Modern day theoretical physics - a cult following.

fkface · 10-07-2012 10:09PM #1

This story about the discovery of Higgs Boson and how the scientists said their research was inconclusive..

What have we actually learned from their research?

They've spent billions of dollars on building this machine 100 meters under the ground and what has been concluded?

And no, this isn't trolling, it's a genuine observation that the scientists have only concluded Higgs Boson might exist, not that it actually does.

The scientific explanations for the origins of the universe are about as accurate as they are in the bible so what makes one more plausible than the other?

And no, I don't read the bible or follow some deity as this is the first accusation from the atheist cult, but nobody knows how big the universe is, the "big bang" theory is based on theoretical science yet there are people convinved this was how the universe started without acknowledging the basis of their beliefs are purely theoretical and inconclusive much the same as a christian believing in bible.

The best way to verify whether these scientific theories are correct or not is to use Mathematics and since these physicists haven't been able to conclude their scientific theories are true or not, why do people follow this stuff like it's 100% real?

It's quite bizzare and not much more different than those following a religion to be honest.

How can someone argue so vehemently in favour of theories that are utterly inconclusive and then call you an "idiot" for pointing out the fact?

That seems to be the modern day religion to me. Anyone else agree?

Jonny7 · 10-07-2012 10:13PM

I have to ask, whats the conspiracy theory?

MrStuffins · 10-07-2012 10:14PM

fkface wrote: »

This story about the discovery of Higgs Boson and how the scientists said their research was inconclusive..

What have we actually learned from their research?

They've spent billions of dollars on building this machine 100 meters under the ground and what has been concluded?

And no, this isn't trolling, it's a genuine observation that the scientists have only concluded Higgs Boson might exist, not that it actually does.

The scientific explanations for the origins of the universe are about as accurate as they are in the bible so what makes one more plausible than the other?

I stopped reading right here.

Wow!

fkface · 10-07-2012 10:23PM

MrStuffins wrote: »

I stopped reading right here.

Wow!

So the big bang is fact?

No, it's not.

That's why they call it "big bang theory"

10-07-2012 10:27PM

fkface wrote: »

So the big bang is fact?

No, it's not.

That's why they call it "big bang theory"

It's also "the theory of gravity" and "germ theory".

So which bit of the big bang do you disagree with, and what research have you done that allows you to form such an opinion?

studiorat · 10-07-2012 10:28PM

fkface wrote: »

The best way to verify whether these scientific theories are correct or not is to use Mathematics and since these physicists haven't been able to conclude their scientific theories are true or not, why do people follow this stuff like it's 100% real?

But the purpose of the Higgs boson experiment was to find out if the mathematics is correct. That is, to actually observe something that was proposed to exist within a theoretical model created using mathematics.

I suppose people follow it because they are interested in and open to new ideas.

The difference between Universal Origin in the Bible and theoretical physics is that one is a theory and the other is a hypothesis at best. Once again the clue is in the name.

FullRetard · 10-07-2012 10:33PM

King Mob wrote: »

It's also "the theory of gravity" and "germ theory".

dont think they teach them in the troll college.

Scientists have more proveable evidence for the big bang theory than that a bearded sky fairly created the universe.

MrStuffins · 10-07-2012 10:34PM

fkface wrote: »

So the big bang is fact?

No, it's not.

That's why they call it "big bang theory"

Well, I never said it was fact! My problem is that you think that the hundreds of years of scientific exploration, experimentation and fact based research that went into all of the different aspects of what makes up the Big Bang Theory is JUST AS PLAUSABLE as the creation myth! It shows you have ZERO understanding of the Big Bang theory itself! ZERO!

Also, LOL at your clichéd "That's why it's called a theory" bull. This also shows that you have very little knowledge of the word "Theory" and it's definitions.

Do you think it's a fact that the sun revolves around the earth? You know, as in the Heliocentric THEORY?? :rolleyes:

MrStuffins · 10-07-2012 10:35PM

King Mob wrote: »

It's also "the theory of gravity" and "germ theory".

So which bit of the big bang do you disagree with, and what research have you done that allows you to form such an opinion?

I think it's safe to say that a guy who has said such things as he has said has done no research whatsoever!

fkface · 10-07-2012 10:36PM

King Mob wrote:

So which bit of the big bang do you disagree with, and what research have you done that allows you to form such an opinion?

We haven't observed the "Big Bang" in nature that's why I find it such a stupid explanation for how the universe was created. "there was a big bang" meh.

Theoretical Physics doesn't answer the question on the origins of the universe, doesn't even come close to being fact in any way.

As for Higgs Boson, combined research by two different teams found only a one in two million chance that their observation was incorrect.

fkface · 10-07-2012 10:40PM

MrStuffins wrote: »

Well, I never said it was fact! My problem is that you think that the hundreds of years of scientific exploration, experimentation and fact based research that went into all of the different aspects of what makes up the Big Bang Theory is JUST AS PLAUSABLE as the creation myth! It shows you have ZERO understanding of the Big Bang theory itself! ZERO!

Also, LOL at your clichéd "That's why it's called a theory" bull. This also shows that you have very little knowledge of the word "Theory" and it's definitions.

Do you think it's a fact that the sun revolves around the earth? You know, as in the Heliocentric THEORY?? :rolleyes:

Yes, but the Big Bang theory is not fact, is it?

That's all that needs to be said really, that you believe in fantasy.

hooradiation · 10-07-2012 10:43PM

fkface wrote: »

And no, this isn't trolling

fkface wrote: »

So the big bang is fact?
No, it's not.
That's why they call it "big bang theory"

Are you sure you're not trolling, because that second quote is either the result of a fundamental misunderstanding of the very basics of science or low quality troll cut 'n' paste.

Either way, you're not off to a good start.

MrStuffins · 10-07-2012 10:43PM

fkface wrote: »

Yes, but the Big Bang theory is not fact, is it?

That's all that needs to be said really, that you believe in fantasy.

It all depends on what you consider "fact".

Nothing is "fact" except Mathematics.

fkface · 10-07-2012 10:47PM

hooradiation wrote: »

Are you sure you're not trolling, because that second quote is either the result of a fundamental misunderstanding of the very basics of science or low quality troll cut 'n' paste.

Either way, you're not off to a good start.

Alright so explain why the Big Bang theory is fact?

I'm merely pointing out flaws in the people who follow science like a cult.

10-07-2012 10:47PM

fkface wrote: »

We haven't observed the "Big Bang" in nature that's why I find it such a stupid explanation for how the universe was created. "there was a big bang" meh.

So what about the fact that distant galaxies are receding at an increasing rate?
What about the fact that tracing this motion back we find that all matter in the universe was closer together?
What about the cosmic background radiation?

Which of these do you disagree with and why?

And when have you ever observed a germ causing disease, or gravity causing masses to attract?

fkface wrote: »

Theoretical Physics doesn't answer the question on the origins of the universe, doesn't even come close to being fact in any way.

You don't seem to know anything about physics or how science works in general.
What has lead you to the conclusion that it's all nonsense other than that you are too lazy to understand it?

fkface wrote: »

As for Higgs Boson, combined research by two different teams found only a one in two million chance that their observation was incorrect.

And? That's quite a huge step in particle physics research. The more experiments they run, chances are good that we'll become more sure of it's existence.

But this just proves you point is nonsense. Why, if physicists are in this massive cult, why do they suggest there's a chance that they are wrong?
Surely if they are behaving like a religion (or a conspiracy theorist) they would have declared the Higgs Boson existed when it was first theorised isn't of bothering with all the experiment stuff.

So can you please explain what issues you have with the theory specifically and could you detail how they went wrong in their experiments.
Surely if your opinion is informed and not just a blanket ignorant denial, you can answer those questions.

MrStuffins · 10-07-2012 10:48PM

fkface wrote: »

Alright so explain why the Big Bang theory is fact?

I'm merely pointing out flaws in the people who follow science like a cult.

Nobody follows science like a cult. I have no idea where you're getting this from.

Also, where's the conspiracy?

fkface · 10-07-2012 10:52PM

The conspiracy: The theories proposed by Theoretical Physicists to explain the origins of our universe are only intended to disuade from exploring alternative theories for our existence.

MrStuffins · 10-07-2012 10:53PM

fkface wrote: »

The conspiracy: The theories proposed by Theoretical Physicists to explain the origins of our universe are only intended to disuade from exploring alternative theories for our existence.

And what are you basing this on?

Because, the above statement shows you have ZERO knowledge of physics!

studiorat · 10-07-2012 10:55PM

fkface wrote: »

The conspiracy: The theories proposed by Theoretical Physicists to explain the origins of our universe are only intended to disuade from exploring alternative theories for our existence.

Have you got an example of one of these alternative theories ?

10-07-2012 10:56PM

fkface wrote: »

The conspiracy: The theories proposed by Theoretical Physicists to explain the origins of our universe are only intended to disuade from exploring alternative theories for our existence.

So who's paying them, and are all physicists involved?
And which alternative theories aren't being explored and why would the evil physicists or whoever not want them explored?
And why did they pick incorrect theories that even you, some one who clearly hasn't a clue about science or physics can see straight through them?

Defiler Of The Coffin · 10-07-2012 10:57PM

Can I absolutely prove I actually exist? If not then there's no way I am even typing this. Theories are for heathens!

Enkidu · 10-07-2012 11:02PM

fkface wrote: »

We haven't observed the "Big Bang" in nature that's why I find it such a stupid explanation for how the universe was created. "there was a big bang" meh.

How ignorant.

The big bang explains:
The ratio of elements present in the universe
The large scale structure of the universe
Structure formation of galaxies
The observed red shift of all galaxies
Quadratic deviations in red shift relations
Anisotropies in the Cosmic Microwave Background
The actual presence of the Cosmic Microwave Background

It's not just "there was a big bang", its part of Einstein's theory of general relativity.

endacl · 10-07-2012 11:05PM

This should be fun..

Seriously though OP, put forward a single alternative, and explain the conspiracy. Don't worry about details. An outline sketch will do grand.

Theoretical physics thus far has withstood the scientific method. That is, hypothesize - test - evaluate. And repeat... The same method, in fact, that tends to knock many ct's flat on their respective arses.

What's the issue?

fkface · 10-07-2012 11:05PM

MrStuffins wrote: »

And what are you basing this on?

Because, the above statement shows you have ZERO knowledge of physics!

Oh, and you're an expert of Physics are you?

Too bad you're unable to prove conclusively the origins of our universe and instead use unfounded theories which are no more useful than believing a God created everything in the universe.

Your theories require a certain level of faith to believe in.

An intelligent person doesn't require a deep understanding of physics to see how clearly flawed some of the the scientific theories explaining the origins of our universe are.

I watched a seminar once about Black Holes and one of the audience asked the scientist what was on the other side of a black hole ...he said

"presumably a light hole"

He just picked his answer out of his own hole and now the cult believe this is exactly what's on the other end of a black hole in space despite the fact scientists have never observed what's on the other side.

Laughable science.

fkface · 10-07-2012 11:09PM

Enkidu wrote: »

How ignorant.

The big bang explains:
The ratio of elements present in the universe
The large scale structure of the universe
Structure formation of galaxies
The observed red shift of all galaxies
Quadratic deviations in red shift relations
Anisotropies in the Cosmic Microwave Background
The actual presence of the Cosmic Microwave Background

It's not just "there was a big bang", its part of Einstein's theory of general relativity.

Oh, here we go, is this all fact now?

MrStuffins · 10-07-2012 11:09PM

fkface wrote: »

Oh, and you're an expert of Physics are you?

Nope, makes 2 of us

Too bad you're unable to prove conclusively the origins of our universe

You are 100% right for the first time tonight. It IS too bad

and instead use unfounded theories which are no more useful than believing a God created everything in the universe.

Unfounded you say.

Ok, do yourself a favour here. Tell me what your understanding of the Big Bang is?

Your theories require a certain level of faith to believe in.

False.

An intelligent person doesn't require a deep understanding of physics to see how clearly flawed some of the the scientific theories explaining the origins of our universe are.

No but a basic understanding of what they're talking about would be nice

I watched a seminar once about Black Holes and one of the audience asked the scientist what was on the other side of a black hole ...he said

"presumably a light hole"

He just picked his answer out of his own hole and now the cult believe this is exactly what's on the other end of a black hole in space despite the fact scientists have never observed what's on the other side.

Laughable science.

Laughable is correct, it's called a joke.

MrStuffins · 10-07-2012 11:11PM

fkface wrote: »

Oh, here we go, is this all fact now?

Lol, yes, it is ALL fact! All of it!

You have absolutely no clue have you?

studiorat · 10-07-2012 11:11PM

fkface wrote: »

Oh, and you're an expert of Physics are you?

Too bad you're unable to prove conclusively the origins of our universe and instead use unfounded theories which are no more useful than believing a God created everything in the universe.

Your theories require a certain level of faith to believe in.

An intelligent person doesn't require a deep understanding of physics to see how clearly flawed some of the the scientific theories explaining the origins of our universe are.

I watched a seminar once about Black Holes and one of the audience asked the scientist what was on the other side of a black hole ...he said

"presumably a light hole"

He just picked his answer out of his own hole and now the cult believe this is exactly what's on the other end of a black hole in space despite the fact scientists have never observed what's on the other side.

Laughable science.

I'm assuming you and this cult don't know what presumably means then. :pac:

So anyway, these alternative theories tell us more...

10-07-2012 11:16PM

fkface wrote: »

An intelligent person doesn't require a deep understanding of physics to see how clearly flawed some of the the scientific theories explaining the origins of our universe are.

We have asked you repeatedly to point out some of the flaws you are referring to. You have not most likely because you cannot because you have no idea what you are talking about.

So if this is not the case, please point us to some of these glaring flaws and answer some of the ones we've pointed to in your laughable claims.

hooradiation · 10-07-2012 11:21PM

fkface wrote: »

Alright so explain why the Big Bang theory is fact?

I tell you what, you learn the difference between a theory in the vernacular sense and a scientific theory and then we'll talk.

In order for there to be a conversation both parties need to agree on or at the very least understand some basic principles. Seeing as you don't (or refuse to) then we have nothing to discuss until such time as you raise yourself to an appropriate level.
It shouldn't take long.

fkface wrote: »

I'm merely pointing out flaws in the people who follow science like a cult.

No, you're not.
You're railing against positions (and misusing terminology like it's going out of fashion) that people don't hold. Gosh, if only there was a term for that.

MrStuffins · 10-07-2012 11:46PM

I hope the OP is off reading a book!

Modern day theoretical physics - a cult following.

Comments