🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <H9B7Pe6w165w@mp.sbay.org> jane@mp.sbay.org (Mingjane Wu) writes:
    >>It's absolutely AMAZING how many dork-nuts, like Dorfman
    >>above, seem to think that an early isolated miniscule use of
    >>something is the same as providing it world wide.
    >>
    >>Scientific American a while back described a thousand year
    >>old Chinese natural gas well the Chinese constructed. Bamboo
    >>pipes connecting a natural gas seep etc. Tghe gas was used to
    >>fire pottery for a royal court.
    >>
    >>Did the Chinese invent natural gas wells?
    >>
    >>No. Drilling platforms? No. Geologic theories? Diamond drill
    >>bits? No no no ...
    >>
    >>Or how about Chinese rockets?
    >>
    >>Any 10-year old with some gun powder can/does invent rockets.
    >>
    >>Is the Chinese rocket technology anywhere close to Oberth,
    >>Von Braun, satellites, space stations? DId the Chinese EVER
    >>figure out "equal and opposite reactions"?
    >>
    >>No.
    >>
    >Then again, what is science unless it is to stand on the
    >shoulders of giants? All of our information, all of our
    >theories, everything of our knowledge is pretty much based on
    >the works of those who came before. Were there drilling ...

The key is contribution. Non DWEM-contributions.

If it is isolated and not a contribution, then it ain't worth much.

Forceps (birthing) were a kept secret in a medical family for over a hundred
years. Essentially useless. WHen the secret got out, it became a contribution
and thus, very udeful.



-- 
"I didn't do it, nobody saw me, and you can't prove it!" - B. Simpson

These opinions are MINE, and you can't have 'em! (But I'll rent 'em cheap ...)