Any Engineers out there?

[Johny-too-small]

I think its stretching things to claim that engineers are not creative...

I never said that engineers are not creative. I am emphasizing the point that architects must have both the ability to design and crunch the physics and math. Not just one or the other.
In addition, architects design the mechanic infrastructures of buildings, not engineers.

[Tren Bull]

screw that im in physics

physics owns you enginnering boy

you think so huh?

[stunner5000pt]

you think so huh?

tahts right, bitch

i shouldve take nengineering physics though, more possibilities

so many regrest *sigh*

[Tren Bull]

tahts right, bitch

i shouldve take nengineering physics though, more possibilities

so many regrest *sigh*

who pissed in your cornflakes this morning?

[Tren Bull]

btw stunner, what the hell kind of physics major takes the watered down business versions of physics?

[stunner5000pt]

btw stunner, what the hell kind of physics major takes the watered down business versions of physics?

ahem

currently i am learning how to solve Laplace's and Poisson's equation in 3 d seapartion of variables - Griffith's EM chapter 3 actually

[Tren Bull]

ahem

currently i am learning how to solve Laplace's and Poisson's equation in 3 d seapartion of variables - Griffith's EM chapter 3 actually

congratulations bro, im real proud of you

[stunner5000pt]

congratulations bro, im real proud of you

yea... so what kind of watered down business physics course teaches that ... PUNK

[Tren Bull]

yea... so what kind of watered down business physics course teaches that ... PUNK

whats with all the insults bro?

you just bitter girls wont talk to you?

[stunner5000pt]

whats with all the insults bro?

you just bitter girls wont talk to you?

no... im bitter that you insult my physics course

[Tren Bull]

no... im bitter that you insult my physics course

this is pointless... why are we arguing anyway?

[stunner5000pt]

this is pointless... why are we arguing anyway?

seemed like you were in the mood?

[Tren Bull]

seemed like you were in the mood?

my bad. i think i need to chill.

[stunner5000pt]

my bad. i think i need to chill.

i could use some mood elevators

[Carlos_E]

*Edited*

Your post was reported as offensive. You need to chill and lose the chip on your shoulder unless you want a suspension.

[Tren Bull]

i could use some mood elevators

yea me too...

haha, a few thousand miligrams of testosterone and trenbolone might do the trick

[stunner5000pt]

Your post was reported as offensive. You need to chill and lose the chip on your shoulder unless you want a suspension.

but i thought they call themselves that? at least... all my italian friends are fine with it?

theres no justification for it though

sorry

[Kärnfysikern]

I never said that engineers are not creative. I am emphasizing the point that architects must have both the ability to design and crunch the physics and math. Not just one or the other.
In addition, architects design the mechanic infrastructures of buildings, not engineers.

Well claiming "anyone can be a engineer" and that archites use both hemispheres of the brain(hinting that engineers doesnt) did make it sound like it.

All branches of science and engineering takes creativity.

To claim that a architect is more creative then a engineer is imo like claiming bethoven is more creative than newton. Or picasso more creative than einstein.

[Johny-too-small]

Well claiming "anyone can be a engineer" and that archites use both hemispheres of the brain(hinting that engineers doesnt) did make it sound like it.

All branches of science and engineering takes creativity.

To claim that a architect is more creative then a engineer is imo like claiming bethoven is more creative than newton. Or picasso more creative than einstein.

I disagree. I don’t know any engineers that demand 10% of the construction budget like architects do. If engineers were just as creative then why do I take home 10x more cash?
Additionally, look at the many years of education and fieldwork it takes to become an Architect. Most engineers don’t even go to graduate schools. Architects must. Requirement to be an Architect: Masters in Architecture plus four years of fieldwork under a licensed architect –or- seven years of field work under a licensed Architect. In addition, an every architect must pass an exam to even be allowed to stamp at the end of his/her “education and fieldwork requirements.”
Requirement to be an engineer: B.A. and pass a qualifying exam.

To reiterate my point: Yes, engineers are creative. However they lack the ability to conceptually design otherwise there would be no need for an architect and an engineer. Everyone knows that architects make more money in a project than the engineers. Engineers must have the conceptual design laid out before they can begin their work.

In other words, in a construction project that involves both an architect and an engineer, the architect can complete the project without requiring the services of an engineer because the architect knows how to engineer as well. However, the engineer cannot complete a project without the architect. Again, they can’t even begin.

Why is it that the architect is always well known on any construction project and makes more cash as well? I can tell you quickly who the architect of the project that is replacing the twin towers is. In fact, 70% of the people who live in Manhattan could. Could they tell you who the engineer(s) are? No.

I’m more interested in $$$$$$. If engineers brought it home than I'd be an engineer. Boring and tedious as it would be.

[needmorestrength]

I disagree. I don’t know any engineers that demand 10% of the construction budget like architects do. If engineers were just as creative then why do I take home 10x more cash?
Additionally, look at the many years of education and fieldwork it takes to become an Architect. Most engineers don’t even go to graduate schools. Architects must. Requirement to be an Architect: Masters in Architecture plus four years of fieldwork under a licensed architect –or- seven years of field work under a licensed Architect. In addition, an every architect must pass an exam to even be allowed to stamp at the end of his/her “education and fieldwork requirements.”
Requirement to be an engineer: B.A. and pass a qualifying exam.

To reiterate my point: Yes, engineers are creative. However they lack the ability to conceptually design otherwise there would be no need for an architect and an engineer. Everyone knows that architects make more money in a project than the engineers. Engineers must have the conceptual design laid out before they can begin their work.

In other words, in a construction project that involves both an architect and an engineer, the architect can complete the project without requiring the services of an engineer because the architect knows how to engineer as well. However, the engineer cannot complete a project without the architect. Again, they can’t even begin.

Why is it that the architect is always well known on any construction project and makes more cash as well? I can tell you quickly who the architect of the project that is replacing the twin towers is. In fact, 70% of the people who live in Manhattan could. Could they tell you who the engineer(s) are? No.

I’m more interested in $$$$$$. If engineers brought it home than I'd be an engineer. Boring and tedious as it would be.

The company I worked with in the summer.. The one guy, had just bought a 5 million dollar property.. Someone who can spend that on property is surely bringing in the $$$$! Give it 5 years, we are essentially entering an energy crisis, and mechanical engineers ( and the likes) will be in more demand then ever to lower energy usage and improve efficiency while using energy alternatives.. I dont know who the architect of the twin towers is, but im sure lots of people do as that is a huge task.. But lots of people also know that Niel Armstrong was an engineer, Jimmy Carter, Thomas Edison, hell Leanardo Da Vinci was both an engineer and architect!!
On that note, I understand what you are saying.. The architect for the most part, designs the whole building and of course he will get paid more.. However I have never ever known an engineer to have only one job on the go, they have sometimes 10-20!! Im not sure about Architects but it seems like they would have one major job on the go, and stick with that till its completed?

[needmorestrength]

I disagree. I don’t know any engineers that demand 10% of the construction budget like architects do. If engineers were just as creative then why do I take home 10x more cash?
Additionally, look at the many years of education and fieldwork it takes to become an Architect. Most engineers don’t even go to graduate schools. Architects must. Requirement to be an Architect: Masters in Architecture plus four years of fieldwork under a licensed architect –or- seven years of field work under a licensed Architect. In addition, an every architect must pass an exam to even be allowed to stamp at the end of his/her “education and fieldwork requirements.”
Requirement to be an engineer: B.A. and pass a qualifying exam.

To reiterate my point: Yes, engineers are creative. However they lack the ability to conceptually design otherwise there would be no need for an architect and an engineer. Everyone knows that architects make more money in a project than the engineers. Engineers must have the conceptual design laid out before they can begin their work.

In other words, in a construction project that involves both an architect and an engineer, the architect can complete the project without requiring the services of an engineer because the architect knows how to engineer as well. However, the engineer cannot complete a project without the architect. Again, they can’t even begin.

Why is it that the architect is always well known on any construction project and makes more cash as well? I can tell you quickly who the architect of the project that is replacing the twin towers is. In fact, 70% of the people who live in Manhattan could. Could they tell you who the engineer(s) are? No.

I’m more interested in $$$$$$. If engineers brought it home than I'd be an engineer. Boring and tedious as it would be.

Oh and for the record, most engineers here do a masters and become a P.Eng

[dan991]

I disagree. I don’t know any engineers that demand 10% of the construction budget like architects do. If engineers were just as creative then why do I take home 10x more cash?
Additionally, look at the many years of education and fieldwork it takes to become an Architect. Most engineers don’t even go to graduate schools. Architects must. Requirement to be an Architect: Masters in Architecture plus four years of fieldwork under a licensed architect –or- seven years of field work under a licensed Architect. In addition, an every architect must pass an exam to even be allowed to stamp at the end of his/her “education and fieldwork requirements.”
Requirement to be an engineer: B.A. and pass a qualifying exam.

To reiterate my point: Yes, engineers are creative. However they lack the ability to conceptually design otherwise there would be no need for an architect and an engineer. Everyone knows that architects make more money in a project than the engineers. Engineers must have the conceptual design laid out before they can begin their work.

In other words, in a construction project that involves both an architect and an engineer, the architect can complete the project without requiring the services of an engineer because the architect knows how to engineer as well. However, the engineer cannot complete a project without the architect. Again, they can’t even begin.

Why is it that the architect is always well known on any construction project and makes more cash as well? I can tell you quickly who the architect of the project that is replacing the twin towers is. In fact, 70% of the people who live in Manhattan could. Could they tell you who the engineer(s) are? No.

I’m more interested in $$$$$$. If engineers brought it home than I'd be an engineer. Boring and tedious as it would be.

We're just talking Mechanical and Structural Engineers here right?

I'm an electrical engineer and it requires a lot more than a BS and an exam. Infact, most larger corporations look for PE's and give them preference, which really requires the same type of thing your talking about in regards to architects.....

[needmorestrength]

We're just talking Mechanical and Structural Engineers here right?

I'm an electrical engineer and it requires a lot more than a BS and an exam. Infact, most larger corporations look for PE's and give them preference, which really requires the same type of thing your talking about in regards to architects.....

Well im on my way to being a P.eng and it requires a 4 year degree, masters, then a big exam

[Johny-too-small]

JEEEEEEEZZE!!!

Fine, you engineers are just as "god's gift to creativity."

By the way, I typically have three to four projects going at once personally. Here was my last job's payout ratio for a 7,000 sq. ft. custom house:

Me (architect): $31,500
Structural Engineer: $1,500

[Kärnfysikern]

I disagree. I don’t know any engineers that demand 10% of the construction budget like architects do. If engineers were just as creative then why do I take home 10x more cash?
Additionally, look at the many years of education and fieldwork it takes to become an Architect. Most engineers don’t even go to graduate schools. Architects must. Requirement to be an Architect: Masters in Architecture plus four years of fieldwork under a licensed architect –or- seven years of field work under a licensed Architect. In addition, an every architect must pass an exam to even be allowed to stamp at the end of his/her “education and fieldwork requirements.”
Requirement to be an engineer: B.A. and pass a qualifying exam.

You seem to be very narrow about just structural engineers.

Was it architects or engineers that developed semi conductors and therefore made everything around us today possible? Are there any architects working on nasa to develop rocket propulsion, are there any architects involved in plasma containment fields in the fusion projects, are there any architects involved in designing nuclear reactor cores, ect ect ect ect.

The ammount on the pay check is not correlated to the degree of creativity. If that was the case I guess Einstein was stupid as a brick because he sure wasnt a millionair.

To reiterate my point: Yes, engineers are creative. However they lack the ability to conceptually design otherwise there would be no need for an architect and an engineer. Everyone knows that architects make more money in a project than the engineers. Engineers must have the conceptual design laid out before they can begin their work.

Architects lack the ability to design new and clever engines, they lack the ability to create new software, they lack the ability to find new semiconductor materials, they lack the ability to conduct nanotechnology research.

Once again engineers are just as creative as architects.

In other words, in a construction project that involves both an architect and an engineer, the architect can complete the project without requiring the services of an engineer because the architect knows how to engineer as well. However, the engineer cannot complete a project without the architect. Again, they can’t even begin.

So?? There are plenty of projects that engineers do without asking a architect and there is plenty of projects where both are needed. I bet my ass that in any big construction like a dam, bridge ect the more detailt physics knoweledge that engineers generaly posess is needed.

Why is it that the architect is always well known on any construction project and makes more cash as well? I can tell you quickly who the architect of the project that is replacing the twin towers is. In fact, 70% of the people who live in Manhattan could. Could they tell you who the engineer(s) are? No.

Well I am much more familiar with engineers like Von Braun, Graham bell, Edison, Alfred Nobel, Nikola Tesla, Faraday ect than I am about any architect.

I’m more interested in $$$$$$. If engineers brought it home than I'd be an engineer. Boring and tedious as it would be.

Well Im sure most engineers would find architecture just as boring as you would find engineering.

I am not a engineer btw, but you need a reality check about the importance of architects vs engineers.

[needmorestrength]

You seem to be very narrow about just structural engineers.

Was it architects or engineers that developed semi conductors and therefore made everything around us today possible? Are there any architects working on nasa to develop rocket propulsion, are there any architects involved in plasma containment fields in the fusion projects, are there any architects involved in designing nuclear reactor cores, ect ect ect ect.

The ammount on the pay check is not correlated to the degree of creativity. If that was the case I guess Einstein was stupid as a brick because he sure wasnt a millionair.



Architects lack the ability to design new and clever engines, they lack the ability to create new software, they lack the ability to find new semiconductor materials, they lack the ability to conduct nanotechnology research.

Once again engineers are just as creative as architects.



So?? There are plenty of projects that engineers do without asking a architect and there is plenty of projects where both are needed. I bet my ass that in any big construction like a dam, bridge ect the more detailt physics knoweledge that engineers generaly posess is needed.



Well I am much more familiar with engineers like Von Braun, Graham bell, Edison, Alfred Nobel, Nikola Tesla, Faraday ect than I am about any architect.



Well Im sure most engineers would find architecture just as boring as you would find engineering.

I am not a engineer btw, but you need a reality check about the importance of architects vs engineers.

In the words of Kelso.... "Aaaaa Burn" LOL

[Haro3]

Johan...your my idol lol. where you studyin at?

[Tren Bull]

I disagree. I don’t know any engineers that demand 10% of the construction budget like architects do. If engineers were just as creative then why do I take home 10x more cash?

10 times more cash than an engineer?

haha yea right bro. im gonna have to call bullsh_t on this one

[Tren Bull]

JEEEEEEEZZE!!!

Fine, you engineers are just as "god's gift to creativity."

you're damn right we are.

[Kärnfysikern]

Johan...your my idol lol. where you studyin at?

Im studying physics at a swedish university. We are not to many physics students so I wont mention what university just for paranoia reasons

[Johny-too-small]

Was it architects or engineers that developed semi conductors and therefore made everything around us today possible?

What? So, what was before semi-conductors? I guess we were all single-cell organisms waiting to evolve into the state we are in now with the invention of semi-conductors. Must I remind you that one of man's innate primal needs has always been shelter? You know along those other basics like food and clothing...
So, you have yourself in a corner with this one. It was architects (primal as they were a million years ago) that made everything around us possible today. Without shelter, your semi-conductors could not have been developed with any type of precision or purity.

Are there any architects working on nasa to develop rocket propulsion, are there any architects involved in plasma containment fields in the fusion projects, are there any architects involved in designing nuclear reactor cores, ect ect ect ect.

Once again this brings up the "what is more important" question. Although, architects may not be involved in the finite details of rocket propulsion. Had it not been for an architect to design the condo where the engineer lives he would have not survived that -30 degree snow storm that came in the night before and he would have not been able to develop fusion in the middle of a dirt patch had it not been for an architect to design an advanced facility for the engineer to do his work.

The ammount on the pay check is not correlated to the degree of creativity. If that was the case I guess Einstein was stupid as a brick because he sure wasnt a millionair.

I agree. Some of the worlds greatest artist were starving their whole lives. However, artist like Steven Spielberg isnt having a tough time paying the bills. Your point, however, taken.

Architects lack the ability to design new and clever engines, they lack the ability to create new software, they lack the ability to find new semiconductor materials, they lack the ability to conduct nanotechnology research.

Unfounded generalization. Can you prove this? This may not be an area of expertise for an architect, but one thing is certain: People dont hold nanotechnology and new software as part of who they are, where they came from, and their rich history and traditions.
Did an engineer build the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington D.C? Did an engineer build the Roman Coliseum in Rome? Did an engineer build the Courthouses and schools that our nation was built upon? Did an engineer build the house that your father lives in so that he can rest, eat and go to work building your Nintendo games that we so desperately need? I know that Americans hold dearly to national icons such as the late World Trade Center and the Pentagon much more than a rocket or a fusion.

Once again engineers are just as creative as architects.

I agree to a point. However, as important historically and philosophically? No. Without basic shelter, were dead. Period. No chance or reason to develop nuclear reactors.

So?? There are plenty of projects that engineers do without asking a architect and there is plenty of projects where both are needed. I bet my ass that in any big construction like a dam, bridge ect the more detailt physics knoweledge that engineers generaly posess is needed.

Again, what comes first? A building to engineer in. You need fire to cook a steak.
More engineers needed for a big dam or whatever? Perhaps. But as I stated before, architects must know how to engineer structurally so this point is mute.

Well I am much more familiar with engineers like Von Braun, Graham bell, Edison, Alfred Nobel, Nikola Tesla, Faraday ect than I am about any architect.

Im proud of you. However, you have never heard of Frank Lloyd Wright?

Well Im sure most engineers would find architecture just as boring as you would find engineering.

That’s what makes us unique human beings!

I am not a engineer btw, but you need a reality check about the importance of architects vs engineers.

Well if semi-conductors are more important than having a roof over my head, than I am living a reality that I'll stay in!

[Johny-too-small]

10 times more cash than an engineer?

haha yea right bro. im gonna have to call bullsh_t on this one

Really? You're 23 years old, son. I didnt realize you had so much experience. I listed my proof, where is yours? And dont give me your dad's armchair opinion.

[Johny-too-small]

you're damn right we are.

Great touch. You claim to be an engineer and this is the comment you choose to respond to?

Johan did all the arguing for you and he's not even an engineer.
You may want to go back to whatever school you went to and ask for a refund cause you robbed.

[Kärnfysikern]

What? So, what was before semi-conductors? I guess we were all single-cell organisms waiting to evolve into the state we are in now with the invention of semi-conductors. Must I remind you that one of man's innate primal needs has always been shelter? You know along those other basics like food and clothing...
So, you have yourself in a corner with this one. It was architects (primal as they were a million years ago) that made everything around us possible today. Without shelter, your semi-conductors could not have been developed with any type of precision or purity.

Well I guess if you mean carpenters are architects?? I can build a primitive shelter but I wouldnt call myself a architect I dont think the pioneers that settled in america and built homes considered themself architects...

[
Once again this brings up the "what is more important" question. Although, architects may not be involved in the finite details of rocket propulsion. Had it not been for an architect to design the condo where the engineer lives he would have not survived that -30 degree snow storm that came in the night before and he would have not been able to develop fusion in the middle of a dirt patch had it not been for an architect to design an advanced facility for the engineer to do his work.

Not realy....It doesnt take a architect to build a home, but it takes a engineer or scientists to design a fusion containment field...

Plenty of high level research has been done in simple hangars. No architects needed there. Any engineer can design a simple hangar. I dont think many of the buildings used in the manhattan project for instance was explicitly designed by architects.

Unfounded generalization. Can you prove this? This may not be an area of expertise for an architect, but one thing is certain: People dont hold nanotechnology and new software as part of who they are, where they came from, and their rich history and traditions.

Not a unfounded generalization. Tell me one architect that has recivied a nobel prize...What I am doing is what you are doing towards engineers. Im sure there are architects that also have scientific educations just as I am sure that there are engineers that have studied as architects.

You are trying to claim architects are always more important than engineers.

I sure do hope the english people hold Newton in higher regard than any structure and as a swede I surely hold Nobel in higher regard than any structure we might have...I dont care who designe and built our churches, goverment buildings ect. It didnt progress humanity to new levels like railroads, cars, telephones, computers ect have.

Did an engineer build the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington D.C? Did an engineer build the Roman Coliseum in Rome? Did an engineer build the Courthouses and schools that our nation was built upon? Did an engineer build the house that your father lives in so that he can rest, eat and go to work building your Nintendo games that we so desperately need? I know that Americans hold dearly to national icons such as the late World Trade Center and the Pentagon much more than a rocket or a fusion.

Well turn of all the power plants and Im sure they will realise what is most important. The vietnam memorial or all the powerplants... Both have its place, but one is absolutely vital for the survival of modern society.

The house I grew up in surely wasnt build by a architect just a team of carpenters....

[
I agree to a point. However, as important historically and philosophically? No. Without basic shelter, were dead. Period. No chance or reason to develop nuclear reactors.

Electricity and power production in general is more important historicaly since the taming and utilisation of first steam and then electricity lead to the biggest revolution in human history. Nothing in human history comes close to the industrial and scientific revolution. Roman empire ect. It all is miniscule compared to the importance of the industrial revolution.

When it comes to creativity it takes the same ammount of creativity to design a high performance car engine as in designing a skyscraper. But offcourse no one cares about the engine beeing astheticly pleasing.
A good architect should offcourse be a better artist than a engineer. But I think its a bit shallow to consider creativity the realm of arts alone.

[
Again, what comes first? A building to engineer in. You need fire to cook a steak.
More engineers needed for a big dam or whatever? Perhaps. But as I stated before, architects must know how to engineer structurally so this point is mute.

What I am saying is that most probably a architect can not design such a complex structure without help from those with a deeper knoweledge in physics. offcourse also probably chemists, physcisits and a team of other scientists.
So you can not say that a architect is more important than the engineer. Im sure a team of engineers can build a dam or a bridge without the assistance of a architect however. The architect gets called in if someone wants the thing to be pleasing to the eye.

[
Im proud of you. However, you have never heard of Frank Lloyd Wright?

Wright? You mean as one of the brothers Wright?? Otherwise I cant say I have....

[
Well if semi-conductors are more important than having a roof over my head, than I am living a reality that I'll stay in!

Just about anyone can build a home. Sure it takes a talented architect to build a big and nice looking structure. But the roof over my head issue was covered way before architect educations got started.

I would consider the semi conductor more important than having a astheticly pleasing building to live in.

Im not trying to piss on architects. What I am simply saying is that engineers have had MUCH bigger impact on todays world. This isnt a subjective view. It is simply the truth.

Tell me one architect that has had the same impact on the development of modern society as edison, ford, tesla or nobel....

But to realy make this clear. I think architects are important and surely needed, I belive most of them are probably creative. But on avarage more creative than a engineer? I doubt it. They just have a knack for creativity in a completely different field. Nothing better or worse about that.

[Kärnfysikern]

and I can se this might turn heated so everyone just chill before that happens

Arguing about what is more important is rather silly in the end. I just started because I reacted to the condescending comment towards engineers

[needmorestrength]

[QUOTE=Johny-too-small
[B]Once again this brings up the "what is more important" question. Although, architects may not be involved in the finite details of rocket propulsion. Had it not been for an architect to design the condo where the engineer lives he would have not survived that -30 degree snow storm that came in the night before and he would have not been able to develop fusion in the middle of a dirt patch had it not been for an architect to design an advanced facility for the engineer to do his work.[/B]


Right you built the walls and roof.. Did an architect engineer the climate system, in accordance with resistance on walls and windows and insulation? Did an architect electrically engineer the security system??
Also you say without shelter we're dead, and your bringing into play classic and historical buildings and statues.... Yes your right we need shelter, and yes many people appreciate classic monuments etc...
But without engineers, that heart monitor might not have saved your fathers life, or the defibulator that an electrical engineer desinged would not be on the walls at school which just saved a kids life! You see every occupation has its benefits, downfalls, glorifications if you will, and simple, there are some people that will find one occupation much more appealing and regard it as such!

[Kärnfysikern]

You see every occupation has its benefits, downfalls, glorifications if you will, and simple, there are some people that will find one occupation much more appealing and regard it as such!

[xlxBigSexyxlx]

Ya, this is rather pointless to argue about and kill each other.

We need better arguments...like....is Michael Jackson black or white?

[Johny-too-small]

and I can se this might turn heated so everyone just chill before that happens

Arguing about what is more important is rather silly in the end. I just started because I reacted to the condescending comment towards engineers

Yes, I agree with you. In addition, I understand, respect, and realize many of the points you have made. Do I see it the way you do (importance, architects are needed for aesthetics purposes only, etc.)? No.
Youre right those building shacks over heads my not be architects, but they are using the science of architecture to do what they did.
I may have been condescending, however, it was in reponse to a statement that I found condescending.

All in all, it comes down to a tug of war of opinion and fact. I am going to stop before it get personal, as I have started to do.

[needmorestrength]

Yes, I agree with you. In addition, I understand, respect, and realize many of the points you have made. Do I see it the way you do (importance, architects are needed for aesthetics purposes only, etc.)? No.
Youre right those building shacks over heads my not be architects, but they are using the science of architecture to do what they did.
I may have been condescending, however, it was in reponse to a statement that I found condescending.

All in all, it comes down to a tug of war of opinion and fact. I am going to stop before it get personal, as I have started to do.

You are an architect because you love it, it brings in good money and requires brain power... I feel the same way about engineering.. Oh and just a random point.. There are always the 2 outta 10 people that bring in a hell of a lot more then the other 8 in the field!!