Several of you have known me for varying lengths of time. One or two have met me face to face. Several of you I consider friends.
Pyrotechnics as an art form (particularly) and high energy hobbies in particular as a learning tool have a dual dependence of our responsibility to
our sense of ethics both personal and as part of community.
I started this thread at this time because I wanted us all to look at the community based ethic of what we do - because if we ignore that component,
more negative attention is focused on ANY high energy format of entertainment, scholastic, hobby, or what-have-you. Whether the high energy is
electrical in origin, surrounds and internal combustion engine, a firearm, or combination of chemicals, the platform for it's continued success is
reflected in the individual's concern for their community. The serf-reflection we conform when we "put the breaks" on a "working-model" may be done
for various reasons. But ultimately, it is the individual through their concern for the community as a whole that will eventually allow the search for
knowledge to have limited walls. The more public that childish negligence is made to be, the more we risk that which would be wonderful to carry
through a lifetime.
I know we have discussed these subjects countless times. However I want those who may just join us for the first time in 2012 to be very clear about
who we are, what we hold valuable......and WHY we may still be here in years to come. Part of that reason may be that this is a productive place,
There are very distinct elements that separate this collection of Forums from those of a less mature, less well thoughtful one.
I wanted to thank all of those people who took that little extra time in pointing out needs for further education and Searches, commented on
inappropriate posts and dialoged in a mature fashion those issue that might be pivotal to the Board's longevity.
I deeply appreciate you all and wish you a very Happy, Productive, & Learning 2012.
[Edited on 1-1-2012 by quicksilver]hissingnoise - 1-1-2012 at 14:44
That's quite succinctly put QS; and as for me, I'd like to think I respect all ethnic groups equally . . .
DougTheMapper - 1-1-2012 at 15:51
Quicksilver, I couldn't have put it better myself.
Is it better to satisfy the demand of the kewl and provide them with a safe procedure you have put together yourself, or ignore them and let them find
a "recipe" somewhere online and potentially hurt themselves or others?
Many years ago, long before my eventual exposure to sciencemadness, I admit that I could be considered as a "kewl". However, I distinctly remember
that it was not the posts that read, "GTFO dumb kewl, no spoonfeeding!" that prevented me from performing some very dangerous procedures, but the
educated and well-thought out posts which enlightened me further regarding the task at hand.
As I matured, I eventually became much more interested in the chemistry behind the material than the material itself, effectively starting a lifelong
career in chemistry which continues to this day.
Is it ethical to deny anyone this knowledge? It is therefore up to the users who contribute to these forums to steer the inquisitive and immature mind
toward safer shores without turning them off to chemistry altogether with snide comments and other forms of discourtesy, while simultaneously
refraining from providing straightforward and simplistic answers to those too lazy to learn. Unlike other sites whose names would be inappropriate to
mention, sciencemadness.org is by far the most useful online user-based resource available because of this ever-present, unspoken, yet unanimously
upheld doctrine.
I therefore must also tip my hat to those who have provided these valuable contributions over the years, and to you quicksilver for reassuring me that
I was not the only one to think so highly of our members. Here's to another great year of sciencemadness, and many more to come!
Cheers, gentlemen, and thank you.
-DTM
[Edited on 2-1-2012 by DougTheMapper]quicksilver - 2-1-2012 at 11:19
I believe the issues involved in the dissemination of knowledge is a responsibility we all share. The Moderator can only walk a fine line. By this I
suggest we "police our own". The Forum Rules state clearly that "Practical Application" is not an appropriate topic for discussion. However, on a
private level the wide interpretation of this conception of contained energy (from aspects of leverage to energetic chemistry) is ultimately in the
hands of the individual.
Misuse of lasers resulted in their restriction in Australia. In the USA, the Consumer Products Protection Agency threatened several pyrotechnics
oriented supplier with civil & legislative action unless some preventive format of mis-use of chlorate explosives were instituted. In it's
original form, the Feinstein Bill was startlingly close to censorship regarding forums, blogs, & web pages just like this one. Just as I would
encourage the use of protective physical equipment in a lab; I encourage any participating individual to look at ethical behaviour in what they do.
I believe that it is appropriate to look deeper into aspects of responsibility in the study of energetic chemistry and expand that from the individual
into the community at large. This is often where the impact of mis-use finds a foundation toward censorship. Every year we brush closer and closer to
the censorship of certain aspects of science. It is almost an intellectual obligation to pull the reins on a Kewl and persuade him to walk back in the
barn for a cool down. Bot0nist - 2-1-2012 at 11:40
In regards to what I we call kewls. To me it is somebody, usually young, who is seeking recipes or knowledge to impress his peers with a bang. I am
sure they operate with little regard to the safety of themselves or the safety or others. I am sure that there will always be idiots cramming empty
CO<sub>2</sub> cartridges with TATP and cramming fuses in them. Can we stop them. I'm afraid not. The best thing I feel like I can do from
my keyboard is discourage it vehemently, maybe an odd insult to kewls IQ, etc. The info to make TATP is widely avalible, so even if I don't tell him
how to do it, he will likely find out how anyways.
As far as the censorship of the decimation of knowledge, If a user asked me, "Hey, whats the best way to purify my ammonium nitrate fertilizer?", or
"Hey, can you point me to some links on ANFO composition or other means to sensitize ammonium nitrate?" I would likely oblige with little hesitation
or suspicion.\, as this information has proven useful/interesting to me and I am not a criminal (I guess) and have never hurt anyone. Does this make
me responsible if this user happens to commit a mass casualty event in a public area using, in part, the information I gave to him/her? Would
that make me an unethical person?quicksilver - 3-1-2012 at 07:43
In my opinion and as what I would consider logical, the dissemination of knowledge would only be unethical if both parties knew that such a tragedy
were to take place.
In fact this was the major objection to the Feinstein Bill and caused it to be re-written. The knowledgeable party has to be shown to know or be aware
that the knowledge would be abused: a very tough thing to prove! But even the introduction of such a Federal Mandate rubs awfully close to censorship
(in fact, as workable law it's a red herring: used as prosecution garnish).
I believe that people should feel free to discuss energetic materials. The issue becomes complex when the question is so shallow in scope that it's
obvious that ignorance and laziness are expressed through the questioner. To answer such a simplistic question places the knowable person with a
greater responsibility than they should have to cope with.Hennig Brand - 14-1-2012 at 16:55
I think this forum is a wonderful resource. I feel the way that society is going may make it much harder for internet sites like this one to operate
in the future. We are moving closer and closer to it all the time, messages designed to convince us that the moral thing to do is to give up more and
more of our freedoms. I find this to be a very sad thing. I may be different than the typical citizen though, I value personal freedom above almost
all other things. I am not as eager as many to trade personal freedom and things like academic freedom for some "free stuff" or the "illusion of
security". One of the reasons I do engage in the activities I do and participate on this forum is because I feel compelled to exercise my rights lest
they be taken, “use it or lose it" I think often holds true.
Sorry for the tirade. I guess you can tell that I like the forum and hope that it stays around for a long time. Don't get me wrong I think we have
made improvements in society in modern times, but we are doing (or letting it be done to us) an awful lot of very destructive things.
I have a certain understanding of why practical discussion is not promoted in this section of the forum, however I also feel that purely theoretical
discussion will often make it harder to develop a real, full understanding of a topic. Some people seem to be able to digest pure theory and work with
it just fine (and really enjoy it), myself I have always found that a little practical along with the theory really helps my understanding (and
enjoyment) and ties things together mentally in a way that often times the theory never could. You need both I think. Saying that, again, I do have
some understanding as to why it is discouraged in this section of the forum.
[Edited on 15-1-2012 by Hennig Brand]DerAlte - 14-1-2012 at 18:39
The above all seconded and passed unanimously.
Quote:
I also feel that purely theoretical discussion will often make it harder to develop a real, full understanding of a topic
How true! When I was in high school, (over 50 years ago!), all sorts of thengs were made and demonstrated now considered "too dangerous". When my
first son was 'learning' science (he's now 44), he complained that virtually nothing was either demonstrated or done by the students. God knows what
it is like now.
Chemistry virtually demands hands on experience. In the case of my son, I became demonstrator. Very soon he was enamored of the subject and worked on
his own to further his knowledge and later took AP chemistry.
I tried the same with #2 son but all he was interested in was pyrotechnics and energetic stuff. He was a little on the ke3wl side, shall we say. Mind
you, he made the fastest black powder I ever saw, and invented all types of ball mills, etc. However I never let him into the usage of chlorates or Mg
powder, for instance. But chemistry per se never interested him. Then he discovered computers...
So there you have two different mindsets. One must discourage the unwary from foolishness, but the pursuit of knowledge should never be thwarted. One
has to interpret from the post which the mindset is; direct questions regarding 'how do I make X?' where X is either energetic or drug related should
be parried with a 'why do you want to make X?' An illiterate juvenile or ke3wl reply should be offered the threat of Detritus. If the message is not
received, then Detritus it is. The dangers of making X, or the legal consequences, should be emphasized.
Der Altequicksilver - 15-1-2012 at 08:10
One of the most powerful subjects intertwined with ethics in many areas are the issues of age-level at initial exposure. Many people have begun
potentially dangerous activities at a young age: most often with adult supervision. Additionally, some people are more mature than others regardless
of age.
I'm fairly sure I have not brought issues such as age into discussions of "practical use" and related Forum Rules. Many people however DO feel
strongly that below a certain age this material is too temping to employ for someone who has a great deal of youthful curiosity. Yet I have read
material from many age-groups that cross the prescribed Forum Rules. I believe we much each carry our own ethics. This issue could be quite complex.
My point is that, as a group, it's vital to look at the big picture of ethical behavior. If we each retain a kernel of what is ethical practices I
believe we all benefit. I could discuss black-smithing all day long but have no control over any violence an individual does with a implement made
with that same information.
I have a difficult line to tread. To discern was is a knowledge and informational oriented discussion and was would be a discussion of "practical
usage" (which is against Forum Rules) can on occasion be a tough call. In fact I ask all of your help in examining this subject individually. It's
certainly not for me to dictate what your ethics would be. My job is simply to maintain Forum Rules.
On the other hand this particular subject (Energetic Materials) demands some level of reading and studying. To no do so and ask questions that amount
to "spoon-feeding" can frankly be a serious danger as the essence of the subject isn't grasped independently. I don't believe I have personally ever
turned down a PM on issues that to extent are basic; but to move a thread into that territory may dull the possibility of creativity, etc. The
"Practical Use" issue is no less clear cut. While the discussion of synthesis techniques may appear to some as "usage" it is not the same as
end-result design or active utility. Only when a synthesis becomes a "recipe" can much of the science be removed.
Let's say a discussion ranges on aspects of PFX's (binders, plasticizers, tackifiers, whatever) could present many aspects simple container or
portability agenda. However when a discussion of enclosure fragmentation arises, the suggestion of where and how to obtain brittle iron that would
break into fragments could become a problem. Shaped charges are another example. The design and arithmetical concepts surrounding it or means to use
electrolyte-plating to design one are different than methods to conceal, or do harm, etc.
What's more, a thread started with no SEARCHING ("how do I make TATP?") does not add to the Forum. When an individual develops a thread on a subject
that could be answered by a simple Search it must be recognized that person has not done any background reading and ASIDE from desiring a simple
recipe, most likely has done little or no research on the sensitivities & dangers of the material. This would be a problem waiting to happen. IMO
- it's the ethical thing in that type of instance to direct that person to a study source.
I deeply believe that the overwhelming amount of people here are very ethical in how they address this subject. My point is to continue to promote
that and yet not stifle creativity. This is no small task: however I believe it has our individual interests are it's heart.
[Edited on 15-1-2012 by quicksilver]hiperion42 - 19-1-2012 at 02:40
And we must never forget that we are blessed that the
creator did not make sand to be a high explosive substance for if it was
human society would not last a day.hiperion42 - 19-1-2012 at 11:16
Quote:
That is sooo profound hiperion; what do you think of us Terrans, BTW?
P
If you don't mind then i'm going to let the animal community
answer that one.
