That's not entirely true, of course.
For you people out there, your Jesus Christ bible-thumper mythology, as with all other religions of any type, that marketing-buzzword "faith" or even "karma", was invented by cavemen and those superstitious imbeciles were completely ignorant - almost as much as you, but less so because of the work of progressive scientific-research filtering down into elementary-school text books and not because of your ridiculous fairy-tales - of the difference between the stars in the night sky and the clouds in the sky above
The clouds are where your Monkey God(s) exist in your dim-wit dullard monkey-brain.
You're too weak to admit that you've become brainwashed by scam-artists because you're gullible and you're susceptible to superstition, in your cowardly terror of mortality. You make the world a worse place because you're unable to cope with reality. You're dumb and stupid and you make others dumb and stupid.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086837/quotes
IMDb
2010: The Year We Make Contact (1984)
Quotes
HAL 9000: Dr. Floyd?
Dr. Heywood Floyd: What is it HAL?
HAL 9000: There is a message for you.
Dr. Heywood Floyd: Who's calling?
HAL 9000: There is no identification.
Dr. Heywood Floyd: What's the message?
Dr. Heywood Floyd: Well, tell whoever it is that I can't accept that identification without proof.
HAL 9000: The response is, "I understand. It is important that you believe me. Look behind you."
HAL 9000: Do you want me to repeat the message, Dr. Floyd?
Dr. Heywood Floyd: Who recorded it?
HAL 9000: This is not a recording.
Dr. Heywood Floyd: Who's sending it?
HAL 9000: There is no identification.
Dr. Heywood Floyd: I don't understand.
HAL 9000: Neither do I.
Dr. Heywood Floyd: Is this message by voice or keyboard?
HAL 9000: I don't know.
Heywood Floyd: HAL, who the hell is sending this?
HAL 9000: I'm sorry, Dr. Floyd, I don't know.
Heywood Floyd: Well, tell whoever it is that I can't take any of this seriously unless I know who I'm talking to.
"2010: Odyssey Two" by Arthur C. Clarke, book 2, Space Odyssey series, Kindle edition
Chapter 5. Leonov
Men knew better than they realized, when they placed the abode of the gods beyond the reach of gravity. He was flying toward the realm of weightlessness; for the moment, he would ignore the fact that out there lay not freedom, but the greatest responsibility of his career.
As the thrust increased, he felt the weight of worlds upon his shoulders - but he welcomed it, like an Atlas who had not yet tired of his burden.
From 11/12/1896 ( from the Alumni Princetonian publication, Princeton University: HOW THE GAME BEGINS. ) To 6/16/2005 ( as me, Kerry Burgess, my official records United States of America Veterans Affairs hospital includes: Date of Admission, psychiatric unit ) is 39662 days
39662 = 19831 + 19831
From 11/2/1965 ( my known birth date in Antlers, Oklahoma, USA, as Kerry Wayne Burgess ) To 2/18/2020 ( ) is 19831 days
From 4/1/1986 ( from The Daily Princetonian publication, Princeton Unviversity: Character Assassination And The CIA Controversy ) To 2/18/2020 ( ) is 12376 days
12376 = 6188 + 6188
From 11/2/1965 ( my known birth date in Antlers, Oklahoma, USA, as Kerry Wayne Burgess ) To 10/12/1982 ( "2010: Odyssey Two" by Arthur C. Clarke, book 2, Space Odyssey series ) is 6188 days
From 10/12/1982 ( "2010: Odyssey Two" by Arthur C. Clarke, book 2, Space Odyssey series ) To 2/18/2020 ( ) is 13643 days
From 11/2/1965 ( my known birth date in Antlers, Oklahoma, USA, as Kerry Wayne Burgess ) To 3/11/2003 ( from The Daily Princetonian publication, Princeton Unviversity: Erickcek ’03 Wins Churchill Scholarship For Cosmology ) is 13643 days
From 3/16/1991 ( from the thoughts in my conscious mind, coinciding with United States of America Veterans Affairs hospital psychiatric doctor medical drugs: my first successful major test of my ultraspace matter transportation device as Kerry Wayne Burgess the successful Ph.D. graduate and possibly - or something - the date of the secret, doctorate-degree credential from Princeton University, I can only theorize, struggling to understand ) To 2/18/2020 ( ) is 10566 days
10566 = 5283 + 5283
From 11/2/1965 ( my known birth date in Antlers, Oklahoma, USA, as Kerry Wayne Burgess ) To 4/20/1980 ( premiere US TV series episode "Galactica 1980"::"The Night the Cylons Landed: Part 2" ) is 5283 days
From 12/8/1964 ( premiere US TV series episode "The Man from U.N.C.L.E."::"The Neptune Affair" ) To 2/18/2020 ( ) is 20160 days
20160 = 10080 + 10080
From 11/2/1965 ( my known birth date in Antlers, Oklahoma, USA, as Kerry Wayne Burgess ) To 6/8/1993 ( commencement, Princeton University Class of 1993 ) is 10080 days
From 10/28/1994 ( premiere US film "Stargate" ) To 2/18/2020 ( ) is 9244 days
From 11/2/1965 ( my known birth date in Antlers, Oklahoma, USA, as Kerry Wayne Burgess ) To 2/23/1991 ( premiere US film "The Doors" ) is 9244 days
From 6/29/1995 ( the Mir space station docking of the United States space shuttle Atlantis orbiter vehicle mission STS-71 includes me Kerry Wayne Burgess the United States Marine Corps officer and United States STS-71 pilot astronaut and my 3rd official United States of America National Aeronautics Space Administration orbital flight of 4 overall ) To 2/18/2020 ( ) is 9000 days
9000 = 4500 + 4500
From 11/2/1965 ( my known birth date in Antlers, Oklahoma, USA, as Kerry Wayne Burgess ) To 2/27/1978 ( premiere US TV series episode "In Search of..."::"Immortality" ) is 4500 days
From 12/13/1895 ( from Wikipedia on the global-internetwork: Ányos István Jedlik dead ) To 7/16/2004 ( premiere US TV series "Stargate: Atlantis" ) is 39662 days
39662 = 19831 + 19831
From 11/2/1965 ( my known birth date in Antlers, Oklahoma, USA, as Kerry Wayne Burgess ) To 2/18/2020 ( ) is 19831 days
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086837/quotes
IMDb
2010: The Year We Make Contact (1984)
Quotes
HAL 9000: Are you sure you're making the right decision? I think we should stop.
by me, Kerry Burgess, posted by me: February 18, 2020
Only in recent days have I watched for the first-time ever those episodes of of Season 9 of The Walking Dead tv series
Only 24 hours ago did I watch that finale episode
Now I'm sitting here trying to stave off the inevitable shakes from too much time in nite sub-freezing temps
Stargate: The Movie (1994)
(from internet transcript)
DANIEL Why don't you just tell them everything? Why don't you tell them about the bomb?
KAWALSKI What's he talking about?
by me, Kerry Burgess, posted by me: Feb 18, 2020
Some of the stuff I noticed only for the first time today
by me, Kerry Burgess, posted by me: Feb 19, 2020
Other stuff I know about already and I go out there *deliberately* to highlight it and then - and only then - to go back home and only then back home do I perform my original work and check the code pattern
https://theprince.princeton.edu/princetonperiodicals/?a=d&d=Princetonian20030311-01.2.6&e=-------en-20--81-byDA-txt-txIN-------
Daily Princetonian, Volume 127, Number 28, 11 March 2003
Erickcek ’03 wins Churchill scholarship for cosmology
Renata Stepanov
Princetonian Staff Writer
The very concept of physics is foreign to most four year-olds, but it was not to senior Adrienne Erickcek, who recently won a Churchill fellowship for year-long graduate study at Cambridge University’s Churchill College. “As early as kindergarten I was saying I wanted to be a physicist,” Erickcek said. “At a very, young age, I got hooked on science fiction and I wanted to design a spaceship that went faster than the speed of light. I asked my father what to do and he told me to become a physicist.” Erickcek, a physics major, has since graduated from fantasy spaceships to theoretical astrophysics and cosmology, where her accomplishments have won her the Churchill fellowship. The scholarship, established in 1959 by the Winston Churchill foundation, funds continued study for at least 11 American students a year in engineering, mathematics or the sciences. Erickcek plans to use her grant to study the math she did not take at the University. “As a physics major I’ve taken lots of math classes, but physics always came first,” she said. “If I have one regret it’s that I haven’t taken more mathematics classes while I was here. It’s my chance to fix that before I move on. That’s what makes this an extraordinary opportunity.” Erickcek hopes to earn a certificate of advanced study in mathematics in Churchill’s department of applied mathematics and theoretical physics.
Although her desire to study physics came naturally, Erickcek said she was inspired by a high school teacher. “My high school had office hours . . . and I used to come in and we would talk about popular science books I was reading at the time,” Erickcek said. The same teacher inspired her to apply to Princeton and eventually, to the Churchill Scholarship. Similarly, the faculty in the physics department at the University has provided her with extraordinary individual attention, she said.
“I’ve been really lucky to have excellent independent study advisors. There’s so few of us that they treat us really well,” Erickcek said. Erickcek cited her thesis advisor, physics professor Paul Steinhardt, as one of her mentors at the University. Steinhardt is overseeing Erickcek’s study of the possible interaction between dark matter and baryons, or normal matter, she said. Following her stay in Cambridge, Erickcek will likely attend graduate school and eventually teach, she said. “I would like to be an astrophysics professor,” Erickcek said. “In physics, especially theoretical astrophysics, there’s not much else you can do. I want to do research. I want to figure out what makes the universe work. It was sort of a given that I’d go into academia.” For now, Erickcek is preoccupied with choosing between the graduate schools that have agreed to defer her enrollment among them the University of Chicago, Berkeley, Caltech and Harvard. Erickcek spent the last two summers studying physics at Cal Tech and then at Harvard. She plans to take a break this summer to travel and have fun, she said.
Lauren Teichner - Princetonian
Adrienne Erickcek ’03 won the Churchill fellowship. She will use it to study mathematics.
https://theprince.princeton.edu/princetonperiodicals/?a=d&d=Princetonian19860401-01.2.19&e=-------en-20--81-byDA-txt-txIN-------
Daily Princetonian, Volume 110, Number 38, 1 April 1986
Character assassination and the CIA controversy
By DAVE ISAACSON '87
Reading the 'Prince' the other day I noticed a column by Carl Ramirez titled "The CIA, Professors and the Real Meaning of Academic Freedom" ('Prince,' Mar. 27). Having recently heard of the ruckus about CIA funding of academic studies, I figured this piece would tackle this question about whether such interactions are proper or not. In fact, this point was touched upon, occasionally, throughout the article; but far more significantly, the article illustrated an all too common fault with writers' approaches to debatable issues.
Mr. Ramirez, in his very first sentence, attacks another writer, Yoram Hazony. He condemns Hazony by stating, "university collaboration with the CIA is justified, based on Hazony's uninformed conception of 'academic freedom.' " Furthermore, "there are three reasons why I (Ramirez) find his maundering and devious reasoning so disturbing."
Uh oh! This guy Hazony is devious and even maunders. In the following paragraphs, we see that Hazony uses perverse arguments, and that he considers himself the self-appointed protector of academic inquiry. Thus, Ramirez seems to conclude, we should ignore Hazony because he is obviously a very bad fellow indeed.
This tactic illustrates a large level of intolerance on the part of Ramirez and, in all fairness, of many other writers as well. They hear of an issue which bothers them, but instead of writing constructively in response, they attack the individual behind the opinion they dislike. Less time is spent presenting cogent arguments and more time is spent in character assassination.
In any case, the debatable points raised by Ramirez seem disturbingly weak and roundabout. He states that Hazony does not understand the infringement on academic freedom produced by CIA-university liaisons. Answering Hazony's statement "not all facts belong in the public domain at all times," Ramirez says this is true in a police state but not in a university.
First, I question Ramirez's claim that the belief that not all information should always be publicized characterizes a policestate mentality — unless he's arguing (and I suppose it is possible that he is) that the U.S. has always been a police state.
Throughout our history, sensitive information has been classified for reasons of national security. If that makes us a police state, which I doubt, then we've been one since this country's inception and the current CIA affair is nothing new.
Ramirez, while loosing his "Hazony as self-appointed protector" barrage, asks a somewhat sarcastic question, "But how well does he (Hazony) know what researchers and professors want?" The answer very simply is that Hazony does not, I do not, and Mr. Ramirez does not. The professors who deal with the CIA choose to do so. They, and only they, know what they want.
Ramirez asks, "Does Hazony really think that intelligent, humanist thinkers want to seek out funding so they can apply their life's work to weapons and political violence?" This is a nifty Catch-22 argument. It implies that Hazony is stupid since he seems to believe this, yet the simple fact that so many academicians are willing to work for the CIA seems to easily contradict his point.
Furthermore, the phrasing of the question suggests that people who work with the CIA must be supporting weapons and political violence. This is simply wrong. The ClA's information-gathering role is the one most tied to university involvement.
I fail to see how research into the causes of things such as Islamic fundamentalism (to use Hazony's example, with which Ramirez takes issue) indicates a desire to apply one's life work to weapons and political violence.
We see here that Ramirez equates the CIA with political violence and weapons and this is the root of his anger. His line of argument posits that intelligent humanists absolutely despise weapons of any sort. I'm sure many scientists do dislike weapons systems, but the fact that many scientists have avidly worked on these programs suggests that they do not oppose such work.
I personally have significant doubts about SDI, but I cannot reasonably claim that all smart folk agree with me. Ramirez makes this claim. From Ramirez's perspective all academicians who work with the government are all either fools or evil people of Hazony's devious ilk. Wow.
Finally, we are told that many academicians have no viable choices, as Hazony suggests, but rather are coerced into such work. Again, no one is coerced. Secondly, no research funds have been converted to SDI funds, as Ramirez claimed. Perhaps Ramirez can tell me which piece of legislation produced this conversion of funds. It would be most enlightening.
I think the basic problem with Ramirez is that he has long ago concluded quite simply that the CIA is very bad. Thus any association with it must logically be bad. This is a logical conclusion from a very precarious assumption. He ignores the critical information-gathering role of the CIA, and the role that academicians may wish to play in this job.
Ramirez has the right to dislike individuals, but his inherent dislikes should not contaminate a column aimed at illuminating a major issue.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%81nyos_Jedlik
Ányos István Jedlik 11 January 1800 – 13 December 1895) was a Hungarian inventor, engineer, physicist
He is considered by Hungarians and Slovaks to be the unsung father of the dynamo
- posted by me, Kerry Burgess 1:45 PM Pacific-time USA Monday 05/23/2022
