https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/29/world/nasa-artemis-moon-secretive-crew-selection-process/index.html
Lemmie guess: Instead of pure suitability for the mission, they'll choose: >-black person
-woman
-crippled person
-transgender person
Just a guess.
On Sun, 29 Jan 2023 16:35:55 -0800 (PST), RichA
<rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/29/world/nasa-artemis-moon-secretive- >>crew-selection-process/index.html
Lemmie guess: Instead of pure suitability for the mission,
they'll choose: -black person
-woman
-crippled person
-transgender person
Just a guess.
As any of those can be as "purely suitable" as anybody else
(there are millions of equally suitable people) any of those
would be good choices. Of course, not to a bigot like you.
Chris L Peterson <clp@alumni.caltech.edu> wrote in >news:o6jethp7j74je90gbfcmtjtc3t59a63oj3@4ax.com:
On Sun, 29 Jan 2023 16:35:55 -0800 (PST), RichAI would say cripipled may or may not be a disqualifier, but that's
<rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/29/world/nasa-artemis-moon-secretive- >>>crew-selection-process/index.html
Lemmie guess: Instead of pure suitability for the mission,
they'll choose: -black person
-woman
-crippled person
-transgender person
Just a guess.
As any of those can be as "purely suitable" as anybody else
(there are millions of equally suitable people) any of those
would be good choices. Of course, not to a bigot like you.
not the point. The point is, those will be the *only* criteria. No
technical or scientific criteria, or competence at any of the
required tasks for perform the mission, will be considered.
He is quite possibly correct, too.
On Mon, 30 Jan 2023 18:40:20 GMT, Ninapenda Jibini
<taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:
Chris L Peterson <clp@alumni.caltech.edu> wrote in >>news:o6jethp7j74je90gbfcmtjtc3t59a63oj3@4ax.com:
On Sun, 29 Jan 2023 16:35:55 -0800 (PST), RichAI would say cripipled may or may not be a disqualifier, but
<rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/29/world/nasa-artemis-moon-secretiv
e- crew-selection-process/index.html
Lemmie guess: Instead of pure suitability for the mission,
they'll choose: -black person
-woman
-crippled person
-transgender person
Just a guess.
As any of those can be as "purely suitable" as anybody else
(there are millions of equally suitable people) any of those
would be good choices. Of course, not to a bigot like you.
that's not the point. The point is, those will be the *only*
criteria. No technical or scientific criteria, or competence at
any of the required tasks for perform the mission, will be
considered.
He is quite possibly correct, too.
You can be counted on to say exceptionally stupid things, but
you've outdone yourself this time!
On Sun, 29 Jan 2023 16:35:55 -0800 (PST), RichA <rande...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Lemmie guess: Instead of pure suitability for the mission, they'll choose: >-black person
-woman
-crippled person
-transgender person
As any of those can be as "purely suitable" as anybody else (there are millions of equally suitable people) any of those would be good
choices. Of course, not to a bigot like you.
On Sun, 29 Jan 2023 16:35:55 -0800 (PST), RichA <rande...@gmail.com>
wrote: >https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/29/world/nasa-artemis-moon-secretive-crew-selection-process/index.html
Lemmie guess: Instead of pure suitability for the mission, they'll choose: >-black person
-woman
-crippled person
-transgender person
Just a guess.As any of those can be as "purely suitable" as anybody else (there are millions of equally suitable people) any of those would be good
choices. Of course, not to a bigot like you.
However, while selecting every astronaut in a fair process which is
based *only on merit* does have an argument in its favor (it's good
for morale in the astronaut corps) because there will be fully
qualified candidates in the minority groups it is desired to represent,
I do believe that it is indeed fully possible for NASA to meet its goals
for minority representation without compromising either mission
safety or mission effectiveness.
I'm just not under any illusions about how they will manage that.
It will not be achieved as an automatic result of a color-blind (and gender-blind, et cetera) selection process based on merit alone.
They are going to have to intentionally nudge things along,
selectively compromising the level of candidate qualification where
they can get away with it.
On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 9:53:08 PM UTC-7, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Sun, 29 Jan 2023 16:35:55 -0800 (PST), RichA <rande...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Well, these days, there are _some_ test pilots who are women.Lemmie guess: Instead of pure suitability for the mission, they'll choose: >-black personAs any of those can be as "purely suitable" as anybody else (there are millions of equally suitable people) any of those would be good
-woman
-crippled person
-transgender person
choices. Of course, not to a bigot like you.
On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 9:53:08 PM UTC-7, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Sun, 29 Jan 2023 16:35:55 -0800 (PST), RichA <rande...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Lemmie guess: Instead of pure suitability for the mission, they'll choose: >> >-black person
-woman
-crippled person
-transgender person
As any of those can be as "purely suitable" as anybody else (there are
millions of equally suitable people) any of those would be good
choices. Of course, not to a bigot like you.
Well, these days, there are _some_ test pilots who are women.
There was a famous article in Ms. magazine about how NASA secretly
trained thirteen women in addition to the Mercury Seven. At the time,
none of those women had the same _formal_ qualifications as the male >astronauts who were known to the public, for the simple reason that
the Air Force did not allow women to be test pilots back then.
But that didn't mean that they weren't qualified - they certainly could
have done a good job on a Mercury mission. It was decided, however,
that given the attitudes of the time, a fatal accident involving a _woman_ >would mean the end of the space program.
You are quite correct in stating that a woman, a person of color, and
someone who was transgendered, _could_ be a fully qualified astronaut.
Even some disabilities would not necessarily be an impediment; being >paraplegic, for example, would be *less* of a disability in zero gravity,
and it certainly wouldn't prevent someone from being, say, a mission >specialist studying crystals growing in microgravity or some such thing.
However, just because you're correct *as far as you go* in what you're >saying, that doesn't mean you've proved RichA wrong.
Being transgendered is indeed not at all relevant to any of the >qualifications needed by an astronaut. However, there aren't
all that many transgendered people. So the *pool* of qualified
candidates is not as large.
There are a lot of women, and even a lot of black people - they
may be a minority, but they are a large one. But they've both faced
past discrimination that still echoes into the present, and that means
that fewer people in both those groups have been able to develop the >qualifications an astronaut would need.
And so, RichA is perfectly right in stating that if NASA is bound and >determined to ensure wide minority representation in its astronaut
pool, it will interfere with selecting the most qualified candidate for
every slot.
What you wrote did not invalidate this concern, it didn't even address
it.
However, while selecting every astronaut in a fair process which is
based *only on merit* does have an argument in its favor (it's good
for morale in the astronaut corps) because there will be fully
qualified candidates in the minority groups it is desired to represent,
I do believe that it is indeed fully possible for NASA to meet its goals
for minority representation without compromising either mission
safety or mission effectiveness.
I'm just not under any illusions about how they will manage that.
It will not be achieved as an automatic result of a color-blind (and >gender-blind, et cetera) selection process based on merit alone.
They are going to have to intentionally nudge things along,
selectively compromising the level of candidate qualification where
they can get away with it.
This isn't because minority members are _inherently_ inferior, but because
we still don't live in a perfect world.
John Savard
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/29/world/nasa-artemis-moon-secretive-crew-selection-process/index.html
Lemmie guess: Instead of pure suitability for the mission, they'll choose: -black person
-woman
-crippled person
-transgender person
Just a guess.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/29/world/nasa-artemis-moon-secretive-crew-selection-process/index.html
Lemmie guess: Instead of pure suitability for the mission, they'll choose:
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/29/world/nasa-artemis-moon-secretive-crew-selection-process/index.html
Lemmie guess: Instead of pure suitability for the mission, they'll choose:
On Mon, 30 Jan 2023 19:54:54 -0800 (PST), Quadibloc-
<jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 9:53:08 PM UTC-7, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Sun, 29 Jan 2023 16:35:55 -0800 (PST), RichA <rande...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Lemmie guess: Instead of pure suitability for the mission, they'll choose:
-black person
-woman
-crippled person
-transgender person
As any of those can be as "purely suitable" as anybody else (there are
millions of equally suitable people) any of those would be good
choices. Of course, not to a bigot like you.
Well, these days, there are _some_ test pilots who are women.
There was a famous article in Ms. magazine about how NASA secretly
trained thirteen women in addition to the Mercury Seven. At the time,
none of those women had the same _formal_ qualifications as the male >astronauts who were known to the public, for the simple reason that
the Air Force did not allow women to be test pilots back then.
But that didn't mean that they weren't qualified - they certainly could >have done a good job on a Mercury mission. It was decided, however,
that given the attitudes of the time, a fatal accident involving a _woman_ >would mean the end of the space program.
You are quite correct in stating that a woman, a person of color, and >someone who was transgendered, _could_ be a fully qualified astronaut.
Even some disabilities would not necessarily be an impediment; being >paraplegic, for example, would be *less* of a disability in zero gravity, >and it certainly wouldn't prevent someone from being, say, a mission >specialist studying crystals growing in microgravity or some such thing.
However, just because you're correct *as far as you go* in what you're >saying, that doesn't mean you've proved RichA wrong.
Being transgendered is indeed not at all relevant to any of the >qualifications needed by an astronaut. However, there aren't
all that many transgendered people. So the *pool* of qualified
candidates is not as large.
There are a lot of women, and even a lot of black people - they
may be a minority, but they are a large one. But they've both faced
past discrimination that still echoes into the present, and that means
that fewer people in both those groups have been able to develop the >qualifications an astronaut would need.
And so, RichA is perfectly right in stating that if NASA is bound and >determined to ensure wide minority representation in its astronaut
pool, it will interfere with selecting the most qualified candidate for >every slot.
What you wrote did not invalidate this concern, it didn't even address
it.
However, while selecting every astronaut in a fair process which is
based *only on merit* does have an argument in its favor (it's good
for morale in the astronaut corps) because there will be fully
qualified candidates in the minority groups it is desired to represent,
I do believe that it is indeed fully possible for NASA to meet its goals >for minority representation without compromising either mission
safety or mission effectiveness.
I'm just not under any illusions about how they will manage that.
It will not be achieved as an automatic result of a color-blind (and >gender-blind, et cetera) selection process based on merit alone.
They are going to have to intentionally nudge things along,
selectively compromising the level of candidate qualification where
they can get away with it.
This isn't because minority members are _inherently_ inferior, but because >we still don't live in a perfect world.
John SavardI don't claim to have proven him wrong. Just pointed out his bigotry,
yet again.
For every astronaut selected on "merit" there are a thousand other
people out there equally qualified. The idea of placing emphasis on
classes of people who have been excluded in no way limits the
selection of the most qualified people. Never has, and never will.
On Tuesday, January 31, 2023 at 9:43:44 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Mon, 30 Jan 2023 19:54:54 -0800 (PST), Quadibloc-
<jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 9:53:08 PM UTC-7, Chris L Peterson wrote:I don't claim to have proven him wrong. Just pointed out his bigotry,
On Sun, 29 Jan 2023 16:35:55 -0800 (PST), RichA <rande...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Lemmie guess: Instead of pure suitability for the mission, they'll choose:
-black person
-woman
-crippled person
-transgender person
As any of those can be as "purely suitable" as anybody else (there are
millions of equally suitable people) any of those would be good
choices. Of course, not to a bigot like you.
Well, these days, there are _some_ test pilots who are women.
There was a famous article in Ms. magazine about how NASA secretly
trained thirteen women in addition to the Mercury Seven. At the time,
none of those women had the same _formal_ qualifications as the male
astronauts who were known to the public, for the simple reason that
the Air Force did not allow women to be test pilots back then.
But that didn't mean that they weren't qualified - they certainly could
have done a good job on a Mercury mission. It was decided, however,
that given the attitudes of the time, a fatal accident involving a _woman_ >> >would mean the end of the space program.
You are quite correct in stating that a woman, a person of color, and
someone who was transgendered, _could_ be a fully qualified astronaut.
Even some disabilities would not necessarily be an impediment; being
paraplegic, for example, would be *less* of a disability in zero gravity, >> >and it certainly wouldn't prevent someone from being, say, a mission
specialist studying crystals growing in microgravity or some such thing.
However, just because you're correct *as far as you go* in what you're
saying, that doesn't mean you've proved RichA wrong.
Being transgendered is indeed not at all relevant to any of the
qualifications needed by an astronaut. However, there aren't
all that many transgendered people. So the *pool* of qualified
candidates is not as large.
There are a lot of women, and even a lot of black people - they
may be a minority, but they are a large one. But they've both faced
past discrimination that still echoes into the present, and that means
that fewer people in both those groups have been able to develop the
qualifications an astronaut would need.
And so, RichA is perfectly right in stating that if NASA is bound and
determined to ensure wide minority representation in its astronaut
pool, it will interfere with selecting the most qualified candidate for
every slot.
What you wrote did not invalidate this concern, it didn't even address
it.
However, while selecting every astronaut in a fair process which is
based *only on merit* does have an argument in its favor (it's good
for morale in the astronaut corps) because there will be fully
qualified candidates in the minority groups it is desired to represent,
I do believe that it is indeed fully possible for NASA to meet its goals
for minority representation without compromising either mission
safety or mission effectiveness.
I'm just not under any illusions about how they will manage that.
It will not be achieved as an automatic result of a color-blind (and
gender-blind, et cetera) selection process based on merit alone.
They are going to have to intentionally nudge things along,
selectively compromising the level of candidate qualification where
they can get away with it.
This isn't because minority members are _inherently_ inferior, but because >> >we still don't live in a perfect world.
John Savard
yet again.
For every astronaut selected on "merit" there are a thousand other
people out there equally qualified. The idea of placing emphasis on
classes of people who have been excluded in no way limits the
selection of the most qualified people. Never has, and never will.
peterson, you are outnumbered 4-to-1 on this.
On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 06:17:57 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>Not much of answer. Try again, 5th grader.
wrote:
On Tuesday, January 31, 2023 at 9:43:44 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:So?
On Mon, 30 Jan 2023 19:54:54 -0800 (PST), Quadibloc-
<jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 9:53:08 PM UTC-7, Chris L Peterson wrote: >> >> On Sun, 29 Jan 2023 16:35:55 -0800 (PST), RichA <rande...@gmail.com>I don't claim to have proven him wrong. Just pointed out his bigotry,
wrote:
Lemmie guess: Instead of pure suitability for the mission, they'll choose:
-black person
-woman
-crippled person
-transgender person
As any of those can be as "purely suitable" as anybody else (there are >> >> millions of equally suitable people) any of those would be good
choices. Of course, not to a bigot like you.
Well, these days, there are _some_ test pilots who are women.
There was a famous article in Ms. magazine about how NASA secretly
trained thirteen women in addition to the Mercury Seven. At the time,
none of those women had the same _formal_ qualifications as the male
astronauts who were known to the public, for the simple reason that
the Air Force did not allow women to be test pilots back then.
But that didn't mean that they weren't qualified - they certainly could >> >have done a good job on a Mercury mission. It was decided, however,
that given the attitudes of the time, a fatal accident involving a _woman_
would mean the end of the space program.
You are quite correct in stating that a woman, a person of color, and
someone who was transgendered, _could_ be a fully qualified astronaut.
Even some disabilities would not necessarily be an impediment; being
paraplegic, for example, would be *less* of a disability in zero gravity, >> >and it certainly wouldn't prevent someone from being, say, a mission
specialist studying crystals growing in microgravity or some such thing. >> >
However, just because you're correct *as far as you go* in what you're
saying, that doesn't mean you've proved RichA wrong.
Being transgendered is indeed not at all relevant to any of the
qualifications needed by an astronaut. However, there aren't
all that many transgendered people. So the *pool* of qualified
candidates is not as large.
There are a lot of women, and even a lot of black people - they
may be a minority, but they are a large one. But they've both faced
past discrimination that still echoes into the present, and that means
that fewer people in both those groups have been able to develop the
qualifications an astronaut would need.
And so, RichA is perfectly right in stating that if NASA is bound and
determined to ensure wide minority representation in its astronaut
pool, it will interfere with selecting the most qualified candidate for >> >every slot.
What you wrote did not invalidate this concern, it didn't even address
it.
However, while selecting every astronaut in a fair process which is
based *only on merit* does have an argument in its favor (it's good
for morale in the astronaut corps) because there will be fully
qualified candidates in the minority groups it is desired to represent, >> >I do believe that it is indeed fully possible for NASA to meet its goals >> >for minority representation without compromising either mission
safety or mission effectiveness.
I'm just not under any illusions about how they will manage that.
It will not be achieved as an automatic result of a color-blind (and
gender-blind, et cetera) selection process based on merit alone.
They are going to have to intentionally nudge things along,
selectively compromising the level of candidate qualification where
they can get away with it.
This isn't because minority members are _inherently_ inferior, but because
we still don't live in a perfect world.
John Savard
yet again.
For every astronaut selected on "merit" there are a thousand other
people out there equally qualified. The idea of placing emphasis on
classes of people who have been excluded in no way limits the
selection of the most qualified people. Never has, and never will.
peterson, you are outnumbered 4-to-1 on this.
On Thursday, February 2, 2023 at 10:46:40 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 06:17:57 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>Not much of answer. Try again, 5th grader.
wrote:
On Tuesday, January 31, 2023 at 9:43:44 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote: >> >> On Mon, 30 Jan 2023 19:54:54 -0800 (PST), QuadiblocSo?
<jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:-
On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 9:53:08 PM UTC-7, Chris L Peterson wrote: >> >> >> On Sun, 29 Jan 2023 16:35:55 -0800 (PST), RichA <rande...@gmail.com> >> >> >> wrote:I don't claim to have proven him wrong. Just pointed out his bigotry,
Lemmie guess: Instead of pure suitability for the mission, they'll choose:
-black person
-woman
-crippled person
-transgender person
As any of those can be as "purely suitable" as anybody else (there are >> >> >> millions of equally suitable people) any of those would be good
choices. Of course, not to a bigot like you.
Well, these days, there are _some_ test pilots who are women.
There was a famous article in Ms. magazine about how NASA secretly
trained thirteen women in addition to the Mercury Seven. At the time,
none of those women had the same _formal_ qualifications as the male
astronauts who were known to the public, for the simple reason that
the Air Force did not allow women to be test pilots back then.
But that didn't mean that they weren't qualified - they certainly could >> >> >have done a good job on a Mercury mission. It was decided, however,
that given the attitudes of the time, a fatal accident involving a _woman_
would mean the end of the space program.
You are quite correct in stating that a woman, a person of color, and
someone who was transgendered, _could_ be a fully qualified astronaut. >> >> >Even some disabilities would not necessarily be an impediment; being
paraplegic, for example, would be *less* of a disability in zero gravity,
and it certainly wouldn't prevent someone from being, say, a mission
specialist studying crystals growing in microgravity or some such thing. >> >> >
However, just because you're correct *as far as you go* in what you're >> >> >saying, that doesn't mean you've proved RichA wrong.
Being transgendered is indeed not at all relevant to any of the
qualifications needed by an astronaut. However, there aren't
all that many transgendered people. So the *pool* of qualified
candidates is not as large.
There are a lot of women, and even a lot of black people - they
may be a minority, but they are a large one. But they've both faced
past discrimination that still echoes into the present, and that means >> >> >that fewer people in both those groups have been able to develop the
qualifications an astronaut would need.
And so, RichA is perfectly right in stating that if NASA is bound and
determined to ensure wide minority representation in its astronaut
pool, it will interfere with selecting the most qualified candidate for >> >> >every slot.
What you wrote did not invalidate this concern, it didn't even address >> >> >it.
However, while selecting every astronaut in a fair process which is
based *only on merit* does have an argument in its favor (it's good
for morale in the astronaut corps) because there will be fully
qualified candidates in the minority groups it is desired to represent, >> >> >I do believe that it is indeed fully possible for NASA to meet its goals >> >> >for minority representation without compromising either mission
safety or mission effectiveness.
I'm just not under any illusions about how they will manage that.
It will not be achieved as an automatic result of a color-blind (and
gender-blind, et cetera) selection process based on merit alone.
They are going to have to intentionally nudge things along,
selectively compromising the level of candidate qualification where
they can get away with it.
This isn't because minority members are _inherently_ inferior, but because
we still don't live in a perfect world.
John Savard
yet again.
For every astronaut selected on "merit" there are a thousand other
people out there equally qualified. The idea of placing emphasis on
classes of people who have been excluded in no way limits the
selection of the most qualified people. Never has, and never will.
peterson, you are outnumbered 4-to-1 on this.
On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 08:00:23 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Thursday, February 2, 2023 at 10:46:40 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote: >> On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 06:17:57 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>The irony burns.
wrote:Not much of answer. Try again, 5th grader.
On Tuesday, January 31, 2023 at 9:43:44 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote: >> >> On Mon, 30 Jan 2023 19:54:54 -0800 (PST), QuadiblocSo?
<jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:-
On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 9:53:08 PM UTC-7, Chris L Peterson wrote:I don't claim to have proven him wrong. Just pointed out his bigotry, >> >> yet again.
On Sun, 29 Jan 2023 16:35:55 -0800 (PST), RichA <rande...@gmail.com> >> >> >> wrote:
Lemmie guess: Instead of pure suitability for the mission, they'll choose:
-black person
-woman
-crippled person
-transgender person
As any of those can be as "purely suitable" as anybody else (there are
millions of equally suitable people) any of those would be good
choices. Of course, not to a bigot like you.
Well, these days, there are _some_ test pilots who are women.
There was a famous article in Ms. magazine about how NASA secretly
trained thirteen women in addition to the Mercury Seven. At the time, >> >> >none of those women had the same _formal_ qualifications as the male >> >> >astronauts who were known to the public, for the simple reason that
the Air Force did not allow women to be test pilots back then.
But that didn't mean that they weren't qualified - they certainly could
have done a good job on a Mercury mission. It was decided, however,
that given the attitudes of the time, a fatal accident involving a _woman_
would mean the end of the space program.
You are quite correct in stating that a woman, a person of color, and >> >> >someone who was transgendered, _could_ be a fully qualified astronaut. >> >> >Even some disabilities would not necessarily be an impediment; being >> >> >paraplegic, for example, would be *less* of a disability in zero gravity,
and it certainly wouldn't prevent someone from being, say, a mission >> >> >specialist studying crystals growing in microgravity or some such thing.
However, just because you're correct *as far as you go* in what you're >> >> >saying, that doesn't mean you've proved RichA wrong.
Being transgendered is indeed not at all relevant to any of the
qualifications needed by an astronaut. However, there aren't
all that many transgendered people. So the *pool* of qualified
candidates is not as large.
There are a lot of women, and even a lot of black people - they
may be a minority, but they are a large one. But they've both faced
past discrimination that still echoes into the present, and that means >> >> >that fewer people in both those groups have been able to develop the >> >> >qualifications an astronaut would need.
And so, RichA is perfectly right in stating that if NASA is bound and >> >> >determined to ensure wide minority representation in its astronaut
pool, it will interfere with selecting the most qualified candidate for
every slot.
What you wrote did not invalidate this concern, it didn't even address >> >> >it.
However, while selecting every astronaut in a fair process which is
based *only on merit* does have an argument in its favor (it's good
for morale in the astronaut corps) because there will be fully
qualified candidates in the minority groups it is desired to represent,
I do believe that it is indeed fully possible for NASA to meet its goals
for minority representation without compromising either mission
safety or mission effectiveness.
I'm just not under any illusions about how they will manage that.
It will not be achieved as an automatic result of a color-blind (and >> >> >gender-blind, et cetera) selection process based on merit alone.
They are going to have to intentionally nudge things along,
selectively compromising the level of candidate qualification where
they can get away with it.
This isn't because minority members are _inherently_ inferior, but because
we still don't live in a perfect world.
John Savard
For every astronaut selected on "merit" there are a thousand other
people out there equally qualified. The idea of placing emphasis on
classes of people who have been excluded in no way limits the
selection of the most qualified people. Never has, and never will.
peterson, you are outnumbered 4-to-1 on this.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/29/world/nasa-artemis-moon-secretive-crew-selection-process/index.html
On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 7:35:57 PM UTC-5, RichA wrote:
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/29/world/nasa-artemis-moon-secretive-crew-selection-process/index.html-
There is a paragraph in the article that, taken at face value, advocates active and intentional discrimination.
It is not exactly clear if that statement represents actual NASA policy, or is just the naive, idealistic meanderings of lefty journalism.
On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 12:23:23 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 7:35:57 PM UTC-5, RichA wrote:
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/29/world/nasa-artemis-moon-secretive-crew-selection-process/index.html-
There is a paragraph in the article that, taken at face value, advocates active and intentional discrimination.
It is not exactly clear if that statement represents actual NASA policy, or is just the naive, idealistic meanderings of lefty journalism.
There is not necessarily anything wrong with intentional
discrimination.
Indeed, in an unfair society, it is an ethical
requirement.
On Thursday, February 2, 2023 at 4:34:23 PM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 12:23:23 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 7:35:57 PM UTC-5, RichA wrote:There is not necessarily anything wrong with intentional
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/29/world/nasa-artemis-moon-secretive-crew-selection-process/index.html-
There is a paragraph in the article that, taken at face value, advocates active and intentional discrimination.
It is not exactly clear if that statement represents actual NASA policy, or is just the naive, idealistic meanderings of lefty journalism.
discrimination.
ROTFLMAO!
You really need to explain yourself on that one!
The astronauts seem to have come from privileged backgrounds and schools.
Indeed, in an unfair society, it is an ethical
requirement.
Explain how ANY of the astronauts have been treated "unfairly."
But obviously if one wants an unfair society, as you seem to want, intentional discrimination will certainly lead to that result. There certainly won't be anything ethical about it.
On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 16:47:04 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Thursday, February 2, 2023 at 4:34:23 PM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote: >> On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 12:23:23 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 7:35:57 PM UTC-5, RichA wrote:There is not necessarily anything wrong with intentional
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/29/world/nasa-artemis-moon-secretive-crew-selection-process/index.html-
There is a paragraph in the article that, taken at face value, advocates active and intentional discrimination.
It is not exactly clear if that statement represents actual NASA policy, or is just the naive, idealistic meanderings of lefty journalism.
discrimination.
ROTFLMAO!
You really need to explain yourself on that one!
The astronauts seem to have come from privileged backgrounds and schools.
Indeed, in an unfair society, it is an ethical
requirement.
Explain how ANY of the astronauts have been treated "unfairly."
But obviously if one wants an unfair society, as you seem to want, intentional discrimination will certainly lead to that result. There certainly won't be anything ethical about it.Who said astronauts have been treated unfairly?
On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 16:47:04 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Thursday, February 2, 2023 at 4:34:23 PM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote: >> On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 12:23:23 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 7:35:57 PM UTC-5, RichA wrote:There is not necessarily anything wrong with intentional
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/29/world/nasa-artemis-moon-secretive-crew-selection-process/index.html-
There is a paragraph in the article that, taken at face value, advocates active and intentional discrimination.
It is not exactly clear if that statement represents actual NASA policy, or is just the naive, idealistic meanderings of lefty journalism.
discrimination.
ROTFLMAO!
You really need to explain yourself on that one!
The astronauts seem to have come from privileged backgrounds and schools.
Indeed, in an unfair society, it is an ethical
requirement.
Explain how ANY of the astronauts have been treated "unfairly."
But obviously if one wants an unfair society, as you seem to want, intentional discrimination will certainly lead to that result. There certainly won't be anything ethical about it.Who said astronauts have been treated unfairly?
In a society that has practiced discrimination and marginalized
specific populations, it is ethical to prioritize selection from those populations as a remedy. That is a form of discrimination that isn't
bad.
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:22:13 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 16:47:04 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Thursday, February 2, 2023 at 4:34:23 PM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote: >> >> On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 12:23:23 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>Who said astronauts have been treated unfairly?
wrote:
On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 7:35:57 PM UTC-5, RichA wrote:There is not necessarily anything wrong with intentional
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/29/world/nasa-artemis-moon-secretive-crew-selection-process/index.html-
There is a paragraph in the article that, taken at face value, advocates active and intentional discrimination.
It is not exactly clear if that statement represents actual NASA policy, or is just the naive, idealistic meanderings of lefty journalism.
discrimination.
ROTFLMAO!
You really need to explain yourself on that one!
The astronauts seem to have come from privileged backgrounds and schools. >> >
Indeed, in an unfair society, it is an ethical
requirement.
Explain how ANY of the astronauts have been treated "unfairly."
But obviously if one wants an unfair society, as you seem to want, intentional discrimination will certainly lead to that result. There certainly won't be anything ethical about it.
In a society that has practiced discrimination and marginalized
specific populations, it is ethical to prioritize selection from those
populations as a remedy. That is a form of discrimination that isn't
bad.
Give examples of how the current white astronauts have discriminated against the black astronauts and how the black astronauts have ever been discriminated against and by whom.
Quoted from the article:
"If Wiseman, a White man, is selected, that means the other spots will almost certainly need to go to at least one woman and at least one person of color. "
I suggest that NASA hold a lottery to determine who goes on the mission, if indeed it has no remaining criteria by which to choose logically. THAT would be fair.
Discrimination, that you seem to wholeheartedly support, is never fair in this context.
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 04:23:24 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:22:13 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 16:47:04 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Thursday, February 2, 2023 at 4:34:23 PM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:Who said astronauts have been treated unfairly?
On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 12:23:23 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 7:35:57 PM UTC-5, RichA wrote:There is not necessarily anything wrong with intentional
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/29/world/nasa-artemis-moon-secretive-crew-selection-process/index.html-
There is a paragraph in the article that, taken at face value, advocates active and intentional discrimination.
It is not exactly clear if that statement represents actual NASA policy, or is just the naive, idealistic meanderings of lefty journalism.
discrimination.
ROTFLMAO!
You really need to explain yourself on that one!
The astronauts seem to have come from privileged backgrounds and schools. >> >
Indeed, in an unfair society, it is an ethical
requirement.
Explain how ANY of the astronauts have been treated "unfairly."
But obviously if one wants an unfair society, as you seem to want, intentional discrimination will certainly lead to that result. There certainly won't be anything ethical about it.
In a society that has practiced discrimination and marginalized
specific populations, it is ethical to prioritize selection from those
populations as a remedy. That is a form of discrimination that isn't
bad.
Give examples of how the current white astronauts have discriminated against the black astronauts and how the black astronauts have ever been discriminated against and by whom.
Quoted from the article:
"If Wiseman, a White man, is selected, that means the other spots will almost certainly need to go to at least one woman and at least one person of color. "
I suggest that NASA hold a lottery to determine who goes on the mission, if indeed it has no remaining criteria by which to choose logically. THAT would be fair.
Discrimination, that you seem to wholeheartedly support, is never fair in this context.I didn't say the current astronauts have discriminated against black astronauts.
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 9:49:45 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 04:23:24 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:22:13 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote: >> >> On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 16:47:04 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>I didn't say the current astronauts have discriminated against black
wrote:
On Thursday, February 2, 2023 at 4:34:23 PM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:Who said astronauts have been treated unfairly?
On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 12:23:23 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 7:35:57 PM UTC-5, RichA wrote:There is not necessarily anything wrong with intentional
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/29/world/nasa-artemis-moon-secretive-crew-selection-process/index.html-
There is a paragraph in the article that, taken at face value, advocates active and intentional discrimination.
It is not exactly clear if that statement represents actual NASA policy, or is just the naive, idealistic meanderings of lefty journalism.
discrimination.
ROTFLMAO!
You really need to explain yourself on that one!
The astronauts seem to have come from privileged backgrounds and schools.
Indeed, in an unfair society, it is an ethical
requirement.
Explain how ANY of the astronauts have been treated "unfairly."
But obviously if one wants an unfair society, as you seem to want, intentional discrimination will certainly lead to that result. There certainly won't be anything ethical about it.
In a society that has practiced discrimination and marginalized
specific populations, it is ethical to prioritize selection from those
populations as a remedy. That is a form of discrimination that isn't
bad.
Give examples of how the current white astronauts have discriminated against the black astronauts and how the black astronauts have ever been discriminated against and by whom.
Quoted from the article:
"If Wiseman, a White man, is selected, that means the other spots will almost certainly need to go to at least one woman and at least one person of color. "
I suggest that NASA hold a lottery to determine who goes on the mission, if indeed it has no remaining criteria by which to choose logically. THAT would be fair.
Discrimination, that you seem to wholeheartedly support, is never fair in this context.
astronauts.
You didn't give examples of how the current black astronauts have been discriminated against, BY SOCIETY. Because you have none to give.
So, why should the white astronauts be discriminated against? They are blameless.
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 07:31:57 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 9:49:45 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 04:23:24 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:22:13 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote: >> >> On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 16:47:04 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>I didn't say the current astronauts have discriminated against black
wrote:
On Thursday, February 2, 2023 at 4:34:23 PM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:Who said astronauts have been treated unfairly?
On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 12:23:23 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 7:35:57 PM UTC-5, RichA wrote:There is not necessarily anything wrong with intentional
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/29/world/nasa-artemis-moon-secretive-crew-selection-process/index.html-
There is a paragraph in the article that, taken at face value, advocates active and intentional discrimination.
It is not exactly clear if that statement represents actual NASA policy, or is just the naive, idealistic meanderings of lefty journalism.
discrimination.
ROTFLMAO!
You really need to explain yourself on that one!
The astronauts seem to have come from privileged backgrounds and schools.
Indeed, in an unfair society, it is an ethical
requirement.
Explain how ANY of the astronauts have been treated "unfairly."
But obviously if one wants an unfair society, as you seem to want, intentional discrimination will certainly lead to that result. There certainly won't be anything ethical about it.
In a society that has practiced discrimination and marginalized
specific populations, it is ethical to prioritize selection from those >> >> populations as a remedy. That is a form of discrimination that isn't
bad.
Give examples of how the current white astronauts have discriminated against the black astronauts and how the black astronauts have ever been discriminated against and by whom.
Quoted from the article:
"If Wiseman, a White man, is selected, that means the other spots will almost certainly need to go to at least one woman and at least one person of color. "
I suggest that NASA hold a lottery to determine who goes on the mission, if indeed it has no remaining criteria by which to choose logically. THAT would be fair.
Discrimination, that you seem to wholeheartedly support, is never fair in this context.
astronauts.
You didn't give examples of how the current black astronauts have been discriminated against, BY SOCIETY. Because you have none to give.
So, why should the white astronauts be discriminated against? They are blameless.I didn't say that current black astronauts had been discriminated
against.
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 11:06:51 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 07:31:57 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 9:49:45 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote: >> On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 04:23:24 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:22:13 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:I didn't say the current astronauts have discriminated against black
On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 16:47:04 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Thursday, February 2, 2023 at 4:34:23 PM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:Who said astronauts have been treated unfairly?
On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 12:23:23 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com> >> >> >> wrote:
On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 7:35:57 PM UTC-5, RichA wrote:There is not necessarily anything wrong with intentional
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/29/world/nasa-artemis-moon-secretive-crew-selection-process/index.html-
There is a paragraph in the article that, taken at face value, advocates active and intentional discrimination.
It is not exactly clear if that statement represents actual NASA policy, or is just the naive, idealistic meanderings of lefty journalism.
discrimination.
ROTFLMAO!
You really need to explain yourself on that one!
The astronauts seem to have come from privileged backgrounds and schools.
Indeed, in an unfair society, it is an ethical
requirement.
Explain how ANY of the astronauts have been treated "unfairly."
But obviously if one wants an unfair society, as you seem to want, intentional discrimination will certainly lead to that result. There certainly won't be anything ethical about it.
In a society that has practiced discrimination and marginalized
specific populations, it is ethical to prioritize selection from those
populations as a remedy. That is a form of discrimination that isn't >> >> bad.
Give examples of how the current white astronauts have discriminated against the black astronauts and how the black astronauts have ever been discriminated against and by whom.
Quoted from the article:
"If Wiseman, a White man, is selected, that means the other spots will almost certainly need to go to at least one woman and at least one person of color. "
I suggest that NASA hold a lottery to determine who goes on the mission, if indeed it has no remaining criteria by which to choose logically. THAT would be fair.
Discrimination, that you seem to wholeheartedly support, is never fair in this context.
astronauts.
You didn't give examples of how the current black astronauts have been discriminated against, BY SOCIETY. Because you have none to give.
Regardless of what you CLAIM to have "not said," and regarding the current roster of NASA astronauts:So, why should the white astronauts be discriminated against? They are blameless.I didn't say that current black astronauts had been discriminated
against.
Do you BELIEVE that any of the white astronauts have discriminated against any black astronauts?
Do you BELIEVE that any of the white astronauts have discriminated against any black people?
Do you BELIEVE that any of the black astronauts have been discriminated against by any white people?
I know that your reading comprehension is poor but do try to answer these simple questions, so that you can (potentially) become educated.
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 11:06:51 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 07:31:57 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 9:49:45 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:I didn't say that current black astronauts had been discriminated
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 04:23:24 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:22:13 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:I didn't say the current astronauts have discriminated against black
On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 16:47:04 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Thursday, February 2, 2023 at 4:34:23 PM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:Who said astronauts have been treated unfairly?
On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 12:23:23 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 7:35:57 PM UTC-5, RichA wrote:There is not necessarily anything wrong with intentional
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/29/world/nasa-artemis-moon-secretive-crew-selection-process/index.html-
There is a paragraph in the article that, taken at face value, advocates active and intentional discrimination.
It is not exactly clear if that statement represents actual NASA policy, or is just the naive, idealistic meanderings of lefty journalism.
discrimination.
ROTFLMAO!
You really need to explain yourself on that one!
The astronauts seem to have come from privileged backgrounds and schools.
Indeed, in an unfair society, it is an ethical
requirement.
Explain how ANY of the astronauts have been treated "unfairly."
But obviously if one wants an unfair society, as you seem to want, intentional discrimination will certainly lead to that result. There certainly won't be anything ethical about it.
In a society that has practiced discrimination and marginalized
specific populations, it is ethical to prioritize selection from those >> >> >> populations as a remedy. That is a form of discrimination that isn't >> >> >> bad.
Give examples of how the current white astronauts have discriminated against the black astronauts and how the black astronauts have ever been discriminated against and by whom.
Quoted from the article:
"If Wiseman, a White man, is selected, that means the other spots will almost certainly need to go to at least one woman and at least one person of color. "
I suggest that NASA hold a lottery to determine who goes on the mission, if indeed it has no remaining criteria by which to choose logically. THAT would be fair.
Discrimination, that you seem to wholeheartedly support, is never fair in this context.
astronauts.
You didn't give examples of how the current black astronauts have been discriminated against, BY SOCIETY. Because you have none to give.
So, why should the white astronauts be discriminated against? They are blameless.
against.
Regardless of what you CLAIM to have "not said," and regarding the current roster of NASA astronauts:
Do you BELIEVE that any of the white astronauts have discriminated against any black astronauts?
Do you BELIEVE that any of the white astronauts have discriminated against any black people?
Do you BELIEVE that any of the black astronauts have been discriminated against by any white people?
I know that your reading comprehension is poor but do try to answer these simple questions, so that you can (potentially) become educated.
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 08:47:24 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 11:06:51 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote: >> On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 07:31:57 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 9:49:45 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote: >> >> On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 04:23:24 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>I didn't say that current black astronauts had been discriminated
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:22:13 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:I didn't say the current astronauts have discriminated against black >> >> astronauts.
On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 16:47:04 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Thursday, February 2, 2023 at 4:34:23 PM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:Who said astronauts have been treated unfairly?
On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 12:23:23 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com> >> >> >> >> wrote:
On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 7:35:57 PM UTC-5, RichA wrote: >> >> >> >> >> https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/29/world/nasa-artemis-moon-secretive-crew-selection-process/index.htmlThere is not necessarily anything wrong with intentional
-
There is a paragraph in the article that, taken at face value, advocates active and intentional discrimination.
It is not exactly clear if that statement represents actual NASA policy, or is just the naive, idealistic meanderings of lefty journalism.
discrimination.
ROTFLMAO!
You really need to explain yourself on that one!
The astronauts seem to have come from privileged backgrounds and schools.
Indeed, in an unfair society, it is an ethical
requirement.
Explain how ANY of the astronauts have been treated "unfairly."
But obviously if one wants an unfair society, as you seem to want, intentional discrimination will certainly lead to that result. There certainly won't be anything ethical about it.
In a society that has practiced discrimination and marginalized
specific populations, it is ethical to prioritize selection from those
populations as a remedy. That is a form of discrimination that isn't
bad.
Give examples of how the current white astronauts have discriminated against the black astronauts and how the black astronauts have ever been discriminated against and by whom.
Quoted from the article:
"If Wiseman, a White man, is selected, that means the other spots will almost certainly need to go to at least one woman and at least one person of color. "
I suggest that NASA hold a lottery to determine who goes on the mission, if indeed it has no remaining criteria by which to choose logically. THAT would be fair.
Discrimination, that you seem to wholeheartedly support, is never fair in this context.
You didn't give examples of how the current black astronauts have been discriminated against, BY SOCIETY. Because you have none to give.
So, why should the white astronauts be discriminated against? They are blameless.
against.
Regardless of what you CLAIM to have "not said," and regarding the current roster of NASA astronauts:
Do you BELIEVE that any of the white astronauts have discriminated against any black astronauts?
Do you BELIEVE that any of the white astronauts have discriminated against any black people?
Do you BELIEVE that any of the black astronauts have been discriminated against by any white people?
I know that your reading comprehension is poor but do try to answer these simple questions, so that you can (potentially) become educated.I believe you miss the point. Of course, all of the black astronauts suffered significant discrimination over their entire lives, as all
black Americans do.
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 08:47:24 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 11:06:51 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 07:31:57 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 9:49:45 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote: >> >> On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 04:23:24 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>I didn't say that current black astronauts had been discriminated
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:22:13 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:I didn't say the current astronauts have discriminated against black
On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 16:47:04 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Thursday, February 2, 2023 at 4:34:23 PM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:Who said astronauts have been treated unfairly?
On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 12:23:23 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com> >> >> >> >> wrote:
On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 7:35:57 PM UTC-5, RichA wrote:There is not necessarily anything wrong with intentional
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/29/world/nasa-artemis-moon-secretive-crew-selection-process/index.html-
There is a paragraph in the article that, taken at face value, advocates active and intentional discrimination.
It is not exactly clear if that statement represents actual NASA policy, or is just the naive, idealistic meanderings of lefty journalism.
discrimination.
ROTFLMAO!
You really need to explain yourself on that one!
The astronauts seem to have come from privileged backgrounds and schools.
Indeed, in an unfair society, it is an ethical
requirement.
Explain how ANY of the astronauts have been treated "unfairly."
But obviously if one wants an unfair society, as you seem to want, intentional discrimination will certainly lead to that result. There certainly won't be anything ethical about it.
In a society that has practiced discrimination and marginalized
specific populations, it is ethical to prioritize selection from those
populations as a remedy. That is a form of discrimination that isn't >> >> >> bad.
Give examples of how the current white astronauts have discriminated against the black astronauts and how the black astronauts have ever been discriminated against and by whom.
Quoted from the article:
"If Wiseman, a White man, is selected, that means the other spots will almost certainly need to go to at least one woman and at least one person of color. "
I suggest that NASA hold a lottery to determine who goes on the mission, if indeed it has no remaining criteria by which to choose logically. THAT would be fair.
Discrimination, that you seem to wholeheartedly support, is never fair in this context.
astronauts.
You didn't give examples of how the current black astronauts have been discriminated against, BY SOCIETY. Because you have none to give.
So, why should the white astronauts be discriminated against? They are blameless.
against.
Regardless of what you CLAIM to have "not said," and regarding the current roster of NASA astronauts:
Do you BELIEVE that any of the white astronauts have discriminated against any black astronauts?
Do you BELIEVE that any of the white astronauts have discriminated against any black people?
Do you BELIEVE that any of the black astronauts have been discriminated against by any white people?
I know that your reading comprehension is poor but do try to answer these simple questions, so that you can (potentially) become educated.I believe you miss the point. Of course, all of the black astronauts
suffered significant discrimination over their entire lives, as all
black Americans do.
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 3:23:33 PM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 08:47:24 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 11:06:51 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote: >> On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 07:31:57 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 9:49:45 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:I didn't say that current black astronauts had been discriminated
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 04:23:24 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:22:13 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:I didn't say the current astronauts have discriminated against black >> >> astronauts.
On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 16:47:04 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com> >> >> >> wrote:
On Thursday, February 2, 2023 at 4:34:23 PM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:Who said astronauts have been treated unfairly?
On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 12:23:23 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 7:35:57 PM UTC-5, RichA wrote: >> >> >> >> >> https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/29/world/nasa-artemis-moon-secretive-crew-selection-process/index.htmlThere is not necessarily anything wrong with intentional
-
There is a paragraph in the article that, taken at face value, advocates active and intentional discrimination.
It is not exactly clear if that statement represents actual NASA policy, or is just the naive, idealistic meanderings of lefty journalism.
discrimination.
ROTFLMAO!
You really need to explain yourself on that one!
The astronauts seem to have come from privileged backgrounds and schools.
Indeed, in an unfair society, it is an ethical
requirement.
Explain how ANY of the astronauts have been treated "unfairly." >> >> >> >
But obviously if one wants an unfair society, as you seem to want, intentional discrimination will certainly lead to that result. There certainly won't be anything ethical about it.
In a society that has practiced discrimination and marginalized
specific populations, it is ethical to prioritize selection from those
populations as a remedy. That is a form of discrimination that isn't
bad.
Give examples of how the current white astronauts have discriminated against the black astronauts and how the black astronauts have ever been discriminated against and by whom.
Quoted from the article:
"If Wiseman, a White man, is selected, that means the other spots will almost certainly need to go to at least one woman and at least one person of color. "
I suggest that NASA hold a lottery to determine who goes on the mission, if indeed it has no remaining criteria by which to choose logically. THAT would be fair.
Discrimination, that you seem to wholeheartedly support, is never fair in this context.
You didn't give examples of how the current black astronauts have been discriminated against, BY SOCIETY. Because you have none to give.
So, why should the white astronauts be discriminated against? They are blameless.
against.
Regardless of what you CLAIM to have "not said," and regarding the current roster of NASA astronauts:
Do you BELIEVE that any of the white astronauts have discriminated against any black astronauts?
Do you BELIEVE that any of the white astronauts have discriminated against any black people?
Do you BELIEVE that any of the black astronauts have been discriminated against by any white people?
You evading the questions are usual. What specific discrimination did any of them suffer that kept them from getting educations and becoming NASA astronauts?I know that your reading comprehension is poor but do try to answer these simple questions, so that you can (potentially) become educated.I believe you miss the point. Of course, all of the black astronauts suffered significant discrimination over their entire lives, as all
black Americans do.
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 3:23:33 PM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 08:47:24 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 11:06:51 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote: >> >> On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 07:31:57 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>I believe you miss the point. Of course, all of the black astronauts
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 9:49:45 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote: >> >> >> On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 04:23:24 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>I didn't say that current black astronauts had been discriminated
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:22:13 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:I didn't say the current astronauts have discriminated against black >> >> >> astronauts.
On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 16:47:04 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Thursday, February 2, 2023 at 4:34:23 PM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:Who said astronauts have been treated unfairly?
On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 12:23:23 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com> >> >> >> >> >> wrote:
On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 7:35:57 PM UTC-5, RichA wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/29/world/nasa-artemis-moon-secretive-crew-selection-process/index.htmlThere is not necessarily anything wrong with intentional
-
There is a paragraph in the article that, taken at face value, advocates active and intentional discrimination.
It is not exactly clear if that statement represents actual NASA policy, or is just the naive, idealistic meanderings of lefty journalism.
discrimination.
ROTFLMAO!
You really need to explain yourself on that one!
The astronauts seem to have come from privileged backgrounds and schools.
Indeed, in an unfair society, it is an ethical
requirement.
Explain how ANY of the astronauts have been treated "unfairly."
But obviously if one wants an unfair society, as you seem to want, intentional discrimination will certainly lead to that result. There certainly won't be anything ethical about it.
In a society that has practiced discrimination and marginalized
specific populations, it is ethical to prioritize selection from those
populations as a remedy. That is a form of discrimination that isn't
bad.
Give examples of how the current white astronauts have discriminated against the black astronauts and how the black astronauts have ever been discriminated against and by whom.
Quoted from the article:
"If Wiseman, a White man, is selected, that means the other spots will almost certainly need to go to at least one woman and at least one person of color. "
I suggest that NASA hold a lottery to determine who goes on the mission, if indeed it has no remaining criteria by which to choose logically. THAT would be fair.
Discrimination, that you seem to wholeheartedly support, is never fair in this context.
You didn't give examples of how the current black astronauts have been discriminated against, BY SOCIETY. Because you have none to give.
So, why should the white astronauts be discriminated against? They are blameless.
against.
Regardless of what you CLAIM to have "not said," and regarding the current roster of NASA astronauts:
Do you BELIEVE that any of the white astronauts have discriminated against any black astronauts?
Do you BELIEVE that any of the white astronauts have discriminated against any black people?
Do you BELIEVE that any of the black astronauts have been discriminated against by any white people?
I know that your reading comprehension is poor but do try to answer these simple questions, so that you can (potentially) become educated.
suffered significant discrimination over their entire lives, as all
black Americans do.
You evading the questions are usual. What specific discrimination did any of them suffer that kept them from getting educations and becoming NASA astronauts?
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 13:27:36 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 3:23:33 PM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 08:47:24 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 11:06:51 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote: >> >> On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 07:31:57 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>I believe you miss the point. Of course, all of the black astronauts
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 9:49:45 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:I didn't say that current black astronauts had been discriminated
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 04:23:24 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:22:13 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:I didn't say the current astronauts have discriminated against black >> >> >> astronauts.
On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 16:47:04 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com> >> >> >> >> wrote:
On Thursday, February 2, 2023 at 4:34:23 PM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:Who said astronauts have been treated unfairly?
On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 12:23:23 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 7:35:57 PM UTC-5, RichA wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/29/world/nasa-artemis-moon-secretive-crew-selection-process/index.htmlThere is not necessarily anything wrong with intentional
-
There is a paragraph in the article that, taken at face value, advocates active and intentional discrimination.
It is not exactly clear if that statement represents actual NASA policy, or is just the naive, idealistic meanderings of lefty journalism.
discrimination.
ROTFLMAO!
You really need to explain yourself on that one!
The astronauts seem to have come from privileged backgrounds and schools.
Indeed, in an unfair society, it is an ethical
requirement.
Explain how ANY of the astronauts have been treated "unfairly." >> >> >> >> >
But obviously if one wants an unfair society, as you seem to want, intentional discrimination will certainly lead to that result. There certainly won't be anything ethical about it.
In a society that has practiced discrimination and marginalized >> >> >> >> specific populations, it is ethical to prioritize selection from those
populations as a remedy. That is a form of discrimination that isn't
bad.
Give examples of how the current white astronauts have discriminated against the black astronauts and how the black astronauts have ever been discriminated against and by whom.
Quoted from the article:
"If Wiseman, a White man, is selected, that means the other spots will almost certainly need to go to at least one woman and at least one person of color. "
I suggest that NASA hold a lottery to determine who goes on the mission, if indeed it has no remaining criteria by which to choose logically. THAT would be fair.
Discrimination, that you seem to wholeheartedly support, is never fair in this context.
You didn't give examples of how the current black astronauts have been discriminated against, BY SOCIETY. Because you have none to give.
So, why should the white astronauts be discriminated against? They are blameless.
against.
Regardless of what you CLAIM to have "not said," and regarding the current roster of NASA astronauts:
Do you BELIEVE that any of the white astronauts have discriminated against any black astronauts?
Do you BELIEVE that any of the white astronauts have discriminated against any black people?
Do you BELIEVE that any of the black astronauts have been discriminated against by any white people?
I know that your reading comprehension is poor but do try to answer these simple questions, so that you can (potentially) become educated.
suffered significant discrimination over their entire lives, as all
black Americans do.
You evading the questions are usual. What specific discrimination did any of them suffer that kept them from getting educations and becoming NASA astronauts?You are evading the issue. How many black people didn't have the
opportunity to become astronauts because of discrimination?
On Sat, 4 Feb 2023 08:03:03 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Saturday, February 4, 2023 at 9:43:46 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote: >> On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 13:27:36 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 3:23:33 PM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote: >> >> On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 08:47:24 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>You are evading the issue. How many black people didn't have the
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 11:06:51 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:I believe you miss the point. Of course, all of the black astronauts
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 07:31:57 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 9:49:45 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:I didn't say that current black astronauts had been discriminated
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 04:23:24 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com> >> >> >> >> wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:22:13 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:I didn't say the current astronauts have discriminated against black
On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 16:47:04 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Thursday, February 2, 2023 at 4:34:23 PM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:Who said astronauts have been treated unfairly?
On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 12:23:23 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 7:35:57 PM UTC-5, RichA wrote:There is not necessarily anything wrong with intentional
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/29/world/nasa-artemis-moon-secretive-crew-selection-process/index.html-
There is a paragraph in the article that, taken at face value, advocates active and intentional discrimination.
It is not exactly clear if that statement represents actual NASA policy, or is just the naive, idealistic meanderings of lefty journalism.
discrimination.
ROTFLMAO!
You really need to explain yourself on that one!
The astronauts seem to have come from privileged backgrounds and schools.
Indeed, in an unfair society, it is an ethical
requirement.
Explain how ANY of the astronauts have been treated "unfairly."
But obviously if one wants an unfair society, as you seem to want, intentional discrimination will certainly lead to that result. There certainly won't be anything ethical about it.
In a society that has practiced discrimination and marginalized
specific populations, it is ethical to prioritize selection from those
populations as a remedy. That is a form of discrimination that isn't
bad.
Give examples of how the current white astronauts have discriminated against the black astronauts and how the black astronauts have ever been discriminated against and by whom.
Quoted from the article:
"If Wiseman, a White man, is selected, that means the other spots will almost certainly need to go to at least one woman and at least one person of color. "
I suggest that NASA hold a lottery to determine who goes on the mission, if indeed it has no remaining criteria by which to choose logically. THAT would be fair.
Discrimination, that you seem to wholeheartedly support, is never fair in this context.
astronauts.
You didn't give examples of how the current black astronauts have been discriminated against, BY SOCIETY. Because you have none to give.
So, why should the white astronauts be discriminated against? They are blameless.
against.
Regardless of what you CLAIM to have "not said," and regarding the current roster of NASA astronauts:
Do you BELIEVE that any of the white astronauts have discriminated against any black astronauts?
Do you BELIEVE that any of the white astronauts have discriminated against any black people?
Do you BELIEVE that any of the black astronauts have been discriminated against by any white people?
I know that your reading comprehension is poor but do try to answer these simple questions, so that you can (potentially) become educated.
suffered significant discrimination over their entire lives, as all
black Americans do.
You evading the questions are usual. What specific discrimination did any of them suffer that kept them from getting educations and becoming NASA astronauts?
opportunity to become astronauts because of discrimination?
None.
Now answer the three questions that you were supposed to answer, above.
You need to stop being evasive. You need to provide evidence of your racist assertions or you need to shut up.Your hood is showing
On Saturday, February 4, 2023 at 9:43:46 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 13:27:36 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 3:23:33 PM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:You are evading the issue. How many black people didn't have the
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 08:47:24 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 11:06:51 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:I believe you miss the point. Of course, all of the black astronauts
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 07:31:57 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 9:49:45 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:I didn't say that current black astronauts had been discriminated
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 04:23:24 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:22:13 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:I didn't say the current astronauts have discriminated against black
On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 16:47:04 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com> >> >> >> >> >> wrote:
On Thursday, February 2, 2023 at 4:34:23 PM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:Who said astronauts have been treated unfairly?
On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 12:23:23 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 7:35:57 PM UTC-5, RichA wrote:There is not necessarily anything wrong with intentional
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/29/world/nasa-artemis-moon-secretive-crew-selection-process/index.html-
There is a paragraph in the article that, taken at face value, advocates active and intentional discrimination.
It is not exactly clear if that statement represents actual NASA policy, or is just the naive, idealistic meanderings of lefty journalism.
discrimination.
ROTFLMAO!
You really need to explain yourself on that one!
The astronauts seem to have come from privileged backgrounds and schools.
Indeed, in an unfair society, it is an ethical
requirement.
Explain how ANY of the astronauts have been treated "unfairly." >> >> >> >> >> >
But obviously if one wants an unfair society, as you seem to want, intentional discrimination will certainly lead to that result. There certainly won't be anything ethical about it.
In a society that has practiced discrimination and marginalized >> >> >> >> >> specific populations, it is ethical to prioritize selection from those
populations as a remedy. That is a form of discrimination that isn't
bad.
Give examples of how the current white astronauts have discriminated against the black astronauts and how the black astronauts have ever been discriminated against and by whom.
Quoted from the article:
"If Wiseman, a White man, is selected, that means the other spots will almost certainly need to go to at least one woman and at least one person of color. "
I suggest that NASA hold a lottery to determine who goes on the mission, if indeed it has no remaining criteria by which to choose logically. THAT would be fair.
Discrimination, that you seem to wholeheartedly support, is never fair in this context.
astronauts.
You didn't give examples of how the current black astronauts have been discriminated against, BY SOCIETY. Because you have none to give.
So, why should the white astronauts be discriminated against? They are blameless.
against.
Regardless of what you CLAIM to have "not said," and regarding the current roster of NASA astronauts:
Do you BELIEVE that any of the white astronauts have discriminated against any black astronauts?
Do you BELIEVE that any of the white astronauts have discriminated against any black people?
Do you BELIEVE that any of the black astronauts have been discriminated against by any white people?
I know that your reading comprehension is poor but do try to answer these simple questions, so that you can (potentially) become educated.
suffered significant discrimination over their entire lives, as all
black Americans do.
You evading the questions are usual. What specific discrimination did any of them suffer that kept them from getting educations and becoming NASA astronauts?
opportunity to become astronauts because of discrimination?
None.
Now answer the three questions that you were supposed to answer, above.
You need to stop being evasive. You need to provide evidence of your racist assertions or you need to shut up.
On Saturday, February 4, 2023 at 2:49:01 PM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Sat, 4 Feb 2023 08:03:03 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Saturday, February 4, 2023 at 9:43:46 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote: >> >> On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 13:27:36 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>Your hood is showing
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 3:23:33 PM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote: >> >> >> On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 08:47:24 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>You are evading the issue. How many black people didn't have the
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 11:06:51 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:I believe you miss the point. Of course, all of the black astronauts >> >> >> suffered significant discrimination over their entire lives, as all
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 07:31:57 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 9:49:45 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:I didn't say that current black astronauts had been discriminated >> >> >> >> against.
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 04:23:24 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com> >> >> >> >> >> wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:22:13 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:I didn't say the current astronauts have discriminated against black
On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 16:47:04 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Thursday, February 2, 2023 at 4:34:23 PM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:Who said astronauts have been treated unfairly?
On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 12:23:23 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 7:35:57 PM UTC-5, RichA wrote:There is not necessarily anything wrong with intentional >> >> >> >> >> >> >> discrimination.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/29/world/nasa-artemis-moon-secretive-crew-selection-process/index.html-
There is a paragraph in the article that, taken at face value, advocates active and intentional discrimination.
It is not exactly clear if that statement represents actual NASA policy, or is just the naive, idealistic meanderings of lefty journalism.
ROTFLMAO!
You really need to explain yourself on that one!
The astronauts seem to have come from privileged backgrounds and schools.
Indeed, in an unfair society, it is an ethical
requirement.
Explain how ANY of the astronauts have been treated "unfairly."
But obviously if one wants an unfair society, as you seem to want, intentional discrimination will certainly lead to that result. There certainly won't be anything ethical about it.
In a society that has practiced discrimination and marginalized
specific populations, it is ethical to prioritize selection from those
populations as a remedy. That is a form of discrimination that isn't
bad.
Give examples of how the current white astronauts have discriminated against the black astronauts and how the black astronauts have ever been discriminated against and by whom.
Quoted from the article:
"If Wiseman, a White man, is selected, that means the other spots will almost certainly need to go to at least one woman and at least one person of color. "
I suggest that NASA hold a lottery to determine who goes on the mission, if indeed it has no remaining criteria by which to choose logically. THAT would be fair.
Discrimination, that you seem to wholeheartedly support, is never fair in this context.
astronauts.
You didn't give examples of how the current black astronauts have been discriminated against, BY SOCIETY. Because you have none to give.
So, why should the white astronauts be discriminated against? They are blameless.
Regardless of what you CLAIM to have "not said," and regarding the current roster of NASA astronauts:
Do you BELIEVE that any of the white astronauts have discriminated against any black astronauts?
Do you BELIEVE that any of the white astronauts have discriminated against any black people?
Do you BELIEVE that any of the black astronauts have been discriminated against by any white people?
I know that your reading comprehension is poor but do try to answer these simple questions, so that you can (potentially) become educated.
black Americans do.
You evading the questions are usual. What specific discrimination did any of them suffer that kept them from getting educations and becoming NASA astronauts?
opportunity to become astronauts because of discrimination?
None.
Now answer the three questions that you were supposed to answer, above.
You need to stop being evasive. You need to provide evidence of your racist assertions or you need to shut up.
Your neighborhood discriminates, heavily.
You owe me an apology, you owe RichA an apology.
On Sat, 4 Feb 2023 12:02:36 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Saturday, February 4, 2023 at 2:49:01 PM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote: >> On Sat, 4 Feb 2023 08:03:03 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Saturday, February 4, 2023 at 9:43:46 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:Your hood is showing
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 13:27:36 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 3:23:33 PM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:You are evading the issue. How many black people didn't have the
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 08:47:24 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 11:06:51 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:I believe you miss the point. Of course, all of the black astronauts >> >> >> suffered significant discrimination over their entire lives, as all >> >> >> black Americans do.
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 07:31:57 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com> >> >> >> >> wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 9:49:45 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:I didn't say that current black astronauts had been discriminated >> >> >> >> against.
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 04:23:24 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:22:13 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:I didn't say the current astronauts have discriminated against black
On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 16:47:04 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Thursday, February 2, 2023 at 4:34:23 PM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:Who said astronauts have been treated unfairly?
On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 12:23:23 -0800 (PST), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 7:35:57 PM UTC-5, RichA wrote:There is not necessarily anything wrong with intentional >> >> >> >> >> >> >> discrimination.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/29/world/nasa-artemis-moon-secretive-crew-selection-process/index.html-
There is a paragraph in the article that, taken at face value, advocates active and intentional discrimination.
It is not exactly clear if that statement represents actual NASA policy, or is just the naive, idealistic meanderings of lefty journalism.
ROTFLMAO!
You really need to explain yourself on that one!
The astronauts seem to have come from privileged backgrounds and schools.
Indeed, in an unfair society, it is an ethical
requirement.
Explain how ANY of the astronauts have been treated "unfairly."
But obviously if one wants an unfair society, as you seem to want, intentional discrimination will certainly lead to that result. There certainly won't be anything ethical about it.
In a society that has practiced discrimination and marginalized
specific populations, it is ethical to prioritize selection from those
populations as a remedy. That is a form of discrimination that isn't
bad.
Give examples of how the current white astronauts have discriminated against the black astronauts and how the black astronauts have ever been discriminated against and by whom.
Quoted from the article:
"If Wiseman, a White man, is selected, that means the other spots will almost certainly need to go to at least one woman and at least one person of color. "
I suggest that NASA hold a lottery to determine who goes on the mission, if indeed it has no remaining criteria by which to choose logically. THAT would be fair.
Discrimination, that you seem to wholeheartedly support, is never fair in this context.
astronauts.
You didn't give examples of how the current black astronauts have been discriminated against, BY SOCIETY. Because you have none to give.
So, why should the white astronauts be discriminated against? They are blameless.
Regardless of what you CLAIM to have "not said," and regarding the current roster of NASA astronauts:
Do you BELIEVE that any of the white astronauts have discriminated against any black astronauts?
Do you BELIEVE that any of the white astronauts have discriminated against any black people?
Do you BELIEVE that any of the black astronauts have been discriminated against by any white people?
I know that your reading comprehension is poor but do try to answer these simple questions, so that you can (potentially) become educated.
You evading the questions are usual. What specific discrimination did any of them suffer that kept them from getting educations and becoming NASA astronauts?
opportunity to become astronauts because of discrimination?
None.
Now answer the three questions that you were supposed to answer, above. >> >
You need to stop being evasive. You need to provide evidence of your racist assertions or you need to shut up.
Your neighborhood discriminates, heavily.You are both human filth.
You owe me an apology, you owe RichA an apology.
You are FOR discrimination:
"There is not necessarily anything wrong with intentional discrimination." YOU wrote that! Talk about 'human filth!'
On Saturday, February 4, 2023 at 6:25:43 PM UTC-7, W wrote:
You are FOR discrimination:Why is it worthy of criticism that someone supports affirmative
"There is not necessarily anything wrong with intentional discrimination." YOU wrote that! Talk about 'human filth!'
action measures as part of cleaning up the consequences of a
long period of past discrimination?
After all, it *is* a fact that the average incomes, the average
wealth, and the average educational levels, of black people
in the United States are lower than those of white people.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 403 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 111:48:28 |
| Calls: | 8,465 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 13,181 |
| Messages: | 5,909,940 |
