[B5JMS] Message to JMS about ASM #511

[b5jms at cs.columbia.edu]

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: arromdee at green.rahul.net (Ken Arromdee)
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 04:58:37 +0000 (UTC)
Lines: 40

In article <c6NXc.396$w%6.304 at newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
Aaron Malchow <aemalchow at earthlink.net> wrote:
>Other posters have already mentioned the use of term "weird" to describe
>scientific theories.

I think you are being needlessly pedantic here.  It's obvious what I meant.

>I'll only add the obvious statement that cloning is no
>longer science fiction.

The kind of cloning which produces an adult duplicate with full memories,
such as the Gwen Stacy clone, is science fiction.

>And I attended a scientific symposium at Stanford
>circa 1998 where physicists were seriously discussing the theoretical
>existence of parallel and pocket universes.

But even a physicist who thinks such things exist won't think a suddenly
appearing relative is likely to be from a parallel universe.

>So I don't see either as good
>examples of "weird" Marvel science, and neither of which keeps modern "real
>world" considerations of DNA "fingerprinting" as being seen as reliable.

If they're children of the Gwen clone, they'd have Gwen's DNA (though the
age still needs to be explained).  If they're from a parallel universe, they
could have had a Gwen-counterpart as their mother and have Gwen's DNA.

>If you think JMS is wrong in his portrayal, you can easily do a Web search
>on DNA testing to check if he got his facts right, rather than assuming he
>did or didn't.

I don't think he's wrong in his portrayal.  I think he's ambiguous in his
portrayal, and I can't tell whether it was supposed to be that way to trick
the reader.
-- 
       Ken Arromdee / arromdee_AT_rahul.net / http://www.rahul.net/arromdee

"They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright
brothers.  But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown." --Carl Sagan

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Lines: 49
From: jmsatb5 at aol.com (Jms at B5)
Date: 28 Aug 2004 09:39:09 GMT

>I don't think he's wrong in his portrayal.  I think he's ambiguous in his
>portrayal, and I can't tell whether it was supposed to be that way to trick
>the reader.

Here, Ken, tell you what, I'll do you a favor.  The very next arc I write, I'll
have Peter stand there on page one and say, "Okay, just so nobody gets confused
by the mystery that follows, that normally we would unfurl slowly so you can
follow the red herrings and twists and turns and enjoy the roller coaster, with
lots of guessing and possibilities but always playing fair with the readers,
we're going to tell you the whole thing up front, right here on page one, so
you don't have to fret that maybe it won't all add up.  Far better that way
than risking the possibility that people might actually have some fun along the
way playing the guessing game.

"Oh, and from this point on, we're going to define science as either *weird*
science or *normal* science, despite the fact that neither term has any
relavance to the real world, to actual scientific method, to...well, to
anything, actually...but there are always some people who just don't understand
the process, and as a result if what they see doesn't match what they *think*
science is, as opposed to what it really is...well, they get kind of confused,
and we have to be good to those people, right?  Like the kid in school that was
slower than everyone else and the teacher kept saying, Hey, throw him the ball!
and we all did it because we were supposed to, even though he couldn't actually
hold onto the thing, but it made him feel better, until we yelled Oh, look, a
pony! and he looked and we pantsed him, but that's not the point, because
really, making the slower kids feel like they're part of the team is important,
it's what we're here for, so everybody play along."

Yep.  I think that's going to be the opening from Peter in the next arc.  

It's either that or the old proverb, "A book is like a mirror.  If an ass peers
in, you can't exactly expect an apostle to peer out."

Not that that has ANY bearing on the current discussion, mind, I'm just waxing
nostalgic for the days of pithy comments.

It's the waxy pithy buildup that kills you, and --

Oh, look, a pony!

 jms

(jmsatb5 at aol.com)
(all message content (c) 2004 by synthetic worlds, ltd., 
permission to reprint specifically denied to SFX Magazine 
and don't send me story ideas)