the big bang...

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

the big bang...

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 3 of 5 < 1 2 3 4 5 >

sitdownstandup 02 Aug 17 11.05pm
Originally posted by thebob The difficult part is the word "believe". If you are of the opinion that data is the only evidence that should be evaluated to reach a conclusion. And that all relevant data needs to be considered, then the theory appears to be quite robust. If you are of the opinion that "belief" is just conjured up from your own head, and evidence is then sought that supports your belief, then almost anything goes, and you are probably also a climate change denier, user of "alternative" medicine, anti vaccine, and also think that "organic" food means something.. You also are either religious or hold other "belief" based ideas. There must be a logical fallacy there somewhere. Argument from ignorance? I can't understand it so it can't be true? ok... do you agree with it or not then? Man is the most insane species. He worships an invisible God and destroys a visible Nature. Unaware that this Nature he’s destroying is this God he’s worshipping. Hubert Reeves
Alert a moderator to this post

sitdownstandup

02 Aug 17 11.05pm

Send a Private Message to sitdownstandup

Originally posted by thebob

The difficult part is the word "believe".

If you are of the opinion that data is the only evidence that should be evaluated to reach a conclusion. And that all relevant data needs to be considered, then the theory appears to be quite robust.

If you are of the opinion that "belief" is just conjured up from your own head, and evidence is then sought that supports your belief, then almost anything goes, and you are probably also a climate change denier, user of "alternative" medicine, anti vaccine, and also think that "organic" food means something.. You also are either religious or hold other "belief" based ideas.

There must be a logical fallacy there somewhere. Argument from ignorance? I can't understand it so it can't be true?

ok... do you agree with it or not then?

Man is the most insane species. He worships an invisible God and destroys a visible Nature. Unaware that this Nature he’s destroying is this God he’s worshipping.

Hubert Reeves

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 02 Aug 17 11.09pm
Originally posted by Ray in Houston Science is ever-evolving; whenever new evidence comes along that disproves previously held science, the new evidence is adopted. Rinse, repeat. "Belief" tends to stay rigid and mostly unaffected by improving knowledge and understanding. Seconded. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

02 Aug 17 11.09pm

Originally posted by Ray in Houston

Science is ever-evolving; whenever new evidence comes along that disproves previously held science, the new evidence is adopted. Rinse, repeat.

"Belief" tends to stay rigid and mostly unaffected by improving knowledge and understanding.

Seconded.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

thebob Tatebayashi (from Croydon) 02 Aug 17 11.09pm
Originally posted by Ray in Houston Science is ever-evolving; whenever new evidence comes along that disproves previously held science, the new evidence is adopted. Rinse, repeat. "Belief" tends to stay rigid and mostly unaffected by improving knowledge and understanding. Science is self-correcting, anything can be challenged, nothing is set in stone. "Blind belief" is the dangerous meme. It is impervious to logic. When people plead "common sense" it usually means that they don't really understand why they "believe" something. Lots of knowledge is counter intuitive.
Alert a moderator to this post

thebob

Tatebayashi (from Croydon) 02 Aug 17 11.09pm

Originally posted by Ray in Houston

Science is ever-evolving; whenever new evidence comes along that disproves previously held science, the new evidence is adopted. Rinse, repeat.

"Belief" tends to stay rigid and mostly unaffected by improving knowledge and understanding.

Science is self-correcting, anything can be challenged, nothing is set in stone.

"Blind belief" is the dangerous meme. It is impervious to logic. When people plead "common sense" it usually means that they don't really understand why they "believe" something. Lots of knowledge is counter intuitive.

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 02 Aug 17 11.11pm
Originally posted by thebob The difficult part is the word "believe". If you are of the opinion that data is the only evidence that should be evaluated to reach a conclusion. And that all relevant data needs to be considered, then the theory appears to be quite robust. If you are of the opinion that "belief" is just conjured up from your own head, and evidence is then sought that supports your belief, then almost anything goes, and you are probably also a climate change denier, user of "alternative" medicine, anti vaccine, and also think that "organic" food means something.. You also are either religious or hold other "belief" based ideas. There must be a logical fallacy there somewhere. Argument from ignorance? I can't understand it so it can't be true? Thirded. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

02 Aug 17 11.11pm

Originally posted by thebob

The difficult part is the word "believe".

If you are of the opinion that data is the only evidence that should be evaluated to reach a conclusion. And that all relevant data needs to be considered, then the theory appears to be quite robust.

There must be a logical fallacy there somewhere. Argument from ignorance? I can't understand it so it can't be true?

Thirded.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

thebob Tatebayashi (from Croydon) 02 Aug 17 11.11pm
Originally posted by sitdownstandup ok... do you agree with it or not then? The evidence seems to support it presently, so it is useful working hypothesis as long as other data doesn't come along and introduce some different conclusions! So kinda, sorta yeah.
Alert a moderator to this post

thebob

Tatebayashi (from Croydon) 02 Aug 17 11.11pm

Originally posted by sitdownstandup

ok... do you agree with it or not then?

The evidence seems to support it presently, so it is useful working hypothesis as long as other data doesn't come along and introduce some different conclusions!

So kinda, sorta yeah.

Alert a moderator to this post

Hrolf The Ganger 03 Aug 17 7.41am
Originally posted by davenotamonkey Not true. To understand the universe as it was at a very early stage, you need to access energy regimes that can only be reached with particle accelerators like the LHC. The spin-offs from CERN et al. have been immense. Including, but not limited to the World wide Web. Development in superconducting magnets, required for these types of experiments also had applications in, for example, fusion generators. Yes, the mechanics of scientific investigation can lead to inventions that serve a useful purpose for sure. Some of the technology that was used on the Moon landings was used in commercial products. What I'm saying is that the pure knowledge of cosmology is not going to have a practical impact on anyone.
Alert a moderator to this post

Hrolf The Ganger

03 Aug 17 7.41am

Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger

Originally posted by davenotamonkey

Not true. To understand the universe as it was at a very early stage, you need to access energy regimes that can only be reached with particle accelerators like the LHC. The spin-offs from CERN et al. have been immense. Including, but not limited to the World wide Web.

Development in superconducting magnets, required for these types of experiments also had applications in, for example, fusion generators.

Yes, the mechanics of scientific investigation can lead to inventions that serve a useful purpose for sure. Some of the technology that was used on the Moon landings was used in commercial products.
What I'm saying is that the pure knowledge of cosmology is not going to have a practical impact on anyone.

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 03 Aug 17 8.13am
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger Yes, the mechanics of scientific investigation can lead to inventions that serve a useful purpose for sure. Some of the technology that was used on the Moon landings was used in commercial products. What I'm saying is that the pure knowledge of cosmology is not going to have a practical impact on anyone. I'm not so sure that's true. It involves working on string theory and other theories. These could potentially lead to controlling mass, which would be the single most dramatic impact imaginable. The powerhouse work in these areas isn't done for potential unclear commercial advantages. They are spin offs that benefit us. The reason that so much brain power goes into these pursuits is largely philosophically driven. If the west isn't doing this work, then it eventually will be done by others who aren't the west. We don't know how that would work out for us. Hitler learnt the lesson of not bothering with 'Jewish science'. We have learnt the benefits of keeping up the pace of research into science and technology. That's why we have the EU space agency and Nasa and projects like CERN ..all obviously funded by taxpayers from around the work. Edited by Stirlingsays (03 Aug 2017 8.15am) 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

03 Aug 17 8.13am

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

I'm not so sure that's true. It involves working on string theory and other theories. These could potentially lead to controlling mass, which would be the single most dramatic impact imaginable.

The powerhouse work in these areas isn't done for potential unclear commercial advantages. They are spin offs that benefit us. The reason that so much brain power goes into these pursuits is largely philosophically driven.

If the west isn't doing this work, then it eventually will be done by others who aren't the west. We don't know how that would work out for us. Hitler learnt the lesson of not bothering with 'Jewish science'.

We have learnt the benefits of keeping up the pace of research into science and technology. That's why we have the EU space agency and Nasa and projects like CERN ..all obviously funded by taxpayers from around the work.

Edited by Stirlingsays (03 Aug 2017 8.15am)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

sitdownstandup 03 Aug 17 8.58am
Originally posted by thebob The evidence seems to support it presently, so it is useful working hypothesis as long as other data doesn't come along and introduce some different conclusions! So kinda, sorta yeah. thebob.. nice answer Man is the most insane species. He worships an invisible God and destroys a visible Nature. Unaware that this Nature he’s destroying is this God he’s worshipping. Hubert Reeves
Alert a moderator to this post

sitdownstandup

03 Aug 17 8.58am

Originally posted by thebob

The evidence seems to support it presently, so it is useful working hypothesis as long as other data doesn't come along and introduce some different conclusions!

So kinda, sorta yeah.

thebob.. nice answer

Man is the most insane species. He worships an invisible God and destroys a visible Nature. Unaware that this Nature he’s destroying is this God he’s worshipping.

Hubert Reeves

Alert a moderator to this post

thebob Tatebayashi (from Croydon) 03 Aug 17 9.15am
Originally posted by sitdownstandup thebob.. nice answer Most people don't understand that science has no "facts" and no "laws". Nothing has beed decided categorically, and never will be. All science can do is show something is wrong, it can never show that something is right!
Alert a moderator to this post

thebob

Tatebayashi (from Croydon) 03 Aug 17 9.15am

Originally posted by sitdownstandup
thebob.. nice answer

Most people don't understand that science has no "facts" and no "laws".

Nothing has beed decided categorically, and never will be. All science can do is show something is wrong, it can never show that something is right!

Alert a moderator to this post

Part Time James 03 Aug 17 9.27am
However we came about, my evening is going to be the same.
Alert a moderator to this post

Part Time James

03 Aug 17 9.27am

Send a Private Message to Part Time James

However we came about, my evening is going to be the same.

Alert a moderator to this post

hedgehog50 Croydon 03 Aug 17 9.38am
What caused this Big Bang? We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell]
Alert a moderator to this post

hedgehog50

Croydon 03 Aug 17 9.38am

What caused this Big Bang?

We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell]

Alert a moderator to this post