Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

You Can't Trust Science!

2456

Comments

  • #32
    Undergod
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,858 ✭✭✭Undergod


    Flamed Diving wrote: »
    Ok, fair enough. Sure didn't Newton have his dodgy side too?

    Yeah, he didn't really tell people a lot of what he discovered, often because he was genuinely the only person in the world who would have understood. Also the anti-social.

    Also the alchemy.

    He had a bit of an agenda that he intended to prove, that's for sure.


  • #33
    mysterious
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,133 ✭✭✭mysterious


    Flamed Diving wrote: »
    Ok, fair enough. Sure didn't Newton have his dodgy side too?

    I've read stories that Newton brought himself into masonry and the secret societies or was asked too ( I can't see why they wouldn't have) Its the nature of power when someone who is a genius.


  • #34
    Kepti
    Closed Accounts Posts: 426 ✭✭Kepti


    Pixel8 wrote: »
    I mean theres tonnes of scientific evidence to state that carbon dioxide levels increase AFTER the planet heats up first, not before, as these carbon taxing muppets would have you believe.

    What's the source of this extra heat we've been measuring? By what process does this heat generate carbon dioxide?


  • #35
    espinolman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,205 ✭✭✭espinolman


    I believe the sciences have been hoaxed and it has been going on for centuries , theories are taught as fact in schools and the laws of physics were supposed to be just guidellines , but they are taught as fact probably at the behest of special interest groups .


  • #36
    Flamed Diving
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,609 ✭✭✭Flamed Diving


    No. Science doesn't deal in fact, just models and evidence. Just look into it, instead of making things up.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Flamed Diving wrote: »
    There are obviously some people in this forum who truly believe the title of this thread, and in fact see Science as some kind of corrosive force in human advancement, etc. So when I saw this video, I thought of you guys.

    The capitalisation of the S in science; intentional or Freudian slip? :D:D:D


  • #38
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Flamed Diving wrote: »

    Remember, next time you enter your kitchen, switch the light on and get a glass of clean drinking water from your refrigerator before returning to your PC to research, you have only one thing to be thankful for.

    Enjoy.

    Okay thats bollox for a start. Your talking in absolutes when I believe the vast majority of people here would view science as neutral by definiton but its application can be used for morally positive or morally negative purposes.

    A single example of countless of the negative impact of science.

    Warning: Pics of deformed babies from Depleted Uranium (disturbing)
    http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2003/DU-Baby2003.htm

    Flamed Diving wrote: »
    Remember, next time you enter your kitchen

    Man-made scientific advancements haven't given us the ability to "enter a room"
    Flamed Diving wrote: »
    switch the light
    Man-made science hasn't given us the ability to see

    etc etc. So we have more to be thankful for than just science.


  • #39
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Flamed Diving wrote: »

    Remember, next time you enter your kitchen, switch the light on and get a glass of clean drinking water from your refrigerator before returning to your PC to research, you have only one thing to be thankful for.

    Enjoy.

    Okay thats bollox for a start. Your talking in absolutes when I believe the vast majority of people here would view science as neutral by definiton but its application can be used for morally positive or morally negative purposes.

    A single example of countless of the negative impact of science.

    Warning: Pics of deformed babies from Depleted Uranium (disturbing)
    http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2003/DU-Baby2003.htm

    Flamed Diving wrote: »
    Remember, next time you enter your kitchen

    Man-made scientific advancements haven't given us the ability to "enter a room"
    Flamed Diving wrote: »
    switch the light
    Man-made science hasn't given us the ability to see

    etc etc. So we have more to be thankful for than just science.


  • #40
    studiorat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,408 ✭✭✭studiorat


    Brown Bomber wrote: »

    A single example of countless of the negative impact of science.

    Warning: Pics of deformed babies from Depleted Uranium (disturbing)
    http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2003/DU-Baby2003.htm

    I didn't bother to look, but in fairness they could be pictures of babies pummelled with a rock or a fist or whatever. Science has nothing to do with the means by which the atrocity was carried out.

    If they were beaten with a base ball bat would you blame the negative impact of sport?


  • #41
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    studiorat wrote: »
    I didn't bother to look,

    Good choice.
    studiorat wrote: »
    Science has nothing to do with the means by which the atrocity was carried out.

    That is exactly what I was trying to demonstrate.

    Science in itself arguably gives a net positive return, it does IMO at least. Science can be used for good or for bad, but the OP ignores the bad in post 1. My understanding of the consensus "CT" view here and it is one that I would share is that few, if any have a deep distrust of science but moreso have a healthy scepticism of (potentially) corrupt scientific or otherwise institutions with political agendas.
    studiorat wrote: »
    If they were beaten with a base ball bat would you blame the negative impact of sport?

    Nope but that is neither here no there. I don't blame science I blame the abuse of science.


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    Flamed Diving
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,609 ✭✭✭Flamed Diving


    I will choose not to answer any of your posts.

    Thanks.


  • #43
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    This is not your personal blog. If you're not interested in discussing what it is that you post, then you probably shouldn't be posting it.

    Thanks.


  • #44
    bonkey
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    This is not your personal blog. If you're not interested in discussing what it is that you post, then you probably shouldn't be posting it.


    You are not a moderator. Please don't be back-seat modding by taking it upon yourself to remind others of the rules.

    We've had this discussion.


  • #45
    TalkieWalkie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,122 ✭✭✭TalkieWalkie


    It is counter productive to believe that Science, because it has given us so much, that it can explain everything and there is nothing more than it. In my opinion any kind of single standard belief system is self and group destructive. It reduces the possibility to open our hearts and minds and diminishes the chances of alternative thinking and learning, thus limiting us to a one dimensional existence and the possibilities of growing or evolving in any other way, individually or collectively, other than technologically. Ultimately, it can only serve as a self inflicted isolated life sentence. It is negative.
    While having our minds and hearts open to all possibilities serves as a gateway to every possible good eventuality and can only be positive. Open you're mind and heart, it's better for everyone.

    With all science has given us, it has not helped us evolve in any other way than technologically. And how does that serve us exactly ?

    Science doesn't help us care for each other, it doesn't bring us closer to each other, it doesn't help us love each other, it doesn't stop us hurting or killing each other, it doesn't stop us from being greedy, power hungry, selfish, jealous, paranoid, mean, hatefull etc, it hasn't helped the homeless or the poorest or the third world, it doesn't help us love life, nature, wildlife, earth or creation, it doesnt help us love ourselves.

    On the contrary, in reality, science has done little for humanity in the way of evolving mentally, spiritually and/or collectively. It has assisted in achieving the opposite of everything good and positive and with all our great technological advancements, we are worse off now in every sense possible than ever before.

    So I ask you, can you trust Science ?:confused:


  • #46
    Flamed Diving
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,609 ✭✭✭Flamed Diving


    It is counter productive to believe that Science, because it has given us so much, that it can explain everything and there is nothing more than it.

    I agree. As would most scientists or science-enthusiasts.
    In my opinion any kind of single standard belief system is self and group destructive.

    I agree.
    It reduces the possibility to open our hearts and minds and diminishes the chances of alternative thinking and learning, thus limiting us to a one dimensional existence and the possibilities of growing or evolving in any other way, individually or collectively, other than technologically.

    Yeah, I guess...
    Ultimately, it can only serve as a self inflicted isolated life sentence. It is negative.

    Ok.
    While having our minds and hearts open to all possibilities serves as a gateway to every possible good eventuality and can only be positive. Open you're mind and heart, it's better for everyone.

    :)

    With all science has given us, it has not helped us evolve in any other way than technologically. And how does that serve us exactly ?

    Well, our life expectancy has roughly doubled, in a century, while other, technologically regressive countries still languish far behind. Ditto infant mortality. Ditto average height. I could go on. This is due mainly to technology. I think you are being extremely myopic.
    Screwdriver doesn't help us care for each other, it doesn't bring us closer to each other, it doesn't help us love each other, it doesn't stop us hurting or killing each other, it doesn't stop us from being greedy, power hungry, selfish, jealous, paranoid, mean, hatefull etc, it hasn't helped the homeless or the poorest or the third world, it doesn't help us love life, nature, wildlife, earth or creation, it doesnt help us love ourselves.

    Science is a tool, nothing more. How we choose to use it, is up to us. What you are talking about is human nature. You could say replace science with, actually, I will just do that. See.
    On the contrary, in reality, science has done little for humanity in the way of evolving mentally, spiritually collectively. It has assisted in achieving opposite of everything good and with all our great technological advancements, we are worse off now in every sense possible than ever before.

    Apart from the roads, sanitation, life expectancy, infant mortality. But what have the Romans, ever done for us?
    So I ask you, can you trust Science ?:confused:

    The vast majority of what you said, had nothing to do with science. You really need to rethink your approach to this.


  • #47
    bonkey
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    TalkieWalkie wrote: »
    It is counter productive to believe that Science, because it has given us so much, that it can explain everything and there is nothing more than it.

    Not only would it be counter-productive, it would require a misunderstanding of science.
    So I ask you, can you trust Science ?:confused:
    I believe that I had a reasonably good understanding of what science is. From that understanding, I understand the limitations of science.

    From understanding science, I can trust it. I can trust it within the boundaries of the limitations I understand it to have.


  • #48
    TalkieWalkie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,122 ✭✭✭TalkieWalkie


    Flamed Diving wrote: »
    I agree. As would most scientists or science-enthusiasts.
    Great
    Flamed Diving wrote: »
    Well, our life expectancy has roughly doubled, in a century, while other, technologically regressive countries still languish far behind. Ditto infant mortality. Ditto average height. I could go on. This is due mainly to technology. I think you are being extremely myopic.

    Life expectancy is and everything else are meaningless if we only use our time for selfish material gain while watching others suffer as a result.
    Flamed Diving wrote: »
    Science doesn't help us care for each other, it doesn't bring us closer to each other, it doesn't help us love each other, it doesn't stop us hurting or killing each other, it doesn't stop us from being greedy, power hungry, selfish, jealous, paranoid, mean, hatefull etc, it hasn't helped the homeless or the poorest or the third world, it doesn't help us love life, nature, wildlife, earth or creation, it doesnt help us love ourselves.
    Science is a tool, nothing more. How we choose to use it, is up to us. What you are talking about is human nature. You could say replace science with, actually, I will just do that. See.
    ok, but, spirituality for example would help with all the above imo. We are not here to evolve financially or materially
    Flamed Diving wrote: »

    Apart from the roads, sanitation, life expectancy, infant mortality. But what have the Romans, ever done for us?
    The vast majority of what you said, had nothing to do with science. You really need to rethink your approach to this.
    Again, all pointless if we gaining from others suffering. I think my approach is spot on. It is positive, good and benefits everyone. Unlike in the financial or material and technological reality, only the ones who find themselves in the fortunate position to benefit, do (or think they do). again while others suffer :D


  • #49
    TalkieWalkie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,122 ✭✭✭TalkieWalkie


    bonkey wrote: »
    Not only would it be counter-productive, it would require a misunderstanding of science.
    Agreed.
    bonkey wrote: »
    From understanding science, I can trust it. I can trust it within the boundaries of the limitations I understand it to have.

    Ok, it wasn't my intention to suggest it was not trusthworthy. I did mean, that given the above, is it wise to put all your trust or belief in Science and only Science. Obviously Science is not the answer to our problems here.

    The first thread pointed out that religion has given us nothing and science has given so much. But the argument is not which has actually given more imo.
    The fact that it was posted in the first place tells me that we have gained nothing that matters from any belief system or technological advancement. As I said, we are worse of now than ever.


  • #50
    mysterious
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,133 ✭✭✭mysterious


    espinolman wrote: »
    I believe the sciences have been hoaxed and it has been going on for centuries , theories are taught as fact in schools and the laws of physics were supposed to be just guidellines , but they are taught as fact probably at the behest of special interest groups .

    Hear here


  • #51
    uprising2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,627 ✭✭✭uprising2


    Theories are taught as fact, science is about seeking further and further and deeper and deeper, we are all scientists to a degree, we're all curious, well most of us and like to understand things, some things cannot be understood, only guessed at, then when science does advance a little they sometimes realise this new "find" fukks up all that went before.
    Science has many different area's also, and many different approach's, some science is 100% spot on, some is pure fantasy and lies, some is to heal, some is to kill, the people who like to use it to kill seem to be the top men of science now, and frankly these are madmen, sadists, occultists and string along fools.

    Science has the ability to "try" save this planet, yet I only see token BS fixes, and science is mainly used to destroy, science thinks it can push nature aside, and for that science and mankind will pay heavily.

    Anyway waffle aside, theory is pushed as fact where science is concerned, and it is not fact, its an idea of how something "might" work, but not definate, sometimes not even probable, yet it is pushed by the worldwide education system as fact, which is wrong.


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    mysterious
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,133 ✭✭✭mysterious


    Science is carreid and perceived on limits. Science can never EVER get past time and distance linear illusion bullshiit most people are cot in.

    Welcome to Earth...:rolleyes: We think we know it all from the ground, with science. Science is the source and curse of why are we are stuck in our minds and illusions. We cannot see past the physical prison we created ourselves. Science basically created it.


  • #53
    studiorat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,408 ✭✭✭studiorat


    Theories aren't taught as fact. That's a misunderstanding. Scientific 'Laws' govern our understanding, but they are still just theories. The 'Theory of Relativity', 'Quantum Theory' etc, the clue is in the name. There's certain things that we take as empirical, or more precisely as a 'given' until a better understanding comes along. Electricity or Gravity for example, no one really knows what they are exactly, but we all know that given a set of circumstances they will act as predicted; apples will fall from trees, light bulbs will light up etc. We even use different models for different occasions and they still do what we expect them to do, I don't expect certain theories will ever be fact, ever-ever!
    uprising2 wrote: »
    Science has many different area's also, and many different approach's, some science is 100% spot on, some is pure fantasy and lies, some is to heal, some is to kill, the people who like to use it to kill seem to be the top men of science now, and frankly these are madmen, sadists, occultists and string along fools.

    The above quote is a theory as far as I can see, it offers no proof simply opinion, so scientifically speaking it's not even a particularly robust theory.
    If it was it would give examples of '100% spot on science', and 'fantasy and lies'.

    Considering how much pseudo-science is around, I'm not suprised people are so distrustful of it as an entity.


  • #54
    studiorat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,408 ✭✭✭studiorat


    mysterious wrote: »
    Science is carreid and perceived on limits. Science can never EVER get past time and distance linear illusion bullshiit most people are cot in.

    Most people get past the 'linear' thing very early with a decent education and a bit of understanding. There's very few things that actually are 'linear' in this world and that it fact :)

    Time is subjetive BTW. Personally I think it has very little to do with anything outide of out perception.


  • #55
    bonkey
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    uprising2 wrote: »
    Theories are taught as fact,

    Lets assume for a moment that this is true.

    Doesn't that suggest that the problem lies with our education system, and not with science? Science is not the problem here...but rather our use of it in education.
    Science has the ability to "try" save this planet,
    No, it doesn't.

    Science could offer us models by which we can better understand what is happening, and what the impact of our various decisions would/could be.

    It is then up to us what we choose to do with this information.

    Again, this is a case where science is not the problem, but rather how we use it.

    The video in the OP (which I admit to having not watched) is clearly targetted at the creationism vs science "debate" (I put that word in quotes as I am using it in the loosest sense possible). As such, the video is mostly a reaction to the oft-used strategy of Creationists to argue that science is untrustworthy.

    To try and put the discussion in a more forum-relevant form...

    It is quite often the case here that we see people (regardless of beliefs on the topic) refusing to accept the validity of some claim or research that claims to be scientific in nature. In some cases, it is because they don't accept that the research has met the required standards to be taken seriously as scientific work. In some cases, it is because they simply don't trust the researchers. There are also some cases, where it literally boils down to belief....that people believe something else to be true, and therefore categorically reject the (allegedly) scientific position, offering some sort of variant of the various arguments that we've already seen on this thread.

    Personally, I'm not going to suggest that people are right or wrong in such cases...but it does open some interesting scope for discussion.


  • #56
    mysterious
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,133 ✭✭✭mysterious


    bonkey wrote: »
    Lets assume for a moment that this is true.


    The video in the OP (which I admit to having not watched) is clearly targetted at the creationism vs science "debate" (I put that word in quotes as I am using it in the loosest sense possible). As such, the video is mostly a reaction to the oft-used strategy of Creationists to argue that science is untrustworthy.

    To try and put the discussion in a more forum-relevant form...

    I saw this coming anyhoo. It turned out to be epic failure on the incitement or reactive side of others to swing to left or right again. Which is so lame imo.


  • #57
    bonkey
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    mysterious wrote: »
    I saw this coming anyhoo.

    You saw what coming?


  • #58
    studiorat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,408 ✭✭✭studiorat


    bonkey wrote: »
    You saw what coming?
    The aim of the Illuminati sausage machine :eek::eek::eek:, called ‘education’, is to activate, stimulate and reward the left brain while suppressing the right and because the most successful victims of this process end up administrating the system, so society is formed in their image.

    Daivd Icke: The Intellect is the Prison of the Mind

    Didn't see it coming myself...


  • #59
    Flamed Diving
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,609 ✭✭✭Flamed Diving


    uprising2 wrote: »
    Anyway waffle aside, theory is pushed as fact where science is concerned, and it is not fact, its an idea of how something "might" work, but not definate, sometimes not even probable, yet it is pushed by the worldwide education system as fact, which is wrong.

    Only a minority push science as fact. Generally the type who don't really understand it, or who are just trying to sell a few books, push an agenda. But the majority recognise that theories are hypotheses, strongly backed by evidence. If science was fact, it would cease to be science. Educated people should know this. So you are wrong in your assertion.


  • #60
    Flamed Diving
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,609 ✭✭✭Flamed Diving


    mysterious wrote: »
    Science is carreid and perceived on limits. Science can never EVER get past time and distance linear illusion bullshiit most people are cot in.

    Welcome to Earth...:rolleyes: We think we know it all from the ground, with science. Science is the source and curse of why are we are stuck in our minds and illusions. We cannot see past the physical prison we created ourselves. Science basically created it.

    In fairness, I would be the first to say that there is more to this universe than we can detect. But I would never fool myself into thinking that my guesswork is an adequate substitute. That is the vital difference.


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    fontanalis
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,619 ✭✭✭fontanalis


    TalkieWalkie wrote: »
    It is counter productive to believe that Science, because it has given us so much, that it can explain everything and there is nothing more than it. In my opinion any kind of single standard belief system is self and group destructive. It reduces the possibility to open our hearts and minds and diminishes the chances of alternative thinking and learning, thus limiting us to a one dimensional existence and the possibilities of growing or evolving in any other way, individually or collectively, other than technologically. Ultimately, it can only serve as a self inflicted isolated life sentence. It is negative.
    While having our minds and hearts open to all possibilities serves as a gateway to every possible good eventuality and can only be positive. Open you're mind and heart, it's better for everyone.

    With all science has given us, it has not helped us evolve in any other way than technologically. And how does that serve us exactly ?

    Science doesn't help us care for each other, it doesn't bring us closer to each other, it doesn't help us love each other, it doesn't stop us hurting or killing each other, it doesn't stop us from being greedy, power hungry, selfish, jealous, paranoid, mean, hatefull etc, it hasn't helped the homeless or the poorest or the third world, it doesn't help us love life, nature, wildlife, earth or creation, it doesnt help us love ourselves.

    On the contrary, in reality, science has done little for humanity in the way of evolving mentally, spiritually and/or collectively. It has assisted in achieving the opposite of everything good and positive and with all our great technological advancements, we are worse off now in every sense possible than ever before.

    So I ask you, can you trust Science ?:confused:

    Sorry but your first paragraph is pure Oprah Woo, and your last two talk about science as it's a person who just pissed in your soup.


Advertisement