|
⇤ ← Revision 1 as of 2023-04-15 22:51:03
Size: 2053
Comment:
|
Size: 2077
Comment:
|
| Deletions are marked like this. | Additions are marked like this. |
| Line 12: | Line 12: |
| . It is amusing to be accused of a belief by ideologues, without an opportunity to state one's actual beliefs, and more importantly, the observations that lead to working hypotheses, Which belief-driven ideologues may not believe in. | . It is amusing to be accused of a belief by ideologues, without an opportunity to state one's actual beliefs, and more importantly, the observations that lead to working hypotheses, ... which belief-driven ideologues may not bother with. Fire, ready, aim. |
Merchants Of Doubt
How a Handful of Scientist Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming
Naomi Oreskes & Erik M. Conway 2010 Beaverton Library 174.ORE
Smoking, Climate, Acid Rain, Strategic Defense, Ozone Hole, DDT/Rachel Carlson, Dixie Lee Ray
260-1 "Moreover, the Soviet Union, for all it's failures, was a technologically innovative society. Most famously, they launched an artificial satellite into space -- Sputnik -- before the United States did."
The authors' ideology (and lack of historical research and technology savvy) is showing. The Soviet Union built much larger nuclear warheads, because their aim was poor; the US deployed smaller warheads and smaller strategic missiles because accurate aim could destroy a hardened target at lower cost with less unnecessary damage and fallout. That meant the US did not have giant rockets to launch heavy, unsophisticated battery-powered satellites like the modified 280 metric ton R-7 ICBM that launched the battery powered, 22 day, 184 kilogram Sputnik 1.
The US was public about its program and progress, and developed a separate non-military Vanguard launch vehicle to launch the tiny solar-cell-powered Vanguard 1 satellite. The Vanguard rocket failed on the first and second attempts (as did many of the Soviet R-7 ICBMs).
261 Cornucopians hold to a blind faith in technology that isn’t borne out by the historical evidence. We call it "technofideism."
- It is amusing to be accused of a belief by ideologues, without an opportunity to state one's actual beliefs, and more importantly, the observations that lead to working hypotheses, ... which belief-driven ideologues may not bother with. Fire, ready, aim.