| Dexter345 677 posts
09-05-03 17:33 Reply | I don't quite see the connection...
-Dexter345- |
| Barrett 385 posts
09-05-03 20:03 Reply | i'm building a trebuchet that will be able to launch a soccer and/or football over 200 yards. rocks, of course will be able to go farther because of the extra momentum, but that's a little dangerous. |
| Michael Vincent 531 posts
09-05-03 22:09 Reply | It's the art of conquering the world of course.
After I do it, I will reduce it to a science. |
| Dexter345 677 posts
09-15-03 22:54 Reply | Is that implying that the sciences are at a lower level than the arts? If that's the case, then I'm gonna have to disagree.
-Dexter345- |
| Barrett 385 posts
09-15-03 22:56 Reply | No. Art is creative. Science is not.
of course you can use art in science, and science in art, so don't complain about my definition. |
| Dr. NO 522 posts
10-04-03 08:23 Reply | With the sort of equations that my physics teacher pulls from her hat, I'd say she's better at creativity than Van Goh/Gogh/Goph(Gah!!!) |
| Xathien 1255 posts
10-04-03 09:40 Reply | Van de KampGopher. It's a good compromise. |
| Dr. NO 522 posts
02-07-04 08:29 Reply | Quite. |