STUPID SCIENTISTS

"Don't post anything racist/misogynistic/pornographic, loli images, or any animated GIFs and you should be fine, haha!" The Raytownian

Moderator: xome

User avatar
fire
Posts: 1799
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:15 pm
Location: noritual unformation

Re: STUPID SCIENTISTS

Post by fire » Wed May 03, 2017 5:01 am

scientists turn wholes into pieces, then try to understand the whole through the pieces, inevitably they misinterpret what they find, then more scientists will take those flawed conclusions and build on them, now we have an impressive body of work to back up our scientism

lets talk specific, about the greatest scientist that ever lived, Tesla

none of the technologies he developed or facilitated through research have improved the human condition, every one of them has been used by the elite to further enslave the planet

only later in life did he realize he had unleashed a tempest on us all, he stopped scientizing reality when he saw the real damage it could do

scientists, as representatives of intelligence, are societies gatekeepers, they are responsible for the health, wealth and prosperity of the planet through their actions

as intelligent beings, they should know better than to give power to evil men, but that is exactly where they send it, and evil demands more power, mostly to kill, sometimes just for suffering

the science of men aims to exalt a man over reality, and they have done just that
[17,963] days since last fuck given

User avatar
amishrobots
Posts: 1823
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2010 5:08 pm
Location: Cincinnati Ohio
Contact:

Re: STUPID SCIENTISTS

Post by amishrobots » Sat May 06, 2017 11:07 pm

fire wrote:
Wed May 03, 2017 5:01 am
scientists turn wholes into pieces, then try to understand the whole through the pieces, inevitably they misinterpret what they find, then more scientists will take those flawed conclusions and build on them, now we have an impressive body of work to back up our scientism
This is just an ignorant thing to say. Like you assume scientists only examine the bones of a T-rex (or a woolly mammoth) through a microscope? I'm sure they spend just as much time turning pieces into wholes. And for that matter, aren't most puzzles solved by combining the pieces, one at a time?
fire wrote:
Wed May 03, 2017 5:01 am
as intelligent beings, they should know better than to give power to evil men, but that is exactly where they send it, and evil demands more power, mostly to kill, sometimes just for suffering
It is not the fault of science that greed accumulates wealth. Blame capitalism. Blame the natural law of survival of the fittest. The biggest baddest monster rules the jungle. Until we can break that tradition, and learn to build a transcendant society, the men who are best at grabbing the leash, imposing their will upon others, will be the ones who use scientific discovery for their own selfish, and often "evil" desires.

Show me an airplane powered by angels. Show me a plague cured by prayer.

Nah, just continue bitching on the internet about how science is dumb, maybe you're right, if this modern technology has served to give voice to your half-wit opinions.

User avatar
fire
Posts: 1799
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:15 pm
Location: noritual unformation

Re: STUPID SCIENTISTS

Post by fire » Sun May 07, 2017 2:09 am

amishrobots wrote:
Sat May 06, 2017 11:07 pm
fire wrote:
Wed May 03, 2017 5:01 am
scientists turn wholes into pieces, then try to understand the whole through the pieces, inevitably they misinterpret what they find, then more scientists will take those flawed conclusions and build on them, now we have an impressive body of work to back up our scientism
This is just an ignorant thing to say.
no, it is quite informed
amishrobots wrote:
Sat May 06, 2017 11:07 pm
Like you assume scientists only examine the bones of a T-rex (or a woolly mammoth) through a microscope?
more like tunnel vision resulting from specialization
amishrobots wrote:
Sat May 06, 2017 11:07 pm
I'm sure they spend just as much time turning pieces into wholes.
you are incorrect
amishrobots wrote:
Sat May 06, 2017 11:07 pm
And for that matter, aren't most puzzles solved by combining the pieces, one at a time?
no, most puzzles start out as wholes, are cut up, then reassembled, as i said above

maybe you meant the application of deductive logic, which unites individual knowns into a greater known, but this is subject to the largest, most encompassing known, i am, a singular awareness of all knowns, of which infinite supporting pieces of knowns can be made if you wish
amishrobots wrote:
Sat May 06, 2017 11:07 pm
fire wrote:
Wed May 03, 2017 5:01 am
as intelligent beings, they should know better than to give power to evil men, but that is exactly where they send it, and evil demands more power, mostly to kill, sometimes just for suffering
It is not the fault of science that greed accumulates wealth.
yes it is, science creates wealth out of resources, it is the materialist religion, or the reconnection of intelligence with matter, in other words, death, science is the death cult

the only wealth worth accumulating is wholly mental
amishrobots wrote:
Sat May 06, 2017 11:07 pm
Blame capitalism.
commodification is the natural result of unbalanced interactions with environment, brought on by scientific misunderstanding, assuming some parts are more/less valuable, absolute egotism
amishrobots wrote:
Sat May 06, 2017 11:07 pm
Blame the natural law of survival of the fittest.
there is no such law
amishrobots wrote:
Sat May 06, 2017 11:07 pm
The biggest baddest monster rules the jungle.
wrong. no one entity or species rules any ecosystem, that is simply a white supremacist lie

unless by rule you mean subjugate and destroy, then i agree
amishrobots wrote:
Sat May 06, 2017 11:07 pm
Until we can break that tradition, and learn to build a transcendant society, the men who are best at grabbing the leash, imposing their will upon others, will be the ones who use scientific discovery for their own selfish, and often "evil" desires.
yep, and heres the cunt in the details, that transcendant social order already has a blueprint, and we burn it to stay warm
amishrobots wrote:
Sat May 06, 2017 11:07 pm
Show me an airplane powered by angels.
i am not familiar with all of your various religious beliefs, perhaps it is you that can show me such a device
amishrobots wrote:
Sat May 06, 2017 11:07 pm
Show me a plague cured by prayer.
you can see plague germs? in any case, if its cured, whats to see?
amishrobots wrote:
Sat May 06, 2017 11:07 pm
Nah, just continue bitching on the internet about how science is dumb,
no tool is dumb or smart, that is the craftsmans domain
amishrobots wrote:
Sat May 06, 2017 11:07 pm
maybe you're right,
i am
amishrobots wrote:
Sat May 06, 2017 11:07 pm
if this modern technology has served to give voice to your half-wit opinions.
now youre catching on
[17,963] days since last fuck given

User avatar
Bipolar Fucking Joe
Posts: 5127
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2009 11:55 am

Re: STUPID SCIENTISTS

Post by Bipolar Fucking Joe » Sun May 07, 2017 5:33 am

It's a fact that there are many scientists of every variety who ignore results that don't fit their hypothesis. It's called being an ideologue.

User avatar
amishrobots
Posts: 1823
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2010 5:08 pm
Location: Cincinnati Ohio
Contact:

Re: STUPID SCIENTISTS

Post by amishrobots » Mon May 08, 2017 2:46 am

fire wrote:
Sun May 07, 2017 2:09 am
amishrobots wrote:
Sat May 06, 2017 11:07 pm
maybe you're right,
i am
amishrobots wrote:
Sat May 06, 2017 11:07 pm
if this modern technology has served to give voice to your half-wit opinions.
now youre catching on
I bet you wear anti-perspirant deoderant, because you're a fucking idiot.

User avatar
fire
Posts: 1799
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:15 pm
Location: noritual unformation

Re: STUPID SCIENTISTS

Post by fire » Mon May 08, 2017 4:19 am

amishrobots wrote:
Mon May 08, 2017 2:46 am
fire wrote:
Sun May 07, 2017 2:09 am
amishrobots wrote:
Sat May 06, 2017 11:07 pm
maybe you're right,
i am
amishrobots wrote:
Sat May 06, 2017 11:07 pm
if this modern technology has served to give voice to your half-wit opinions.
now youre catching on
I bet you wear anti-perspirant deoderant, because you're a fucking idiot.
my mommy puts it on, "one pit, two pits, and some for your balls"
[17,963] days since last fuck given

User avatar
Sleep Of Ages
Posts: 5960
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 2:55 am
Location: SÃO PAULO HARSH NOISE CITY

Re: STUPID SCIENTISTS

Post by Sleep Of Ages » Mon May 08, 2017 5:32 am

Noise rock
Image
SLEEP OF AGES (Industrial, Harsh Noise, PE)
CARRION BLACK PIT (HNW)
EXU (Industrial)

User avatar
fire
Posts: 1799
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:15 pm
Location: noritual unformation

Re: STUPID SCIENTISTS

Post by fire » Wed May 17, 2017 11:49 am

They call it the multiverse. It’s a cosmos in which there are multiple universes. And by multiple, I mean an infinite number. These uncountable realms sit side by side in higher dimensions that our senses are incapable of perceiving directly.

Yet increasingly astronomers and cosmologists seem to be invoking the multiverse to explain puzzling observations. oh fuck, here come the lols

The stakes are high. Each alternate universe carries its own different version of reality. There will be one where you wrote this column and I read it; one where the Guardian is an alt-right propaganda rag; even a really weird one in which Donald Trump uses twitter to spread nothing but amusing cat videos.

It sounds bonkers but the latest piece of evidence that could favour a multiverse comes from the UK’s Royal Astronomical Society. They recently published a study on the so-called ‘cold spot’. This is a particularly cool patch of space seen in the radiation produced by the formation of the Universe more than 13 billion years ago.

The cold spot was first glimpsed by NASA’s WMAP satellite in 2004, and then confirmed by ESA’s Planck mission in 2013. It is supremely puzzling. Most astronomers and cosmologists believe that it is highly unlikely to have been produced by the birth of the universe as it is mathematically difficult for the leading theory – which is called inflation – to explain. uh oh

This latest study claims to rule out a last-ditch prosaic explanation: that the cold spot is an optical illusion produced by a lack of intervening galaxies.

One of the study’s authors, Professor Tom Shanks of Durham University, told the RAS, “We can’t entirely rule out that the Spot is caused by an unlikely fluctuation explained by the standard [theory of the Big Bang]. But if that isn’t the answer, then there are more exotic explanations. Perhaps the most exciting of these is that the Cold Spot was caused by a collision between our universe and another bubble universe. If further, more detailed, analysis … proves this to be the case then the Cold Spot might be taken as the first evidence for the multiverse.” wow, just wow, and you guys think im stupid

Heady stuff.*cough, bullshit* But the irony is that if there is a multiverse, scientists will have to accept that the ultimate goal of physics – to explain why our universe is the way it is – could be forever out of reach. oh fuck yeah! we can stop trying to explain why we are completely baffled by literally everything we see in the sky, thank jesus, that was becoming embarassing

The endgame for physics has been to provide the reason why our universe takes the form it does. To do this it must explain why certain fundamental quantities have the values they do. For example: the speed of light[no fixed speed], the mass of an electron[zero], the strength of the gravitational interaction.[doesnt exist, misunderstood charge coupling]

If there is a multiverse, however, that quest could be doomed to failure. oh nooo, wont someone think of all the overpaid idiots in academia, how will they maintain control of society?

Just as there are an infinite number of similar yet slightly different universes (like the one in which you have written this column not me), there will also be an infinite number in which the basic laws of physics are different.how fucking convenient, cop out

So, every possible combination of physics is tried out across the multiverse. Inevitably then, by nothing more than blind luck, at least one will have the conditions we see around us today. It’s just a big old accident, and that hardly seems very satisfying.you hear that, we are all accidents, reminds me of one of my favorite insults, "if you dont think you were intelligently designed, then you probably arent"

One of the most vocal opponents of the multiverse theory is – ironically – one of its original architects. Paul Steinhardt, Princeton University, helped develop inflation, the theory of the origin of our universe. It’s the one that struggles to explain the cold spot, whilst also giving rise to the multiverse because according to its maths once a universe starts to form it triggers more to be born ad infinitum.

However, Steinhardt turned against his own theory.


In 2014, he told Scientific American magazine, “Our observable universe would be just one possibility out of a continuous spectrum of outcomes. So, we have not explained any feature of the universe by introducing inflation after all.no shit? We have just shifted the problem of the original big bang model (how can we explain our simple universe when there is a nearly infinite variety of possibilities that could emerge from the big bang?) to the inflationary model (how can we explain our simple universe when there is a nearly infinite variety of possibilities that could emerge in a multiverse?).”
hard to believe he admits this, must be dying

Put this way, a multiverse doesn’t sound attractive. It would cut to the very heart of physics’ purpose. derp Nature, of course, doesn’t care about this. Maybe the cosmos really is this way and we just have to accept it. Certainly, there are many who are willing to defend the multiverse as a valid direction for thought.

Comfortingly, if we do live in a multiverse, we can be assured that somewhere out there is an alternate version of you and me that have already figured all this out (and won a Nobel prize for the effort).derp
[17,963] days since last fuck given

User avatar
xdugef
Posts: 12885
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 11:26 am
Location: 噪声æº￾
Contact:

Re: STUPID SCIENTISTS

Post by xdugef » Wed May 17, 2017 12:00 pm

fire wrote:
Wed May 17, 2017 11:49 am
The stakes are high. Each alternate universe carries its own different version of reality. There will be one where you wrote this column and I read it; one where the Guardian is an alt-right propaganda rag; even a really weird one in which Donald Trump uses twitter to spread nothing but amusing cat videos.
There certainly could be worse realities.. like the one we currently live in where a rotting pumpkin with wispy cotton candy for hair is President

User avatar
fire
Posts: 1799
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:15 pm
Location: noritual unformation

Re: STUPID SCIENTISTS

Post by fire » Wed May 17, 2017 12:41 pm

trust me, its not as bad as the one where i am dicktater of the world

Image
[17,963] days since last fuck given

User avatar
xdugef
Posts: 12885
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 11:26 am
Location: 噪声æº￾
Contact:

Re: STUPID SCIENTISTS

Post by xdugef » Wed May 17, 2017 1:57 pm

fire wrote:
Wed May 17, 2017 12:41 pm
trust me, its not as bad as the one where i am dicktater of the world

Image
Or the one where it's all dick nipples

User avatar
fire
Posts: 1799
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:15 pm
Location: noritual unformation

Re: STUPID SCIENTISTS

Post by fire » Wed May 17, 2017 5:58 pm

xdugef wrote:
Wed May 17, 2017 1:57 pm
Or the one where it's all dick nipples
Image
[17,963] days since last fuck given

User avatar
jliat
Posts: 1433
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: STUPID SCIENTISTS

Post by jliat » Thu May 18, 2017 12:05 am

This kind of thing is so lame. Kant sort to provide a firm foundation for science, not that science was bothered. AKA Newton. All science is a posteriori and so never absolutely certain. And scientists are well aware of that, though maybe not the general public. Which is why they try to put their observations (which are never certain) into mathematics or logic which once seemed certain. The stupidity arrives because most people cant do the maths, so publicists and popularizers of science use metaphor and analogy. And if people then believe in these analogies then they are mistaken, if not stupid. Now move on to Gödel -perhaps the smartest person ever, who showed that mathematics itself was not complete. (not that all maths is wrong!) And so even the maths that science uses is not absolute.

What is incredibly boring is people who bang on and on about 'stupid scientists' when those very scientists are more aware of the provisional (stupid) nature of scientific knowledge than the knowing journalist, popularises and old hippies who boringly bang on about the uncertainty of science.

Well YES. We all know this – so move on, get a life, change the tune.

A 'good' scientific experiment sets out to disprove a given hypothesis . And that is a *key* scientific method. If the experiment(s) fail they do not prove the hypothesis. It remains provisional. Black Swans!

Stuff like religion, belief is spirits etc. never provides any experiment which would disprove these ideas, and are therefore pseudo-science.

So again – please change the tune. It's boring – like water is wet!

User avatar
fire
Posts: 1799
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:15 pm
Location: noritual unformation

Re: STUPID SCIENTISTS

Post by fire » Thu May 18, 2017 6:43 am

jliat wrote:
Thu May 18, 2017 12:05 am
This kind of thing is so lame.
not so lame you didnt reply
jliat wrote:
Thu May 18, 2017 12:05 am
All science is a posteriori and so never absolutely certain.
this sentence proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that you have no understanding of how science works

THE SCIENCE IS SETTLED
jliat wrote:
Thu May 18, 2017 12:05 am
And scientists are well aware of that, though maybe not the general public.
youre right, the general population considers science a god of certitude, but understands little to nothing about the charade of the "scientific method"
jliat wrote:
Thu May 18, 2017 12:05 am
Which is why they try to put their observations (which are never certain) into mathematics or logic which once seemed certain. The stupidity arrives because most people cant do the maths, so publicists and popularizers of science use metaphor and analogy. And if people then believe in these analogies then they are mistaken, if not stupid. Now move on to Gödel -perhaps the smartest person ever, who showed that mathematics itself was not complete. (not that all maths is wrong!) And so even the maths that science uses is not absolute.
wait, did you just switch sides, i thought we were diametrically opposed?
jliat wrote:
Thu May 18, 2017 12:05 am
What is incredibly boring is people who bang on and on about 'stupid scientists' when those very scientists are more aware of the provisional (stupid) nature of scientific knowledge than the knowing journalist, popularises and old hippies who boringly bang on about the uncertainty of science.
boredom is a state that arises from improper interaction with ones environment, maybe go ice skating?
jliat wrote:
Thu May 18, 2017 12:05 am
Well YES. We all know this – so move on, get a life, change the tune.
DONT TASE ME BRO!
jliat wrote:
Thu May 18, 2017 12:05 am
A 'good' scientific experiment sets out to disprove a given hypothesis . And that is a *key* scientific method. If the experiment(s) fail they do not prove the hypothesis. It remains provisional. Black Swans!
you dont really keep up on the sciency stuff, huh? you do know that the majority of articles in peer reviewed publications rely on experiments which are unable to be reproduced, right?
jliat wrote:
Thu May 18, 2017 12:05 am
Stuff like religion, belief is spirits etc. never provides any experiment which would disprove these ideas, and are therefore pseudo-science.
ah, the old "science is god because ignorance, religion is fake because i dont understand" philosophy, lol
jliat wrote:
Thu May 18, 2017 12:05 am
So again – please change the tune. It's boring – like water is wet!
i feel that if i am under your skin i am definitely on the right track, thanks
[17,963] days since last fuck given

User avatar
jliat
Posts: 1433
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: STUPID SCIENTISTS

Post by jliat » Thu May 18, 2017 9:09 am

fire wrote:
Thu May 18, 2017 6:43 am
not so lame you didnt reply
Precisely- when someone talks nonsense I think even if only for the benefit of others the point should be made. Your idea of science seems to come from newspaper articles, written by journalists to make money by selling sensational news.
fire wrote:
Thu May 18, 2017 6:43 am
this sentence proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that you have no understanding of how science works
THE SCIENCE IS SETTLED
What does this mean? Its obvious that theories of science change, this is due to the provisional nature of science.
"A priori knowledge or justification is independent of experience, as with mathematics (3 000 + 2 000 = 5 000), tautologies ("All bachelors are unmarried"), and deduction from pure reason (e.g., ontological proofs).
A posteriori knowledge or justification is dependent on experience or empirical evidence, as with most aspects of science and personal knowledge."
Of course you might mean something different - but i'm using what is generally considered - as above.
fire wrote:
Thu May 18, 2017 6:43 am
youre right, the general population considers science a god of certitude, but understands little to nothing about the charade of the "scientific method"
You need to provide evidence for your use of "charade". As for the general population i'm not in a position to speak for them.
jliat wrote:
Thu May 18, 2017 12:05 am
Which is why they try to put their observations (which are never certain) into mathematics or logic which once seemed certain. The stupidity arrives because most people cant do the maths, so publicists and popularizers of science use metaphor and analogy. And if people then believe in these analogies then they are mistaken, if not stupid. Now move on to Gödel -perhaps the smartest person ever, who showed that mathematics itself was not complete. (not that all maths is wrong!) And so even the maths that science uses is not absolute.
fire wrote:
Thu May 18, 2017 6:43 am
wait, did you just switch sides, i thought we were diametrically opposed?
I've repeatedly made these points. As have many philosophers and scientists. Journalists make science seem like absolute knowledge, which is why its both foolish to believe them, and wrong to cite them. A very good example is The Higgs particle, journalists called it 'The God Particle' which sounds cool, a term Peter Higgs hated.
fire wrote:
Thu May 18, 2017 6:43 am
ah, the old "science is god because ignorance, religion is fake because i dont understand" philosophy, lol
But i'm not saying science is god. Or religion is fake. So you are not 'under my skin' - you are under the skin of your own making, a straw man. Religious 'understanding' if its not to seem nonsensical is not the same as that of science, or that of mathematics and logic. All three are different.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests