Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions Page: <<   < prev  15 16 [17] 18 19   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions - 6/5/2014 7:01:49 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Fred Hoyle is another guy who lost it later in his life.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Hoyle

The guy came up with nucleosynthesis but then embraced various nutty stuff (panspermia?).

Life could spread from planet to planet or from stellar system to stellar system, carried on meteors. ~Stephen Hawking

Could doesn't mean life on Earth started elsewhere. Hawking was speculating on what we might find once we get out there. Do try to stop grasping at straws.

You claimed the idea was "nutty stuff" concocted by a guy who had "lost it." Do stop trying to pretend that you didn't just get called on more of your trademark bullshit.

It is nutty. Do you want to get into the why's? Are you aware that Hoyle's theory is totally discredited? Are you really going to plant your flag there? Do you have any idea what you are talking about? Ready to discuss the sunspot cycle and the flu pandemic cycle?

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 321
RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions - 6/5/2014 7:14:44 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

And again, I'm not embracing anyone. Am I going too fast for you?

I'm just pointing out that you're an idiot, and not the arbitrator of what is and isn't in science.

Scientists get to do that. It's their job. They think up stuff, test it, see what happens.

You, on the other hand, simply continually misrepresent claims and rant about tangents. Really, continually.

Wow, so you have no idea what you are posting, you just googled for stuff and had no idea what it was, and you called me and idiot.

You posted stuff by  guys who think there is a carved face on Mars, that the Archaeopteryx fossils were fakes, flu virus falls out of space and a bunch of other kooky stuff. OTOH I am on the side of the majority opinion. Since science is always conducted based on the majority opinion and Occam's razor...

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 322
RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions - 6/5/2014 7:21:29 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		Wow is right. So . . . scientists vote for good science now?

Damn. I always thought they tested hypotheses instead.

Occam's razor suggests you're an idiot. It's the simplest explanation that explains the phenomena here. And the data support that hypothesis so far.

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 323
RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions - 6/5/2014 8:57:39 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Wow is right. So . . . scientists vote for good science now?

Damn. I always thought they tested hypotheses instead.

Occam's razor suggests you're an idiot. It's the simplest explanation that explains the phenomena here. And the data support that hypothesis so far.

Consensus is built by scientists. The bulk of scientists in a field agree on the theories that best explain the data. There are always some who don't agree and that does not invalidate those theories.

For instance the vast bulk of climatologists agree the Earth's climate is warming and humans are responsible.

That some whiny nuts disagree is unlikely to make that not the way it is.

That you don't like reality or choose to insult me because I view reality as reality is also unlikely to change anything. But go ahead and have your hissy fit.

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 324
RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions - 6/5/2014 9:37:43 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

It is nutty. Do you want to get into the why's? Are you aware that Hoyle's theory is totally discredited?

You're making shit up again as usual. How about we get into the "why" of that, instead.

Astrobiologists discover fossils in meteorite fragments

Researchers in the United Kingdom have found algae-like fossils in meteorite fragments that landed in Sri Lanka last year. This is the strongest evidence yet of cometary panspermia — that life on Earth began when a meteorite containing simple organisms landed here, billions of years ago — and, perhaps more importantly, that there’s life elsewhere in the universe.

Fossils of Cyanobacteria in CI1 Carbonaceous Meteorites

The detection of valid, indigenous microfossils in carbonaceous meteorites has direct implications to the study of the Origin and Evolution of the Biosphere and the distribution of life in the Cosmos.

The panspermia hypothesis isn't proven, but is long way from being "totally discredited."

K.


< Message edited by Kirata -- 6/5/2014 10:18:21 PM >

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 325
RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions - 6/5/2014 9:47:58 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Consensus is built by scientists. The bulk of scientists in a field agree on the theories that best explain the data. There are always some who don't agree and that does not invalidate those theories.

For instance the vast bulk of climatologists agree the Earth's climate is warming and humans are responsible.

That some whiny nuts disagree is unlikely to make that not the way it is.

Some whiny nuts, eh?

Well you may care to consider that in virtually any group the most intelligent among them will be in the minority, and as a consequence of this any generally agreed upon view will necessarily reflect the opinion of the mediocre majority, which as the history of science amply demonstrates usually turns out to be wrong.

Food for thought there.

K.


< Message edited by Kirata -- 6/5/2014 9:57:21 PM >

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 326
RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions - 6/6/2014 4:54:16 AM   
GotSteel


Posts: 5871
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
Says the guy who just took only half the sentence. Especially one that was concession/qualification -- so obviously you'd agree with the concession half. Ignoring the qualification part ignores the point of the sentence.


This is incorrect, I'm not ignoring the qualification half of your sentence. The majority of my post addresses it.

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 327
RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions - 6/6/2014 5:00:24 AM   
GotSteel


Posts: 5871
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
Here's the real point -- Tyson said it, and you accepted it without investigation.


That's your assumption but as I've pointed out several times previously you're actually having an argument with your invalid assumptions instead of a discussion with me.

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 328
RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions - 6/6/2014 6:11:20 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
Says the guy who just took only half the sentence. Especially one that was concession/qualification -- so obviously you'd agree with the concession half. Ignoring the qualification part ignores the point of the sentence.


This is incorrect, I'm not ignoring the qualification half of your sentence. The majority of my post addresses it.


Since the rest of the sentence points out that other factors than religion are the cause -- bullshit.

(in reply to GotSteel)
Profile   Post #: 329
RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions - 6/6/2014 6:23:27 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Wow is right. So . . . scientists vote for good science now?

Damn. I always thought they tested hypotheses instead.

Occam's razor suggests you're an idiot. It's the simplest explanation that explains the phenomena here. And the data support that hypothesis so far.

Consensus is built by scientists. The bulk of scientists in a field agree on the theories that best explain the data. There are always some who don't agree and that does not invalidate those theories.


If that were strictly true, science would never advance, because all new ideas butt against current consensus.

That's actually what Tyson was getting at -- Islamic science went from inquiry to teaching tradition, and it shut down discovery.

Where he's off base is assuming that's a function of religion, when it was a function instead of governmental focus. (<--that's the part Steel keeps dancing around)

Nonetheless, that's exactly your bias--you want everything set in stone, while science keeps exploring.

The difference between "whiny nuts" (which in this case include a nobel laureate) and dissenting scientists is that they then look to test their hypotheses, where you just dismiss them. For example, finding carbon throughout space, and finding living microbes.

Einstein was a whiny nut until an eclipse showed he was appeared right about gravity bending light.

And a lot of other hypotheses are disproved. But that's not whiny nuts--that's how science learns (disproving something additionally adds to knowledge, vs. mere speculation, positive or negative).

I've already granted, several times now, that Big Bang reigns, and for good reason. You can only function in attack mode, so you keep pretending that's not true, and instead pretending I'm backing this or that, just because I noted that a lot of scientists, celebrated scientists, don't agree with Ken. There are some problems with the Big Bang, and scientists properly wonder about how to best account for these anomalies. To see if the Big Bang has room for them somehow is reasonable. To insist that it has to, and to prop it up in the face of conflicting data, would indeed violate Occam's razor. A scientist properly will be open to both.

On a basic level, it's an appropriate question to challenge whether the universe must have a beginning -- time is relative and local, after all, and stops in a black hole of huge gravity, when even light can't escape. That the universe just always was is a valid line of exploration. So is the idea that it's continually created. As those ideas are tested, they've move from speculation to true or false, and our knowledge will be advanced.

That's science. To not wonder because "we already know" is the antithesis of science--and you embody and demonstrate that antithesis.

Like it or not, you are the danger Tyson warns against, and you're as blind to it as the Fundies in your mutual certainty.

< Message edited by Musicmystery -- 6/6/2014 6:29:33 AM >

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 330
RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions - 6/6/2014 7:10:20 AM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

On a basic level, it's an appropriate question to challenge whether the universe must have a beginning -- time is relative and local, after all, and stops in a black hole of huge gravity, when even light can't escape. That the universe just always was is a valid line of exploration. So is the idea that it's continually created. As those ideas are tested, they've move from speculation to true or false, and our knowledge will be advanced.

Agreed that these are valid areas of speculation and they are mutually supportive if there exists in fact a multiverse.

quote:

That's science. To not wonder because "we already know" is the antithesis of science--and you embody and demonstrate that antithesis.

Like it or not, you are the danger Tyson warns against, and you're as blind to it as the Fundies in your mutual certainty.

You are expanding Tyson's argument to suit your own dumbass purpose. Tyson was pointing directly at religious fundamentalism in the OP video. Again you're making shit up. Tyson never says what you pretend he said: "That's actually what Tyson was getting at -- Islamic science went from inquiry to teaching tradition, and it shut down discovery." That's utter bullshit. He talked only of the adverse effects of religious fundamentalism.



(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 331
RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions - 6/6/2014 7:18:14 AM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Right. They didn't exist, because a poster on a kink site doesn't list them for you.

That clearly means the more likely scenario is that 25% of the world's population, spanning half the globe, had no scientific advances for centuries.

Good thinking, Bomb Boy.

Meanwhile, I've provided sources which do . . . which you refuse to read.

Very reasonable of you.



Go away. You're boring.



The greatest scientific advances from the Muslim world And not one of them after the 13th C despite the stretch in the article subtitle.

21 Century Muslim Science: Saudi Arabia announces the discovery of sand. "Oh gosh, it was all around us. We just didn't notice before."

Muslim Science in the modern world? Keep dreaming, gutter mouth.

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 332
RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions - 6/6/2014 7:26:42 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		And that he only talks of Islamic fundamentalism ignores better explanations for the change. That's Occam's razor. And science.

I've already given you a dozen major 20th century scientists, including two Nobel laureates, Bomb Boy. Anything that lists the greatest is going to focus on the Golden Age, for obvious reasons. You might note that western science is built on the back of that--including the concept of scientific inquiry.

You're prejudiced beyond belief, and blind with arrogance. Fuck off.

Oh look -- you've discovered sand now. Quite the student of science, you are! Bombs and sand!


(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 333
RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions - 6/6/2014 8:17:31 AM   
GotSteel


Posts: 5871
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery



Yep that's what you're doing. Get back to me when you're ready to put aside your assumptions and actually listen to what the people around you are saying.

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 334
RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions - 6/6/2014 8:26:11 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		Nonsense. By "my assumptions" you mean not agreeing with yours.

You are predisposed to point the finger at religion. But it's not the only factor, and here, it's not the major factor. You keep ignoring that point, crying "but that's not what I said!" I know. And in the real world, that's what people do--point out better explanations.

Sing the Sand Song if you like. Ken, meet Steel. Steel, meet Ken. Have a nice three-some with Bomb Boy.

I'm sorry the world doesn't revolve around you and your conclusions. But that's how it works for us all.

(in reply to GotSteel)
Profile   Post #: 335
RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions - 6/6/2014 9:57:14 AM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

listen to what the people around you are saying.

I suppose you mean those who, like you, argue that the great advantage of science is that old ideas are discarded as new understandings arise -- which is a very good thing, of course, because the old ideas were wrong -- while simultaneously insisting that the currently fashionable view be regarded as Holy Writ and anyone expressing doubt as a fraud and a lunatic.

I mean seriously, it's a wonder your fucking heads don't explode. Even with a second brain cell to make you twice as smart, you would still be a long way from being as smart as you think.

K.

< Message edited by Kirata -- 6/6/2014 10:10:51 AM >

(in reply to GotSteel)
Profile   Post #: 336
RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions - 6/6/2014 10:19:57 AM   
GotSteel


Posts: 5871
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
Nonsense. By "my assumptions" you mean not agreeing with yours.


Nope.

I'm talking about:

1. Telling people what they are thinking.

You've spent a good bit of time in this thread informing other people as to what they're thinking. Determining what other people are thinking is something that's really easy to get wrong and something people tend to think they're much better at then they actually are. At least that's what all the research I've seen says. So when somebody lets you know that you don't get what they're thinking maybe a little less arguing and profanity and a little more asking them where they are coming from would be helpful.

2. The dumbest possible interpretation.

As I pointed out with one of Vincent posts earlier it's often possible to interpret what someone is saying in multiple ways. There's a common tendency among humans to pick the really dumb interpretations of their opponents words in a debate. This is why the principle of charity exists:

quote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_charity
In philosophy and rhetoric, the principle of charity requires interpreting a speaker's statements to be rational and, in the case of any argument, considering its best, strongest possible interpretation.


I think the people left in this thread mostly have above average IQ's, hopefully you'll at least agree that we're not a bunch of retards. As such if what you're seeing looks completely retarded there's a pretty good chance that's not what we mean. Try picking a more charitable interpretation of our words.


< Message edited by GotSteel -- 6/6/2014 10:22:28 AM >

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 337
RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions - 6/6/2014 10:36:00 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		1) Given Bomb Boy's repeated insistence that nothing has happened in Islamic science since the Mongol invasion, the dumb interpretation is his. In fact, it's the signature piece of his argument. I can decide (a) that's really what he thinks, and he's an idiot, especially in ignoring evidence to the contrary, or (b) decide he's playing at ignorant, which makes him by definition unreasonable. Either way, charity isn't going to resolve that. He's either blind or willfully ridiculous.

2) Ken repeatedly insists that current science is dogma. To ignore that this contradicts the very heart of Tyson's position defies logic. When that's pointed out, Kenneth goes off on bizarre topics, calling anyone in earshot dumb. Charity isn't going to help that.

3) You, while less vociferous, are likewise entrenched, dismissing "false assumptions" (which are well established in science) while expecting your own assumptions (all arguments begin with assumptions) to be ipso facto factual. There's nothing reasonable about that either. The charity I can afford you is that, while I suspect (but true, don't necessarily know) that pure pride and desire to "win" (whatever the fuck that means here) is driving Ken's and Bomb Boy's silliness, you actually appear to believe your position, despite its inherent contradiction. When that contradiction is pointed out, by me or Kirata (or anyone else), you simply reassert the flawed premise, and whine that we aren't listening. We are -- and we disagree, for the reasons noted.

Now, you can march off in a huff of superiority, or you can do what good philosophic rhetoric does -- either (a) provide backing and evidence for your warrants (assumptions), or (b) concede the faulty points and qualify your position, or even (c) provide better counterarguments.

So far, the closest thing you have to an argument is "Well, while not the main issue, it still could be a factor!" Yes, it could, like all speculation.

Meanwhile, if you were truly concerned about the decline in science, you'd be concerned about the real and current threat via funding slashes.

But you aren't. You are exclusively focused on finding fault with religion. And the trouble with that argument is that science can and has flourished under it, alerting us to the reality that religion per se is not the cause. We can't even fault Fundamentalism, as there was plenty of that during the Golden Age as well.

Tyson is a smart man. I like him. But the focus of his piece is to go after fundamentalists, as this is his crusade. In this case, while "staying on topic," he's ignored better explanations, as many have noted in the many links in this thread.

You continue to simply ignore these points, rather than to dispute them beyond mere dismissal. Kind of puts you in an uncharitable position, doesn't it.

(in reply to GotSteel)
Profile   Post #: 338
RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions - 6/6/2014 10:39:00 AM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

hopefully you'll at least agree that we're not a bunch of retards.

You mean like people who refer to the cognitively disabled as "retards," for example?

K.






< Message edited by Kirata -- 6/6/2014 11:25:12 AM >

(in reply to GotSteel)
Profile   Post #: 339
RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions - 6/6/2014 1:54:51 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

It is nutty. Do you want to get into the why's? Are you aware that Hoyle's theory is totally discredited?

You're making shit up again as usual. How about we get into the "why" of that, instead.

Astrobiologists discover fossils in meteorite fragments

Researchers in the United Kingdom have found algae-like fossils in meteorite fragments that landed in Sri Lanka last year. This is the strongest evidence yet of cometary panspermia — that life on Earth began when a meteorite containing simple organisms landed here, billions of years ago — and, perhaps more importantly, that there’s life elsewhere in the universe.

You really will believe anything that you think helps you "win"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polonnaruwa_(meteorite)

Why are these space borne diatoms exactly the same as fresh water species alive today? Because they are fresh water species alive today.

quote:

Fossils of Cyanobacteria in CI1 Carbonaceous Meteorites

The detection of valid, indigenous microfossils in carbonaceous meteorites has direct implications to the study of the Origin and Evolution of the Biosphere and the distribution of life in the Cosmos.

The panspermia hypothesis isn't proven, but is long way from being "totally discredited."

K.


Actually Hoyle's stuff is completely discredited which is what I was referring to. And this stuff here is ludicrous. Why would modern life forms be falling out of the sky? We've been evolving down here for 4+ billion years. You would expect what ever seed stock started the whole thing, if panspermia was correct, to be very different.

Furthermore why only once? If various life forms are floating around out there you'd expect more than one to have fallen to Earth at some point but all life on Earth shares the same essential biochemistry and genetic code so we share the same common ancestor. The most parsimonious answer is we evolved here.

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 340
Page:   <<   < prev  15 16 [17] 18 19   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions Page: <<   < prev  15 16 [17] 18 19   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




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

0.117