May. 9th, 2014

jamesq: (An actual picture of me.)
Yesterday was the inauguration of Nerd Nite Calgary.

The setting was the basement of The Belfry, which advertises itself as a gastropub. I'm not sure I'd go that far, but the food is good and the beer selection is decent. They have a special event room in the basement, and that's where we were.

I got there early and found a table that managed to be far enough away to make it hard to hear, yet close enough that I couldn't pretend I was in the back of the classroom. I couldn't get anyone to go with me (my one maybe turned into a no due to a stress headache at the last minute). Normally this sort of thing would depress me, except A) I'm starting to get used to it, and B) I ended up with two cool table-mates, Jill and... David? I remember Jill's name because she ended up following me on Twitter. Maybe-David I'm not sure about because my facility with names sucks. I need to use your name at multiple different things for it to stick, and I didn't do that this time.

The first speaker was Graham Christensen, who is on the long list to be a Mars colonist. He discussed his own motivations for wanting a one-way ticket to Mars, the Mars-One project itself, and some of the hurdles (both personal and technological) to colonizing the red planet.

He's also a fun and engaging public speaker. I don't know if this is just a natural talent, or if he's worked hard at making it seem natural. As Churchill said (paraphrasing), it takes days of work to make a good off-the-cuff speech. His enthusiasm for the project was infectious.

The other good thing about Nerd Nite? The discussions that happen during the breaks between speakers. After listening to Mr. Christensen, my tablemates and I had a nice discussion about the psychology of long-distance space travel. I, for one, could not imagine spending 200+ days locked in a minivan with three other people. I'd be the world's first interplanetary spree killer. And actually living on Mars? Sorry - I like all the things that civilization can offer. Still, good on the Mars-one folk for trying it. I wish them success, even if I think it's long odds.

The next speaker was Christine Shellska, who in addition to being a post-grad at U of C, is also involved in the local Atheist/skeptic community. Her talk was on how the Intelligent Design community refines their bullshit to better sell their manufactroversy (a new word I just learned).

Ms. Shellska was the weakest of the three speakers, but she still made her points plainly. I think if she had used her initial premise (The Flintstones are historical) using the same "evidence" that the ID movement uses, she'd have made her points in a more entertaining fashion. Of course, ID "proof" is ridiculous, and using ridiculous things ironically has it's own humour.

"Fred Flintstone really existed and worked for Mr. Slate by using a Brontosaurus Apatosaur as construction equipment."
"It was just a cartoon rip-off of the Honeymooners."
"HOW DO YOU KNOW, WERE YOU THERE?!?"
It was a fun talk; I think it could have been better.

The next table discussion immediately veered into mutual ranting about anti-vaxxers (because we saw parallels between ID bullshit and anti-vaxxer bullshit). I've long maintained that the chief characteristic of anti-vaxxers was a thick streak of you're-not-the-boss-of-me-ism. However, Maybe-David had actually studied the phenomenon and discovered that you can explain the facts to someone, they can absorb the facts, they can believe that the facts come from a credible source, but in the end that matters less than whether they had made a public pronouncement on the subject. That is to say, anti-vaxxers (and others of their ilk) will stick to their guns, even if they've accepted the facts, because they'd rather be wrong, then to admit that they were wrong. A rather alien concept for me, since I routinely admit to being wrong.

Other factors included the ease with which one can surround yourself in pseudo-scientific BS in the age of the internet. Anyone can cite a study. Citing a study that has credible peer-review is somewhat harder though. For one thing, you have to accept the notion of peer-review.

As you might imagine, all three of us saw eye-to-eye on this subject.

The final speaker was Dr. Donald Henderson of the Royal Tyrrell, discussing his theory of sauropod buoyancy. This included a computer model of a rubber ball showing the idea of buoyancy. I joked that, as a good scientist, he was starting with "first, assume a perfectly spherical dinosaur". Subsequent models had modern creatures like crocodiles and elephants, to demonstrate it's fitness, followed by sauropods. Turns out they probably floated rather well, due to large lungs and a skeleton that likely incorporated numerous air-bladders.

And, of course, it was all about dinosaurs, which are intrinsically cool.

Overall, the night was pretty good. The company was terrific (hell, any night where a pretty stranger buys me a rum & coke is a good night), the talks were both entertaining and educational, and the setting was ideal. About the only thing I'd change would be the order of the talks (I'd have it be dinosaurs/Flintstones/Mars), and having a partner to go with. If they make it a regular thing, I'll make attending it a regular thing.

Profile

jamesq: (Default)
jamesq

December 2024

S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
15 161718192021
22232425262728
293031    

Most Popular Tags

Page Summary

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 7th, 2025 08:37 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios