|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
On 10/22/2010 1:34 AM, scott wrote:
>> Engineers are less likely to run into such situations, admittedly, but
>> they instead have a very bad habit of showing up in someone "else's"
>> work shop, to tell them that their expertise as an engineer **backs**
>> their religion, which in turn undermines the other guys entire
>> discipline.
>
> Huh, sorry I have no idea what you mean by that, and also I don't know
> any engineers that work in a workshop, nor any that preach their
> religious beliefs in the workplace.
>
Seriously? You think I mean "literal" workshop, or I am talking about
sermons, rather than, say, showing up, for example, on the blog of a
well known biologist, where the guy *talks* about his, and other
people's work, and proceeds to say, "I don't believe in evolution. As an
engineer, I know everything *must* have a designer, and therefor I
believe god did it, not some random process!". Other than failing to use
comic sans, this is almost a direct quote of at least 4-5 of the last
batch of engineers that have sporadically shown up to babble about how
they know more about genetics than an actual geneticist. This, often,
includes expounding on how well "designed" the genome, or the body, is,
when both look more like they where invented by the gnomes in D&D (extra
gears, things that don't work, or do what they seem like they should, or
do things that are not intended, and, if you are unlucky, explode) than
anything a competent engineer would build. Yet, if they happen to show
up to whine about Darwin, they invariable think the whole thing looks
like it was made by the most crafty, best, and wondrous, designer in all
universes. Mind, I have no evidence that the only engineers that show up
to babble this stuff are not all D&D gnomes either. It would explain
some things... lol
>> A problem that wouldn't be so annoying, except that, as I stated in
>> the other post, sometimes you can't *make* progress in other
>> disciplines without referencing things in others, and.. well.. What
>> happens when you consult an engineer on something in biology, and the
>> engineer does 100% perfect work in engineering, but rejects the
>> underlying principles *of* the biology they are being asked to lend
>> their own expertise on?
>
> You can't force people to work on things they don't want to. If someone
> has chosen to be an engineer on PC monitors for example, you can't
> expect them to willingly give advice on how to design a missile or
> engineer a system to clone humans. If you ask someone advice out of
> their field of work, you have to expect there might be a conflict,
> especially for sensitive subjects.
>
Hardly a case of them working on things they don't "want" to. They might
want to do so, but have a completely batshit insane view of how to get
to the result. You know, sort of like the movie trope of the weirdo
that, in answer to, "We need to build a better space ship.", answers,
"Oh great! In a past life I reverse engineered alien space ships for
Pharaoh Tutankhamen!" One only **hopes** that their defect is *that*
obvious, when starting the project. This is hardly a certainty though. A
few people have described ending up on teams where they where making
fair progress, except for the one nut in the group, who kept insisting
that they should use some totally absurd thing to get it done.
Sometimes, this person isn't one you can, for internal political
reasons, or the funder, etc., get rid up. And, they get to go to their
next job, with the recommendation of some clown who never directly dealt
with the project, doesn't know he was a liability, but is perfectly
happy to say, "Yep. Joker A. Floop worked with the project for 12
months, until completion."
--
void main () {
If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
if version = "Vista" {
call slow_by_half();
call DRM_everything();
}
call functional_code();
}
else
call crash_windows();
}
<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |