Comments on: Debate update — Nanotechnology: Radical new science or plus ca change http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=2042 examining transformative technology Wed, 03 Apr 2013 18:23:47 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4 By: Philip Moriarty http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=2042#comment-20647 Philip Moriarty Sat, 24 Jun 2006 21:29:27 +0000 http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=2042#comment-20647 At long last, streaming video footage of the Nottingham Nanotechnology debate is now available (via Google Video) here . Best wishes, Philip At long last, streaming video footage of the Nottingham Nanotechnology debate is now available (via Google Video) here .

Best wishes,

Philip

]]> By: Philip Moriarty http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=2042#comment-7430 Philip Moriarty Sun, 08 Jan 2006 12:54:19 +0000 http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=2042#comment-7430 Christine, The debate has now been transcribed and will be published in the next issue of "Nanotechnology Perceptions". Both the transcription and the video footage have taken rather longer to sort out than was first imagined. In the next issue of "Nanotechnology Perceptions" (i.e. that following the issue in which the transcript of the debate will be published), I will comment in detail on the very many scientific questions and issues raised during the debate. On your "why was the anti-MNT debater allowed to speak four times as long to make his case?", could I please bring your attention to the following timings of the introductory presentations by each of the speakers. 04:40 – 15:28: Richard Jones 15:40 – 21:40: John Storrs-Hall 21:50 – 31:15: Jack Stilgoe 31:20 – 40:20: David Forrest 41:09 – 47:57: Saul Tendler (I was required to provide these timings to the editors of "Nanotechnology Perceptions" to facilitate the transcription process). As you can see, Richard's presentation runs to a little until 11 minutes and Saul's to a little under 7 minutes. Josh's intro was 6 minutes long whereas David's ran to 9 minutes. Best wishes, Philip Christine,

The debate has now been transcribed and will be published in the next issue of “Nanotechnology Perceptions”. Both the transcription and the video footage have taken rather longer to sort out than was first imagined. In the next issue of “Nanotechnology Perceptions” (i.e. that following the issue in which the transcript of the debate will be published), I will comment in detail on the very many scientific questions and issues raised during the debate.

On your “why was the anti-MNT debater allowed to speak four times as long to make his case?”, could I please bring your attention to the following timings of the introductory presentations by each of the speakers.

04:40 – 15:28: Richard Jones
15:40 – 21:40: John Storrs-Hall
21:50 – 31:15: Jack Stilgoe
31:20 – 40:20: David Forrest
41:09 – 47:57: Saul Tendler

(I was required to provide these timings to the editors of “Nanotechnology Perceptions” to facilitate the transcription process). As you can see, Richard’s presentation runs to a little until 11 minutes and Saul’s to a little under 7 minutes. Josh’s intro was 6 minutes long whereas David’s ran to 9 minutes.

Best wishes,

Philip

]]> By: David Forrest http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=2042#comment-7135 David Forrest Sat, 22 Oct 2005 20:37:21 +0000 http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=2042#comment-7135 Although I didn't always agree with our soft machines protagonist, I did find it refreshing to be on the same side of the fence in terms of agreeing that molecular manufacturing is possible. All realistic approaches to achieve the goal of developing productive nanosystems should be encouraged. My post-debate comments can be found at http://davidrforrest.com/pub/forrest_debate_points.html Although I didn’t always agree with our soft machines protagonist, I did find it refreshing to be on the same side of the fence in terms of agreeing that molecular manufacturing is possible. All realistic approaches to achieve the goal of developing productive nanosystems should be encouraged. My post-debate comments can be found at http://davidrforrest.com/pub/forrest_debate_points.html

]]>