Announcement

Collapse

World History 201 Guidelines

Welcome to World History 201.

Find out if Caesar crossed the Rubicon or threw a dollar across it.

This is the forum where world history, in general, can be discussed. Since the WH201, like the other fora in the World History department, is not limited to participation along lines of theology, all may post here.

Please keep the Campus Decorum in mind when posting here--while 'belief' restrictions are not in place, common decency is.

The Tweb rules are in force . . . we're watching you.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

The End Is Near?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Sparko
    replied
    Originally posted by robrecht View Post
    The journalist's most specific statement in his original article speaks of "The NASA-funded HANDY model," and that appears to be correct. I would not assume that he wrote the headline. From Paprika's very helpful post, it seems as if NASA invested some $9 million dollars into the Grant Study: "Collaborative Earth System Science Research between NASA/GSFC and UMCP". I'm not sure how much of that went toward the development of this HANDY model and what the actual topics of this research were. But if NASA wants to give me a grant, I'll be happy to look into it.
    actually the most specific statement was the first one:
    "A new study sponsored by Nasa's Goddard Space Flight Center has highlighted the prospect that global industrial civilisation could collapse in coming decades due to unsustainable resource exploitation and increasingly unequal wealth distribution. "

    Leave a comment:


  • robrecht
    replied
    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
    yeah so it sounds like it was the news reporter who decided to try to give his story a bit more credibility by claiming "NASA funded" when it was not, and he is now in some desperate defensive mode when it came to light what he did.
    The journalist's most specific statement in his original article speaks of "The NASA-funded HANDY model," and that appears to be correct. I would not assume that he wrote the headline. From Paprika's very helpful post, it seems as if NASA invested some $9 million dollars into the Grant Study: "Collaborative Earth System Science Research between NASA/GSFC and UMCP". I'm not sure how much of that went toward the development of this HANDY model and what the actual topics of this research were. But if NASA wants to give me a grant, I'll be happy to look into it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sparko
    replied
    Originally posted by robrecht View Post
    The author of the initial article responds:

    http://www.theguardian.com/environme...fclimatechange
    yeah so it sounds like it was the news reporter who decided to try to give his story a bit more credibility by claiming "NASA funded" when it was not, and he is now in some desperate defensive mode when it came to light what he did.

    Leave a comment:


  • Paprika
    replied
    Originally posted by robrecht View Post
    Very interesting. I wonder what the research tools were, and what NASA activity they were developed to support?
    The paper states that "this work was partially funded through NASA/GSFC grant NNX12AD03A", which was given to Antonio Busalacchi for "Collaborative Earth System Science Research between NASA/GSFC and UMCP". This research included the development of the HANDY model which Motesharrei et al. used to model societies.

    Leave a comment:


  • robrecht
    replied
    Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
    I'm curious who was mainly responsible for launching the "NASA was responsible" narrative. I'm assuming it probably wasn't the researchers themselves; I imagine pulling such a stunt would be a good way to blackball oneself from future funding from anywhere.
    The author of the initial article responds:

    http://www.theguardian.com/environme...fclimatechange

    Leave a comment:


  • KingsGambit
    replied
    I'm curious who was mainly responsible for launching the "NASA was responsible" narrative. I'm assuming it probably wasn't the researchers themselves; I imagine pulling such a stunt would be a good way to blackball oneself from future funding from anywhere.

    Leave a comment:


  • robrecht
    replied
    Originally posted by NASA
    ... was not solicited, directed or reviewed by NASA. It is an independent study by the university researchers utilizing research tools developed for a separate NASA activity. ...
    Very interesting. I wonder what the research tools were, and what NASA activity they were developed to support?
    Last edited by robrecht; 03-24-2014, 10:30 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Teallaura
    replied
    Originally posted by Paprika View Post
    NASA distances itself from the study:

    Source: "Press Release

    The following is a statement from NASA regarding erroneous media reports crediting the agency with an academic paper on population and societal impacts.
    "A soon-to-be published research paper 'Human and Nature Dynamics (HANDY): Modeling Inequality and Use of Resources in the Collapse or Sustainability of Societies' by University of Maryland researchers Safa Motesharrei and Eugenia Kalnay, and University of Minnesota’s Jorge Rivas was not solicited, directed or reviewed by NASA. It is an independent study by the university researchers utilizing research tools developed for a separate NASA activity.
    "As is the case with all independent research, the views and conclusions in the paper are those of the authors alone. NASA does not endorse the paper or its conclusions."

    © Copyright Original Source

    Leave a comment:


  • Sparko
    replied
    Originally posted by Paprika View Post
    NASA distances itself from the study:

    Source: "Press Release

    The following is a statement from NASA regarding erroneous media reports crediting the agency with an academic paper on population and societal impacts.
    "A soon-to-be published research paper 'Human and Nature Dynamics (HANDY): Modeling Inequality and Use of Resources in the Collapse or Sustainability of Societies' by University of Maryland researchers Safa Motesharrei and Eugenia Kalnay, and University of Minnesota’s Jorge Rivas was not solicited, directed or reviewed by NASA. It is an independent study by the university researchers utilizing research tools developed for a separate NASA activity.
    "As is the case with all independent research, the views and conclusions in the paper are those of the authors alone. NASA does not endorse the paper or its conclusions."

    © Copyright Original Source

    ah so yet again someone is trying to legitimize their political agenda by making it sound backed by science. I was wondering what NASA would have to do with such a study.

    Leave a comment:


  • Paprika
    replied
    NASA distances itself from the study:

    Source: "Press Release

    The following is a statement from NASA regarding erroneous media reports crediting the agency with an academic paper on population and societal impacts.
    "A soon-to-be published research paper 'Human and Nature Dynamics (HANDY): Modeling Inequality and Use of Resources in the Collapse or Sustainability of Societies' by University of Maryland researchers Safa Motesharrei and Eugenia Kalnay, and University of Minnesota’s Jorge Rivas was not solicited, directed or reviewed by NASA. It is an independent study by the university researchers utilizing research tools developed for a separate NASA activity.
    "As is the case with all independent research, the views and conclusions in the paper are those of the authors alone. NASA does not endorse the paper or its conclusions."

    © Copyright Original Source

    Leave a comment:


  • robrecht
    replied
    The Star Trek Economy: (Mostly) Post-Scarcity (Mostly) Socialism

    By Matthew Yglesias

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/..._scarcity.html

    Leave a comment:


  • robrecht
    replied
    Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
    So, what are credits then, huh?
    I don't know. I think you know more about Star Trek than me!

    Leave a comment:


  • Teallaura
    replied
    Originally posted by robrecht View Post
    This is why Starfleet Command is strictly subservient to the Federation High Council. They never seem to need funding, probably because money has become obsolete.
    So, what are credits then, huh?

    Leave a comment:


  • robrecht
    replied
    Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
    Translation: Don't pay any attention to that man behind the curtain...
    Interesting comment. The Wizard of Oz has the opposite worldview to that of Star Trek. Rather than space exploration, there's no place like home. The wizard is a very good man, just not a very good wizard.

    Leave a comment:


  • robrecht
    replied
    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
    I don't want to sound like Truthseeker and be a conspiracy nut, but I think that NASA is very desperate for funding, so they are the plaything of politicians who want to shove their agenda on the public. They will bend over and kiss butt all day long to get a few dollars to keep running the space program.
    This is why Starfleet Command is strictly subservient to the Federation High Council. They never seem to need funding, probably because money has become obsolete.

    Leave a comment:

widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
Working...
X