Bahahhaa Bill O'Reilly on god, tides, and the moon...

[Toma]

hahahahaha.... fucking funny.

5v1SkpUqYj0

[v2kai]

Originally posted by Toma
hahahahaha.... fucking funny.


niiice:rofl:

how'd it get there!~? tell me. Why doesnt mars have!? huh?

[Cos]

Oh my god. I was almost pissing myself.

Mars doesnt have the sun or the moon, except those two moons it does have. Where does the sun go at night. Hahahahaha

[Cos]

Gay it went down.

nm found it

http://watch.thecomedynetwork.ca/the-colbert-report/#clip410188

[CUG]

What a fucking... wow.

[Xtrema]

http://yfrog.com/5lsy8z

This is the exact clip.

[Freeskier]

Oh my god.

a) forgot how funny colbert is.

b) I wanna punch bill o'reilly in the face.

Why does my tevo think I wanna watch swamp loggers? No body knows...:rofl: :rofl:

[Toma]

Lmao.... It's fucking EPIC. And the "right wing" idiots STILL support him and make excuses for him! Classic

It's back....
5v1SkpUqYj0

[JMaj7]

Colbert is brilliant!

Most Fox reporters shouldn't be given a public voice. I'm all for debate and the presentation of ideas from any ideology but these people are on some sentimental superstitious bullshit that seems to be targeting to influence the stupid people that develop opinions based on minimum education. It's a piss off to be taught to respect elders and have these clowns on a popular News network.

[arian_ma]

Hahahahaha!

[RecoilS14]

The worst part is there are politicians all across the globe that are just as, and for lack of a better word, retarded.

It's time to let the children run the world already, cuz even the slowest kid on the short bus knows that the moon causes the tides to change.

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by JMaj7
It's a piss off to be taught to respect elders and have these clowns on a popular News network.

Fox news is what happens when you commercialize news. Designed to be opinionated to gain viewership. Reporting facts are pretty boring.

The down side of democracy is that it serves the lowest denominator. Unfortunately, religion and pop culture has kept the bar pretty damn low.


Originally posted by RecoilS14
It's time to let the children run the world already, cuz even the slowest kid on the short bus knows that the moon causes the tides to change.

The same kids who caused a 5th season of Jersey Shore to happen? :rofl:

[911fever]

oh please, as if loony lefts don't use retarded arguments? Colbert is a leftie and takes delight in mocking right wing media - that's his job.
Who cares!

[Toma]

Originally posted by 911fever
oh please, as if loony lefts don't use retarded arguments? Colbert is a leftie and takes delight in mocking right wing media - that's his job.
Who cares!
What?

You are defending O'Reilly? bahahahahahha

[Toma]

Here is O'Reilly and Dawkins ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2FARDDcdFaQ&NR=1

[kertejud2]

Compared to people like Limbaugh and Beck who are crazy with occasional visits to the world of the sane, Papa Bear is relatively sane who goes on benders in the world of the crazy. While such visits probably expose his actual feelings, the fact that he's able to hold it in for extended periods means that he is, sadly, one of the more balanced right wing pundits out there (I mean that in the mental way, not the political one).

His temper makes him go from being typical right wing talking head to right wing nutjob in a spectacular fashion. Its what makes him so damn entertaining to people who are smart enough to not take him seriously (because he's a right wing talking head) and provides a rather bottomless pit of material for Stewart, Colbert and co.

[BigMass]

Originally posted by RecoilS14
, cuz even the slowest kid on the short bus knows that the moon causes the tides to change.

yeah... but how did the moon get there? Mars doesn't have the moon, we do. Explain that pinhead

[TorqueDog]

I fucking howled watching this. Go Colbert!

[RecoilS14]

Originally posted by BigMass


yeah... but how did the moon get there? Mars doesn't have the moon, we do. Explain that pinhead

I really hope that was sarcasm

[TorqueDog]

Originally posted by RecoilS14
I really hope that was sarcasm I really hope THAT was sarcasm. Are you for real?

[ZenOps]

The sun affects tides, but the moon affects it about 2.5 more.

Yes, mars has two moons.

Google FTW.

BTW: Colbert brings in an expert that says invest in nickels! As tongue in cheek as it is, I agree.

http://www.tvsquad.com/2011/02/02/how-much-is-a-nickel-worth-more-than-five-cents-video/

20 million nickels would be 100 tons :) Dragon hoard worthy.

[revelations]

Originally posted by BigMass


yeah... but how did the moon get there? Mars doesn't have the moon, we do. Explain that pinhead

I would but then I'd be labeled as "desperate" .

[Mitsu3000gt]

Lol I saw this on Colbert the other night, I lost my shit.

What is truly scary is that he actually believes that. And he's probably not the only one who believes stuff like that. It's sad, really.

[mazdavirgin]

I mean to be fair most people don't understand how tidal forces work either... Probably more than 98% of people can't explain why the tide is high in two places in the world at the same time. I bet most school kids don't really understand it either.

[syeve]

^^That means god it.

[Mitsu3000gt]

Originally posted by mazdavirgin
I mean to be fair most people don't understand how tidal forces work either... Probably more than 98% of people can't explain why the tide is high in two places in the world at the same time. I bet most school kids don't really understand it either.

That maybe so, but I would say most people know it's because of science and not because of God, even if they don't know what's actually causing it.

[TorqueDog]

Originally posted by mazdavirgin
I mean to be fair most people don't understand how tidal forces work either... Probably more than 98% of people can't explain why the tide is high in two places in the world at the same time. I bet most school kids don't really understand it either. Most people who don't understand things will not, on national television, start ranting and raving about the hows and whys of the subject.

Bill O. does not subscribe to this line of logic.

[Cos]

Originally posted by mazdavirgin
I mean to be fair most people don't understand how tidal forces work either... Probably more than 98% of people can't explain why the tide is high in two places in the world at the same time. I bet most school kids don't really understand it either.

That is very true and I will be honest enough to admit that I dont know why that is true. However I hope you dont mean that because I dont understand how it works that my default answer has to be god did it.

[revelations]

Originally posted by Cos


That is very true and I will be honest enough to admit that I dont know why that is true. However I hope you dont mean that because I dont understand how it works that my default answer has to be god did it.

I wasnt too sure either.... this video is pretty good.

CTQ6ciHENgI

[Cos]

You know what I feel like I should have known that. I guess from maybe Science 10? That was 11 years ago though. Lol

Thanks for the video :thumbsup:

[kertejud2]

Originally posted by Mitsu3000gt


That maybe so, but I would say most people know it's because of science and not because of God, even if they don't know what's actually causing it.

Saying "science" does it shows about as much ignorance on the subject as saying God did it. One is based on blind faith rather than simply a complete lack of knowledge on the matter.
On a test for the subject I'd imagine answering "God" or "Science" would get you the same mark.

Using the same line of reasoning on the subject of Hurricane Katrina:

Kid: Why did Hurricane Katrina come?
Crazy-Religious Guy: God sent it to punish the sinners
Kid: Why?
CRG: Because God is an all powerful force who can do what he wants
Kid: What kind of force?
CRG: The force that causes the wind to blow really fast over water.

Kid: Why did Hurricane Katrina come?
"Science" Guy: Science did it.
Kid: Why?
SG: Because there's a force that causes the wind to blow really fast over water.
Kid: Like God?
SG: No.
Kid: Then what?
SG: Science.

Regardless of which one he chooses, the kid still isn't going to understand how it happens.

[ZenOps]

Gravity is just god pushing you down.

*puts on flak jacket*

[01RedDX]

.

[mazdavirgin]

Originally posted by revelations


I wasnt too sure either.... this video is pretty good.

CTQ6ciHENgI

Yeah that's a little over simplified but eh I guess it can do as an explanation. Just as a side note the earth itself experiences a tide when the moon transits above areas of the crust. GPS and other touchy scientific experiments take the deformation of earth into account.

[revelations]

Originally posted by mazdavirgin


Yeah that's a little over simplified but eh I guess it can do as an explanation. Just as a side note the earth itself experiences a tide when the moon transits above areas of the crust. GPS and other touchy scientific experiments take the deformation of earth into account.

Our baseline surveys account for earth tides as well. I've heard 0.02m isnt unusual.

[ekguy]

hahahaha oh that was so great. Hilarious way to wake up in the morning. haha.

[ekguy]

oh and for those saying if you don't know the answer to something saying god did it or science did it is similar...no it isn't. Even if you don't know how it's done, it's better to know that it can be proven scientifically rather than saying some imaginary person, who most likely doesn't exist, did it.

Seriously there are so many religions that it's pretty obvious at the very least that all but one are wrong...Pretty sure we can almost take it as a sign that there is no god simply by the fact that there's countless religions...

If there was a god don't you think there'd be ONE religion...And even if there ends up being a god it's going to be funny when all the people from the wrong religion find out they were wrong once they die...hahaha silly people.

[syeve]

Originally posted by kertejud2


Saying "science" does it shows about as much ignorance on the subject as saying God did it. One is based on blind faith rather than simply a complete lack of knowledge on the matter.
On a test for the subject I'd imagine answering "God" or "Science" would get you the same mark.

Using the same line of reasoning on the subject of Hurricane Katrina:

Kid: Why did Hurricane Katrina come?
Crazy-Religious Guy: God sent it to punish the sinners
Kid: Why?
CRG: Because God is an all powerful force who can do what he wants
Kid: What kind of force?
CRG: The force that causes the wind to blow really fast over water.

Kid: Why did Hurricane Katrina come?
"Science" Guy: Science did it.
Kid: Why?
SG: Because there's a force that causes the wind to blow really fast over water.
Kid: Like God?
SG: No.
Kid: Then what?
SG: Science.

Regardless of which one he chooses, the kid still isn't going to understand how it happens.

I get what you are saying but I disagree. There will always be area's in science that unless you are an expert you won't really understand it 100% (ie. tides) - the difference between religion and science in this case is there are experts that can discuss the cause of tides (scientifically - based on gathering observable, empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning) vs religion, where no person exists because they are all just going to say "god did it yo"

[Mitsu3000gt]

Originally posted by syeve


I get what you are saying but I disagree. There will always be area's in science that unless you are an expert you won't really understand it 100% (ie. tides) - the difference between religion and science in this case is there are experts that can discuss the cause of tides (scientifically - based on gathering observable, empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning) vs religion, where no person exists because they are all just going to say "god did it yo"

Thanks - I was far too lazy to write a reply lol. At least IMO, the difference between science and religion is crystal clear, even if you don't fully understand it. I can't think of a single thing where "god" or "religion" would make even an equally as logical/rational/likely argument as "science".

[Antonito]

I can see the argument with regards to controversial topics like global warming where there are discenting opinions from other scientists. In that case if you are taking a position based on no knowledge other than something you heard on a TV show, then it's blind faith in that particular scientists observations.

For a lot of things such as this particular topic where there is a consensus, if you don't take the entire scientific communities findings at face value, you're either an idiot or you have an agenda.

[Spoons]

Originally posted by 911fever
oh please, as if loony lefts don't use retarded arguments? Colbert is a leftie and takes delight in mocking right wing media - that's his job.
Who cares!

Did you even watch the movie?

But lets assume you did and where you are wrong. The first part, Colbert is incredibly right wing. I don't know if you paid much attention in social class and the political spectrum, but the man is clearly right winged if you ever watch the show. But lets not forget that plain and simple, you are defending Bill O'Reilly... :facepalm:

[atgilchrist]

Without getting into the whole debate, Colbert is a satirist who plays a right-wing character. A large source of his inspiration originally was actually o'Reilly. He just makes crazy funny, instead of just crazy.

[Freeskier]

:werd: Colbert is a democrat... His character The Rev. Dr. Stephen Colbert of the show is a caricatured right wing fundamentalist

[kertejud2]

Originally posted by syeve


I get what you are saying but I disagree. There will always be area's in science that unless you are an expert you won't really understand it 100% (ie. tides) - the difference between religion and science in this case is there are experts that can discuss the cause of tides (scientifically - based on gathering observable, empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning) vs religion, where no person exists because they are all just going to say "god did it yo"

The difference between not really understanding something and not understanding it at all (i.e. the moon affects tides because of gravity vs. science affects tides) is pretty big, about the same as "magnets work because two metals have a charge and are attracted to each other" and "magnets work because of science...its a miracle!"

Replacing "God" with "science" just replaces an ignorance of the study of the natural world with an ignorance of what science is.

[TorqueDog]

Originally posted by Spoons
The first part, Colbert is incredibly right wing. I don't know if you paid much attention in social class and the political spectrum, but the man is clearly right winged if you ever watch the show.Jesus tapdancing Christ, you're an idiot. :facepalm:

[911fever]

Originally posted by Spoons


Did you even watch the movie?

But lets assume you did and where you are wrong. The first part, Colbert is incredibly right wing. I don't know if you paid much attention in social class and the political spectrum, but the man is clearly right winged if you ever watch the show.

:rofl: :rofl: you fail Russ :facepalm: :facepalm:

[Spoons]

Originally posted by 911fever


:rofl: :rofl: you fail Russ :facepalm: :facepalm:

Wiki failed me for my burns once again. :facepalm:

[Xtrema]

http://i.imgur.com/vmker.jpg

[Graham_A_M]

Oh wow. When I was a young kid, I hoped to anything that religion would make a vicious mistake, and move towards its demise.

Yet to my amazement, this is actually a happening trend.
I cannot establish my happiness through mere words to describe how ecstatic I am that humankind is taking a vast dislike towards christianity.

This is absolutely amazing. More and more people that wake up to the ignorance and bullshit that christianity is based on, the better this world will end up. :thumbsup:

Thank you! To the bottom of my heart!

[ekguy]

At least we know one thing religion can explain...or at the very least cause haha.

WAR.

Seems to be the only thing religion has brought to our little planet. Well that and idiots haha.

[SmAcKpOo]

Originally posted by Graham_A_M
I cannot establish my happiness through mere words to describe how ecstatic I am that humankind is taking a vast dislike towards christianity.

Thank you! To the bottom of my heart!

Substitute Christianity for any religion, and I agree!

[revelations]

:rofl:



Originally posted by Xtrema
http://i.imgur.com/vmker.jpg

[Freeskier]

Originally posted by Graham_A_M
Oh wow. When I was a young kid, I hoped to anything that religion would make a vicious mistake, and move towards its demise.

Yet to my amazement, this is actually a happening trend.
I cannot establish my happiness through mere words to describe how ecstatic I am that humankind is taking a vast dislike towards christianity.

This is absolutely amazing. More and more people that wake up to the ignorance and bullshit that christianity is based on, the better this world will end up. :thumbsup:

Thank you! To the bottom of my heart!



Originally posted by SmAcKpOo


Substitute Christianity for any religion, and I agree!

Religion is never going away. We're a species that crave and search for meaning in our lives and turn to religious and mythological beliefs in an attempt to both better ourselves and explain the world around us. But it keeps youtube funny as shit so I'm alright with it lolol. Just lets make sure they stay out of power.

[Cos]

See the Southpark where there is no religion just science and how science becomes a religion.

I believe that is where we are heading.

[Freeskier]

Yeah I love that episode and its true, we'll just always replace a religion with another one of a different style. See paganism into christianity lol.

[Idratherbsidewayz]

Originally posted by Cos
See the Southpark where there is no religion just science and how science becomes a religion.

I believe that is where we are heading.

Heading? I say its fully happened. Scientists/doctors are modern day medieval priests touting things that the general public does not understand and is forced to believe/take.

Misinformation on the internet and the way people will believe the first semi-logical point presented to them only serves to make this situation much worse.

A generation of "Atheists" with self-righteous humanity as their God, and technology/science as their vessel to salvation.

[syeve]

Originally posted by kertejud2


The difference between not really understanding something and not understanding it at all (i.e. the moon affects tides because of gravity vs. science affects tides) is pretty big, about the same as "magnets work because two metals have a charge and are attracted to each other" and "magnets work because of science...its a miracle!"

Replacing "God" with "science" just replaces an ignorance of the study of the natural world with an ignorance of what science is.

Totally agreed - Blind faith in anything is dangerous. My only point was very people truly understand things like quantum physics/relatively/special relatively etc - doesn't make it "less" true – where as people giving credit to a deity just because it’s what the bible says is horse shit.

[syeve]

Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz


Heading? I say its fully happened. Scientists/doctors are modern day medieval priests touting things that the general public does not understand and is forced to believe/take.

Misinformation on the internet and the way people will believe the first semi-logical point presented to them only serves to make this situation much worse.

A generation of "Atheists" with self-righteous humanity as their God, and technology/science as their vessel to salvation.

Lol - Wow, never heard scientists called that before. I agree with the internet leading people this way and that with very little in the way of facts to back it up. BUT I would still argue that just because you don't understand it, doesn't make it un-true.

[Idratherbsidewayz]

Originally posted by syeve


Lol - Wow, never heard scientists called that before. I agree with the internet leading people this way and that with very little in the way of facts to back it up. BUT I would still argue that just because you don't understand it, doesn't make it un-true.

Modern Science is a collection of convenient theories that fit into the stringent box that is physics, biology, and chemistry. Somebody could come along tomorrow and show a whole new way of thinking that permits anti-gravity and things thought impossible with the old system.

If you told somebody in medieval times that people would be flying around all over the world, or talking instantly with anyone on the planet with video, they would not be able to comprehend it as their scientific knowledge was limited by the physics/biology/chemistry box that existed at that time.

An example that always does it for me is the temperature absolute zero. 0 Kelvin is physically unattainable because we have set it as the bottom limit. Scientists will keep trying to hit it, but it is physically impossible. They will only ever be able to approach absolute zero. As soon as this guideline is set, you're thinking on temperatures available for your disposal is limited and as such your ideas are limited.

Despite the fact that we have such a limited and theoretical understanding of how the world works, scientists tout it as fact, it's taught in schools as fact, and everybody believes fully in science. This is where the parallel with medieval priests becomes apparent. If the word science is replaced with God, you get carbon copies of the shit they were feeding people in medieval times. As long as everyone is afraid of some power they don't understand, they will generally follow what you say and do what you want.

In the end, it's all about control and power of an elite over the general populace.

[cycosis]

Get back to work greg

[Tik-Tok]

Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz


Despite the fact that we have such a limited and theoretical understanding of how the world works, scientists tout it as fact, it's taught in schools as fact, and everybody believes fully in science. This is where the parallel with medieval priests becomes apparent. If the word science is replaced with God, you get carbon copies of the shit they were feeding people in medieval times. As long as everyone is afraid of some power they don't understand, they will generally follow what you say and do what you want.


Science is proven with mathematics and logic, and isn't based on a book written decades after the main character died, or a collection of even more ancient fables and fairy tales.

How exactly is god proven again? Oh, that's right it isn't, and it's called faith.

faith (fth)
n.
1. Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.
2. Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. See Synonyms at belief, trust.
3. Loyalty to a person or thing; allegiance: keeping faith with one's supporters.
4. often Faith Christianity The theological virtue defined as secure belief in God and a trusting acceptance of God's will.
5. The body of dogma of a religion: the Muslim faith.
6. A set of principles or beliefs.

[Idratherbsidewayz]

Originally posted by Tik-Tok


Science is proven with mathematics and logic, and isn't based on a book written decades after the main character died, or a collection of even more ancient fables and fairy tales.

How exactly is god proven again? Oh, that's right it isn't, and it's called faith.

faith (fth)
n.
1. Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.
2. Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. See Synonyms at belief, trust.
3. Loyalty to a person or thing; allegiance: keeping faith with one's supporters.
4. often Faith Christianity The theological virtue defined as secure belief in God and a trusting acceptance of God's will.
5. The body of dogma of a religion: the Muslim faith.
6. A set of principles or beliefs.

I think you're missing the point. "Mathematics and logic", which are of course the absolute basis of science ( ;) ) are still theories in how things work. 1 + 1 = 2 is a limit we have placed and everything must fit inside this limitation. Someone could come in tomorrow with a plausible theory on how everything works and is calculated with a completely different mathematical system where cow + ostrich = 69. Then if this new system extended the limits of modern science, it would be accepted as fact and nobody would remember how 1 + 1 equaled to 2.

Most people have faith that what the scientist is talking about is the truth, and so they believe anything he says. The medieval priest would convince everyone that God (a concept nobody understood) spoke to him and commanded him to lead them based on a book that was written a long time ago. This gave him power over others. In the same way, a scientist will convince everybody that physics is speaking to him and giving him power to run your world based on a book that long dead author Isaac Newton wrote a long time ago.

The Global Warming phenomenon/fear mongering is a good example of scientists and politicians (the people in power) using science, logic, and fact to steal from the world in the same way medieval priests/the church stole from peasants using God.

[Tik-Tok]

Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz

cow + ostrich = 69

There's a mental image I could do without.

It's true, in another 500 years they could have advanced science well beyond our current understanding. But MOST of science isn't just thoery, it's built on universal constants.

If you have 1 thing and another 1 thing, then you have 2 things. Just because we've placed names on those doesn't mean it's less true. Cow does not equal Pi(x)Ostrich^2, and never will unless we rename Area and Radius

Comparing it to the "theory" of god is ridiculous.

[syeve]

Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz


I think you're missing the point. "Mathematics and logic", which are of course the absolute basis of science ( ;) ) are still theories in how things work. 1 + 1 = 2 is a limit we have placed and everything must fit inside this limitation. Someone could come in tomorrow with a plausible theory on how everything works and is calculated with a completely different mathematical system where cow + ostrich = 69. Then if this new system extended the limits of modern science, it would be accepted as fact and nobody would remember how 1 + 1 equaled to 2.

Most people have faith that what the scientist is talking about is the truth, and so they believe anything he says. The medieval priest would convince everyone that God (a concept nobody understood) spoke to him and commanded him to lead them based on a book that was written a long time ago. This gave him power over others. In the same way, a scientist will convince everybody that physics is speaking to him and giving him power to run your world based on a book that long dead author Isaac Newton wrote a long time ago.

The Global Warming phenomenon/fear mongering is a good example of scientists and politicians (the people in power) using science, logic, and fact to steal from the world in the same way medieval priests/the church stole from peasants using God.

lol - ok I give, you are 100% right. Will you be releasing a book soon? I would love to read it.

[Idratherbsidewayz]

Originally posted by syeve


lol - ok I give, you are 100% right. Will you be releasing a book soon? I would love to read it.

:love: :love:

Ramblings of a Bored at Work Moron? Yea its due out later this year...

[syeve]

Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz


:love: :love:

Ramblings of a Bored at Work Moron? Yea its due out later this year...

Fuck - that's what I was going to call my book. K, I will think of something else.

[TorqueDog]

Originally posted by syeve
Fuck - that's what I was going to call my book. K, I will think of something else. He should call his book "Cow + Ostrich = 69". Instant best-seller.

[mucat]

Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz


I think you're missing the point. "Mathematics and logic", which are of course the absolute basis of science ( ;) ) are still theories in how things work. 1 + 1 = 2 is a limit we have placed and everything must fit inside this limitation. Someone could come in tomorrow with a plausible theory on how everything works and is calculated with a completely different mathematical system where cow + ostrich = 69. Then if this new system extended the limits of modern science, it would be accepted as fact and nobody would remember how 1 + 1 equaled to 2.

Most people have faith that what the scientist is talking about is the truth, and so they believe anything he says. The medieval priest would convince everyone that God (a concept nobody understood) spoke to him and commanded him to lead them based on a book that was written a long time ago. This gave him power over others. In the same way, a scientist will convince everybody that physics is speaking to him and giving him power to run your world based on a book that long dead author Isaac Newton wrote a long time ago.

The Global Warming phenomenon/fear mongering is a good example of scientists and politicians (the people in power) using science, logic, and fact to steal from the world in the same way medieval priests/the church stole from peasants using God.

1+1=2 is not a limit we placed. It is a tested and applied fact that used in many practical applications. The chance of someone that can discover a (real, not those you cut n paste from the internet) theory against this is pretty much zero. It is similar to newtonian physics, it is tested and proved and applied. Even later on relativity proved newtonian physics doesn't work in extreme situation. It will not make newtonian physics obsolete. The reason no one develop a theory against 1+1=2 because there is none existed.

While people can put blind faith on anything. Unlike religion, science does not require anyone to follow with blind faith. You are free to study, understand, test, etc. any science theory or knowledge you want.

He explains a lot better than I do:
http://www.youtube.com/user/QualiaSoup#p/u/24/SlaCq3dKvvI

[dirtsniffer]

ya, i was going to say the 'science' i am learning in 3rd year university was just theory 2 centuries ago. but has now been proven to be pretty good approximations to i can reproduce with shity lab equipment. so ya there are tons of scientific theories, and hopefully in a couple centuries kids will learn them as fact

[DRKM]

Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz


An example that always does it for me is the temperature absolute zero. 0 Kelvin is physically unattainable because we have set it as the bottom limit. Scientists will keep trying to hit it, but it is physically impossible. They will only ever be able to approach absolute zero. As soon as this guideline is set, you're thinking on temperatures available for your disposal is limited and as such your ideas are limited.


I was not going to respond to this but...

It appears that you knowledge of thermodynamics/Statistical mechanics is very poor. Not to mention your understanding of the meathodogly of science in general.

First lets start with Absolute Zero. Since the 1800s it has been known that thermodynamic properties are the result of the atomic/molecular movement/Kinetic energy. It was then theorized that there must be a temperature that all matter stops moving at the molecular level, ie: No thermal energy in the system.

So does this put a limit on temperature? Yes, since temperature is the average kinetic energy of the particles in a system. Are our ideas limited by absolute zero? No, absolutely not.

The problem with getting to absolute zero is a little more complex due to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle and the wave duality of matter. If you wish I can explain all of this in a clear manner.

With regards to your comparison of science and religion I have to disagree. Science is based on Positivism, ie knowledge can be shown true only by experiment and observation. This is completely different than faith/religion.

Also when you speak on the climate change debate its a little more complex then what you might think. Weather Systems in general is one of the most complex systems known to man. It is very difficult to make any real predictions as it has so many external perturbations/inputs.

While I can agree with you on one thing that when people in authority break the scientific method it can lead to a dogmatic system. I feel that this has happened with the climate change research. Does everyone remember how people were massaging there data and not letting outside peer reviewers see there data?

That is wrong and not following the scientific method and can be just as dangerous as religious dogma.

If you have any other questions about physics I can do my best to answer them as I come from a physics degree and have first hand experience with it.

[Cos]

Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz

......

I don’t have the time, mental capacity, or energy to comment on every one of your posts so I will try to be brief.

I think your understanding of science is extremely flawed. First I read a study a few years ago where they were questioning applied mathematics use of 1+1 = 2 as nothing in the universe is identical. So you cant take one apple, add it to another apple, and have two apples that are identical. One apple will be different.

In theoretical mathematics obviously this is different.

Absolute zero is not a limit set by someone who was bored. It is the limit in which all vibration stops. There cannot be LESS movement therefore it isn’t a made up limit it is actually a very real threshold. Nevermind poster above really covered it better.

Global warming is a theory and not everyone in the scientific community agrees with it. Oddly enough like evolution except evolution has much more support. I have yet to hear a scientist claim something and all the other scientists get killed because they don’t agree with his theory. Science is tested and peer reviewed.

Religion is awful convenient in the fact that all of its prophets seem to get instructions alone, with nothing to back it up. Moses goes up Mount Sinai and only god talks to him. Joseph Smith was alone in the forest and was the only person who could read the tablets from Jesus. Scientists don’t post a study with no proof with no way to replicate the results, then make everyone believe it is fact and finally get it published into a grade 10 science book. It is sad you feel that way.

[gretz]

Originally posted by Cos

Joseph Smith was alone in the forest and was the only person who could read the tablets from Jesus.

All I could think of:

Dum Dum Dum Dum Dum (south park)

[Idratherbsidewayz]

Haha, you're all just proving my point. Every response you've given has been within the boundaries of our current scientific system. Open your minds!

You're saying that the way we think the world works (modern science) is the absolute and 100% correct way of thinking. We have reached the end of innovation, and figured it all out. Humans are God!!!

In medieval times, people pondered how storms, floods, and natural disasters happened. "It's God's will", priests said, and everyone agreed. Essentially this is what scientists have done with our current world, albeit with much more detail, and much less God. You have all accepted our current way of thinking as being an absolute.

Why couldn't they be wrong? They are human after all. Why can't there be a better theory that trumps all the current ones (just like there has been many times before). How did people think apples fell from trees before Newton?

As for absolute zero, make all the excuses you want, no experiment will ever hit it. ;)

[Cos]

Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz
Haha, you're all just proving my point. Every response you've given has been within the boundaries of our current scientific system. Open your minds!

You're saying that the way we think the world works (modern science) is the absolute and 100% correct way of thinking. We have reached the end of innovation, and figured it all out. Humans are God!!!




Errrr no I didnt. Read my post again. There are theories in science and Mathematics that are always changing. Are you saying that science says this and is never changing and religion says this and is never changing? That is not the case. Science adapts as it learns. Religion does not. I am not saying the science we have today is correct what I am saying is that the mainstream religions (Christianity, Islam, LDS) are not correct.

For your storm example, yes the priests came out and said that yes this is what has happened. Everyone believed the priest. Scientists looked at the data, crunched some numbers, and said this is what I THINK is happening. A bunch of other scientists all over the world crunched their own numbers on their own and came up with their own results. Now could it still be wrong? Yes.... does it currently predict the weather? Yes. Show me a 16th century priest that could predict weather at all, let alone to the accuracy that super computers programmed by scientific studies can.

I personally believe we have lots to learn as I believe in some things that Buddhism teaches (Karma, energies, etc) but you sound pretty committed to believing what you want so have fun with that.

[Idratherbsidewayz]

Originally posted by Cos



Errrr no I didnt. Read my post again. There are theories in science and Mathematics that are always changing. Are you saying that science says this and is never changing and religion says this and is never changing? That is not the case. Science adapts as it learns. Religion does not. I am not saying the science we have today is correct what I am saying is that the mainstream religions (Christianity, Islam, LDS) are not correct.

For your storm example, yes the priests came out and said that yes this is what has happened. Everyone believed the priest. Scientists looked at the data, crunched some numbers, and said this is what I THINK is happening. A bunch of other scientists all over the world crunched their own numbers on their own and came up with their own results. Now could it still be wrong? Yes.... does it currently predict the weather? Yes. Show me a 16th century priest that could predict weather at all, let alone to the accuracy that super computers programmed by scientific studies can.

I personally believe we have lots to learn as I believe in some things that Buddhism teaches (Karma, energies, etc) but you sound pretty committed to believing what you want so have fun with that.

Like you, I'm an engineer and use the laws and theories that were made over the last few hundred years every day. It's not that I think what we're doing right now is wrong, I just hate the arrogance of scientists and "people in the know". It always seems that they're knowledge is the be all and end all. Then everyone not in the know who watched a discovery channel special on something scientific is automatically "in the know" and will fight tooth and nail to defend the concept. When things like homeopathy, acupuncture, or other unknown energies are presented, they scoff and say that's impossible because science doesn't support it. Chalk it up to the placebo effect because it makes no sense, right?

As for weather, we are terrible at predicting it. Satellite monitoring may help us track a storm, but all it takes is a quick look at your weekly forecast to realize how terrible we are at predicting what will happen.

All I'm saying is keep an open mind, things can always change (and drastically at that). The way we look at things could be completely wrong. Don't believe in science as an absolute truth, but rather as a convenient set of theories that helps us do the things we do.

[Everlast]

You honestly think there's some merit in homeopathy? :nut:

8KbLHii8M2A

XQibRZSGREM

[Idratherbsidewayz]

Originally posted by Everlast
You honestly think there's some merit in homeopathy? :nut:

:hijack:

Been using it my whole life. Cured my asthma, gets me out of anything serious.

I did a lot of hiking growing up, and at certain very exposed spots would get nervous from the heights. Take 4 Argentum Nitricum "sugar pills", and the fear melts away instantly. It's dangerous though as you can go from having a fear of heights to being overly cocky. Used to always use it before doing guitar concerts (stage fright). My family calls it "No Fear".

Arsenicum Albium is an extremely efficient way to get out of food poisoning. Take a couple "sugar pills", and 30-40 mins later you're back on track.

There are pills for motion sickness, which I would take when I got ill from reading on long car rides. Pills for heat stroke which work very well.

Don't take my word for it, try it yourself!

[Seth1968]

[i]As for absolute zero, make all the excuses you want, no experiment will ever hit it. ;) [/B]

Are you suggesting that a non-oscillating particle can't occupy space and therefore exist?

Aside from that, doesn't your absolute statement contradict the point you're trying to make?

[badatusrnames]

Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz
...

You've been spouting a lot of nonsense in this thread and I really don't have the time and energy to try and respond to you fully. I'm not going to lie, I stopped reading it after a bit.

Regardless, it probably won't change your belief system.


Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz


Like you, I'm an engineer and use the laws and theories that were made over the last few hundred years every day.

But, as someone who came over to an engineering degree from a science one, I'd like to stop you right there. As engineers, you aren't given a rigorous understanding of the scientific process, and how science, as a discipline works, how we derive scientific knowledge from observation, hypothesis, observation, repeatability, etc.

As engineers, we are given the scientific tools developed by others and told that dogmatically, this is how it works. In engineering education, we often don't delve deeper into the hows and whys because for the most part, that isn't relevant to an engineer, that's the job of the scientist. It's unfortunate, because then you have individuals that believe they are well versed scientifically, when in reality, they really only know what's on the very top, the applications of the science that's been developed by others, but they haven't a faintest idea of what lies beneath - the rigorous and systematic application of the scientific method that led to these principles being developed and proven.

I think also what clouds things furthers is that engineers often use empirical correlations that are arbitrarily derived because they fit our data well and work reasonably well for practical purposes, but have no underlying scientific basis to them - they're just fudge factors that work. It can be easy to mistake this engineering work with actual science, which goes deeper to understand the fundamental mechanisms explaining that phenomena, not just trying to fit a relationship to the data.

An engineer is someone who indeed does use science frequently, and is good at doing that, but is quite far from being a scientist. This isn't to say that an engineer can't understand science and vice versa (it would be better if they both were better at that). It's that the separation between the two fields is a lot wider than people think, especially in training and education.

So for you, what I'm trying to say is don't mistake using science with understanding it. You might be a great engineer, but your understanding of science is terribly limited.

Anyways, I'd invite you to start with this:

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

1+1 does equal two, however you choose to represent it, that's fundamental.

And homeopathy, really? Ever heard of the placebo effect?

[Idratherbsidewayz]

Originally posted by Seth1968


Are you suggesting that a non-oscillating particle can't occupy space and therefore exist?

Aside from that, doesn't your absolute statement contradict the point you're trying to make?

Using what we have at our disposal and the laws we have decided to follow, you will never be able to completely "freeze" a particle. You will be able to slow it down extremely, but since the limit of absolute zero is in place you can only approach it. The perfect crystal is unattainable using our current approach. What if there was another energy that we could harness to completely freeze a particle and benefit from the properties achieved. This would revolutionize science as we know it. If we open our minds to this, maybe it will be measurable one day. Just saying, don't rule anything out.

I realize everything I'm talking about can be interpreted as nonsense, and for what its worth, it probably is. Without imagination you'll never get innovation, and it is my hope that one day someone will revolutionize what we see and believe to be true and propel humanity to new levels of greatness (which has been done in history many times before).

I did a degree in Material's Engineering, highly theoretical, lots of thermodynamics, chemistry, and crystallography. An understanding of our current system is what opened my mind to the idea of there being something more, and wondering if someone will find it one day.

[mucat]

Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz

Using what we have at our disposal and the laws we have decided to follow, you will never be able to completely "freeze" a particle. You will be able to slow it down extremely, but since the limit of absolute zero is in place you can only approach it. The perfect crystal is unattainable using our current approach. What if there was another energy that we could harness to completely freeze a particle and benefit from the properties achieved. This would revolutionize science as we know it. If we open our minds to this, maybe it will be measurable one day. Just saying, don't rule anything out.

I realize everything I'm talking about can be interpreted as nonsense, and for what its worth, it probably is. Without imagination you'll never get innovation, and it is my hope that one day someone will revolutionize what we see and believe to be true and propel humanity to new levels of greatness (which has been done in history many times before).

I did a degree in Material's Engineering, highly theoretical, lots of thermodynamics, chemistry, and crystallography. An understanding of our current system is what opened my mind to the idea of there being something more, and wondering if someone will find it one day.

Just sayin'

[Idratherbsidewayz]

Originally posted by mucat


Just sayin'

You know of experiments that have caused a particle to lose all of its energy? No movement of any kind?

[Freeskier]

I think I can understand what idratherbesideways is trying to say. But the examples and shit are not very compelling.

The difference between the science of today and the science of the past is that today's scientific methodology relies on experimentation and testing of hypotheses. It is a much more humble and self depricating process than it has been. Sure you get people fabricating data in order to push their theories but these quacks are not the norm. Time and again you have scientists disproving their own ideas through further experimentation. The fact that hypotheses are never proven, but only either supported or disproven is partly ensuring that we never have giant mistakes such as the world is flat again.

Scientists are the first people to acknowledge that we know very little about the universe, life on earth etc etc. The more we find out about things like subatomic particles, or interstellar phenomena the more we realize we don't know anything at all. That is the beauty of modern science. And sure we're arrogant about certain things, maybe we shouldn't be. And sure, I'm certain the physical laws of the universe will change fundamentally from our current understanding of them. For christ sake, we don't even know what mass really is...we have theories and ideas, but nothing concrete.

Dunno if I missed what he was saying completely, but that's my understanding/rebuttle lol.

[mucat]

You misunderstood why I bolded part of your post.

First, you said something will never happen, then you said don't rule anything out.

I only agree with the last bolded statement.

Don't forget, you also suggested cow + ostrich = 69 might be possible and 1 + 1 = 2 could be wrong.

[Graham_A_M]

Originally posted by Toma
Here is O'Reilly and Dawkins ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2FARDDcdFaQ&NR=1 Wow, I don't think I'd have the self control to not strangle that imbecile. Dawkins employees logic and emotionless, objective fact. O'reily spouts off with the typical blatantly ignorant retort that bible belt Americans are known for, yet still he remains composed and tactful
:eek:
I had no respect for O'riely to begin with, but this just puts the final nail in the coffin

[Freeskier]

http://208.116.9.205/10/content/25771/3.jpg

[nich148_9]

Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz


I think you're missing the point. "Mathematics and logic", which are of course the absolute basis of science ( ;) ) are still theories in how things work. 1 + 1 = 2 is a limit we have placed and everything must fit inside this limitation. Someone could come in tomorrow with a plausible theory on how everything works and is calculated with a completely different mathematical system where cow + ostrich = 69. Then if this new system extended the limits of modern science, it would be accepted as fact and nobody would remember how 1 + 1 equaled to 2.

Most people have faith that what the scientist is talking about is the truth, and so they believe anything he says. The medieval priest would convince everyone that God (a concept nobody understood) spoke to him and commanded him to lead them based on a book that was written a long time ago. This gave him power over others. In the same way, a scientist will convince everybody that physics is speaking to him and giving him power to run your world based on a book that long dead author Isaac Newton wrote a long time ago.

The Global Warming phenomenon/fear mongering is a good example of scientists and politicians (the people in power) using science, logic, and fact to steal from the world in the same way medieval priests/the church stole from peasants using God.

LSD is fun.