This Ain't Good...As A Matter Of Fact, Damn Sad!!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rob Allen said:
Neil Degrasse Tyson is not expert enough ti talk about religion, in fact he is completely ignorant on the issue and therefore has no authority to offer an opinion on it.
Click to expand...

... how do you know that he is "completely ignorant on the issue" (you have no idea of the volumes of reading the man has done) and where did you go to divinity school to make you expert enough. Your proclamations, just in this thread, make you sound completely ignorant (eg, regarding the originator of western thought, the earth is a sphere [but you were close enough :) ], etc), but I would never say you have no authority to offer an opinion. What I would express is why I might think your opinion is flawed.

No to pick on you Rob, but your absolutist rhetoric often seems to lead you to fall through various logical trap doors, unfortunately, sometimes sounding rather foolish.
 
Flymph said:
Let's see, can anyone think of a generation that didn't overpopulate this planet? The same white slave holder mentality that created the US constitution looms larger than ever in our country. Agnotology can be prevalent in any generation but maybe some are more gullible than others??
Click to expand...

I think folks forget history real quick. Or at least look at it through weird ass glasses.
I'm not saying we are perfect. I'm not saying there isn't more work to be done.
But God damn, if you think the slave holder mentality is anywhere close to even par compared to the past, I wish we had a time machine.
There are corporations that would implement (and do so actually) slavery in a heart beat. The fucking phone I'm typing on is some slave shit. From the apple factory it's made in, to the minerals from the Congo. (I'm on a Samsung, but point made)
But as far as the USA workforce and liberties given to every race of its inhabitants, its night and day compared to the past. Literally factual.
Shit ain't perfect, but let's not buy into what the media and governement is feeding the simple minds.

Overpopulation is not as dire. Europe is fading, usa is stagnant. China is about to face a crisis.
Nigeria, Bangladesh, India, ect might be a different story, but it's not as insane as one tends to believe
 
Also, to touch on some points made earlier. I think alot of our issues with the world is collapsing in the way of ethics amd such is based on our view of folks in this country.
I've been to peru, Mexico, Belize, Costa Rica, cambodia and s. korea. And i dont do tourist resorts, i try to get out there. Not a huge list, but enough. In every country, save pockets of Mexico, I'll be damned if folks aren't the most pleasant, honest (usually), helpful, good people.
I get home and am shocked with how shitty people are to each other here.
A victim of progress, maybe.
But on a whole traveling has helped my pessimistic view on people, except for here. Generally obviously
 
Rob Allen said:
Science is very faith based. That's all a scientific theory is. I see X so I believe Y.
Repeated results builds faith.
Click to expand...

Incorrect.

X can be independently verified, therefore we know X.

There is no Y.

There is no faith required, in science; if you are willing to put in the effort, you can independently verify an experiment. In contrast, no amount of theology will ever prove anything.
 
jaredoconnor said:
Incorrect.

X can be independently verified, therefore we know X.

There is no Y.

There is no faith required, in science; if you are willing to put in the effort, you can independently verify an experiment. In contrast, no amount of theology will ever prove anything.
Click to expand...
This is key. any you do science by actively trying to disprove your hypothesis. "If my hypothesis is wrong, we'll see this instead. Let's go look for that thing that proves it wrong". And if we keep failing to disprove, then we can conclude that maybe that's how the world works. Until someone finds that thing, and that's not a failure - we've learned something new.

And if anyone thinks there's trust or faith within the scientific community, they've never attended a scientific meeting or read the letters in a journal. When you see the line forming at the microphone in the audience when the presenter hasn't finished their intro, it's time to bust out the popcorn.
 
Flymph said:
No sure what you are referring to but assumed you give it your middle finger and all is good. Actually I agree with your assertion on NDT being out of his realm.
Click to expand...
Sorry, accidentally included you..
 
Is this just a long way of saying Mary was not a virgin?
 
Rob Allen said:
Neil Degrasse Tyson is not expert enough ti talk about religion, in fact he is completely ignorant on the issue and therefore has no authority to offer an opinion on it.

Science is very faith based. That's all a scientific theory is. I see X so I believe Y.
Repeated results builds faith.

I believe you that the knife is sharp based on my faith in your honesty.
Click to expand...
Jared beat me to it, responding to you. Science is the exact opposite of faith. Science is objective truth. Repeated consistent results doesn't build faith, at least not for most of us, just maybe for you. I witness the result and believe it to be true. Jared, Phil, Mossback, and others here all witness the same result. We decide this truth is a fact, in part because we cannot disprove it. Along comes another scientist with a better designed experiment and proves that, in fact, we were all wrong, but we now have a better understanding of more relevant facts, and we decide that the new fact best represents the truth. No faith is required for this understanding.

Saying Tyson is not expert enough to talk about religion suggests very shallow thinking on your part Rob. It's true that Tyson is a world famous astro-physicist, but that doesn't mean he has not also studied religion. I used to know a not so famous physicist who held a Doctorate and was a professor but also in his earlier life had been a Catholic Brother or Father, or some such, but not a priest. Although I didn't personally understand it, I never questioned his ability to be an expert in both science and religion. That would have been ludicrous. He studied both far more than I ever did. What are your credentials to offer an opinion on either science or religion?
 
PhilR said:
This is key. any you do science by actively trying to disprove your hypothesis. "If my hypothesis is wrong, we'll see this instead. Let's go look for that thing that proves it wrong". And if we keep failing to disprove, then we can conclude that maybe that's how the world works. Until someone finds that thing, and that's not a failure - we've learned something new.

And if anyone thinks there's trust or faith within the scientific community, they've never attended a scientific meeting or read the letters in a journal. When you see the line forming at the microphone in the audience when the presenter hasn't finished their intro, it's time to bust out the popcorn.
Click to expand...
That's great. Science is not being done that way nowadays.
Nowadays, at least on the " issues of the day" you start out with a political idea in mind then create "science" that establishes your idea then you demand that others accept it as the absolute truth including government agencies.

If there was a political agenda that needed the science of gravity to be overturned it absolutely would be and the professional organizations in that field of study would be bullied into accepting it.

Yes I just generalized modern science.. yes I know there are exceptions even lots of them.
 
Last edited:
Rob Allen said:
Rob Allen is not expert enough to talk about science, in fact he is completely ignorant on the issue and therefore has no authority to offer an opinion on it.
Click to expand...

See how it works ?

Your previous admissions of being poorly educated were never more evident...
Not sure exactly why you feel the need to demonstrate your complete and total lack of reasoning and critical thinking skills, but I do admire your commitment to continue doing so.
:)
 
Salmo_g said:
Jared beat me to it, responding to you. Science is the exact opposite of faith. Science is objective truth. Repeated consistent results doesn't build faith, at least not for most of us, just maybe for you. I witness the result and believe it to be true. Jared, Phil, Mossback, and others here all witness the same result. We decide this truth is a fact, in part because we cannot disprove it. Along comes another scientist with a better designed experiment and proves that, in fact, we were all wrong, but we now have a better understanding of more relevant facts, and we decide that the new fact best represents the truth. No faith is required for this understanding.

Saying Tyson is not expert enough to talk about religion suggests very shallow thinking on your part Rob. It's true that Tyson is a world famous astro-physicist, but that doesn't mean he has not also studied religion. I used to know a not so famous physicist who held a Doctorate and was a professor but also in his earlier life had been a Catholic Brother or Father, or some such, but not a priest. Although I didn't personally understand it, I never questioned his ability to be an expert in both science and religion. That would have been ludicrous. He studied both far more than I ever did. What are your credentials to offer an opinion on either science or religion?
Click to expand...
The idea that you can learn about religion by reading about religion is faulty. That is what's extremely shallow.

"The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned."
 
Rob Allen said:
That's great. Science is not being done that way nowadays.
Nowadays, at least on the " issues of the day" you start out with a political idea in mind then create "science" that establishes your idea then you demand that others accept it as the absolute truth including government agencies.

If there was a political agenda that needed the science of gravity to be overturned it absolutely would be and the professional organizations in that field of study would be bullied into accepting it.
Click to expand...


Curious where you get your insight on how "science is done nowadays". Seems to me there are folks on this very forum with actual science knowledge and careers who are quite open about explaining exactly how science is done. What exactly are you basing this claim on, beyond what you read from a third party source?
 
Nick Clayton said:
Curious where you get your insight on how "science is done nowadays". Seems to me there are folks on this very forum with actual science knowledge and careers who are quite open about explaining exactly how science is done. What exactly are you basing this claim on, beyond what you read from a third party source?
Click to expand...
Umm I watch the news, I see what's going on in society.. it's as demonstrably true as gravity.
 
Rob Allen said:
That's great. Science is not being done that way nowadays.
Nowadays, at least on the " issues of the day" you start out with a political idea in mind then create "science" that establishes your idea then you demand that others accept it as the absolute truth including government agencies.

If there was a political agenda that needed the science of gravity to be overturned it absolutely would be and the professional organizations in that field of study would be bullied into accepting it.
Click to expand...

You unfortunately have further proven my previous point. You apparently are completely ignorant on how science operates, and therefore, according to your standard, unqualified to opine. I suspect you only get your "Science" through some popular media, which often do a very poor job, not from the actual source. I suggest if you want to see/read how science operates, read some science journals (Cell, Astrophysical Reviews, the science reports/papers in Nature and Science, etc - warning can be tough slogging, but you will see no hint of politics or "agendas"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top