Funny (political, religious) pictures

PatrThom

PatrThom

Ravenpoe said:
To use the plane analogy, pilot is a poor term
Click to expand...
You don't have to switch to a plane analogy. "Pilot" applies to seafaring ships as much as airships, if Gilbert & Sullivan taught me anything.
@Li3n said:
isn't the whole point of calling out Perry as not being an astronaut to not have the word astronaut become the next xerox ?
Click to expand...
I don't believe so. This isn't about losing exclusivity to use a trademark (Aspirin, Kleenex), this sounds (to me, at least) more like a discussion regarding whether calling her an astronaut would essentially qualify as "stolen valor."

--Patrick
 
GasBandit

GasBandit

Staff member
Yeah, if Katy Perry is an astronaut because somebody else carried her into space, then I'm a sailor because I've been a passenger on multiple sailing ships, and I'm an airline pilot because I've flown in many airliners, and I'm a bus driver because I've ridden the bus.
 
MindDetective

MindDetective

Arguably many astronauts have been carried to the ISS without doing any piloting at all. All of this is, of course, just parsing categories in the way we are always all so fond of. In truth, Perry is more of an astronaut than I am and Chris Hadfield is more of an astronaut than Perry is. On the continuum, I would put Perry closer to me than to Hadfield. Not sure what else there is to say about it than that.
 
GasBandit

GasBandit

Staff member
MindDetective said:
Arguably many astronauts have been carried to the ISS without doing any piloting at all. All of this is, of course, just parsing categories in the way we are always all so fond of. In truth, Perry is more of an astronaut than I am and Chris Hadfield is more of an astronaut than Perry is. On the continuum, I would put Perry closer to me than to Hadfield. Not sure what else there is to say about it than that.
Click to expand...
Unless Perry had an actual role to play with tasks and objectives, she was a passenger, not a specialist, and no more an astronaut than you or I. We're within 90% of the same distance from the earth's core, after all.
 
figmentPez

figmentPez

Staff member
MindDetective said:
Arguably many astronauts have been carried to the ISS without doing any piloting at all.
Click to expand...
And how many of them didn't do any work while on the station? How many of them could not have piloted a spacecraft in an emergency situation? How many of them were in space without any sort of education or preparation focused on making their time in space productive towards the advancement of science, technology, engineering, or mathematics?
 
MindDetective

MindDetective

GasBandit said:
Unless Perry had an actual role to play with tasks and objectives, she was a passenger, not a specialist, and no more an astronaut than you or I. We're within 90% of the same distance from the earth's core, after all.
Click to expand...
I was specifically responding to your focus on being a pilot. And yes, like it or not, she is 10% more astronaut than you or I.
 
@Li3n

@Li3n

PatrThom said:
I don't believe so. This isn't about losing exclusivity to use a trademark (Aspirin, Kleenex), this sounds (to me, at least) more like a discussion regarding whether calling her an astronaut would essentially qualify as "stolen valor."

--Patrick
Click to expand...
Does the motivation behind why you don't want it happening really change anything about the linguistic process ?



figmentPez said:
How many of them could not have piloted a spacecraft in an emergency situation?
Click to expand...
Considering the article linked by mikerc about the FAA's updated definition, i'd say enough that the FAA made sure to include all other contributions of a crew, and not just the capability to pilot.


And you're all still missing the point.

It's not that 99% of people don't understand that there's a difference between the crew and a passenger, it's that it used to be that everyone that went up was a professional astronaut for so much time that a lot of people associate teh word with simply going to space, regardless of what you're doing (or not doing) there (which is likely also why the FAA's original definition of a commercial astronaut didn't limit it to crew, the need didn't occur to them until it was happening).

And emphasising the difference might not matter as much as you'd think, since we already have plenty of words that apply to both people doing stuff professionally and just doing it.

Now, you want to make sure most people differentiate the 2, it would help if we find a cooler name then space passenger or space tourist... like, even buses get bus rider...


GasBandit said:
We're within 90% of the same distance from the earth's core, after all.
Click to expand...
We're all speeding through space on a big rock while working... so aren't we all cosmonauts, comrade ?
 
Vrii

Vrii

I’m just enjoying the idea that anyone’s deciding to call someone taking the bus a “rider” instead of a “passenger“ because they think it sounds so cool.
 
@Li3n

@Li3n

Vrii said:
I’m just enjoying the idea that anyone’s deciding to call someone taking the bus a “rider” instead of a “passenger“ because they think it sounds so cool.
Click to expand...
Consciously, probably not.

But it's not like rider is a better descriptor then passenger when it comes to a bus. You're most certainly not sitting astride a bus.
 
Vrii

Vrii

I'll point out for completion's sake that I'm pretty sure I've heard bus-takers referred to interchangeably as "passengers" and "riders" and I have never, ever noticed that either of them is used less respectfully or whatever.

The idea that riding a horse like the Rohirrim is the etymological equivalent of paying a fare and grabbing a seat on the bus is a separate source of amusement, though. Just picturing an entire bus full of people fully engaged in making horse noises and bouncing in their seats.
 
@Li3n

@Li3n

Vrii said:
I'll point out for completion's sake that I'm pretty sure I've heard bus-takers referred to interchangeably as "passengers" and "riders" and I have never, ever noticed that either of them is used less respectfully or whatever.
Click to expand...
I don't think cool implies the other words being less respectful.

But yeah, i guess me experiencing bus rider more then bus passenger on the internet isn't indicative of it's use IRL, esp. when i assume bus passengers is the more official sounding one that likely gets use in PSA's on a bus etc.
 
PatrThom

PatrThom

Why is the WH so focused on this one guy? They should be like, "Oops, our bad. Let's bring him back and hope y'all forget about this by the next time we deport somebody," but instead they seem to keep redoubling on just how much Barbara Streisand they can possibly pack into this whole thing.
MindDetective said:
JFC that is not normal.
Click to expand...
I mean, it is if we are just letting Elon straight up write the tweets, I guess.

--Patrick
 
Ravenpoe

Ravenpoe

PatrThom said:
Why is the WH so focused on this one guy? They should be like, "Oops, our bad. Let's bring him back and hope y'all forget about this by the next time we deport somebody," but instead they seem to keep redoubling on just how much Barbara Streisand they can possibly pack into this whole thing.

I mean, it is if we are just letting Elon straight up write the tweets, I guess.

--Patrick
Click to expand...
The cruelty is the point. They want to send the message that they can do this to anyone.
 
Krisken

Krisken

PatrThom said:
Why is the WH so focused on this one guy? They should be like, "Oops, our bad. Let's bring him back and hope y'all forget about this by the next time we deport somebody," but instead they seem to keep redoubling on just how much Barbara Streisand they can possibly pack into this whole thing.

I mean, it is if we are just letting Elon straight up write the tweets, I guess.

--Patrick
Click to expand...
Because they can't have him come back and talking to the press.
 
figmentPez

figmentPez

Staff member
PatrThom said:
Why is the WH so focused on this one guy? They should be like, "Oops, our bad. Let's bring him back and hope y'all forget about this by the next time we deport somebody," but instead they seem to keep redoubling on just how much Barbara Streisand they can possibly pack into this whole thing.
Click to expand...
Kilmar Abrego Garcia fled El Salvador because he was a victim of gang violence. It's most likely someone in power in El Salvador that wants him, and the White House loves play nice with other fascists. Trump doesn't care what US citizens think (his propaganda machine already tells his followers what to think), but Trump does care what other fascist dictators think of him, so he's going to make sure that they get to enact whatever petty revenge they want on someone who fled from them.
 
D

Dubyamn

PatrThom said:
Why is the WH so focused on this one guy? They should be like, "Oops, our bad. Let's bring him back and hope y'all forget about this by the next time we deport somebody," but instead they seem to keep redoubling on just how much Barbara Streisand they can possibly pack into this whole thing.

--Patrick
Click to expand...
If they bring him back it means that going to CECOT is a two way street and they will start being pressured into bringing back other people sent to CECOT. It’s the same reason why republicans focus on trans girls in sports. Once they get you agreeing that Trans Girls shouldn’t be playing sports with other girls then they move onto trans girls not being allowed to be girls in schools. Republicans know that something like this isn’t a line you can just erase and redraw, it’s a seal that once broken can’t be closed again.

Or like the famous grasshopper speech once one stands up they all might.
 
@Li3n

@Li3n

PatrThom said:
Wanting to keep a definition consistent exerts pressure upon the linguistic process, kind of like how a company will defend a trademark if they want to retain the rights to it.

--Patrick
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's what i said they where trying to do, which makes the situations similar... hence teh comparison.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top