I'm not sure how you'd slap someone with a PDF. You truly are unobservant.
Like they can't be printed out as a hard copy? And like you provided sufficient details to make a distinction?
It was donated to our Library.
Missed it. Just to be sure I did a search of the page for the title, NASA. Nope not there.
Forum Announcements, hmmm, "The Flat Earth Society Manifesto, version2? Search for NASA yields...nada. The rest of the pins, nada.
Page one titles search for NASA, nada.
Page two titles search for NASA, nada.
Page three, three strikes. No more pages.
facebook maybe? Search found one reference to NASA. Nope, not it.
Two references on Twitter, nope they aren't it.
Nothing under Reddit.
Nothing on your home page.
you just haven't bothered to do even the most rudimentary of research before you came here
I did read your entire wiki before making a post here, not there either.
"Hrm" indeed.
You're not obligated [sic] to do anything at all. I'm just telling you why you're hopelessly wrong, and suggesting that you stop guessing and start observing. Whether or not you choose to take advice from a guy on the Internet is entirely your prerogative.
More hrm here too. Stop guessing and start observing. Umm yeah, that would be why I requested some information? Which you haven't provided, which leaves me guessing.
That said, you assuming that I consider you obliged to do anything is yet another great example of your problem.
And lack of genuine dialog would be yours. Does it hurt the revenue stream from your sales area?
"Popular recognition" with(in) a single organisation? That doesn't even make sense.
Why not? Organizations are comprised of people with a head count. You told me to go ahead and take a poll of NASA employees so I guess you are just being inconsistent now.
to be noticed or important
Yep, applies. And you aren't.
used to say that people [...] know about something or that something is or is not important to someone
Yes, yes, you are getting it now.
[radar:] range of notice <fell off the radar after losing their first three games>
I could quote Obama here but I'll pass on that.
Ah, yes, that's right, you're full of shit. Not only did your own use make no sense in the context you used it (it is impossible to be "popularly recognised" by a tiny organisation), it also isn't the idiom's meaning at all.
Well I have to disagree. You are not on Obama's radar, you are not on NASA's radar, you are not considered important by anyone that I can find outside of your little website. And being popular in a small organization is possible. Let me give an example. The concept of a flat earth is popular here at this forum. Are you larger or smaller in number than NASA? Let's see, 412 total members, yikes! NASA has currently 18,000 civil service employees and an additional 40,000 contractors and grantees doing work for NASA.
Again, again, and again, you let your assumptions and imagination take the lead, causing you to forget to pay attention to the perceivable world.
I assume that I can rely on the findings of others in the fields of science. I imagine that work that is checked by others and can be re-investigated at any time by anyone else is the basis for a valid accumulation of knowledge by our species. Perceptions can be wrong and have been wrong. I first perceived you to be an educated astronomy geek making fun of people trying to defend RE. Then I perceived you to be a troll. Now I percieve you perhaps making a slight income off of this site. You see the issue is that perceptions are largely biased crap based on stuff like intuition. That is why it is better to rely on experimentation and collect data and make hypotheses to explain the data that have predictive power and use anomalies to improve our theories after we gather enough further data.
Actually, we're talking about space missions. The thread title appears numerous times on each page here. You butted in here and started saying stupid things, so I'm pointing them out to you as a courtesy.
Nice way to skirt your miscategorization my argument as an ad populum fallacy when it was nothing of the sort.
Okay, provide some evidence to the following:
The YEC "debate" has been "renewed", rather than always having been present.
YEC somehow increased awareness of the FES.
The second is self evident in that you guys get mentioned a lot in the debates. And the debate being revived does not imply it was dead previously. Check the definition. (specifically: give new strength or energy to)
See, again with the fantasies. You made an attempt at recalling something I said years ago, but sadly you failed. Since according to RE'ers the Cavendish Experiment clearly works with any and all matter, I'd like to see it evaluated on a kind of matter of my choosing; namely, bananas.
And that's different how? Nevermind I'm almost out of Excedrin. You do realize that bananas are made of the same elements as everything else right? Carbon, Hydrogen, Oxygen, etc.
So far, nobody even attempted to construct as little as a thought experiment for this.
Really. I wasn't aware that a thought experiment for this was necessary. But here goes.
In place of the lead spheres on the balance arm we place fishbowls filled with the goop of Vitamixed whole bananas.
So your pass on the people being turned into monkeys and pigs by Allah means... you're afraid of Muslim retribution. OK, at least that much makes sense.