This is a example of how engineers design new technology but big business ignores and stiffles its growth in order to increase their profit margin.

I bring this point up because as an engineers you know the design aspect of the topic and as consumers you understand the benifits of such an invention.

 

seat belts and ralph nader?

 

lol

how the hell did we go from proving they landed and walked on the moon to how greedy big business is in the US?

 

hey tim was going off on tagents too thats your side

the point is motivation

 

This is too difficult for you guys becasue you are not reading my thread completely.

The moon landing was to motivate the people.but if you read the thread that I told you to "make sure you read" you would understand the impact it had on the people also the timelines reflect that the missions ended the same time the Vietnam war ended. You guys are not reading everything so I'm wasting my time.

I gave the example of how even technology is controlled by greed in big business.

You guys don't even know that fuel injection was developed in WWII. The fuel injection allow the planes to fly faster and higher. Which means it was developed in 1945. Fuel injection should have been in main stream earlier. The 1956 Corvett had fuel injection but because it did not consume gas like a carbs big business forces GM to revert back the carb.

This is another example of influence for the wrong reason.

It's just like the tuning, people don't understand.

sorry I wasted you guys time

 

well, at least the tangents I was going off on (the stadium truck analogy) was engineering related and was used to explain things that are usually described with complex equations and technospeak. This is about how companies are greedy and later, a plug about fuel injection systems and how it ties into greedy companies? Are you implying that ppl stood to make money riding the wave in after NASA called it a success?

I could say that I don't understand tuning and testing as well as Ichi, but I can also say that he doesn't understand engineering like I do. If I tried to learn about tuning, the engineering knowlege I have will fill in the gaps better as opposed to learning cold turkey. If you learn cold turkey, you just know that x leads to a y outcome and assume all other outcomes behave like that. That is not being an engineer. As opposed to "fuel injection allows the planes to fly higher and faster", I can reason why and how. Actually, fuel injection doesn't necessarily makes planes fly higher and faster though it does improve engine efficiency with a proper closed loop feedback control system. We could start talking bout this, but it would take this on a tangent.

 

Too hard to follow along I understand.

 

apparently so were my explanations.

EDIT - You start saying they didn't go to the moon because of the tracks and the "POS" lander so therefore they didn't go. Then I voiced a simple belief that they did go and you say not to believe in it. Since I pretty much told you that having something look like a POS doesn't mean it will work like a POS, you start mulling over the tracks being inconsistent and looping over and over again that since x =/= y, it just doesn't add up. I use analogies to explain what I see and you call them bantering. I use different theories to explain things (which are perfectly legal) and you call me inconsistent without using anything remotely science or engineering related to back it up. I give as simple an answer to your simple question and you laugh it off.. etc etc etc. And I can't follow along?

 

just an fyi, the person from Nasa we talked to yesterday was NOT the janitor

Group Leader, Advanced Structures and Measurement Technology

 

thats just a fancy way of saying he has a ruller so he gets to work there?









haha jk

 

this is almost like a religious discussion

person A: "there's archaeological photos of bone structures to show how humans evolved"

person B: "no, that's just coincidence. besides, god said we're from adam and eve and he created us so he wouldn't lie."

 

I know I was thinking "I didn't remember talking to you."

 

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science...terstitialskip

lol

Not to start this again.

 

LETS FAKE IT!!!!!!111111


i am joking i dont want to start this up again haha

 

That too funny.