RE: The Society for the Suppression of Curiosity (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

[Poll]

The Society for the Suppression of Curiosity


I watched. Sign me up for the SFTSOC.
  0% (0)
I watched. Interesting. I'd like to see more.
  46% (7)
I don't have to watch. I support the SFTSOC.
  0% (0)
I don't have to watch. Fuck the SFTSOC.
  53% (8)


Total Votes : 15
(last vote on : 4/23/2013 2:03:36 PM)
(Poll will run till: -- )


Message

DesideriScuri -> RE: The Society for the Suppression of Curiosity (4/23/2013 6:37:51 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
Something for which there is no positive evidence and all the laws of physics say cannot be does not strike me as something that could be. however if you want every phrase of mine to be absolutely correct "However back in reality mystical claptrap remains not science and not observed ever by anyone." Happy?


Not really. How is it that you claim it's never been observed by anyone? Did we not see things prior to understanding them? One of the most basics of science is seeing something and trying to figure out why. Not being able to figure out why doesn't mean it doesn't happen, especially since it's been observed.



DomKen -> RE: The Society for the Suppression of Curiosity (4/23/2013 6:56:48 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
Something for which there is no positive evidence and all the laws of physics say cannot be does not strike me as something that could be. however if you want every phrase of mine to be absolutely correct "However back in reality mystical claptrap remains not science and not observed ever by anyone." Happy?


Not really. How is it that you claim it's never been observed by anyone? Did we not see things prior to understanding them? One of the most basics of science is seeing something and trying to figure out why. Not being able to figure out why doesn't mean it doesn't happen, especially since it's been observed.


Please provide the measurements and other data supporting your claim that some supernatural event has been observed.



vincentML -> RE: The Society for the Suppression of Curiosity (4/23/2013 7:01:54 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

The options that religion offers have not been ignored. They have been put off limits from scientific investigation by claiming miracles ~ the suspension of physics.



You should probably watch at least the first video, Vince, if only to understand why your arguments are being laughed at so hard right now.



There you go again, Rich, late to the party and with a predictable half-assed understanding of the nature of the topic. In post #3 I clearly stated I had viewed both videos. The issue of religion, actually militant atheism, was brought up in the long letter posted in the OP. If you had read the letter you would have a glimmer of understanding why there is some discussion of science and religion in this thread. But no. You are too eager to make another ad hominem slam at me so you are content to wallow in ignorance. Why am I not surprised? Clueless again.[8|]



Yachtie -> RE: The Society for the Suppression of Curiosity (4/23/2013 7:01:55 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Please provide the measurements and other data supporting your claim that some supernatural event has been observed.



Is it your opinion that only scientific observations, measurable, are evidence as to any event, supernatural or otherwise?



mnottertail -> RE: The Society for the Suppression of Curiosity (4/23/2013 7:04:18 AM)

Since his sentence claims no quarter for non-supernatural events, why would he hold such a position, unless you get it successfully invented for him?



vincentML -> RE: The Society for the Suppression of Curiosity (4/23/2013 7:11:24 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Please provide the measurements and other data supporting your claim that some supernatural event has been observed.



Is it your opinion that only scientific observations, measurable, are evidence as to any event, supernatural or otherwise?

The video posted by Kirata in #47 relies heavily on measurements except he does not make any claims to supernatural events.



Kirata -> RE: The Society for the Suppression of Curiosity (4/23/2013 7:12:13 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Interesting. But it is still millimeter sized crystals at millimetric distances. It still doesn't support psi which still requires interaction at much greater distances. Also keep in mind QE always means the two things have opposite states which means it cannot be what youthink it could be.

Entanglement is theoretically independent of distance, and has been demonstrated at kilometer ranges:
    Here we experimentally demonstrate entanglement-based quantum key distribution over 144 km ~Nature Physics
Nor is size the limiting factor it was once thought to be:
    Traditionally, entanglement was considered to be a quirk of microscopic objects that defied a common-sense explanation. Now, however, entanglement is recognized to be ubiquitous and robust. ~Nature
Your observation about opposite states may or may not be relevant. The collapse into opposite states only happens upon measurment. Prior to collapse, the two systems would be in identical non-coincidental states of quantum coherence.
    Quantum coherence, or superposition, between different states is one of the main features of quantum systems... [and] has triggered a surge of interest into the relationship between quantum coherence and biological function. ~Nature
Whether or not quantum effects are instrumental in Psi remains to be seen, but the hypothesis is being pursued.

K.



Yachtie -> RE: The Society for the Suppression of Curiosity (4/23/2013 7:16:28 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Since his sentence claims no quarter for non-supernatural events, why would he hold such a position, unless you get it successfully invented for him?



I'll let him answer the question, thank you.

As to your post,

DK used the words "the measurements and other data..." which necessitates science involvement within the term "measurements". Had he used the word "or" in place of "and", I would not be asking the question.



vincentML -> RE: The Society for the Suppression of Curiosity (4/23/2013 7:16:39 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

So you're left postulating a method of action by a unknown and undetectable force. That ain't science.

I'm still awake, and the question has occurred to me whether you would raise the same objection to quantum entanglement.

If your answer is yes, then the complaint is irrational. If your answer is no, then tell us what the force is and it's method of action. If your answer would be that a force and method of action don't apply in the entanglement situation, then you have no complaint against Psi. As I pointed out previously, the definition of "telepathy" as a "communication between minds" has been rejected precisely because it suggests an unknown method of action by some unknown force, just as does a "communication" interpretation of entanglement. In both cases, there is no evidence of communication. The information can only be observed by looking at the correlations between the two particles, or between the two minds.

K.


I understand the logic of your argument. However, you are comparing a quantum phenomenon with a macro phenomenon. It is already conceded that the quantum world is counterintuitive. That doesn't give you license to make the same claim to support Psi.

Nevermind . . . you have already posted an adequate answer.



Kirata -> RE: The Society for the Suppression of Curiosity (4/23/2013 7:17:31 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

I understand the logic of your argument. However, you are comparing a quantum phenomenon with a macro phenomenon.

You've missed a few posts.

I see you caught up. [:)]

K.




mnottertail -> RE: The Society for the Suppression of Curiosity (4/23/2013 7:21:50 AM)

Please provide the measurements and other data supporting your claim that some supernatural event has been observed.


Yeah, half measure spin to set up the straw dog, lets try whole sentences when you reach the level of spin you do, and notice the prelude only sets up the peroration.

You need to learn to diagram the sentence perhaps.

Your claim --- supernatural event  (the key concepts)




Yachtie -> RE: The Society for the Suppression of Curiosity (4/23/2013 7:29:53 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Please provide the measurements and other data supporting your claim that some supernatural event has been observed.


Yeah, half measure spin to set up the straw dog, lets try whole sentences when you reach the level of spin you do, and notice the prelude only sets up the peroration.

You need to learn to diagram the sentence perhaps.

Your claim --- supernatural event  (the key concepts)






hardly -


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
Something for which there is no positive evidence and all the laws of physics say cannot be does not strike me as something that could be. however if you want every phrase of mine to be absolutely correct "However back in reality mystical claptrap remains not science and not observed ever by anyone." Happy?


Not really. How is it that you claim it's never been observed by anyone? Did we not see things prior to understanding them? One of the most basics of science is seeing something and trying to figure out why. Not being able to figure out why doesn't mean it doesn't happen, especially since it's been observed.


Please provide the measurements and other data supporting your claim that some supernatural event has been observed.



DK is the one who joined "measurements" with "other data". DS merely said what is true, "Not being able to figure out why doesn't mean it doesn't happen, especially since it's been observed".

So I asked my question, since it's quite obvious not all observation is scientific.



GotSteel -> RE: The Society for the Suppression of Curiosity (4/23/2013 7:35:03 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
There is much being made of 'militant atheists' on here.

Suppose I should start calling Christians willing to talk about their position 'militant christians'?

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
quote:

When we start limiting science, we do a dis-service to ourselves but, when we start limiting religious belief we do the same thing. It would be nice if people would see it that way.

I suggest you are blind to the contemporary attempt by fundamentalist religious here and the world over to limit science. Both the Islamic fundies and the Christian fundies would throw is into an age of dis-enlightenment.

Yep, Islam, Christianity and Judaism are a lot healthier for everybody when they're on a short leash.



Kirata -> RE: The Society for the Suppression of Curiosity (4/23/2013 7:40:56 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
There is much being made of 'militant atheists' on here.

Suppose I should start calling Christians willing to talk about their position 'militant christians'?

The ones who condemn and seek to suppress any other view, yeah that works for me. Any Christian who is simply willing to talk about his or her views? Nah, I'll leave that to you.

(It would at least be a step up from calling them ignorant and gullible)

K.



mnottertail -> RE: The Society for the Suppression of Curiosity (4/23/2013 7:42:44 AM)

DK is the one who joined "measurements" with "other data". DS merely said what is true, "Not being able to figure out why doesn't mean it doesn't happen, especially since it's been observed".

So I asked my question, since it's quite obvious not all observation is scientific.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

And he wanted to see who observed the 'your claim' and measured and provided other data regarding the 'supernatural event'.

To see autogenesis is one thing, to check measurements and observations for repeatability and therefore assurance that it is true is quite another.




Yachtie -> RE: The Society for the Suppression of Curiosity (4/23/2013 7:54:31 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

And he wanted to see who observed the 'your claim' and measured and provided other data regarding the 'supernatural event'.

To see autogenesis is one thing, to check measurements and observations for repeatability and therefore assurance that it is true is quite another.



Quite so. But sans assurance does not invalidate whether some X occurred or not. That is what I want to know from DK. Does he accept the possibility of X being true from reported observation despite the lack of available "measurement"?



GotSteel -> RE: The Society for the Suppression of Curiosity (4/23/2013 8:01:57 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59
Science is not a predetermined conclusion,looking to include any supporting evidence and ignoring any evidence that doesn`t.
It`s [Science] an ongoing exploration of nature that`s open to correction and re-examination.....


Isn't ignoring the options that religion offers the same as "ignoring any evidence that doesn't" support the conclusion? Isn't it typical for science to continually ask "why" and to challenge "accepted" truth when new information is discovered?


No, options and evidence aren't the same thing. I can make up a supernatural option for people to believe in, oh let's say if you don't wear a cone on your head you will be butt raped by unicorns after you die. Nothing about that option is the same as evidence.

Science will reevaluate current theories in the light of new evidence but it's evidence driven and in no way similar to conspiracy theorist mumbo jumbo.



DesideriScuri -> RE: The Society for the Suppression of Curiosity (4/23/2013 8:05:27 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
Something for which there is no positive evidence and all the laws of physics say cannot be does not strike me as something that could be. however if you want every phrase of mine to be absolutely correct "However back in reality mystical claptrap remains not science and not observed ever by anyone." Happy?

Not really. How is it that you claim it's never been observed by anyone? Did we not see things prior to understanding them? One of the most basics of science is seeing something and trying to figure out why. Not being able to figure out why doesn't mean it doesn't happen, especially since it's been observed.

Please provide the measurements and other data supporting your claim that some supernatural event has been observed.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Air_Lines_flight_1628_incident

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wow!_signal




DesideriScuri -> RE: The Society for the Suppression of Curiosity (4/23/2013 8:11:27 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59
Science is not a predetermined conclusion,looking to include any supporting evidence and ignoring any evidence that doesn`t.
It`s [Science] an ongoing exploration of nature that`s open to correction and re-examination.....

Isn't ignoring the options that religion offers the same as "ignoring any evidence that doesn't" support the conclusion? Isn't it typical for science to continually ask "why" and to challenge "accepted" truth when new information is discovered?

No, options and evidence aren't the same thing. I can make up a supernatural option for people to believe in, oh let's say if you don't wear a cone on your head you will be butt raped by unicorns after you die. Nothing about that option is the same as evidence.
Science will reevaluate current theories in the light of new evidence but it's evidence driven and in no way similar to conspiracy theorist mumbo jumbo.


I'm not calling for religious explanations to be ruled in as science, but that they not be totally ruled out.

This whole thread is an argument about keeping open the options for the curious. Boxing in any thought outside of what we currently know and what the very next step might be, isn't the best way to advance science. Certainly, those thing need to be examined, but decrying those who have "outside the box" ideas will inhibit science more than it will help it.



DomKen -> RE: The Society for the Suppression of Curiosity (4/23/2013 8:13:14 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Please provide the measurements and other data supporting your claim that some supernatural event has been observed.



Is it your opinion that only scientific observations, measurable, are evidence as to any event, supernatural or otherwise?

The only reliable evidence, yes.



Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0625