The problems in the scientific community

How reliable is science?

Discussions on astrology, homeopathy and superstition etc.

Moderators: Calilasseia, DarthHelmet86, Onyx8

Re: The problems in the scientific community

#21  Postby bogdan9310 » Feb 07, 2019 12:39 pm

I am just sparking a discussion. You can't deny that where people are involved, you find errors. Science is not perfect. That's what I want to point out.
User avatar
bogdan9310
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: Bogdan Bacosca
Posts: 69
Male

Country: UK
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: The problems in the scientific community

#22  Postby Cito di Pense » Feb 07, 2019 12:40 pm

bogdan9310 wrote:I am just sparking a discussion.


No, that is not what you are doing. What you're doing is assuming that whenever people are involved, there are errors, but that is a different conversation from the one we were having.

If it's the case that whenever people are involved, there are errors, and you are a person, then you are in error, and you cannot instruct me in any way. End of the fucking story.

bogdan9310 wrote:You can't deny that where people are involved, you find errors.


Sometimes that is the case, and I would not deny it if it were the case. If you want to insist that it is always the case, then you are in error, and should shut the fuck up.
Хлопнут без некролога. -- Серге́й Па́влович Королёв

Translation by Elbert Hubbard: Do not take life too seriously. You're not going to get out of it alive.
User avatar
Cito di Pense
 
Name: Fay Smask
Posts: 29357
Age: 23
Male

Country: The Heartland
Mongolia (mn)
Print view this post

Re: The problems in the scientific community

#23  Postby surreptitious57 » Feb 07, 2019 1:13 pm

bogdan9310 wrote:
surreptitious57 wrote:
bogdan9310 wrote:
any recent studies are based on the observations of others not on first hand observations

Observations that are inter subjective and peer reviewed in scientific journals
That can also be replicated and subject to potential falsification at any time

There are not a lot of scientific studies that I can verify in my living room. The problem here is that we
have to use language to describe our observations. And is at that point where everything can go sideways

The laws of physics are written in mathematical language and mathematics is a deductive discipline
It is therefore more exacting and rigorous than non mathematical language which is only descriptive

The scientific method is designed to seek out errors and is also the most rigorous methodology ever devised
It is an eternally self correcting discipline which accepts nothing as true unless it has actually been falsified

The combination of mathematical language and the scientific method make observations more accurate
Way more accurate than a non scientist describing the same phenomena using only descriptive language

Science is restricted in what it can do but what it does do is as brutal as it is possible to get given its limitations
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious57
 
Posts: 10195

Print view this post

Re: The problems in the scientific community

#24  Postby felltoearth » Feb 07, 2019 1:23 pm

bogdan9310 wrote:
felltoearth wrote:
bogdan9310 wrote:
Every individual who had a new idea struggled getting acknowledgment from the community.


This isn’t even remotely true.


I told you the reasons for why that is true, what is your argument?

If that were even remotely true it would have been impossible to from the first manned flight in 1903 to transcontinental commercial jets in 50 years. Most of science isn’t Hollywood style eureka moments. It’s small incremental steps of tested and then accepted facts. Even your example of Galileo is overly simplified. Most of the church authorities accepted his findings, they just didn’t want him blabbing about it and wanted him to approach it as some sort of weird, non overlapping majesteria. In fact his findings were accepted in many parts of the world within years.
"Walla Walla Bonga!" — Witticism
User avatar
felltoearth
 
Posts: 13727
Age: 53

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: The problems in the scientific community

#25  Postby bogdan9310 » Feb 07, 2019 4:11 pm

felltoearth wrote:
bogdan9310 wrote:
felltoearth wrote:
bogdan9310 wrote:
Every individual who had a new idea struggled getting acknowledgment from the community.


This isn’t even remotely true.


I told you the reasons for why that is true, what is your argument?

If that were even remotely true it would have been impossible to from the first manned flight in 1903 to transcontinental commercial jets in 50 years. Most of science isn’t Hollywood style eureka moments. It’s small incremental steps of tested and then accepted facts. Even your example of Galileo is overly simplified. Most of the church authorities accepted his findings, they just didn’t want him blabbing about it and wanted him to approach it as some sort of weird, non overlapping majesteria. In fact his findings were accepted in many parts of the world within years.


If you understand something well enough, you can explain it in a simple way. Can you not admit science has its flaws? Is science perfect in your view?
I thought the first thing scientists do, is to admit ignorance, and how flawed everything is.
User avatar
bogdan9310
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: Bogdan Bacosca
Posts: 69
Male

Country: UK
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: The problems in the scientific community

#26  Postby newolder » Feb 07, 2019 4:46 pm

Science builds models. Any sufficiently advanced science is indistinguishable from nature.
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops. - Stephen J. Gould
User avatar
newolder
 
Name: Albert Ross
Posts: 7308
Male

Country: Feudal Estate number 9
Print view this post

Re: The problems in the scientific community

#27  Postby bogdan9310 » Feb 07, 2019 5:00 pm

newolder wrote:Science builds models. Any sufficiently advanced science is indistinguishable from nature.

I know this quote. Was it not magic instead of nature?
User avatar
bogdan9310
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: Bogdan Bacosca
Posts: 69
Male

Country: UK
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: The problems in the scientific community

#28  Postby Macdoc » Feb 07, 2019 5:04 pm

If you understand something well enough, you can explain it in a simple way. Can you not admit science has its flaws? Is science perfect in your view?
I thought the first thing scientists do, is to admit ignorance, and how flawed everything is.


Science is not a noun ....it's a method....you are the one that is flawed and without the merest hint of understanding.
The body of work that encompasses scientific understanding of the universe we inhabit is a result applying scientific method and that body of work changes daily in a torrent you haven't the faintest glimpse of

EVERY scientist understands that on new evidence theories change.

And NO .....much about our universe cannot be explained simply especially to those like you who are too lazy to do the work to at least gain a basic understanding of the principles involved. :nono:

For you science is just as opaque as magic and as incomprehensible ...it's not the case for all of us.
Travel photos > https://500px.com/macdoc/galleries
EO Wilson in On Human Nature wrote:
We are not compelled to believe in biological uniformity in order to affirm human freedom and dignity.
User avatar
Macdoc
 
Posts: 17156
Age: 73
Male

Country: Canada/Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: The problems in the scientific community

#29  Postby newolder » Feb 07, 2019 5:09 pm

bogdan9310 wrote:
newolder wrote:Science builds models. Any sufficiently advanced science is indistinguishable from nature.

I know this quote. Was it not magic instead of nature?

It's an update by a random internet commentator to some quote by Arthur C. Clarke.*

* ETA
The paraphrase “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from nature” of Clarke’s famous quote was originally offered by the Canadian scifi author Karl Schroeder...

medium.com source
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops. - Stephen J. Gould
User avatar
newolder
 
Name: Albert Ross
Posts: 7308
Male

Country: Feudal Estate number 9
Print view this post

Re: The problems in the scientific community

#30  Postby Thommo » Feb 07, 2019 5:25 pm

Macdoc wrote:Science is not a noun ....


I don't think that can really be what you mean to say.
User avatar
Thommo
 
Posts: 27038

Print view this post

Re: The problems in the scientific community

#31  Postby Cito di Pense » Feb 07, 2019 6:04 pm

Thommo wrote:
Macdoc wrote:Science is not a noun ....


I don't think that can really be what you mean to say.


The renowned anthropologist, Leslie White, is reputed to have said, once (or maybe several times) "Science is sciencing".

Don't get me started on my annual lecter about the science of the lambdas.
Хлопнут без некролога. -- Серге́й Па́влович Королёв

Translation by Elbert Hubbard: Do not take life too seriously. You're not going to get out of it alive.
User avatar
Cito di Pense
 
Name: Fay Smask
Posts: 29357
Age: 23
Male

Country: The Heartland
Mongolia (mn)
Print view this post

Re: The problems in the scientific community

#32  Postby Thommo » Feb 07, 2019 6:11 pm

I'm pretty sure that's what Tom Hanks meant when he famously said "science is as science does".
User avatar
Thommo
 
Posts: 27038

Print view this post

Re: The problems in the scientific community

#33  Postby felltoearth » Feb 07, 2019 6:49 pm

bogdan9310 wrote:
felltoearth wrote:
bogdan9310 wrote:
felltoearth wrote:

This isn’t even remotely true.


I told you the reasons for why that is true, what is your argument?

If that were even remotely true it would have been impossible to from the first manned flight in 1903 to transcontinental commercial jets in 50 years. Most of science isn’t Hollywood style eureka moments. It’s small incremental steps of tested and then accepted facts. Even your example of Galileo is overly simplified. Most of the church authorities accepted his findings, they just didn’t want him blabbing about it and wanted him to approach it as some sort of weird, non overlapping majesteria. In fact his findings were accepted in many parts of the world within years.


If you understand something well enough, you can explain it in a simple way. Can you not admit science has its flaws? Is science perfect in your view?
I thought the first thing scientists do, is to admit ignorance, and how flawed everything is.

How does that even relate to what I posted?
"Walla Walla Bonga!" — Witticism
User avatar
felltoearth
 
Posts: 13727
Age: 53

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: The problems in the scientific community

#34  Postby TopCat » Feb 07, 2019 8:25 pm

I can't read this thread any more, I can feel my IQ falling in real time. And I can't spare a single point.
TopCat
 
Posts: 770
Age: 57
Male

Country: England
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: The problems in the scientific community

#35  Postby SafeAsMilk » Feb 07, 2019 9:04 pm

bogdan9310 wrote:I am just sparking a discussion JAQing off.

fify
"They call it the American dream, because you have to be asleep to believe it." -- George Carlin
User avatar
SafeAsMilk
 
Name: Makes Fails
Posts: 14266
Age: 40
Male

United States (us)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: The problems in the scientific community

#36  Postby Ironclad » Feb 07, 2019 10:30 pm

"What if science relies on philosophy to exist?"

Uhh.. it does, it is philosophy. Isn't it?? Natural philosophy, at least. Snip off the metaphysical and you're nearly home.
I could be mistaken.
For Van Youngman - see you amongst the stardust, old buddy

"If there was no such thing as science, you'd be right " - Sean Lock

"God ....an inventive destroyer" - Broks
User avatar
Ironclad
RS Donator
 
Name: Nudge-Nudge
Posts: 23758
Age: 51
Male

Country: Wink-Wink
Indonesia (id)
Print view this post

Re: The problems in the scientific community

#37  Postby Macdoc » Feb 07, 2019 11:32 pm

Macdoc wrote:
Science is not a noun ....

Thommo
I don't think that can really be what you mean to say.


Nice out of context ... :roll:

The word "science" often brings up all the facts, theories, laws, and principles taught in science class. In reality, those things are produced through science, but they are not science themselves.
Science is not a collection of things; it is not a noun. Science is a verb!
Science is an active process of learning, and the scientific method guides scientists as they do science (designing, carrying out, analyzing and explaining their research).


my bolding
http://www.uwyo.edu/scienceposse/scienc ... -verb.html

Our ill informed OP is confusing the outcome ...scientifically derived body of knowlege..... with the process scientific method.
Travel photos > https://500px.com/macdoc/galleries
EO Wilson in On Human Nature wrote:
We are not compelled to believe in biological uniformity in order to affirm human freedom and dignity.
User avatar
Macdoc
 
Posts: 17156
Age: 73
Male

Country: Canada/Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: The problems in the scientific community

#38  Postby Hermit » Feb 07, 2019 11:50 pm

TopCat wrote:I can't read this thread any more, I can feel my IQ falling in real time. And I can't spare a single point.

Without engaging in your hyperbole, I don't think highly of this thread either. Bogdan9310 seems incapable of developing a train of thought. A train of thought requires some kind of locomotive. There is none. What we have here instead, is a number of random wagons, each placed in arbitrary locations on various tracks, and going nowhere. No wonder this thread resembles a train wreck. Still, most of us can't help but doing a bit of rubbernecking when we see an accident, and I am part of that majority, so I keep peeking into it. I don't expect to discover anything useful emerging from Bogdan9310 - his fractured way of thinking simply makes that impossible - but he is sort of, kind of entertaining in the aforementioned train wreck way, at least for a while.
God is the mysterious veil under which we hide our ignorance of the cause. - Léo Errera


God created the universe
God just exists
User avatar
Hermit
 
Posts: 4022
Age: 67
Male

Print view this post

Re: The problems in the scientific community

#39  Postby Hermit » Feb 07, 2019 11:53 pm

Ironclad wrote:"What if science relies on philosophy to exist?"

Uhh.. it does, it is philosophy. Isn't it?? Natural philosophy, at least. Snip off the metaphysical and you're nearly home.
I could be mistaken.

More importantly, one can't science without an underlying philosophy - a philosophy of science, a.k.a. epistemology. Or, to put it more bluntly, without philosophy there would be no science.
God is the mysterious veil under which we hide our ignorance of the cause. - Léo Errera


God created the universe
God just exists
User avatar
Hermit
 
Posts: 4022
Age: 67
Male

Print view this post

Re: The problems in the scientific community

#40  Postby Macdoc » Feb 08, 2019 12:37 am

aren't we past the Natural Philosophy bucket...tossed with alchemists et al.

Do you really think the Wright Brothers needed philosophy to undertake powered flight.
or that their method was not scientific?

Wedging philosophical arguments into the practice of scientific method and the resulting successes ( or failures at times ) opens the door to Jamest type claptrap.

and marginally valuable work for over-educated ...under experienced philo profs while working scientists in the field can barely scrape together a living :coffee:
Travel photos > https://500px.com/macdoc/galleries
EO Wilson in On Human Nature wrote:
We are not compelled to believe in biological uniformity in order to affirm human freedom and dignity.
User avatar
Macdoc
 
Posts: 17156
Age: 73
Male

Country: Canada/Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

PreviousNext

Return to Pseudoscience

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest