[~CB]

I feel as if this post I'm about to make is right now very important on here as there are some members who have made it their objective to target what Science doesn't knows 'yet' to validate their own beliefs. I don't want the members this post is referring to, to get offended, rather understand what I'm about to say and start making actual difference.

I originally posted this on another topic 'Poll: Are you an Atheist' in the 'Just Chat' section. In reply to Jccc.

"Why would you expect science to have the answers to EVERYTHING? Theories are evidence based conclusions with the highest confidence that we can have, but they all have gaps in understanding including Gravity, Germ theory of disease, General Relativity, etc. Complete understanding may be impossible but the strength of science is admitting that our understanding is not complete and therefore continuing to pursue knowledge and refine current understanding. That's why science works.
Usually people target what Science doesn't knows 'yet' and then just keep iterating it to feel as if they have won the debate/argument. Science didn't just fall down from space in the form of books giving us answers to everything. We have been evolving to understand concepts we would have deemed impossible to understand a century ago. And we will continue to evolve and maybe, just maybe have answers to everything, someday. The type of argument you start here, usually everyday... Isn't helping Science or the mankind in any way. If you want to follow something which claims to have the answer to everything then you should ditch Science and start following religion. Because having ALL of the answers is the domain of religion. Just don't question those answers or try to verify them, that's blasphemy. Your only job there is to believe what you are told by a book and other human beings, and have faith (not evidence) that they are correct."

I know I should have made this post in the 'Just chat' section but I wanted everyone to see this.

[yor_on]

Well, I don't know there Jasper. I think we should keep faith as one part of us, science as another. This world you and me lives in works on trust, although wars and disaster pointing to something opposite. We all have faith, because that's the greater part of why we survive, as well as progress, our ability of trust in each other. There's a blind spot when it comes to science, arguing that logic is all there is. You can do it if you choose, but you must incorporate the world as it is if so. And that then will include a lot of stuff, that science has no contemporary explanations for, as us 'thinking', emotions, etc etc. I do believe they too can place under logic, and must be, if we want to understand the world we exist in.

[~CB]

I wasn't quite able to grasp completely what you were trying to say and correct me if I'm wrong here, but... Are you saying (in a way) that whatever is conceivable by thinking, is a possibility? That we should just have faith in whatever anyone is saying and not correct him, however illogical?

[PmbPhy]

Why do you expect Science to know everything?

I'm curious where you ever got this idea from? It's most certainly wrong. Not one scientist today believes that we can know everything through the methods of science. For example; nothing about science will answer most questions that philosophers pose. It can't address most parts of religion either. The goal of science is to address questions about nature.

Complete understanding may be impossible but the strength of science is admitting that our understanding is not complete and therefore continuing to pursue knowledge and refine current understanding. That's why science works.

Correct.

[alancalverd]

Science is a process. It doesn't "have answers" but helps us to answer sensible questions.

[chiralSPO]

AMEN!

[guest39538]

I feel as if this post I'm about to make is right now very important on here as there are some members who have made it their objective to target what Science doesn't knows 'yet' to validate their own beliefs. I don't want the members this post is referring to, to get offended, rather understand what I'm about to say and start making actual difference.

I originally posted this on another topic 'Poll: Are you an Atheist' in the 'Just Chat' section. In reply to Jccc.

"Why would you expect science to have the answers to EVERYTHING? Theories are evidence based conclusions with the highest confidence that we can have, but they all have gaps in understanding including Gravity, Germ theory of disease, General Relativity, etc. Complete understanding may be impossible but the strength of science is admitting that our understanding is not complete and therefore continuing to pursue knowledge and refine current understanding. That's why science works.
Usually people target what Science doesn't knows 'yet' and then just keep iterating it to feel as if they have won the debate/argument. Science didn't just fall down from space in the form of books giving us answers to everything. We have been evolving to understand concepts we would have deemed impossible to understand a century ago. And we will continue to evolve and maybe, just maybe have answers to everything, someday. The type of argument you start here, usually everyday... Isn't helping Science or the mankind in any way. If you want to follow something which claims to have the answer to everything then you should ditch Science and start following religion. Because having ALL of the answers is the domain of religion. Just don't question those answers or try to verify them, that's blasphemy. Your only job there is to believe what you are told by a book and other human beings, and have faith (not evidence) that they are correct."

I know I should have made this post in the 'Just chat' section but I wanted everyone to see this.

A great question, and has one of those other members, I feel I can answer your question.   Myself does not expect science to know everything, but I do expect that everything you state or defend, has substantial proof with solid foundation.  Without this proof , science leaves itself wide open to , how can I put it, ''making itself look rather religious and silly''.   

Members defend unicorn belief at times, state the individual like myself is a crackpot.   Therefore the individual thinks even harder and discourses deep into your information often showing you have no evidence.

Myself never attacks the truths and physics involved of true facts, like an object falls to the ground.  I expect your ideas to be has solid as an object falling to the ground, if not then it is just fantasy, and no more different to my own fantasy, which I can not prove except by using science to overthrow your science.   

See my expansion thread in new theories this will show you what I mean.

[Colin2B]

Your comparison with religion is a useful one. There is no doubt that to many people science, particularly medicine, is a religion, a belief system. One of the things that attracted me to TNS was that I saw less of that sort of thinking than on the odd glimpses of other fora. Many people here are prepared to understand and accept the basic science but to question at the edges, hoping for insight and understanding, perhaps to be able to change their views.

In many areas I have absorbed standard teaching. I accept that the earth is round, I cannot prove it or measure it, and if you asked me to I would not be able to prove otherwise except by quoting those who have studied the problem. The long history of science, and physics in particular, shows me that I cannot build that knowledge from scratch, I do not have the time and resources to perform every experiment and derive every theory, I have to accept much on faith. If I find something that doesn't work the way it is predicted I will question it and try to find out why.

However, some of the people you are taking about, who attack science, are similar to someone who goes into a church and declares that the existence of God cannot be proven. However, they have not read or understood the particular bible of that church, so cannot know whether proof lies within. Even more so, they will declare to a Christian church that the view of the trinity is wrong, they are capable of thinking for themselves and have decided that duodecinity is the true answer. In reality they should set up their own religion, not Christianity but Duodecinintarianism. I'm sure they would have a strong following in no time.

The problem with many who question science is that they do so from a lack of understanding. They will tell you they accept the basics eg an apple falls to the ground. But they do question other basic concepts because they do not understand the answers, and they do not have the knowledge to understand that these concepts are clear and obvious to those who have studied them.
It is an arrogance and complacency that says "if I can't understand the answer, it must be wrong", but also an arrogance which says I do not need to study this in order to understand, it should be obvious to all who view it. Well, I'm sorry, but it's not that simple, some things are complex and pretending they are not is of little help to anyone.

[Bill S]

Why do you expect Science to know everything?

I'm curious where you ever got this idea from? It's most certainly wrong.

Fascinating how two people can read the same thing and understand it differently.  I took it that Jasper was chiding those who seemed to expect science to know everything.

[guest39538]

Your comparison with religion is a useful one. There is no doubt that to many people science, particularly medicine, is a religion, a belief system. One of the things that attracted me to TNS was that I saw less of that sort of thinking than on the odd glimpses of other fora. Many people here are prepared to understand and accept the basic science but to question at the edges, hoping for insight and understanding, perhaps to be able to change their views.

In many areas I have absorbed standard teaching. I accept that the earth is round, I cannot prove it or measure it, and if you asked me to I would not be able to prove otherwise except by quoting those who have studied the problem. The long history of science, and physics in particular, shows me that I cannot build that knowledge from scratch, I do not have the time and resources to perform every experiment and derive every theory, I have to accept much on faith. If I find something that doesn't work the way it is predicted I will question it and try to find out why.

However, some of the people you are taking about, who attack science, are similar to someone who goes into a church and declares that the existence of God cannot be proven. However, they have not read or understood the particular bible of that church, so cannot know whether proof lies within. Even more so, they will declare to a Christian church that the view of the trinity is wrong, they are capable of thinking for themselves and have decided that duodecinity is the true answer. In reality they should set up their own religion, not Christianity but Duodecinintarianism. I'm sure they would have a strong following in no time.

The problem with many who question science is that they do so from a lack of understanding. They will tell you they accept the basics eg an apple falls to the ground. But they do question other basic concepts because they do not understand the answers, and they do not have the knowledge to understand that these concepts are clear and obvious to those who have studied them.
It is an arrogance and complacency that says "if I can't understand the answer, it must be wrong", but also an arrogance which says I do not need to study this in order to understand, it should be obvious to all who view it. Well, I'm sorry, but it's not that simple, some things are complex and pretending they are not is of little help to anyone.

Your words speak truth's, but  I would argue it is arrogant of science to presume the present answers are not understood by any individual, a sort of arrogance that is portraying the individuals to be stupid and that only science is smart.   I have stated many times that knowledge and explanation is at my finger tips , literally, we all have this knowledge.  Like I stated, science perceives some things and defends it, when it is physically impossible, which makes no relative to sense to any reader, it is understood but does not logically conform to being correct.

The biggest example - space itself is expanding.

You defend this and to an ordinary person, we think it is quite absurd, we know space can not be destroyed nor as it physical body, this is laughable.

Simple things like this make the said trolls who expect science to at least have answers when questioned about it. Science says something then offers no proof, can you observe space?  No

Can you observe space expanding?   NO

Can you observe some matter moving away from us?  Yes


It is not that hard to say the truth.

[chiralSPO]

Except that the simplest answer is not always the right one.

We cannot observe space directly, but we can see that (on a cosmic scale) everything is moving away from everything else. An observer anywhere in the universe would look around themselves and claim that all of the distant galaxies are moving away from them (expanding universe, where the observer is at the center of expansion), and that the galaxies farthest away are moving fastest.

If it were just an issue of galaxies moving apart from one another you would see a progression like:

a...b.....c............d
a.....b.....c............d
a.......b.....c............d
a..........b.....c............d


But what we see is more like:
a...b.......c..............d
a.....b.........c................d
a.......b...........c..................d
a..........b.............c....................d

or more exaggerated:

a..b....c......d
a....b........c............d
a........b................c........................d
a................b................................c................................................d

Which indicates that the rate that objects move apart from one-another depends on how far away they are already. The easiest way to think about this is that the space between them is growing.

This also explains how objects can be moving apart from one-another faster than the speed of light. Since it is impossible (as far as we know) to accelerate an object to a speed greater than the speed of light, but not necessarily impossible (though we don't know how) for the space itself between objects to increase at any rate, making it appear as if the objects themselves are moving.

There are other explanations of these observations, but expanding space is the current favorite among most physicists and cosmologists.

I am content for the moment saying that the observations and theory are consistent, but I do wonder if there is a better explanation. Luckily there are people smarter than both of us working on it right now!

[Colin2B]

I am content for the moment saying that the observations and theory are consistent, but I do wonder if there is a better explanation.

This is a good example of where our understanding is developing and I'm sure there will be plenty of exciting developments in cosmology and at the QM level that will move ideas forward.

However, pseudoscience tries to second guess on the basis of limited and incorrect knowledge. It also tries to rewrite (usually in gobbledygook) well understood ideas just because the writer fails to understand the basic concepts.

[jccc]

i only expect science to know me, who cares everything? not me.

[~CB]

AMEN!

Ah! That humour! I LOVE IT! Haha!

[chiralSPO]

I'm glad someone gets it  []

[Ethos_]

The true spirit of the scientific method is to find answers through experiment to the many unanswered questions that good science is seeking after. If scientists believed that they knew everything, there would be no incentive for them to look for those answers. Those arrogant individuals that come to this forum insisting that, only they have answers, when good scientific minds within our membership do not, only expose their ignorance.

How many times have we all heard; "You arrogant scientists think you have all the answers." The greater truth is; Many of the poorly educated beginners come here thinking they are the only ones with any answers.

Personally , I along with many of our respected members have a desperate hunger to learn how the universe works. And we are open to new ideas that make sense and are compatible with proven theory. Nevertheless, we are also smart enough to know nonsense when it is suggested by some hapless amateur.

A word of caution: Don't come here vomiting up drivel and expect not to be challenged for it. If it doesn't level with tested and tried scientific theory, we will let you know about your error. Do not be surprised to be shown your errors, every good scientist is willing to accept the truth when confronted with it. And don't act insulted when you're shown those errors, acting like you don't deserve to be shown those errors only reveals your true ignorance.

[~CB]

A word of caution: Don't come here vomiting up drivel and expect not to be challenged for it. If it doesn't level with tested and tried scientific theory, we will let you know about your error. Do not be surprised to be shown your errors, every good scientist is willing to accept the truth when confronted with it. And don't act insulted when you're shown those errors, acting like you don't deserve to be shown those errors only reveals your true ignorance.

Jccc, you should definitely read this, mate.
If we ban you and TheBox we will find ourseleves in a pretty friendly community but we respect you sharing your theories on here. But, you cannot expect everything you have thought of to be golden. You have to be ready for any errors the more experienced and knowledgeable minds here point out. Instead you argue with them yet again bring in those old 'what science doesn't knows yet' questions and try to validate your theory/belief. All we are saying is... Just try to UNDERSTAND!

[guest39538]

A word of caution: Don't come here vomiting up drivel and expect not to be challenged for it. If it doesn't level with tested and tried scientific theory, we will let you know about your error. Do not be surprised to be shown your errors, every good scientist is willing to accept the truth when confronted with it. And don't act insulted when you're shown those errors, acting like you don't deserve to be shown those errors only reveals your true ignorance.

Jccc, you should definitely read this, mate.
If we ban you and TheBox we will find ourseleves in a pretty friendly community but we respect you sharing your theories on here. But, you cannot expect everything you have thought of to be golden. You have to be ready for any errors the more experienced and knowledgeable minds here point out. Instead you argue with them yet again bringing in those old 'what science doesn't knows yet' questions and try to validate your theory/belief. All we are saying is... Just try to UNDERSTAND!

If I and JCCC were banned then that would be ludicrous, I and Jccc only questioning the unanswered.  What makes science think we do not understand?   

Do you not think that I  could repeat back your knowledge and present thought back to you?
  The point is we have to know your knowledge in the first place to make our own ideas.


It really is a point where I speak street and you speak science, except my street science has no words to explain it because they do not exist, so I personally try to use comparative words that are often misunderstood.  Maybe it is still science not trying to understand and continues with the , you just do not understand and are a crackpot.


Science aims at preaching these disciplines, if you do not accept we ban you, this is why I get banned.  This leads me to all sort of conspiracy theories, why such an interest in forcing theories on people that have little grounds to be said facts.

My personal opinion is that I could take 2 boxes, fill one box with all the guaranteed facts, and fill the other box with the not so factual of science, the second box I will argue all day everyday .




 

[Colin2B]

we respect you sharing your theories on here. But, you cannot expect everything you have thought of to be golden.

I've said it elsewhere but will repeat. Jccc and the box both have ideas worthy of consideration, but often the discussion gets diverted by the need to explain basic misunderstanding of fundamental concepts. Combine this with a strange need for some people to create obscuration by misusing scientific terminology and the gems get lost in the dross.
There have been a number of topics I would have liked to pursue, but it can be like wading through treacle, and I have limited time, so the topic gets dropped here. I either consider it on my own or with friends who have more open minds and able to think both within and outside the box.
I suspect you might have the potential to fall into that group.

PS don't be too hard on some posters here and judge them as rude. Like most of us they have limited time, and so our replies can often be quite terse. Some folks on here fail to realise that answers are not intended to "write the textbook" but can only be a summary, and hence incomplete, sometimes appearing inconsistent and seemingly full of holes!

[jccc]

been banned twice, i almost jump the lake. ban me again, i might hit the train.

pls don't, i will be friendly as a dog.