Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

This Isn't the Petition Response You're Looking For

petitions.whitehouse.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 71 posts

Re: This Isn't the Petition Response You're Looking For

#61

Post by JamisonM »

ghc wrote: post #14
jtokoph wrote: post #10

Now that they write a joke response to a joke petition, it would be nice to see a serious response to a serious petition.

While there are jokes within the response, I do not believe this to be a "joke response". The points he makes are good, and the call to action regarding careers in math and science is a fantastic way to handle a response likely to be read by 14-16 year olds throughout the reaches of the internet. Paul Shawcross is still a long way from making amends for what he's done to help cripple our human space flight program, h…

The "Shawcross Option" might have been for the best for all we know. The shuttle was designed to be expensive, doing things that it never really needed to do. If NASA had ended the shuttle program sooner we might very well have a better space-exploration-only vehicle out on the tarmac right now instead of... what do we have now? Oh, right, nothing. I would add that the emphasis on non-human exploration seems to be about the best possible PR and science move for NASA, it has been cheap and generated positive buzz in the media as mission after mission has exceeded expectations.

Re: This Isn't the Petition Response You're Looking For

#63

Post by adastra »

ghc wrote: post #14
jtokoph wrote: post #10

Now that they write a joke response to a joke petition, it would be nice to see a serious response to a serious petition.

While there are jokes within the response, I do not believe this to be a "joke response". The points he makes are good, and the call to action regarding careers in math and science is a fantastic way to handle a response likely to be read by 14-16 year olds throughout the reaches of the internet. Paul Shawcross is still a long way from making amends for what he's done to help cripple our human space flight program, h…

> Paul Shawcross is still a long way from making amends for what he's done to help cripple our human space flight program, however.

And what is it you think he did, exactly? Just curious.

Re: This Isn't the Petition Response You're Looking For

#65

Post by baddox »

autotravis wrote: post #39
ceol wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, it recovered pretty well after a 6 mile wide rock going millions of miles per hour hit it right in the face and cause one of the biggest extinction events in its history. If that didn't destroy its habitability for good, I'm not sure we'd be able to do it.

> "If that didn't destroy its habitability for good, I'm not sure we'd be able to do it." But we sure can make it a lot more miserable to live on.

Sure, but by this point we've redefined "destroying the Earth" to mean "making someone less comfortable."

Re: This Isn't the Petition Response You're Looking For

#68

Post by brazzy »

jerf wrote: post #29
georgemcbay wrote: post #8

"The Administration does not support blowing up planets." I guess we're going to have to wait until the Republicans are back in the executive branch.

"Destroying the Earth is harder than you may have been led to believe. "You've seen the action movies where the bad guy threatens to destroy the Earth. You've heard people on the news claiming that the next nuclear war or cutting down rainforests or persisting in releasing hideous quantities of pollution into the atmosphere threatens to end the world. "Fools. "The Earth is built to last. It is a 4,550,000,000-year-ol…

OTOH:

"The momentum would be enough to knock the Earth into a different orbit—but the Earth is no more. The energy deposited is ten thousand times greater than the planet’s gravitational binding energy, and the planet is blown into an expanding cloud of plasma, with a particularly energetic streamer extending away from the far side of the impact site, out into space."

-- http://whatif.xkcd.com/20/

Re: This Isn't the Petition Response You're Looking For

#69

Post by mscarborough »

pekk wrote: post #36
mscarborough wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So many things to say, but really not the right forum. Sigh. I laughed at this, it's a fun and smart response targeted to a sub-community that barely broke the threshold to get that response. But let's be real. If your standard of 'blowing up the planet' is somewhat lesser than 'the Republicans'...it might make you feel better to say it but history shows both of them are plenty happy dropping bombs for no justifiable…

I am afraid that history doesn't show that we wage wars "for no justifiable reason".

How about the most recent US-Iraq war? The one justified by "OMG WMDs and Al-Qaeda", and a vial of scary stuff waved around at the UN by our Secretary of State?

Merely saying a few things and seeing what might stick in order to justify your actions doesn't automatically qualify them as justified or reasoned.

Re: This Isn't the Petition Response You're Looking For

#70

Post by illuminate »

ceol wrote: post #38
dinkumthinkum wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think when people say "destroy the Earth" they are talking more about it's habitability than what a Death Star can do.

Well, it recovered pretty well after a 6 mile wide rock going millions of miles per hour hit it right in the face and cause one of the biggest extinction events in its history. If that didn't destroy its habitability for good, I'm not sure we'd be able to do it.

"If that didn't destroy its habitability for good, I'm not sure we'd be able to do it"

You have a pretty stunted imagination for what we are able to do to the planet.

Post reply on HN