conversation.

If someone, anyone, goes looking for the facts, there is only one destination in which they will end up. The facts aren't hard to find. They are all in boring science textbooks. But nobody reads those anymore.

The current culture war is waged by those who profit off ignorance against those who crusade for truth. You may think this is a black and white view of it, but it isn't. One side wishes to obliterate facts, the other wishes to incinerate pretty lies at the expense of hurt feelings.

So yes, there are a great many positions that are factually incorrect. All of them, to be exact, except the factually correct ones.

The problem of course is that facts can be inconvenient to those who seek power.

> Who exactly has proposed starting a war with Russia or anything remotely resembling that?

The entire left establishment, from Hillary to Obama.

Hillary wanted a no-fly zone in Syria. Obama just imposed a new round of sanctions on Russia, which is a precursor to war.

The mental gymnastics are hitting Olympic levels with the left.

Tell me, friend, how does a group of people enforce their rights within a country against those who wish to deny those rights?

ISIS wants a global Islamic caliphate, along with a Caliph at its head and Sharia law. They want this in the US, Europe, and every other country on the planet. They do not negotiate, because they believe they carry out the will of an omnipotent deity. And most importantly, they will brutally slaughter anyone who stands in their way.

So, how do we defend our rights to a different way of life, against those who would kill us for it?

Oh, and a cursory glance at history would be educational. Pacifism is a great idea, until it isn't.

Ah yes, because average Americans control US geopolitical strategy.

Sounds like a pretty accurate implementation of a Randian Utopia.

Pure self interest isn't a difficult vector to map. The results are predictable and repeatable.

"Taxation is theft!"

Don't be sorry. We need scientists to be skeptics when it comes to absurd assertions which violate the most fundamental principles of physics.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

What gets forgotten here, and something that I keep bringing up, is the lack of a Martian magnetosphere. This means long term human settlements have to be artificially shielded.

This means living underground, which defeats the point of going to Mars in my opinion. Elon mentioned using a local magnetosphere generator, which is one of those ideas that is theoretically possible but whose practicality seems questionable. How powerful a magnetosphere generator is required to deflect ionizing radiation? How much power generation capacity will a Martian colony have to spare? Will this require a Fusion reactor?

The only hope I have for Martian settlement is that Musk and his engineers are some of the most audacious and brilliant people on the planet. I will never bet against their success, and I wish them the best of luck.

I have been a space exploration fan since as long as I can remember, I just worry that humans have a tendency to focus on the wrong goals when ideals and emotion cloud our judgement (e.g. the Space Shuttle).

Understood. My post was a retaliation to a blatant ad hominem.

I do not enjoy getting into the mud, but sometimes it is necessary. As you can see from my parent post, I was engaging in discussion whereas EdHominem lived up his name almost immediately.

Regardless, your site, your rules.