[continued from previous message]   
      
   > > > > > > desire, and only limit it to specific arenas as their are many   
   ancillary   
   > > > > > > tracks or veins of thought that went into it or stem from it.   
   > > > > >   
   > > > > > Science is not a business operation, even if NDAs are used.   
   > > >   
   > > > > Then why do the have P&L statements?   
   > > >   
   > > > Because they use and need money, just like everyone else. That   
   > > > doesn't mean they're earning profit margins of 100% or such. If   
   > > > business is the art of making money, then that's just one more part of   
   > > > popular culture that academic scientists aren't interested in.   
   > >   
   > > So in principle you are agreeing to the idea that they are not just there   
   > > for   
   > > the fun of it, or the research joys. And like any other business money is   
   > > needed for operations.   
   >   
   > No, I don't agree with that, in principle or otherwise.   
   >   
   > > > > > > Even in a scholarly environment were freedoms used to be the rule   
   of the   
   > > > > > > day,   
   > > > > > > things have changed. And many professors have side gigs related to   
   their   
   > > > > > > profession. And what better place to grab ideas, trains of   
   thoughts than   
   > > > > > > from   
   > > > > > > young people, and then take their ideas that have merit, build on   
   them   
   > > > > > > and   
   > > > > > > thereby profit. There may be a very few who would tell the student   
   of   
   > > > > > > the   
   > > > > > > possibilities of their idea or concept/s and assist them to   
   develop them   
   > > > > > > while they continue in their studies and not just halt their   
   education   
   > > > > > > by   
   > > > > > > getting sidetracked.   
   > > > > >   
   > > > > > Do the words "rich young scientist" sound right to you? (Hint: they   
   > > > > > shouldn't, since scientists are not in it for the money).   
   > > > >   
   > > > > Avoid a search on the WWW at all costs. :)   
   > > > >   
   > > > > Also avoid a search for poor young scientists who are worried about   
   > > > > funding   
   > > > > cuts and where the money is going to come from.   
   > > >   
   > > > I was referring to scientists in academia, not those in engineering   
   > > > pursuits.   
   > >   
   > > I was too, as some of them left colleges and universities be cause of their   
   > > projects and big money. With their earnings even exceeding billions of   
   > > dollars.   
   >   
   > Right, but they would have to leave academia to do that.   
   >   
   > > In fact I have a granddaughter in chemistry field with a full load   
   > > scholarship at a major University who enjoys the learning of it, but also   
   > > has   
   > > an eye on the future potentials with is normal for most people.   
   >   
   > Like becoming a biotech pharmacist? That's not a job for everyone,   
   > even if it is very lucrative.   
   >   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > There used to be think tanks where someone with great   
   wealth would   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > fund research without limitations of directions,   
   allowing dream   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > chasers   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > to run freely, uninhibited. Whether they were seemingly   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > successful or not.   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > I don’t now it that exists anymore.   
   > > > > > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > > > > No, science is better than think tanks.   
   > > > > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > > > Then you have limited knowledge in regards to think tanks.   
   I was   
   > > > > > > > > > > looking   
   > > > > > > > > > > into   
   > > > > > > > > > > funding for one in my early years due to my inquisitive   
   nature in   
   > > > > > > > > > > many   
   > > > > > > > > > > things and arena's.   
   > > > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > > So why did you lose your interest in think tanks? And what   
   makes them   
   > > > > > > > > > even on a par with scientific excellence?   
   > > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > It has nothing to do with scientific excellence it has to do   
   with   
   > > > > > > > > ideas   
   > > > > > > > > carried out to their useful ends and or total failures thus   
   proving it   
   > > > > > > > > to   
   > > > > > > > > be   
   > > > > > > > > just another pipe dream. That part of my life I did not wan't   
   to sell   
   > > > > > > > > to   
   > > > > > > > > anyone, although one of my project ideas I wish that I could   
   have   
   > > > > > > > > given   
   > > > > > > > > it   
   > > > > > > > > to the proper people for even free, since it would/could have   
   helped   
   > > > > > > > > space   
   > > > > > > > > travel considerably in a variety of ways.   
   > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > Think tanks -- popular culture's answer to a question no one   
   asked.   
   > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > You must be a pessimist at heart.   
   > > > > >   
   > > > > > No, I just don't have a high opinion of pop culture. Science seems   
   > > > > > to separate itself from that part of society.   
   > > > >   
   > > > > Enter Fauci. LOL   
   > > >   
   > > > Consulting is not science, though scientists outside academia might   
   > > > become interested in it.   
   > >   
   > > Fauci was not a consultant..   
   >   
   > Not technically, but he was sought after as if he were.   
   >   
   > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > No.   
   > > > > >   
   > > > > > I'm glad we agree on that.   
   > > > >   
   > > > > It was never an issue. But imprints in certain layers are.   
   > > >   
   > > > They are, but they're not found with dinosaur footprints.   
   > >   
   > > A very generalized and false statement.   
   >   
   > There are no human footprints contemporaneous with dinosaur   
   > footprints, and indeed, in general there are no *modern* footprints   
   > like cat and dog footprints found contemporaneous with dinosaur   
   > footprints.   
   >   
   > And as I've said before, there is not a trace of an antediluvian   
   > civilization found in the fossil record.   
   >   
   > > > > > > > > And in the Rain Forest of the Amazon a large city covered up   
   by the   
   > > > > > > > > jungles.   
   > > > > > > > > Lots of things to learn there, as well. Ancient people were   
   not as   
   > > > > > > > > stupid   
   > > > > > > > > and illiterate as many gave them credit for.   
   > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > Hunter-gatherers would probably be illiterate but not stupid.   
   However   
   > > > > > > > I don't know of anyone that would claim literate and intelligent   
   > > > > > > > civilizations couldn't exist in the Americas 2500 years ago. I   
   mean   
   > > > > > > > that civilization lasted to almost the beginning of the   
   well-known   
   > > > > > > > Maya civilization which developed in the jungles of Central   
   America.   
   > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > Hunter gatherers, splorf. There always has been and forever will   
   be.   
   > > > > >   
   > > > > > What does that have to do with ancient civilizations?   
   > > > >   
   > > > > You were the one who brought it up, as if there was a reason for it.   
   You   
   > > > > started off you paragraph referring to them.   
   > > >   
   > > > Wasn't it you that introduced the idea of civilization in the Amazon,   
   > > > and claimed that you had shown that ancient peoples weren't illiterate   
   > > > or stupid?   
   > >   
   > > Yes. But then you reduced them, to hunter gatherers. Despite the large   
   > > cities, etc.   
   >   
   > Hunter-gatherers are quite capable of existing along side advanced   
   > civilizations. When did I ever claim that wasn't so?   
   >   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > The reason that stood out to be was because the   
   evolutionary   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > scientists   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > who   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > tried to say that somehow the human foot prints were   
   man made   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > seemed   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > absurd   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > to me, it was like they were grasping at straws to   
   disprove it   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > because   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > it   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > stood out so bad in a manner that contradicted the   
   current   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > thinking   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > of   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > evolution.   
   > > > > > > > > > > >   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)