[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]una999 wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]QueenMercury46 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Hey una,
http://i234.photobucket.com/albums/ee201/QueenMercury46/Fuck_your_theory.jpg[/QUOTE]
How about fuck yourself[/QUOTE]
Of course i dont mean that because i dont use bad language. Yes that's a good picture but just a picture, u wasted time looking for it, my origional point is still correct and you can't argue against that.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]una999 wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]gnomo wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]una999 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]u see what difference is this PHD going to make to anyone's life? [/QUOTE]A whole world of difference to HIS life surely.
Some difference, hopefully, also to the life of some astronomer who might use the data and conclusions in it to get a better understanding of something somewhere in the Universe.[/QUOTE]
But if it could wait 30 years...how relevant is it?[/QUOTE]
Hi
Been reading this thread with interest and would like to add the following. Let's have a look at the following dissertation topic - On the Gaussian error function which proved fundamental results on probability theory, namely the central limit theorem. Oh how this one drips off the tongue - I'm sure you agree the title is even easier to remember than Brian's topic. Well let's just take a moment to review this title and piece of research - this is the dissertation of a one Alan Turing (http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Biographies/Turing.html) the famous code breaker who helped change the direction of WWII due to his work at Bletchley Park. I can just hear your comments now on first review of the dissertation title - how irrelevant is this piece of work. I'm sure Alan Turing just shouldn't have bothered after all surely all of the real academic work in computing was researched and completed years before by better and smarter individuals i.e. Charles Babbage (http://ei.cs.vt.edu/~history/Babbage.html) Using your point of view we'd never make any progress at all - You refer to Alan sugar time and time again - very successful and interesting guy but his success is mainly built on selling Amstrad PC's that other academic's and computing professionals invented and manufactured for him.
Your posting is totally ironic - if we used your approach to education we'd all be still banging rocks together. "If something takes 30 years how can it really be relevant." Many academics take a lifetime of work and research only for their work to make an impact many years after their death. You'd not be able to post on this thread without the work of academics such as Turing and Babbage.
I'm sure that Brian's research will have an equally important impact in the field of astronomy. Just because you don't grasp the relevance of the work doesn't make it irrelevant.
And finally before you start stating that my example refers to computing which is engineering related and thus relevant from your limited perspective I'm sure I could find thousands of other examples in other fields i.e. music, art, etc etc...
Learning and research is about making new discoveries not about how much money you can make. Academic research aids the whole of society and makes us what we are. Dismissing the work that Brian's done is a clear example of ignorance and a very limited outlook on life. I'd like to congratulate you on your original posting, it so clearly demonstrates to everyone a lot about yourself and your approach to everyone else - well done!
Some difference, hopefully, also to the life of some astronomer who might use the data and conclusions in it to get a better understanding of something somewhere in the Universe.[/QUOTE]
But if it could wait 30 years...how relevant is it?[/QUOTE]
Hi
Been reading this thread with interest and would like to add the following. Let's have a look at the following dissertation topic - On the Gaussian error function which proved fundamental results on probability theory, namely the central limit theorem. Oh how this one drips off the tongue - I'm sure you agree the title is even easier to remember than Brian's topic. Well let's just take a moment to review this title and piece of research - this is the dissertation of a one Alan Turing (http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Biographies/Turing.html) the famous code breaker who helped change the direction of WWII due to his work at Bletchley Park. I can just hear your comments now on first review of the dissertation title - how irrelevant is this piece of work. I'm sure Alan Turing just shouldn't have bothered after all surely all of the real academic work in computing was researched and completed years before by better and smarter individuals i.e. Charles Babbage (http://ei.cs.vt.edu/~history/Babbage.html) Using your point of view we'd never make any progress at all - You refer to Alan sugar time and time again - very successful and interesting guy but his success is mainly built on selling Amstrad PC's that other academic's and computing professionals invented and manufactured for him.
Your posting is totally ironic - if we used your approach to education we'd all be still banging rocks together. "If something takes 30 years how can it really be relevant." Many academics take a lifetime of work and research only for their work to make an impact many years after their death. You'd not be able to post on this thread without the work of academics such as Turing and Babbage.
I'm sure that Brian's research will have an equally important impact in the field of astronomy. Just because you don't grasp the relevance of the work doesn't make it irrelevant.
And finally before you start stating that my example refers to computing which is engineering related and thus relevant from your limited perspective I'm sure I could find thousands of other examples in other fields i.e. music, art, etc etc...
Learning and research is about making new discoveries not about how much money you can make. Academic research aids the whole of society and makes us what we are. Dismissing the work that Brian's done is a clear example of ignorance and a very limited outlook on life. I'd like to congratulate you on your original posting, it so clearly demonstrates to everyone a lot about yourself and your approach to everyone else - well done!
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]una999 wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]QueenMercury46 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Hey una,
http://i234.photobucket.com/albums/ee201/QueenMercury46/Fuck_your_theory.jpg[/QUOTE]
How about fuck yourself[/QUOTE]
Good idea. Thanks!
http://i234.photobucket.com/albums/ee201/QueenMercury46/Fuck_your_theory.jpg[/QUOTE]
How about fuck yourself[/QUOTE]
Good idea. Thanks!
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Hitman1965 wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]una999 wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]gnomo wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]una999 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]u see what difference is this PHD going to make to anyone's life? [/QUOTE]A whole world of difference to HIS life surely.
Some difference, hopefully, also to the life of some astronomer who might use the data and conclusions in it to get a better understanding of something somewhere in the Universe.[/QUOTE]
But if it could wait 30 years...how relevant is it?[/QUOTE]
Hi
Been reading this thread with interest and would like to add the following. Let's have a look at the following dissertation topic - On the Gaussian error function which proved fundamental results on probability theory, namely the central limit theorem. Oh how this one drips off the tongue - I'm sure you agree the title is even easier to remember than Brian's topic. Well let's just take a moment to review this title and piece of research - this is the dissertation of a one Alan Turing (http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Biographies/Turing.html) the famous code breaker who helped change the direction of WWII due to his work at Bletchley Park. I can just hear your comments now on first review of the dissertation title - how irrelevant is this piece of work. I'm sure Alan Turing just shouldn't have bothered after all surely all of the real academic work in computing was researched and completed years before by better and smarter individuals i.e. Charles Babbage (http://ei.cs.vt.edu/~history/Babbage.html) Using your point of view we'd never make any progress at all - You refer to Alan sugar time and time again - very successful and interesting guy but his success is mainly built on selling Amstrad PC's that other academic's and computing professionals invented and manufactured for him.
Your posting is totally ironic - if we used your approach to education we'd all be still banging rocks together. "If something takes 30 years how can it really be relevant." Many academics take a lifetime of work and research only for their work to make an impact many years after their death. You'd not be able to post on this thread without the work of academics such as Turing and Babbage.
I'm sure that Brian's research will have an equally important impact in the field of astronomy. Just because you don't grasp the relevance of the work doesn't make it irrelevant.
And finally before you start stating that my example refers to computing which is engineering related and thus relevant from your limited perspective I'm sure I could find thousands of other examples in other fields i.e. music, art, etc etc...
Learning and research is about making new discoveries not about how much money you can make. Academic research aids the whole of society and makes us what we are. Dismissing the work that Brian's done is a clear example of ignorance and a very limited outlook on life. I'd like to congratulate you on your original posting, it so clearly demonstrates to everyone a lot about yourself and your approach to everyone else - well done!
[/QUOTE]
I must confess i didn't read all that technical stuff...explain this then sir. Queen are pretty much self taught musicians, like most bands. So you could have a trained pianist but he'll never be as successful as freddie mercury...now u see that's if you measure success in terms of money, but i measure it interms of added value, or wealth. Freddie Mercury wrote his own songs, which added value to our lives in this modern world, whereas some classical pianist basically plays mozart all day...now that may add value to someone's life, but if one pianist doesn't play mozart there will be another 20 who will. So Freddie Mercury created something new...he added value to people's lives. Now Freddie didn't need to know every complex terminology in music to do this...so it does show how pointless a lot of these things are. Getting back to my origional point which Alan Sugar made ( now u can disagree with him, but as a businessman he knows what he's talking about, remember he's wealthier than us so he must be doing something different) who stated that we need to teach kids enterprise and not textbook crap. If you can't accept the validity of that point you are stupid. Innovation drives this world. Everyone doesn't need a degree in XYZ to do this. The majority of degrees outside the science field are pathetic, and my whole point of Brian's thesis is that something that is so important could not wait 30years, but don't lose my point above.
Some difference, hopefully, also to the life of some astronomer who might use the data and conclusions in it to get a better understanding of something somewhere in the Universe.[/QUOTE]
But if it could wait 30 years...how relevant is it?[/QUOTE]
Hi
Been reading this thread with interest and would like to add the following. Let's have a look at the following dissertation topic - On the Gaussian error function which proved fundamental results on probability theory, namely the central limit theorem. Oh how this one drips off the tongue - I'm sure you agree the title is even easier to remember than Brian's topic. Well let's just take a moment to review this title and piece of research - this is the dissertation of a one Alan Turing (http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Biographies/Turing.html) the famous code breaker who helped change the direction of WWII due to his work at Bletchley Park. I can just hear your comments now on first review of the dissertation title - how irrelevant is this piece of work. I'm sure Alan Turing just shouldn't have bothered after all surely all of the real academic work in computing was researched and completed years before by better and smarter individuals i.e. Charles Babbage (http://ei.cs.vt.edu/~history/Babbage.html) Using your point of view we'd never make any progress at all - You refer to Alan sugar time and time again - very successful and interesting guy but his success is mainly built on selling Amstrad PC's that other academic's and computing professionals invented and manufactured for him.
Your posting is totally ironic - if we used your approach to education we'd all be still banging rocks together. "If something takes 30 years how can it really be relevant." Many academics take a lifetime of work and research only for their work to make an impact many years after their death. You'd not be able to post on this thread without the work of academics such as Turing and Babbage.
I'm sure that Brian's research will have an equally important impact in the field of astronomy. Just because you don't grasp the relevance of the work doesn't make it irrelevant.
And finally before you start stating that my example refers to computing which is engineering related and thus relevant from your limited perspective I'm sure I could find thousands of other examples in other fields i.e. music, art, etc etc...
Learning and research is about making new discoveries not about how much money you can make. Academic research aids the whole of society and makes us what we are. Dismissing the work that Brian's done is a clear example of ignorance and a very limited outlook on life. I'd like to congratulate you on your original posting, it so clearly demonstrates to everyone a lot about yourself and your approach to everyone else - well done!
[/QUOTE]
I must confess i didn't read all that technical stuff...explain this then sir. Queen are pretty much self taught musicians, like most bands. So you could have a trained pianist but he'll never be as successful as freddie mercury...now u see that's if you measure success in terms of money, but i measure it interms of added value, or wealth. Freddie Mercury wrote his own songs, which added value to our lives in this modern world, whereas some classical pianist basically plays mozart all day...now that may add value to someone's life, but if one pianist doesn't play mozart there will be another 20 who will. So Freddie Mercury created something new...he added value to people's lives. Now Freddie didn't need to know every complex terminology in music to do this...so it does show how pointless a lot of these things are. Getting back to my origional point which Alan Sugar made ( now u can disagree with him, but as a businessman he knows what he's talking about, remember he's wealthier than us so he must be doing something different) who stated that we need to teach kids enterprise and not textbook crap. If you can't accept the validity of that point you are stupid. Innovation drives this world. Everyone doesn't need a degree in XYZ to do this. The majority of degrees outside the science field are pathetic, and my whole point of Brian's thesis is that something that is so important could not wait 30years, but don't lose my point above.
and i only used engineering and medicine as an example...i left out computers...well i'm sure i left out other important courses, but merely to show a point, don't have all day i come on here for a bit of fun
You are one mean thinking little man with a mind the size of a golf-ball. Really, you lack perspective.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]una999 wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Hitman1965 wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]una999 wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]gnomo wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]una999 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]u see what difference is this PHD going to make to anyone's life? [/QUOTE]A whole world of difference to HIS life surely.
Some difference, hopefully, also to the life of some astronomer who might use the data and conclusions in it to get a better understanding of something somewhere in the Universe.[/QUOTE]
But if it could wait 30 years...how relevant is it?[/QUOTE]
Hi
Been reading this thread with interest and would like to add the following. Let's have a look at the following dissertation topic - On the Gaussian error function which proved fundamental results on probability theory, namely the central limit theorem. Oh how this one drips off the tongue - I'm sure you agree the title is even easier to remember than Brian's topic. Well let's just take a moment to review this title and piece of research - this is the dissertation of a one Alan Turing (http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Biographies/Turing.html) the famous code breaker who helped change the direction of WWII due to his work at Bletchley Park. I can just hear your comments now on first review of the dissertation title - how irrelevant is this piece of work. I'm sure Alan Turing just shouldn't have bothered after all surely all of the real academic work in computing was researched and completed years before by better and smarter individuals i.e. Charles Babbage (http://ei.cs.vt.edu/~history/Babbage.html) Using your point of view we'd never make any progress at all - You refer to Alan sugar time and time again - very successful and interesting guy but his success is mainly built on selling Amstrad PC's that other academic's and computing professionals invented and manufactured for him.
Your posting is totally ironic - if we used your approach to education we'd all be still banging rocks together. "If something takes 30 years how can it really be relevant." Many academics take a lifetime of work and research only for their work to make an impact many years after their death. You'd not be able to post on this thread without the work of academics such as Turing and Babbage.
I'm sure that Brian's research will have an equally important impact in the field of astronomy. Just because you don't grasp the relevance of the work doesn't make it irrelevant.
And finally before you start stating that my example refers to computing which is engineering related and thus relevant from your limited perspective I'm sure I could find thousands of other examples in other fields i.e. music, art, etc etc...
Learning and research is about making new discoveries not about how much money you can make. Academic research aids the whole of society and makes us what we are. Dismissing the work that Brian's done is a clear example of ignorance and a very limited outlook on life. I'd like to congratulate you on your original posting, it so clearly demonstrates to everyone a lot about yourself and your approach to everyone else - well done!
[/QUOTE]
I must confess i didn't read all that technical stuff...explain this then sir. Queen are pretty much self taught musicians, like most bands. So you could have a trained pianist but he'll never be as successful as freddie mercury...now u see that's if you measure success in terms of money, but i measure it interms of added value, or wealth. Freddie Mercury wrote his own songs, which added value to our lives in this modern world, whereas some classical pianist basically plays mozart all day...now that may add value to someone's life, but if one pianist doesn't play mozart there will be another 20 who will. So Freddie Mercury created something new...he added value to people's lives. Now Freddie didn't need to know every complex terminology in music to do this...so it does show how pointless a lot of these things are. Getting back to my origional point which Alan Sugar made ( now u can disagree with him, but as a businessman he knows what he's talking about, remember he's wealthier than us so he must be doing something different) who stated that we need to teach kids enterprise and not textbook crap. If you can't accept the validity of that point you are stupid. Innovation drives this world. Everyone doesn't need a degree in XYZ to do this. The majority of degrees outside the science field are pathetic, and my whole point of Brian's thesis is that something that is so important could not wait 30years, but don't lose my point above. [/QUOTE]
Lots to consider in your reply - don't get me wrong; nothing wrong with Alan Sugar great guy and a big plus to society. You mention innovation - this comes from understanding and knowledge which comes from research. Please don't get me wrong - you can make great contributions to society without a degree -univerity of life is a great thing. Academic institutes are about providing an infrastructure to allow people to be creative and successful. You quote we need to teach kids enterprise not textbook crap - I'd comment that we need to teach kids to think, question and react constructively to what they encounter (objectivity comes to mind as well - which some people appear to lack). You comment that all members of Queen are self taught - if you really understood how academic institutes work you'd understand that all teachers really do is provide an infrastructure for people to learn. By the way correct me if I'm incorrect here but all four members of Queen all hold university degrees. There's really very little difference between a self taught subject and something structured as a university course.
I respect everyone's right to have an opinion (including yours) but please don't be so quick to term others stupid or pathetic. Please take some time to properly look at the area Brian studies before passing judgement. Your comment about if something is so important how can it wait 30 years. Scientific discovery and research can take a lifetime and in terms of Astronomical research 30 years is nothing in real terms. Publishing a Phd thesis and having it accepted is about reaching a certain level of research and having it acknowledged by your peers in the relevant field of study. It's about making a contribution to collective knowledge. That is what Brian's current piece of work is about - hard work and innovation aiming to help others understand. That should be recognised and applauded not dismissed as irrelevant.
Brian's a fantastic role model for kids, hard working, skilled, loads of talent, highly creative in loads of areas both music and scientific. Commenting that you only come here to have fun - great I didn't start this debate - you did. Sounds like Brian completing his thesis appears to upset you - sorry to here this.
Some difference, hopefully, also to the life of some astronomer who might use the data and conclusions in it to get a better understanding of something somewhere in the Universe.[/QUOTE]
But if it could wait 30 years...how relevant is it?[/QUOTE]
Hi
Been reading this thread with interest and would like to add the following. Let's have a look at the following dissertation topic - On the Gaussian error function which proved fundamental results on probability theory, namely the central limit theorem. Oh how this one drips off the tongue - I'm sure you agree the title is even easier to remember than Brian's topic. Well let's just take a moment to review this title and piece of research - this is the dissertation of a one Alan Turing (http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Biographies/Turing.html) the famous code breaker who helped change the direction of WWII due to his work at Bletchley Park. I can just hear your comments now on first review of the dissertation title - how irrelevant is this piece of work. I'm sure Alan Turing just shouldn't have bothered after all surely all of the real academic work in computing was researched and completed years before by better and smarter individuals i.e. Charles Babbage (http://ei.cs.vt.edu/~history/Babbage.html) Using your point of view we'd never make any progress at all - You refer to Alan sugar time and time again - very successful and interesting guy but his success is mainly built on selling Amstrad PC's that other academic's and computing professionals invented and manufactured for him.
Your posting is totally ironic - if we used your approach to education we'd all be still banging rocks together. "If something takes 30 years how can it really be relevant." Many academics take a lifetime of work and research only for their work to make an impact many years after their death. You'd not be able to post on this thread without the work of academics such as Turing and Babbage.
I'm sure that Brian's research will have an equally important impact in the field of astronomy. Just because you don't grasp the relevance of the work doesn't make it irrelevant.
And finally before you start stating that my example refers to computing which is engineering related and thus relevant from your limited perspective I'm sure I could find thousands of other examples in other fields i.e. music, art, etc etc...
Learning and research is about making new discoveries not about how much money you can make. Academic research aids the whole of society and makes us what we are. Dismissing the work that Brian's done is a clear example of ignorance and a very limited outlook on life. I'd like to congratulate you on your original posting, it so clearly demonstrates to everyone a lot about yourself and your approach to everyone else - well done!
[/QUOTE]
I must confess i didn't read all that technical stuff...explain this then sir. Queen are pretty much self taught musicians, like most bands. So you could have a trained pianist but he'll never be as successful as freddie mercury...now u see that's if you measure success in terms of money, but i measure it interms of added value, or wealth. Freddie Mercury wrote his own songs, which added value to our lives in this modern world, whereas some classical pianist basically plays mozart all day...now that may add value to someone's life, but if one pianist doesn't play mozart there will be another 20 who will. So Freddie Mercury created something new...he added value to people's lives. Now Freddie didn't need to know every complex terminology in music to do this...so it does show how pointless a lot of these things are. Getting back to my origional point which Alan Sugar made ( now u can disagree with him, but as a businessman he knows what he's talking about, remember he's wealthier than us so he must be doing something different) who stated that we need to teach kids enterprise and not textbook crap. If you can't accept the validity of that point you are stupid. Innovation drives this world. Everyone doesn't need a degree in XYZ to do this. The majority of degrees outside the science field are pathetic, and my whole point of Brian's thesis is that something that is so important could not wait 30years, but don't lose my point above. [/QUOTE]
Lots to consider in your reply - don't get me wrong; nothing wrong with Alan Sugar great guy and a big plus to society. You mention innovation - this comes from understanding and knowledge which comes from research. Please don't get me wrong - you can make great contributions to society without a degree -univerity of life is a great thing. Academic institutes are about providing an infrastructure to allow people to be creative and successful. You quote we need to teach kids enterprise not textbook crap - I'd comment that we need to teach kids to think, question and react constructively to what they encounter (objectivity comes to mind as well - which some people appear to lack). You comment that all members of Queen are self taught - if you really understood how academic institutes work you'd understand that all teachers really do is provide an infrastructure for people to learn. By the way correct me if I'm incorrect here but all four members of Queen all hold university degrees. There's really very little difference between a self taught subject and something structured as a university course.
I respect everyone's right to have an opinion (including yours) but please don't be so quick to term others stupid or pathetic. Please take some time to properly look at the area Brian studies before passing judgement. Your comment about if something is so important how can it wait 30 years. Scientific discovery and research can take a lifetime and in terms of Astronomical research 30 years is nothing in real terms. Publishing a Phd thesis and having it accepted is about reaching a certain level of research and having it acknowledged by your peers in the relevant field of study. It's about making a contribution to collective knowledge. That is what Brian's current piece of work is about - hard work and innovation aiming to help others understand. That should be recognised and applauded not dismissed as irrelevant.
Brian's a fantastic role model for kids, hard working, skilled, loads of talent, highly creative in loads of areas both music and scientific. Commenting that you only come here to have fun - great I didn't start this debate - you did. Sounds like Brian completing his thesis appears to upset you - sorry to here this.
typo at end - should read - sorry to HEAR this.
Be careful; this thread might make it to 4 pages.
una has always been a fucking tool.... I think I've lost more useful things down the drain to be honest.
una has always been a fucking tool.... I think I've lost more useful things down the drain to be honest.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]una999 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]my whole point of Brian's thesis is that something that is so important could not wait 30years [/QUOTE]AGAIN - you must have missed this explanation the first time around.
Research on zodiacal dust was still relevant back then, when Brian started his work, as a means of understanding how our Solar System developed and works.
However, it has been overlooked since, while research on the Solar System concentrated on planetary exploration through fly-by or surface probes, which brought more interesting and exciting data.
BUT, since the search for extra-solar planetary system has progressed, thanks to better instruments, zodiacal dust has become of interest AGAIN, because dust clouds are considered the environment in which planets form and develop, so where plenty of dust is, it's likely that planets can be found.
Astronomers today have instruments that can detect and "measure" dust clouds around other stars, while planets are still extremely difficult to detect: to find a planet, they need to now *where* to look and *what clues* to look for amongst the dust.
Which means that a better knowledge of the structure and dynamics of those dust clouds has become relevant AGAIN for astronomers - this time, not those researching "our" planetary system, but those looking for other planetary systems "out there".
In short, the topic of his thesis:
- was important back then in a specific context;
- lost importance subsequently;
- has become important again in another context;
does the above answer your question?
Research on zodiacal dust was still relevant back then, when Brian started his work, as a means of understanding how our Solar System developed and works.
However, it has been overlooked since, while research on the Solar System concentrated on planetary exploration through fly-by or surface probes, which brought more interesting and exciting data.
BUT, since the search for extra-solar planetary system has progressed, thanks to better instruments, zodiacal dust has become of interest AGAIN, because dust clouds are considered the environment in which planets form and develop, so where plenty of dust is, it's likely that planets can be found.
Astronomers today have instruments that can detect and "measure" dust clouds around other stars, while planets are still extremely difficult to detect: to find a planet, they need to now *where* to look and *what clues* to look for amongst the dust.
Which means that a better knowledge of the structure and dynamics of those dust clouds has become relevant AGAIN for astronomers - this time, not those researching "our" planetary system, but those looking for other planetary systems "out there".
In short, the topic of his thesis:
- was important back then in a specific context;
- lost importance subsequently;
- has become important again in another context;
does the above answer your question?
Theres so many stupid things in your last post that I dont know where to begin. Im sure Alan Sugar is nice fellow, but maybe you should start having opinions of your own instead of just repeating what he says. So hes got more money than us, whats the point in this? Is all lifes about who makes the most money?
The quote about all degrees outside of science being pathethic is both stupid and proves you dont know a thing about what goes on in a university or in research.
How about you start giving arguments for your opinions instead of just saying "Alan Sugar says so" or "you have to agree otherwise you are stupid"?
The quote about all degrees outside of science being pathethic is both stupid and proves you dont know a thing about what goes on in a university or in research.
How about you start giving arguments for your opinions instead of just saying "Alan Sugar says so" or "you have to agree otherwise you are stupid"?
Luckily you seem to be the only one here who has opinions like these.
I know Una is just an act,
why do I keep getting sucked in then?
why do I keep getting sucked in then?
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Zebonka12 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Be careful; this thread might make it to 4 pages.
una has always been a fucking tool.... I think I've lost more useful things down the drain to be honest.[/QUOTE]
I'd go even further: Even Treasure Moment is more beneficial to this world than una.
una has always been a fucking tool.... I think I've lost more useful things down the drain to be honest.[/QUOTE]
I'd go even further: Even Treasure Moment is more beneficial to this world than una.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]ThomasQuinn wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Zebonka12 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Be careful; this thread might make it to 4 pages.
una has always been a fucking tool.... I think I've lost more useful things down the drain to be honest.[/QUOTE]
I'd go even further: Even Treasure Moment is more beneficial to this world than una.[/QUOTE]
Question: I'm new here what is Treasure Moment?
una has always been a fucking tool.... I think I've lost more useful things down the drain to be honest.[/QUOTE]
I'd go even further: Even Treasure Moment is more beneficial to this world than una.[/QUOTE]
Question: I'm new here what is Treasure Moment?