Keillor told MPR News, “I’ll be able to tell my side of the story at length, in my own words, in due course, and that’s sufficient for me.”
Keillor told MPR News, “I’ll be able to tell my side of the story at length, in my own words, in due course, and that’s sufficient for me.”
Second rule: know your target! If she’s so social-media-savvy, why didn’t she do 30 seconds of research & discover that the owner of this place is known for his social-media savagery & his willingness to ban dippy troublemakers?
AS YOU CAN TELL, IT’S A VERY VERY THICK BOOK
Eh, I think it was NBD until she made a video talking about how people over 30 don’t understand the social media economy. Then it escalated.
Oh, they seem to understand two things that matter: 1) any publicity is good publicity and 2) people love drama.
over 30s can’t both suck at social media and then be the ones massively trolling her
Yeah but Victorian 18 is, like, present-day 31.
Science is all about blindly accepting what you are told and never testing it. That’s just how science gets done.
That’s kind of amazing. I read it in grade 8. I still remember parts of it. I read other books at that time, most of which i’ve completely forgot. To write something at that age that stays with people for so long is such an accomplishment. Hell, to do that at any age is. But as a first book, as a 16 year old? amazing.
She was 18 when it was published. She wrote it when she was about 15 or 16.
You assume these “formulas” aren’t ones he devised himself from first principles and thus do not include the curvature of the planet. In which case I’mma need more popcorn.
Give a flat eather a rocket and he is only steps away from being a pancaked earther.
The crazy part is those “formulas” he refers to... FACTOR IN THE FUCKING CURVATURE OF THE EARTH.
Gravity.
I don’t believe in science. I know about aerodynamics and fluid dynamics and how things move through the air, about the certain size of rocket nozzles, and thrust. But that’s not science, that’s just a formula. There’s no difference between science and science fiction.
Would Gizmodo please ask Hughes why launching a rocket to an altitude of 1800 ft yields better data than simply driving a car to the summit of a hill with say 2200 ft of altitude?
I mean, you really expect guys who think the Earth is flat to drive to LA or SF and sit for hours looking through a telescope hoping to see the top of a ship appear before the body?
I think he’s confusing the Flat Earth Society with the Flattened Upon Impact with the Earth Society.
I think this problem will eventually take care of itself.