The Big Picture: Science!

CrazyGirl17

I am a banana!
Sep 11, 2009
5,141
0
0
Interesting points. A jetpack would be nice... but personally, I'd prefer a hoverboard. (checks) Huh, apparently they do make jetpacks... but it sounds kinda expensive...

Okay, so there's cultured food now. Sounds good, I can't even look at alive crab knowing I'm going to eat it, myself... but what about the cows and pigs and chicken, then?

Going into space... well, I'm kinda with you, I'm tired of sharing this planet with a bunch of morons. Can't we just launch them into space and be done with them?
 

Dody16

New member
Jan 24, 2008
56
0
0
Strictly in terms of the videos I watch every week, Bob, I want you to know, this is kind of my highlight. I also want you to know I am not disappointed per say in today's episode.
I just want say I was expecting something more... profound. :(
 

MonkeyPunch

New member
Feb 20, 2008
589
0
0
Probably the 100th person to point it out but we've had jetpacks for a while now.
1960's jetpack vs. car [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jw5KaEshU3g]
Probably most people will know about the Olympics 1984 [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5qBLoegGz4].
They also used that jetpack at the start of a Bond movie.

There now are a load of different jetpack types available - just do a Youtube search to see some in action. This water powered one [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=im1iNq02Kz0] looking most fun and relatively affordable.

So question isn't where is your jetpack, but rather: why don't you have enough money for your* own ^_^
*or why don't I have enough money for my own.
 

MB202

New member
Sep 14, 2008
1,157
0
0
Father Time said:
MB202 said:
Father Time said:
MB202 said:
Also, about jetpacks, how are you going to solve the problem of having your pants and underpants burned off?
Not all Jetpacks need to shoot fire, just something that can provide lift.
How's that work?
It'll shoot out something at high speed and that will provide thrust (yeah I should've said thrust and not lift, sorry about that).

Speaking of which:


Oh and they had a jetpack on Penn and Teller Tell A Lie that used hair bleach. I can't find a clip of it though.
OH, now a jetpack like THAT, where it's not spewing exhaust or whatever that stuff is directly on your behind, that would be awesome!
 

TheEnglishman

New member
Jun 13, 2009
546
0
0
BgRdMchne said:
You're life will be a lot better if you take off the rose colored glasses and accept that this world is shit and that science is no longer about innovation and advancement, merely profit and finding better ways to put dumb YouTube videos on a telephone.
I stopped reading when you used the wrong your.
 

walsfeo

New member
Feb 17, 2010
314
0
0
Title suggestion: Big Questions

Some foodologists think beef raised on corn isn't as good for you as grass fed beef. I wonder what the implications of hydroponic beef would be. It sure doesn't sound as tasty though with enough nutrients pumped into it I suppose it could turn out ok.
 

Navvan

New member
Feb 3, 2011
560
0
0
RT-Medic-with-shotgun said:
Father Time said:
BgRdMchne said:
You are never going into space.
You will never own a jet pack.
Your car will never fly.
HIV will not be cured in your lifetime.
Cancer will not be cured in your lifetime.
The common cold will not be cured in your lifetime.
Don't these things bother you?
You don't know these things
Given the behavior of the average human flying cars are out; we already have people afraid of planes being hijacked the last thing we need is a car being stolen for the same purpose. Or for that matter drunken people in flying cars. Jetpacks reasonably out. Humanity as a whole is not ready for personal flight. Ideological differences with some nuts, parts of the world that are still barbarians(points outside his window at Texas). As you can see a lot of the world is not ready for personal flight; even with restricting licenses.

As for disease curing there is not much money in curing a disease. Treating is over long term has money therefore that is probably all we will get.
See the problem with this is that many researchers are employed by the government and/or Academia (Universities)and not directly by a pharmaceutical company. The government is generally doing it for non-profit, and Academia is usually doing it to boost reputation to attract more students and grants. In either case your idea about there being "no money in curing disease" breaks down. The only way such a theory would be true is if there was some elaborate conspiracy theory where pharmaceutical companies were in control and halting research. That just makes far to many assumptions to be a credible theory.

I won't address the jetpacks/flying cars because I agree. People shouldn't even be allowed to drive vehicles the way they can now.
 

ElectricMegaHamstah

New member
Oct 10, 2011
50
0
0
kingmob said:
I'm actually a 'space guy' and in my daily work the biggest problem is that not all those in 'team science' are in it for this reason :\ Seriously, a surprising number of people is in it for the paycheck and the tax benefits (I train astronauts).
Depressing? I know...

But I will consider your input for the next discussion ;)
My GOD You have the best job ever...
 

CAPTCHA

Mushroom Camper
Sep 30, 2009
1,075
0
0
unlimitedwin said:
Fusion technology (same reaction that powers the Sun (and Ironman for that matter...)) is the current main hope for achieving this efficiency, but we are still MANY years away from seeing fusion reactors successfully scaled down to manageable sizes.
There are no man made fusion reactors. Fusion is the process of new element been formed by compressing another until the atomic structure of two atoms are combined into one and the excess is fired out as radiation. Gold for example is the result of iron that has undergone fusion. The end result however is very similer to nucular power, which is based upon the use of elements that have undergone an incomplete fusion and are still expelling their excess atomic contents.
 

Kenjitsuka

New member
Sep 10, 2009
3,051
0
0
Wow, claim there's oil on Mars and then bring your own.... !
That is pure brilliance, and since people who control the countless trillions that are wasted on shit like war are dumb as bricks it indeed should work just fine :D

Made me laugh, Bob, good job! :D
 

Xeldrak

New member
Feb 8, 2011
37
0
0
Madrak the Red said:
I usually hate doing this, but I feel I just have to:

Bob, please don't do this. It makes me sad. As soon as I saw the title, I though 'I sure hope he doesn't ask for a goddamn jetpack'. And then he went and did it. Needless to say, it made me die a little inside. Why don't you have one? Because they're impractical and incredibly dangerous. They have short runtimes, and technology does not exist to allow them to be much longer. Once again, as is often the case with these 'why don't we have x' scenarios, perfectly plausible theory is defeated by engineering, and our actual current ability.

Number two: growing steaks. No large scale infrastructure exists to do this. People like the way things are. People don't buy GM food, they aren't going to jump on this too quickly. It is a technology in it's infancy. Give it time, you sound like a child moaning because things aren't happening quite as fast as you like.

Number three: Space travel. I agree, it's a mighty shame that space programs are getting cut all over the place. I want to go to Mars as much as the next guy. I want Star Trek to be as real as much as the next guy. But unless some fairly major overhauls in the fundamentals of physics take place, it isn't going to happen. I'm sorry (and I really am) but it just isn't. Not within your lifetime, anyway.

Also: a scientist who lies is no longer a scientist. As people have said, you do not falsify data. You seek the truth, and the reason. Doing what you propose would have the potential to discredit the entire scientific community. Which would be really, really bad. You for sure do not want people to stop listening to science.

Number four: the many different shapes and sizes of dogs is due to a long, long period of selective breeding, complete with health problems that come with it. It wasn't a process of picking out genes or whatever (which is super difficult in controlling things like size of a very complex mammal, by the way). To do it with other animals would require a similar process, one with millions of animals taking many years. And a rather brutal process at that. And then let's not forget the genetic diseases that come with any pure-breed. I do not personally know, but the genome of a dog may support the differences in phenotype that can be exhibited. Such differences may not be possible with other species (granted, this is somewhat conjecture, but it is still possible).

So please, Bob, think before you speak next time. To me, a some-what educated scientist and engineer, you sound unabashedly ignorant and demanding. Granted, there is the possibility that this was a joke, and I'm sure people will urge me to take it as such. But please, do a little reading up before you start.
Just exactly this. Usually I'm a big fan of bob, but this was awfull.
 

ph0b0s123

New member
Jul 7, 2010
1,689
0
0
Kumagawa Misogi said:
ph0b0s123 said:
Point 2. Meat. Thanks Bob, have been saying this for years. Yes, I don't eat meat now, but 'meat substitutes'. But would so go back to eating meat if this was done.

And it solves two issues, not having to kill animals for meat and not having to torture as many animals for medical testing. Only the most fundamental animal rights person would still have a problem after this was invented...

Point 3. Space. So true...


Overall great episode.

You do know all the farm animals would then go extinct right? Since no one is going to pay the food bills if there is no money in it.
Yep....Though I don't agree with 'extinct'. Cows will never go extinct as there is whole religion that would never let that happen. You bet there would be a lot less of them about. People advocating animal rights are perfectly aware of this by product and are quite happy about it. Nice try...
 

Skarvig

New member
Jul 13, 2009
254
0
0
This was a joke episode. Right? RIGHT?
The reason why we don't cultivate meat is the same reason why we don't get genetically manipulated food. It's people who don't want to eat it. I don't mean you and me or anyone who is starving but nearly anyone else.
 

Drake the Dragonheart

The All-American Dragon.
Aug 14, 2008
4,607
0
0
Giant Mutant Gerbil Steed! That would be awesome. Though I am curious what one could do with a hamster-sized Bear. Hey if we can make animals smaller our bigger, what about weird crossovers? Where's my badgerhawk? (Take that with a bit of a grain of salt if you will, I was only joking around with the crossovers part.)
 

DrathLegion

New member
Mar 28, 2011
8
0
0
Sure someone has already done this, but can't be arsed reading the whole thread;

1) Jetpacks don't exist because we don't have a capable energy source. Once we get a nano-sized energy source, preferably a battery like device, with an as high is not higher output than the biggest batteries of today, you'll get your jetpack.

2) Cultured meat; You do realize that's going to cost more than the beef of a bull that's had thai massages every ten seconds for it's entire life. Yeah, that shit don't come cheap. Also, it's harder to create beef with all the required nutrients, than it is to create genetically enhanced crops with a lot more variation in vitamins.

3) Space; This is a HUGE topic as to why we can't go further than we can right now. And I can only suggest the one thing that would actually void most of this episode: Learn some science.

Now, don't get me wrong I sometimes like ol' Bob here, so long as he stays away from game related topics, and I realize this was made as a bit of a laugh. But these kinds of fancy flights of the mind are as much a part of undermining actual science, due to it not looking at the bigger picture and demanding the stuff we actually CAN do, as those braindead God fellatio experts who want to abolish it altogether.

With compliments of your friendly neighbourhood scientist.
 

theheroofaction

New member
Jan 20, 2011
928
0
0
1)Where have you been the past 10 years, jetpacks are a thing. They generally clock in at $20,000, though they don't last very long
2)I've had some of this lab-meat stuff, tastes like shit and is about as nutritious as cardboard.
3)What can I say about space travel other than: In due time. This stuff costs money. Oh, and alien life is probably less "green space babe" and more "shadow of the colossus meets Doom."
4) Tiny bears, why hasn't anybody else thought of this?

Anyway that's just my thoughts.
 

Alandoril

New member
Jul 19, 2010
532
0
0
I'm with you on basically all of that. The problem is that people with real drive and ambition to change the world are forced into corporate niches and never let out of boxes defined by profit margins.

Get rid of the all-consuming pursuit of money, which technically only has the value we decide it has anyway so it's actually worthless, and we solve that problem. Until then all the pure awesomeness that science is capable of will be sidelined, marginalised and just out-right ignored.
 

Not G. Ivingname

New member
Nov 18, 2009
6,368
0
0
MovieBob said:
Science!

Hey, science guys, we need you to answer a few questions.

Watch Video
Want a jetpack? Here you go: http://www.jetpackinternational.com/

All you need is a pultry sum of 200,000 dollars for both the jetpack and the training for how to use it. :D