http://www.pewinternet.org/interactives/public-scientists-opinion-gap/
Have humans evolved over time? Inquiring minds...
Have humans evolved over time? Inquiring minds...
![]() http://www.pewinternet.org/interactives/public-scientists-opinion-gap/ Have humans evolved over time? Inquiring minds... |
|
![]() I'm guessing that has at least something to do with envy. When Clinton killed the supercollider back in 1993, I was talking to a research chemist about it and he said he thought it was a good thing, "Because many smaller projects in other areas of science can be funded instead." I've long since lost track of him, but I'd love to know how much of the supercollider's savings were redirected to other efforts. My guess is none. bcnu, Mikem It's mourning in America again. |
|
![]() https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-supercollider-that-never-was/ A good article. Originally estimated to cost $4.4 billion, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to kill the project in the summer of 1992, when costs had risen to $8.25 billion, but it was saved by the Senate, although a $100-million cut below requested funds put the project further behind schedule, increasing its costs even more. By the fall of 1993 the estimated cost had risen to a minimum of $11 billion (equivalent to $18 billion today), in part because administrative overhead proved larger than anticipated, and refined calculations of expected beam losses lead to a magnet redesign. (There were to be about 10,000 of them in the ring.) The latter’s increased cost, about $2 billion, could have been avoided by accepting a smaller ring and its resulting lower energy, but that idea was rejected by upper scientific and academic management. There were lots of reasons why it died. Putting it in Hootchitfatchit, Texas rather than at Fermilab in Illinois was one of the first and expensive bad choices (but this article doesn't mention that). There weren't any "savings" in killing the SSC - it was already far over budget when it was killed. Cheers, Scott. |
|
![]() WASHINGTON, Oct. 30— Lamenting its death as "a serious loss" to science, President Clinton on Friday signed a bill killing the $11 billion superconducting supercollider project. http://www.nytimes.com/1993/10/31/us/stating-regret-clinton-signs-bill-that-kills-supercollider.html So, the "budget-conscious Congress" wasn't concerned with "saving money"? Let me guess, it's still Congress' fault that WJC signed the bill killing it and that's okay because, after all, WJC "felt our pain" when he did it. Seriously, can we never expect to see a single criticism of the Clintons from you, ever? bcnu, Mikem It's mourning in America again. |
|
![]() |
|
![]() bcnu, Mikem It's mourning in America again. |
|
![]() |
|
![]() cf. Alex's Sig, a timeless guidepost to Murican weirdness, generally (?) |