What do you object to about science?

[PhineasJWhoopee]

First off, what do you mean by poiticization? And secondly, do you even know what you're objecting?

I'm a Principal Scientist at a large corporation. I know a little bit about science.

 

[sandorski]

I object to being told I'm the descendant of a monkey. I object to being told that the world was created by accident. I object to being told that all followers of Christ are weak minded, uneducated lemmings. I object to some scientists being elitist, pompous a$$hats.

That's it for now.

Scientists, somewhere, are working hard on the Tiniest Violin just for you.

 

[Ruptga]

I object to being told I'm the descendant of a monkey. I object to being told that the world was created by accident. I object to being told that all followers of Christ are weak minded, uneducated lemmings. I object to some scientists being elitist, pompous a$$hats.

That's it for now.

You object to all of those things because you don't like them. Reality is determined by what is, not by what is liked. I mean, you can say it's not fair or that it's unpleasant but that doesn't have anything to do with whether it's wrong, right, or some mixture of the two.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Yes math is a science.

If math is a science, then Spanish is a science.

You could split hairs and say otherwise. Most people would say "well if you bend the definition enough you could say either way"

Most people are morons.

trying to act as if the answer is as definitive as 2+2 is fucking childish.

But the answer is simple, and you are wrong.

Yes I am avoiding a dumbass flaming slugfest with you. It would be a complete waste of time.

Trying to defend indefensible claims is usually a waste of time.

 

[Train]

For something like religion, positive claims require positive evidence. If someone says there is a God, that someone needs to show evidence..

No they don't. In fact, thats exactly what a hypothesis is.

Sure you can say this hypothesis of a God has never been PROVEN, so can never be fact. And since you can't disprove it either, the hypothesis/theory of a God is entirely legal in the scientific sense.

And you can't tell someone they cant make such a hypothesis to begin with. That would be so.... unscientific.

The entire hadron collider project was built to attempt to prove/disprove hypotheses

 

[Train]

If math is a science, then Spanish is a science.


Most people are morons.


But the answer is simple, and you are wrong.



Trying to defend indefensible claims is usually a waste of time.

You have not made a single assertion to support your point that math is not a science. You have only made arrogant ass comments.

 

[sandorski]

No they don't. In fact, thats exactly what a hypothesis is.

Sure you can say this hypothesis of a God has never been PROVEN, so can never be fact. And since you can't disprove it either, the hypothesis/theory(can't be THeory) of a God is entirely legal in the scientific sense.

And you can't tell someone they cant make such a hypothesis to begin with. That would be so.... unscientific.

The entire hadron collider project was built to attempt to prove/disprove hypotheses

"Legal"? Ok, sure, but as that it is also entirely useless because it can't go beyond a simple musing.

 

[Train]

"Legal"? Ok, sure, but as that it is also entirely useless because it can't go beyond a simple musing.

Whatever makes you feel better.

 

[sandorski]

Whatever makes you feel better.

You're conflating some many Terms at once you clearly have no idea what you are discussing. Proven/Fact/Hypothesis/Theory, learn about these words, then get back to us.

 

[Ruptga]

"Legal"? Ok, sure, but as that it is also entirely useless because it can't go beyond a simple musing.

He's exactly right. Any claim that can't be tested is a pointless claim. To quote a famous example: I have an invisible pink unicorn in my garage.

"It is common when discussing the Invisible Pink Unicorn to point out that because she is invisible, no one can prove that she does not exist (or indeed that she is not pink)."



Yes, you can believe whatever you want, especially if it can't be disproven. However, if it can't be proven then there's no reason you should believe it either. You can if you want to, but it's irrational.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

You have not made a single assertion to support your point that math is not a science.

That's easy. Mathematics is a language -- a formal one, at that. With mathematics we formulate statements with proper symbology and syntax to communicate ideas. Science is a method of systematic inductive reasoning based on observation and testation of hypotheses. Very clearly they are not the same.

The funny thing is that it was originally me taking you to task for making the silly claim that math was a science, and here you are shifting the burden onto me to supply a demonstration of the contrary. You were asked to supply support for your claim much earlier, but refused.

Obviously, then, you're not only wrong and stupid, you're a hypocrite. Congrats.

You have only made arrogant ass comments.

I get to be arrogant, because I'm right.

 

[Train]

You're conflating some many Terms at once you clearly have no idea what you are discussing. Proven/Fact/Hypothesis/Theory, learn about these words, then get back to us.

In science, a theory is an explanation that generally is accepted to be true. Yes, it can be defined as a theory, just because you arent part of the generally accepting, doesn't refute that it's a theory.

 

[HumblePie]

Where's my fucking flying car already!!!

 

[sandorski]

In science, a theory is an explanation that generally is accepted to be true. Yes, it can be defined as a theory, just because you arent part of the generally accepting, doesn't refute that it's a theory.

erm, I'm not even sure what you're trying to say here. Earlier you mentioned that "God" could not be Proven or Disproven and the Claim of "God" was somewhat equivalent to a Scientific Postulation. You did more than just that though, by suggesting that Postulation and Theory were somewhat interchangeable. The problem with that is that they are not interchangeable. A Theory has Facts and Evidence to back it up, where a Postulation is merely a Suggestion given for further Experiment/Investigation. "God" is not even close to a Theory, it is a mere Postulation that many have simply accepted as True for millenia.

 

[ShawnD1]

No they don't. In fact, thats exactly what a hypothesis is.

Sure you can say this hypothesis of a God has never been PROVEN, so can never be fact. And since you can't disprove it either, the hypothesis/theory of a God is entirely legal in the scientific sense.

A hypothesis is considered wrong until it is proven to be correct. My hypothesis is that I can fly if I think about it hard enough. I can't prove that it's right since it hasn't happened yet, and I can't prove it wrong because the hypothesis states that I'm just not trying hard enough. As it stands, the hypothesis that I can fly is considered wrong until I can show otherwise.

If you go around claiming there is some place somewhere called hell, we can only assume it's wrong until you prove it exists. Nobody will say it's proven wrong since that's not proven either, but it's assumed wrong until you can show evidence.

In science, a theory is an explanation that generally is accepted to be true. Yes, it can be defined as a theory, just because you arent part of the generally accepting, doesn't refute that it's a theory.

It's also worth noting that conflicting theories can both be accepted as correct as long as there is a valid reason to believe each one. Example: plate tectonics explains a lot about the earth. A different theory is about an expanding earth. We have reason to believe in plates because that actually seems to be true, there really are physical plates that slam into each other and cause tsunamis. There's also reason to believe in an expanding earth because when scaled down, the continents fit together really really well. Both have evidence, both might be correct, both might be wrong, both are good theories.

 

[NinjaTech]

You are told this one because it's statistically true. Religiosity and intelligence have a fairly good correlation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religiosity_and_intelligence


Basically the answer is that smart people don't try to draw conclusions until they have enough evidence.

For something like religion, positive claims require positive evidence. If someone says there is a god, that someone needs to show evidence. The default answer is atheism until more evidence is shown.

Other intelligent people might believe there is some kind of god, but try to avoid making any solid claims about that god such as how many gods, things they did, how important their role in life is, etc; there are lots of people who are religious but still think for themselves.

People who are profoundly retarded go all the way to the end of the spectrum. They will have absolutely unshakable belief with absolutely no evidence. They will make claims about what god wants or things god has done even though they have no evidence. They will start wars over religion and they will die for religion. Stupid people don't need evidence. All you need to tell a stupid person is that blowing yourself up means you go straight to heaven, and they'll actually do it.

Hmmm ... a study done by scientists to prove how much smarter they are than those religious crackpots. Bias??? Absurd! *sarcasm*

In all fairness, I do believe some religious people are crackpots. However, I think they were crackpots before they started believing in God.

I disagree with having no evidence for believing in God. I have all the evidence I need just experiencing first hand the amazing things that God has done in my own life and those of others. I could list events and times. I could provide eyewitness accounts. I could provide a list of historical data through the centuries that would fill up a room. Sadly enough, I doubt you would believe any of it. You need to experience God first hand and one of the first steps to experiencing God is prayer.

I'm a fool for Jesus, who's fool are you?

You object to all of those things because you don't like them. Reality is determined by what is, not by what is liked. I mean, you can say it's not fair or that it's unpleasant but that doesn't have anything to do with whether it's wrong, right, or some mixture of the two.

Actually, I think you are the person who's sense of reality is skewed. The reason I object to the things I posted is because I believe they are inane and stupid. There are no other reasons.

 

[NinjaTech]

Where's my fucking flying car already!!!

I'll give you your flying car. I'll park it up your asphalt.

 

[Ruptga]

1. Why did you bump this waste of a thread?

2. You just said exactly what I said, except you seem to think that's a good thing. You don't say you have reasons that they are stupid, you just say they are and that's good enough. The point is that's not good enough if you even have a shred of intellectual integrity.

Do you get it yet? You have a habit of just saying things without backing them up at all. While that will take you far as a politician you will never be able to convince anyone that thinks because it will always come down to "you: yeah huh, them: nuh uh, you: yeah huh, them: nuh uh."

 

[NinjaTech]

1. Why did you bump this waste of a thread?

2. You just said exactly what I said, except you seem to think that's a good thing. You don't say you have reasons that they are stupid, you just say they are and that's good enough. The point is that's not good enough if you even have a shred of intellectual integrity.

Do you get it yet? You have a habit of just saying things without backing them up at all. While that will take you far as a politician you will never be able to convince anyone that thinks because it will always come down to "you: yeah huh, them: nuh uh, you: yeah huh, them: nuh uh."

My reasons are not stupid just beyond your simple mind. You see the world through a microscope when there is a much bigger world around you. My intention is not to convince you because only God himself can convince you of his existence. My intention is just to make you think and reason beyond your own limited understanding of the world. You imply that your intelligence is much greater than my own and yet you are unable to reason beyond what your own senses perceive. The greatest minds in existence all had one quality in common. That quality was that they all were able to see beyond what other people accepted as fact. So the question is whether or not you get it yet?

 

[Nik]

what do I hate about science? Why, I'll TELL you what I hate about science. Science spawns these impossible ilk that, you know, want proof for everything I claim. These assholes actually expect evidence to back up a claim?! PREPOSTEROUS. Everyone knows the Bible is absolutely irrefutable, so why do they even try?

They even have the balls to invent these infernal contraptions to disprove the bible! I'm not sure how all the machines work, but they do stuff like prove an item's age based on well-documented and ever-better-evolving methods.

How the hell am I supposed to brainwash the weak minded so they'll follow every command I say this book says? How the hell am I supposed to get them to give me all their money so I don't have to go get a real job?

I'm tellin ya, this stupid science thing is ruining my day.

 

[Jeff7]

My reasons are not stupid just beyond your simple mind. You see the world through a microscope when there is a much bigger world around you. My intention is not to convince you because only God himself can convince you of his existence. My intention is just to make you think and reason beyond your own limited understanding of the world. You imply that your intelligence is much greater than my own and yet you are unable to reason beyond what your own senses perceive. The greatest minds in existence all had one quality in common. That quality was that they all were able to see beyond what other people accepted as fact. So the question is whether or not you get it yet?

Open your mind farther, and you will see that your deity is but a single noodle of the one true pastalicious god.


And for this "convincing" of people of his existence...well, I for one am still waiting. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Thus far, things are sorely lacking in the "extraordinary evidence" department.
Blind faith in ancient texts doesn't really do much for me, otherwise I'd also accept the existence of Zeus, Ra, and Santa Claus.

 

[Nik]

...because only God himself can convince you of his existence.

Then why hasn't anyone in recorded history seen him? Why does he insist on playing Hide & Go Fuck Yourself Because You'll Never Find Him?

He doesn't exist and, no matter how down in the dumps you are in life, screaming to the sky out of absolute desperation like innocent children in war-torn regions of the world or a prisoner of war lost in korea & vietnam, he will never show himself and save you from your predicament.

Some say death is him "saving us" from further torture. Some say "well I actually made it out of that situation so he must exist" but the billion other people who've been in that situation before you didn't make it so what makes you so special?

It's called "delusional" for a reason.

 

[Jeff7]

Then why hasn't anyone in recorded history seen him? Why does he insist on playing Hide & Go Fuck Yourself Because You'll Never Find Him?

What, you've never seen Jesus on a piece of toast, or in a tree stump?

He doesn't exist and, no matter how down in the dumps you are in life, screaming to the sky out of absolute desperation like innocent children in war-torn regions of the world or a prisoner of war lost in korea & vietnam, he will never show himself and save you from your predicament.

But of course, following such a scream to the sky, if anything comes along and saves you from that predicament, it was surely God.

Like these places that have droughts that last decades sometimes, and result in famine and death - the people will pray for rain, year after year. When it finally does rain, after much suffering, everyone's thanking the deity in charge of that sort of thing. That sounds like the work of a fairly cruel and sadistic deity.

Some say death is him "saving us" from further torture. Some say "well I actually made it out of that situation so he must exist" but the billion other people who've been in that situation before you didn't make it so what makes you so special?

It's called "delusional" for a reason.

And of course for that stuff I wonder, why be upset when someone dies? 1) They're supposedly going to a much better place. 2) It's not really a permanent separation, as you're supposedly nearly-guaranteed to be reunited with them once you also die.

The "well I made it out of that situation" - as what happens when a plane crashes and all aboard except one die, and he praises God for looking out for him. Everyone else on the plane: Sorry, God hates you.

 

[Nik]

Don't forget that the one guy on the plane who made it out made it out for a reason! He must have some life-impacting job somewhere ahead of him in his future or something, right?

You know Hitler was almost killed in WWI by sniper fire, right? The bullet was about 6" to his right and killed the asshole standing next to him.

Thank god for saving lives, right? God must have loved him. Or something. :awe:

 

[drnickriviera]

fuckin magnets, how do they work?