Why are they blocking this out ? (part of space)

21-08-2009 03:43PM

worldrepublic wrote: »

Excuse me? I did not say or even imply that science is "worthless". My point is that it cannot deliver absolutes. Most scientists of course accept this, but a small (and vocal) minority have become almost religious or dogmatic about science.

And as vocal as they want to be science just isn't dogmatic.
Should we dismiss conspiracy theories because there's a small but vocal minority who claim "the it's always the Joos".

And how exactly does any this exempt Hoagland's theory from the scientific process or the burden of proof?

worldrepublic wrote: »

You should also note that arguments are made concerning the prejudice attached to some of the scientific language. For example, leading feminists criticise the hypothesis stage of scientific experiments purporting to explain gender traits, for example "active" (male) versus "passive" (female) (cf. Judith Butler).

Really? You'll have to explain how science can work without making testable hypothesises. Cause that's really integral in science and especially in establishing new theories.

worldrepublic wrote: »

There are many arguments, but rest assured that scientific dogma is not in vogue with the left.

Firstly there's no such thing as scientific dogma. It's almost an oxymoron.
Second it doesn't matter if the left like science or not.

Science is a process that works really well. No one has been able to show a process that is fairer or more accurate.

So why exactly should we change how we do science to accommodate Hoagland's theory?

Given not a single person has been able to provide a scrap of verifiable evidence in support of this theory.
Which do you think is most likely to be wrong: the process which gives us the entire body of provable reliable knowledge we have or Richard Hoagland?

22-08-2009 12:46AM

worldrepublic wrote: »

So even if many many scientists observe say the law of gravity... one day it may well be falsified!

I assume by law of gravity you mean Newton's Law of Gravitation? Well, to some extent, that has already been shown to be "wrong". Einstein's General Relativity is its more advanced and accurate replacement.

You have to understand, though, that science (to personify it) doesn't say that it's absolute. The Law of Gravitation and General Relativity aren't absolutes, they're merely models. With the latter being more accurate than the former.

Science doesn't, nor does it pretend to, provide absolutes, it offers models. Absolutes only exist in mathematics.

So you see, science has no real foundations

Of course it does! What a statement to make.

and is in a constant state of update and change. It offers no absolutes!

It doesn't pretend to offer absolutes. It could be argued that absolutes don't exist outside of the world of mathematics.

At one time top scientists declared that the world was flat (they even developed highly sophisticated charts and rounds of data to support the hypothesis. Some people began to say the world is round! They were dismissed as nuts and charlatans.

No, they didn't. That, as KingMob as pointed out, is only a myth. People believed that the Earth was flat in ~400 BC. It could be argued that--at least the modern version of--science didn't exist that early. Top scientists never proclaimed that the Earth was flat.

So............. maybe, just maybe space is so vast that it is full of inexplicable phenomena, so much so that it threatens the currently held belief system/scientific worldview?

The beauty of the laws of physics is their ubiquity throughout the universe. One cannot argue that, in general, a certain physical law doesn't hold throughout the universe, and still call it a physical law. So, knowing that, the above is nullified.

This is being suppressed (again) in order that society have a stable belief system?

I doubt it, as it has--in my view--never happened before.

bonkey · 22-08-2009 11:42AM

worldrepublic wrote: »

He has falsified the primary hypothesis. It only takes one unknown, one black swan to refute even a vast body of research!

Sort of.

It only takes one observation to show that a hypothesis is not entirely correct. The Australian has shown that there are limitations which need to be applied to the hypothesis (other than the obvious, tautological "all white swans are white").

To be fair, though, what should have been stated (in modern science) is that we can have a high degree of certainty that all swans are white.

So you see, science has no real foundations and is in a constant state of update and change. It offers no absolutes!

Absolutes precludes the possibility of being even slightly wrong. It precludes the possibility of improving, refining or furthering knowledge.

It is a good thing that science does not have absolutes.

So............. maybe, just maybe space is so vast that it is full of inexplicable phenomena, so much so that it threatens the currently held belief system/scientific worldview? This is being suppressed (again) in order that society have a stable belief system?

You've gone from talking about science to talking about the common man. Scientists have posited many things that have threatened currently held worldviews, and fear of the public reaction has never stopped this.

In science, discovering something new is cool. Even cooler, is being able to show that something previously held to be correct is wrong. It is, in fact, just about the ultimate accomplishment in science. Suggesting that such things would be suppressed is, frankly, a denial of much of the reality of what modern science really is.

C.Rizzle · 22-08-2009 11:08PM

What do people think of nibiru?? I not a freak or atn but after reading about this and looking at it on youtube it seems to be possible. I dont know just that the samarians were around 4000 years before Jesus and were scolars and stuff its abit crazy dont you think?? Also if anybody is board look up ''Prjoect Blue Beam'' its crazy stuff ha.

22-08-2009 11:34PM

C.Rizzle wrote: »

What do people think of nibiru?? I not a freak or atn but after reading about this and looking at it on youtube it seems to be possible. I dont know just that the samarians were around 4000 years before Jesus and were scolars and stuff its abit crazy dont you think?? Also if anybody is board look up ''Prjoect Blue Beam'' its crazy stuff ha.

The Sumerians didn't have telescopes or a working knowledge of planetary motion or gravity.

I really don't get how they could see this planet but we can't.

C.Rizzle · 22-08-2009 11:39PM

They said the planet came or sumtin i think,
Read it up. We were suppose to be made by them
in order to mine gold, it tells about it and the stuff
we dont use like ependics, tonsils and stuff.
Its worth a read while your on this like

22-08-2009 11:49PM

C.Rizzle wrote: »

They said the planet came or sumtin i think,
Read it up. We were suppose to be made by them
in order to mine gold, it tells about it and the stuff
we dont use like ependics, tonsils and stuff.
Its worth a read while your on this like

Well no they didn't.
Nibiru was part of their mythology and was probably the name for a know planet.
They never said it was going to come close to Earth let alone predict such an event.

That claim surfaced in the late 90's and originally Nibiru was going to end the world in 2003.
And we can guess how accurate that was.

Mahatma coat · 22-08-2009 11:49PM

King Mob wrote: »

The Sumerians didn't have telescopes or a working knowledge of planetary motion or gravity.

I really don't get how they could see this planet but we can't.

really???

You know this for a fact "the Sumerians didnt have a knowledge of planetary motions or gravity."

the arrogance of that statement is mindblowing, or are we to meant to add ancient archeology and an intimate knowledge of the workings of ancient societies to the vast list of things which your word is the ultimate authority, and therefore above question??

C.Rizzle · 22-08-2009 11:51PM

are ya mad??
Yes they did, they said every 3600 years i goes by
us. its also predicted for 2012 get ur facts right
before trying to sound smart, timmy....

Mahatma coat · 23-08-2009 12:01AM

I'm curious tho, if yiu look at the planetqry maps the sumerians made the Niburiu is on there, but its orbit does look a bit more like a comet, how big do comets get??

23-08-2009 12:10AM

Mahatma coat wrote: »

really???

You know this for a fact "the Sumerians didnt have a knowledge of planetary motions or gravity."

the arrogance of that statement is mindblowing, or are we to meant to add ancient archeology and an intimate knowledge of the workings of ancient societies to the vast list of things which your word is the ultimate authority, and therefore above question??

Ok then can you provide any solid evidence that they did?

Cause as far as I know theories of gravity and astronomy only became accurate enough to make predictions like that around Newtons time at the earliest.
But if you have evidence to show otherwise, please share it with us.

23-08-2009 12:13AM

C.Rizzle wrote: »

are ya mad??
Yes they did, they said every 3600 years i goes by
us. its also predicted for 2012 get ur facts right
before trying to sound smart, timmy....

No they didn't.
Can you provide a single credible source that says they do?

Cause the only sources I can find aren't the most accurate or very heavy with real research.

Lone Stone · 23-08-2009 01:13AM

This is about 6000(or 5000) years old, It depict's the annunaki (celestial beings aka gods) handing us agraculture, And behind the men you see our solar system
with 2 extra planet's one planet is now where there is some huge asteroid belt and the other is nibiru. they did say it is a 3600 year anti clock wise orbit around the sun. Well thats what a few people who translated there writing said. Also they literaly said that we were created by them in there image. and that they mined gold for them.

Now ive hard people say they wrote about the planets in detail color , the rings around saturn etc but i cant find it, seen it somewhere but bleh cant find it.

also they made these

They wrote about them saying
"they were alive but not alive and carried out the daily task's of the gods"

And the sumerians were an advanced civilisation have you seen the size of the things they built ! like hugeee at the very start of the stone age ? :eek:
They built ziggurats to observe the stars and all sorts of stuff.

But you know you can say any ancient civilization made **** up by calling it a myth, I dont think what they spoke of was a myth considering the things we can do today whats to say some alien species didn't come here and decide to modify some dumb ape.

here's a video i found talkin about them describing the solar system.

http://technorati.com/videos/youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DvV_jCzTeR1U

23-08-2009 01:22AM

Lone Stone wrote: »

they did say it is a 3600 year anti clock wise orbit around the sun. Well thats what a few people who translated there writing said.

Where did they say this?

Because there's this tablet: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MUL.APIN
Which identifies Nibiru as Jupiter.

Here's a paper that goes into detail about it.

http://www.michaelsheiser.com/nibiru.pdf

1) Nibiru is called a star.
2) Nibiru is called a planet – nearly always Jupiter-Marduk, but once Mercury, and never anything beyond Pluto or the known planets.
3) The Sumerians, by their own records, knew of only five planets (and accepted the sun and moon as planets).
4) Nibiru is never mentioned in any respect with the Anunnaki; it is never said to have been or be inhabited.
5) Nibiru is both a “fixed star” in some relationship to constellations (whether a member or just in proximity is unknown) that “holds” them in their courses, but is also described as “changing position” and “crossing” the sky at times.
6) Nibiru was seen every year, which demolishes Sitchin’s view of a 3600 year cycle for it.

Lone Stone wrote: »

But you know you can say any ancient civilization made **** up by calling it a myth, I dont think what they spoke of was a myth considering the things we can do today whats to say some alien species didn't come here and decide to modify some dumb ape.

Because there's no evidence for it?

What's to say some magic unicorns didn't come here and decide to modify some dumb ape?

Lone Stone · 23-08-2009 01:46AM

Your saying there is no evidence yet i just put a picture up thats about 6 or 5000 years old that depict's our solar system :rolleyes:

23-08-2009 01:57AM

Lone Stone wrote: »

Your saying there is no evidence yet i just put a picture thats about 6 or 5000 years old that depict's our solar system :rolleyes:

No it's a group of dots that you're interpreting as the solar system.
Doesn't necessarily mean that's what it is.
Could be a constellation.
Or could represent something else entirely.

They aren't at different distances like the planets are.
And there another little dot of similar size of on it's own between the farm tool and the middle figure, what's that supposed to be?

And did you actually read the paper I linked?
Especially this part.

3) The Sumerians, by their own records, knew of only five planets (and accepted the sun and moon as planets).

Can you point to a source that conclusively shows they thought there were 11 planets and not uneducated interpenetration like we are offering?

But those animals depicted look like unicorns don't you think?

Undergod · 24-08-2009 08:50PM

I have two questions here, regarding the "hyper-dimensional physics".

1) Could observations made in three dimensions provide any evidence as to what happens in four or more dimensions?

2) Conversely, why would we need hyper-dimensional physics to describe things in three dimensions?

studiorat · 24-08-2009 11:51PM

Lone Stone wrote: »

Ive been searching around about it on the internet and alot of people seem to think its the planet nibiru "the the 10th planet" according to the sumerians.

What do you think ?

There's at least 5 other "dwarf planets" outside of Pluto in what's called the kuiper belt, of course whether Pluto is or isn't a planet is debatable. There's also been another 342 extra solar planets most with a mass comparable to or larger than Jupiter discovered as of Feb 2009. I wonder if Nibiru could be one of those then?

Undergod wrote: »

I have two questions here, regarding the "hyper-dimensional physics".

1) Could observations made in three dimensions provide any evidence as to what happens in four or more dimensions?

2) Conversely, why would we need hyper-dimensional physics to describe things in three dimensions?

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

This could answer your second question.

25-08-2009 12:19AM

studiorat wrote: »

There's at least 5 other "dwarf planets" outside of Pluto in what's called the kuiper belt, of course whether Pluto is or isn't a planet is debatable. There's also been another 342 extra solar planets most with a mass comparable to or larger than Jupiter discovered as of Feb 2009. I wonder if Nibiru could be one of those then?

No they could be, they orbit different stars.
The nearest one I think is 50 lightyears away.

The Kuiper belt objects are usually much much smaller than Pluto and never come near Earth.

Why are they blocking this out ? (part of space)

Comments