Science Reconsidered

Discussion in 'Science' started by Moi621, Oct 2, 2014.

  1. Moi621

    Moi621 Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2013
    Messages:
    10,772
    Likes Received:
    2,356
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    No one :heart: "reconsidering" Science, Archeology, History more than Moi :woot:
    http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3//topic/reconsidering-history/
    and I just wanted to share a newly discovered web page dedicated to Archeology and stuff that doesn't fit the dogma, like the 700,000 year old humanoid skull found in Europe
    http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/806686-the-human-skull-that-challenges-the-out-of-africa-theory/
    or the Rosetta Stone of South America that includes proto Sumerian inscriptions.
    http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/993844-fuente-magna-the-rosetta-stone-of-the-americas/

    Please, pick a story, share, let's discuss.
    Don't make me pick, another one. :lol:


    Moi :oldman:
    Debunkers Welcome

    r > g



     
  2. ronmatt

    ronmatt New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2009
    Messages:
    8,867
    Likes Received:
    158
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Obviously, we 'don't know' far more than we 'do' know about almost everything and anything. I used to get frustrated at the babblings of the 'science pros' on this forum with their theories and charts and links. Albeit, the 'science of the obvious' is relatively inarguable. But most science is really nothing more than converting 'could be' into 'maybe'. [atoms 'could be' particles..but 'maybe' they're waves]. There 'could have' been a Big Bang' but 'maybe' there wasn't. WTF is that? Modern humans 'could be' as old as 100,000 years. 'Maybe' older. Ancient structures were constructed solely using human blood, sweat and tears and stone hammers and chicken bones yielded by profound artisans whose eyes were more accurate than modern lasers. 100 ton slabs of virtually perfectly shaped rock were moved 100's of miles and lifted 10's of feet or more with reed ropes and logs.
    Uh...OK science, you certainly have it all figgered out. The atheists laugh at religious dogma. Well I contend that there is little more dogmatic than science itsownself. E=MC2 is not 42

    http://www.independent.co.uk/life-s...life-the-universe-and-everything-2205734.html
    for those that don't quite get that.
     
  3. One Mind

    One Mind Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2014
    Messages:
    14,579
    Likes Received:
    4,585
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We really do not know which end of our universe is up, and only human arrogance says differently. Scientific knowledge is extremely limited, and there is little doubt that what is accepted as fact today will join the dustbin of history in the future.
     
  4. wyly

    wyly Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Messages:
    12,481
    Likes Received:
    490
    Trophy Points:
    83
    so if understand you correctly because sciences are above your paygrade of understanding those that study the various sciences are all wrong and arrogant?...that sounds like uber arrogance to me...
     
  5. wyly

    wyly Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Messages:
    12,481
    Likes Received:
    490
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Eric von daniken level archeolgy, get back to us when you have something that I wont read in a tabloid ...
     
  6. 10A

    10A Chief Deplorable Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2013
    Messages:
    5,003
    Likes Received:
    144
    Trophy Points:
    63
    You are exactly correct. We only understand a sliver of the universe, yet many puff their chests out like we are so knowledgeable. I always like to point out we don't even know definitively how cats purr.

    As far as atheists go, here's a cool article:

    "Scientists discover that atheists might not exist, and that’s not a joke."
    http://www.science20.com/writer_on_...s_might_not_exist_and_thats_not_a_joke-139982
     
  7. DarkDaimon

    DarkDaimon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2010
    Messages:
    4,742
    Likes Received:
    909
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Shouldn't this be in Conspiracy Theories?
     
  8. Moi621

    Moi621 Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2013
    Messages:
    10,772
    Likes Received:
    2,356
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The 700,000 year old skull, the earliest showing Europoid features has been reviewed on the origin of our species thread.

    Please, chose either of the 2 stories linked above and offer up "the problem". Okay ?

    Moi :oldman:

    r > g

    No :flagcanada:
     
  9. 10A

    10A Chief Deplorable Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2013
    Messages:
    5,003
    Likes Received:
    144
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Should it? Explain why...

    Moi is not talking about 9/11, Elvis, or JFK. Not everything that conflicts with mainstream ideas is a conspiracy, sometimes it's simply just a different viewpoint. Is that wrong?
     
  10. AboveAlpha

    AboveAlpha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2013
    Messages:
    30,296
    Likes Received:
    526
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Science is simply a METHOD to help us understand reality.

    It serves us well.

    Humanity in one form or another has been around for about 5 Million years and after 5 Million Years of Evolution...we have Technological Wonders that people just 200 years ago would think were MAGIC.

    There is much more that we don't know than we do know...but SCIENCE shows us the way.

    AboveAlpha
     
  11. Ozymandis

    Ozymandis New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2014
    Messages:
    344
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Scientists are to be looked up to and applauded for their contributions to humanity. Forum trolls who arrogantly wear the word "science" on their chests, yet live in a dark cave of self righteous hateful dogma, should be avoided like ebola.
     
  12. AboveAlpha

    AboveAlpha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2013
    Messages:
    30,296
    Likes Received:
    526
    Trophy Points:
    83
    It is not possible to apply the word...DOGMA...to those who properly use and follow the Scientific Method.

    Dogma is a word specific to Religious belifs and practices.

    AboveAlpha
     
  13. Ozymandis

    Ozymandis New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2014
    Messages:
    344
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Exactly, and forum trolls who attach the word "science" to their posts with little comprehension of the scientific method operate on belief. It's belief in the own infallibility, in their own stupendous factuality, as to render them immune to anything but stoic knowledge. It's arrogance. It's blind. It's hypocritical. When all is said and done, history will look back at them as a pseudo religious movement, not objective realists.

    X is true. Why? Because science said so.
     
  14. AboveAlpha

    AboveAlpha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2013
    Messages:
    30,296
    Likes Received:
    526
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I am having a hard time finding anyone here posting in a Pseudo Religious Scientific manner.

    Perhaps you can enlighten me?

    AboveAlpha
     
  15. Ozymandis

    Ozymandis New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2014
    Messages:
    344
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Like earlier when you went on and on about how the unborn aren't people, and one of your points was their lack of bacteria. I didn't bother, at the time, to correct you. Your post was so rambling and contrived that I just raised an eyebrow and moved on. But now I have an opportunity to maybe open your eyes to how much of a muppet you are, simply repeating lines you think you heard elsewhere, believing what you were told by what you thought was science. As an Internet forum poster, you are not a scientist. Your claims aren't backed up by peer reviewed fact. It's just a belief you have that it is, and it serves to make you feel better about yourslef, as if you are better than me. I admit that much of how I view the world is based on belief. You insist that what you view is fact. The ironic thing is that you have just as much belief as I do, but you are oblivious to it. Nothing will ever break this belief you have that you don't operate on belief. It's a self serving ideology, an ego trip. I present to you a times article detailing Dr. Medan, an assistant professor of pediatrics at dartmouth, in her description of the dogma (the article actually uses that very word), which up until now you label as scientific fact, of the sterility of a fetus as, I quote, "insane".

    http://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/08/29/science/human-microbiome-may-be-seeded-before-birth.html?_r=0

    I'm reminded of a conversation between Tommy Lee Jones and will smith, in men in black, where Jones points out how people are so sure they know something, as absolute fact, until one day that fact is turned on its heels. He goes on to wonder about the facts that we know today that will turn out to be wrong tomorrow. A scientist wonders about what he or she doesn't know. A forum troll of the dogma of science never has time for that because they are too busy being sure of what they already know. You are the latter.
     
  16. AboveAlpha

    AboveAlpha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2013
    Messages:
    30,296
    Likes Received:
    526
    Trophy Points:
    83
    The UNBORN...as you so call them do NOT have a lack of Bacteria in them after a few weeks.

    You did not read and obsorb what I posted.

    I was trying to inform you of what the criteria of being a Human Being was as well I was explaining after you posted about how a Fertilized Egg Cell was HUMAN....I agreed but then informed you that it was NOT a Human Being....as a Human Being is a Multispecies Organism.

    And I pointed out to you that a Fertilized Egg Cell was not even CLOSE to being a Human Being as at that point it does not contain the other species of life that are necessary for a Human Being to exist.

    I understand you are nowhere near as educated upon Human Biology, Development and Anatomy as I am and that is OK....but you present a proposition that is false...that being that a Fetus is a Human Being during all stages of it's development in the womb and that is simply no so.

    I would appreciate it if you would not make this personal as I am not doing this and you should not either.

    To do so would be....unwise.

    AboveAlpha
     
  17. Ozymandis

    Ozymandis New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2014
    Messages:
    344
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Conceited, threatening, and factually incorrect. It wouldn't bother me if it weren't hypocritical too, based on your insistence that you are unbiased, open, fact finding, science lover. It's ridiculous, and not intimidating in the least.

    Unwise? Pffft.
     
  18. AboveAlpha

    AboveAlpha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2013
    Messages:
    30,296
    Likes Received:
    526
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Yes...you are unwise....for so many reasons.

    I pity you.

    AboveAlpha
     
  19. Ozymandis

    Ozymandis New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2014
    Messages:
    344
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Lol whatever dude. I'm off to bed.
     
  20. ronmatt

    ronmatt New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2009
    Messages:
    8,867
    Likes Received:
    158
    Trophy Points:
    0
    But is science the 'KNOW ALL'-END ALL' some people claim it is? Today we have our gadgets. We puff up our chests and say "look at these wondrous gadgets science has provided us with. Aren't we the greatest ever in all of evolution?" "We are the 'cat's meow' with our gadgets"....yet, our ancestors created great things as well. Things that we today marvel at and wonder how the ancients managed to do what obviously they did. 'they had no gadgets like our superior gadgets'. Many of our 'really knowledgeable engineers and scientists' say that we 'modern gadgeteers' couldn't duplicate what ancient man constructed thousands of years ago even with our marvelous gadgets.
    We crawled out of the 'dark ages' and pat ourselves on the back for doing so. Rightfully so possibly. But it would seem that our retrospection only goes back as far as those dark ages. The marvels of that much longer time prior to the dark ages have been over simplified and misinterpreted. Science can't tell us how long man has been here. It can't provide answers to how many advanced civilizations of man have come and gone. It obviously doesn't know how ancient man achieved what it managed to achieve, or even the full scope of what was achieved. And because it doesn't know it's arrogance kicked in and it created theories founded on postulations formed from inaccuracies.
     

Share This Page