Live Stoner Chat Effect of drugs on spider webs

[Eyes on Fire]

oh cool.I didnt know they actually ouched the spider with the chem.cool.cuz a sponge piece with water n stuff on it is how many drink in captivity.Man,thanks for the link,bet thats a fun read.

 

[epenguin]

What was the point of this "experiment" and what genuine conclusions can be drawn if it is in fact a real experiment. In REAL science such a scenario would be accompanied with a lot of supporting evidence. ie a paper in a respected journal and accredited scientists would debate the findings.
Please feel free to correct me if I am wrong but I don't see real science here. What I do see is human interpretations of what we "want" to see. Exactly what the funny video shows us. Albeit exaggerated.

Here is the so called NASA original. It is so brief. I don't believe a word... eP

http://web.archive.org/web/20070704003310/http://science.nasa.gov/faq/NASA Tech Brief.pdf

Bugger, if I am wrong, I went out on a limb here. Well, a flipper at least!
Please tell me I am not wrong. Again. ( won't be the first! )

 

[shax]

Had good laught hahahaha n1

 

[SkatterBrayne]

What was the point of this "experiment" and what genuine conclusions can be drawn if it is in fact a real experiment.

Refer to my posts on the first page. Simply one question / speculation arising from the data, which could lead to an abundance of similar experiments.

Science isn't always about conclusions, which is why we experiment to begin with. More often than not, the data will simply lead to more questions. Discoveries often happen accidently, arising from questions that were neglected to be asked in the first place.

- - - Updated - - -

What was the point of this "experiment" and what genuine conclusions can be drawn if it is in fact a real experiment.

Refer to my posts on the first page. Simply one question / speculation arising from the data, which could lead to an abundance of similar experiments.

Science isn't always about conclusions, which is why we experiment to begin with. More often than not, the data will simply lead to more questions. Discoveries often happen accidently, arising from questions that were neglected to be asked in the first place.

 

[AndyBotwin]

Science isn't always about conclusions, which is why we experiment to begin with. More often than not, the data will simply lead to more questions. Discoveries often happen accidently, arising from questions that were neglected to be asked in the first place.

Agreed. And the NASA brief stated this as a reason for the testing: "Potential alternative to toxicity testing on higher animals."

Penguin, the brief is only part of the data and the rest can be ordered from NASA. I already posted a link to it on their site:

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19950065352

If your contention is that NASA published joke data 19 years ago and still keeps it in their archive for public consumption, we'll have to agree to disagree. Not to mention there are other researchers who performed similar studies since the 1940s. The Wikipedia page has references to those as well.

 

[epenguin]

What I see are "human values" being attributed to a SPIDER?? Not even a primate. But I can see why one would not want to subject a primate to such drugs. I cannot accept that spiders behave in a way that humans would assume they would, if they had any amount of brains, which they do not. OK, NASA may have done these experiments (Why NASA?, are astronauts going to take meth n LSD in-flight?) but the conclusions drawn are speculative to say the least. IMHO. For me, the comic video puts it into perspective, because I just don't see any real conclusion from the "experiment" Which I accept is OK as we should always question. Conclusions are not always evident.
Thanks for not shouting me down. I suspect on other sites my feathers would be on fire by now. It's good we can debate healthily and I respect all opinions.
Thanks for making me think again. eP.