Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

ComfortableIntern218 OP t1_jccfs91 wrote

How can you conclude that when we don't know how it works? I say we wait for the results from space to draw conclusions. I'm still skeptical, but I'm also against damning technology that I don't understand just to sound edgy.

2

Gigazwiebel t1_jccgc1c wrote

I have a PhD in physics. Extraordinary claims that break physics as we know it require extraordinary evidence. These kind of bullshit pops up regularly and it always amounts nothing.

9

lazyeyepsycho t1_jcdmvjj wrote

its an expensive hoax though certainly

full commitment

2

ComfortableIntern218 OP t1_jcibnez wrote

Yes, because small companies buy multi-million dollar launches to go to space and proceed to fake data from extremely sensitive and accurate measurement equipment, all of which are verified by outside sources. I can see them making a claim and never delivering on it, but a launch is a totally different animal. In order to pull off the scam, you would have to be able to fake a mass of data. That scenario is so complex/silly that you can't possibly believe they would go through that much trouble just to fool people momentarily. They and their partner clearly think they have something and have enough data to back up and justify a rocket launch.

1

ComfortableIntern218 OP t1_jcchk9g wrote

Do you have inside information that we do not on how this technology works? No offense, but your degree means you know a certain determined extent of human knowledge of a subject. It does not mean you know the secrets of the universe, including every human invention that can and will exist. If this was the case, your rockets would be landing themselves instead of SpaceX. I'd also like to point out the quantity of PhD holders that stood in the way of SpaceX and many other revolutionary companies that have brought about technological change. Let's see the data first, or did they not teach you the scientific method while you were obtaining that fancy degree?

0