Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!nuchat!flatline!erict From: erict@flatline.UUCP (eric townsend) Newsgroups: sci.misc Subject: Re: Omni-Americans Message-ID: <472@flatline.UUCP> Date: 22 Mar 88 03:41:11 GMT References: <5017@uwmcsd1.UUCP> <2790@gryphon.CTS.COM> <1221@uop.edu> <1236@uop.edu> Organization: ROM construct (houston) Lines: 75 Summary: Har. They laughed at Galileo, too... In article <1236@uop.edu>, todd@uop.edu (Dr. Nethack) writes: > ... The details of discovery and formations of opinions is far > better than Omni-esque attempts at mimickry... mimickry loaded with > psuedo reality. Wait. If I never take into consideration really, truely ludicrous ideas -- how am I supposed to come up with new ideas? Many great theorheticians were laughed at, and some were made to revoke their original statements by an *uniformed* populace. Why not have a populace that is ready to accept new ideas, even if those ideas are semi-valid? If it's science fiction or science "fact" you're still going to have to get out to the populace some concepts that they may not be ready for. What better way than with science fiction, and trendy silly ideas and theories? Isn't that better than a nation of "I Love Lucy" watchers? (A sort of unrealted comment: My grandfather refuses to believe that a person has ever been into space. His logic: God would kill anybody that went up there, so NASA and all that must be a big fake. 1/4 :-) > You want to find out? Read Physics Today, Physical Review Letters, > et. al. Professional Journals will tell you better what is going on > than anything off a newsstand, the trouble is, that is too much work > for *some* (most) people. Ok, fine. Where do I find such wonderful purveyors of fact? Not at the 7-11 down the street. Univ of Houston library carries a few good things, but those are fought for tooth and nail. I have to subscribe, or hang out at some really esoteric places to get my hands on a copy. Once I find them, how do I understand them? True, Sci_Am is a good layman's mag, I've learned a lot from it... Many "professional" journals are difficult to read for us poor fools who aren't majoring in the sciences. > Maybe you like Omni, I see it as part of a growing problem of armchair > expertise in this country, that serves no other function than that of > making the truth harder to percieve. Again, the "I Love Lucy" watchers that have a 4th grade science education. I'd rather have some ill-informed, self-appointed experts than a completly ignorant, *apathetic* populace ready to take up the hue and cry of anybody with a good line of BS. > Perhaps some might think that calling a spade, a spade is bad. Nit pick: "Calling a spade a spade" is a racist cliche'. Like I said, it's picky, but valid. > And I mean worship. Such things are guarded with uninformed opinions, > and propagated by those who wish to conform to such models. Again, I'd rather have some people that are wrong, but trying, than people that couldn't care less. (Preferably, we'd all have "a computer with the power of 10,000 Crays and the size of a sugar cube stuck behind our ear." -- Tom Maddox, I think. :-) > Understand, Omni, although it can be enjoyable is essentially a science > fiction rag, not a masterpiece of informative literature. Yeah, this is true. It also points you in the right directions. I started out on s-f fiction and some other pulp crap. Then moved up to Omni, and now am into Sci_Am and a few other "factual" magazines. > + uop!todd@uunet.uu.net + > + cogent!uop!todd@lll-winken.arpa + > + {backbone}!ucbvax!ucdavis!uop!todd + -- ... They'll take the place apart -- Any minute now -- I've seen it happen before on Mercury where we put out a Cool Issue -- And the law is moving in fast -- Nova Heat -- Not locals, boss -- This is *Nova Heat* -- Well boss?" -- from _The_Ticket_That_Exploded_, William S. Burroughs J. Eric Townsend ->uunet!nuchat!flatline!erict smail:511Parker#2,Hstn,Tx,77007