Absurdly Driven looks at the world of business with a skeptical eye and a firmly rooted tongue in cheek.
I know I'm supposed to be impressed by NASA.
But honestly, how long is it since we had a man on the moon?
There are people alive today for whom the whole thing is but a rumor. Or, worse, a bad reality TV show.
How odd, then, that so many were aghast when the Golden State Warriors' future legend Stephen Curry seemed to express disbelief that America had ever put a man on the moon.
He appeared on the Winging It podcast and seemed to be flinging science to the nether regions.
My colleague Justin Bariso is impressed with NASA's response. Instead of getting angry and patronizing Curry, it extended an invitation to visit and see all the glorious moon rocks the space agency has amassed.
Of course I understand.
Of course I see the marvelous photo-op for Curry, should he visit NASA during his team's next trip to the basketball backwater of Houston. (Disclosure: Golden State Warriors fan.)
I admire those who still believe in the joys of gentle persuasion.
I revere those who champion the marvels of being reasoned and reasonable in a world beset by prejudice and rancor.
But it's a little dull, isn't it? Ineffective, too.
Our world doesn't pay attention to the dully rational anymore. It wants to shout, scream, accuse, denigrate and denounce.
Indeed, I'm extremely disappointed that President Trump hasn't already come out on Twitter to defend NASA and rename Curry Rocket Man II.
I confess, then, that I'm far more impressed with the response of one of Curry's fellow professionals.
Detroit Pistons forward Blake Griffin took one look at Curry's celestial twaddle of doubt and retorted on Twitter.
i doubt that bill gates has all that money... https://t.co/tCOgGpn9v3-- Blake Griffin (@blakegriffin23) December 11, 2018
A far more modern response, surely.
He didn't quite stoop to call Curry an idiot. He merely mused wryly that he seems to be.
Moreover, he invoked the only thing everyone respects and understands these days: money.
The problem with NASA's response is that it panders to Curry.
It treats his skepticism with respect. It almost begs to be heard and understood. It's a little doting father-to-child, when what's required is a deeply physical, peer-to-peer box-out.
Science has taken a considerable beating of late. It's become the victim of a mob that thinks the pursuit of objective truth annoying and irrelevant, especially when it produces answers that are awkward for the mob.
Frankly, science has been too nice about it. There comes a point where you lose more respect by being nice and still expecting a result.
Ask Stephen Curry. When he was being knocked about on the court, grabbed and scratched to infinity, did he play nice?
No, he put on a little more muscle and played with even more guile. He's not averse to a grab or two himself these days, too.
I have no idea whether Curry was joking or not.
Perhaps he was merely creating controversy because he has a new shoe coming out, from an Under Armour brand that's under considerable financial pressure.
But sometimes when people say silly things, perhaps it's best to gently snort and move right along.
Why give their nonsense more oxygen? NASA has far more important things to deal with.
Preventing an Elon Musk takeover, for example.