Welcome, Guest. Please Login
YaBB - Yet another Bulletin Board
  Visit YaBB today Wink
  HomeHelpSearchLogin  
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 
Send Topic Print
Absolute Evidence (Read 18975 times)
Volcano Girl
Junior Member
**
Offline


Geologist

Posts: 66
Re: Absolute Evidence
Reply #15 - Dec 29th, 2009 at 3:03am
 
Simianus wrote on Dec 28th, 2009 at 7:47pm:
Sure, you can seek the truth, but acknowledge that you'll never attain it. If you think you've attained truth, your arrogance will always prevent you from seeking any more.


+5 for winning with style
Back to top
 

I'm sorry if i start to sneeze and cough, however i'm allergic to nonsense pseudoscience.
 
IP Logged
 
metha
Full Member
***
Offline


Seek Truth!

Posts: 100
Re: Absolute Evidence
Reply #16 - Dec 29th, 2009 at 5:27am
 
GoodScienceForYou wrote on Dec 28th, 2009 at 1:26pm:
These photos are absolute evidence of atomic power and its effects on humans. This is just one example.


What? No! You cannot be serious. They are not proofs of anything. I understand now that you really have no idea what proof or evidence are. How can you prove that this destructive power is not the ether exploding, instead of atomic power? This is not scientific.

GoodScienceForYou wrote on Dec 28th, 2009 at 1:26pm:
You cannot test any mythological ideas from billions of years ago, without a time machine. You cannot go back in time and see how any creature got here or what they have been through. You cannot test evolution.


ALL statements can be tested. Anything that says anything about reality can be tested. Evolution can be tested, and I think that there exist tests that will fail.

GoodScienceForYou wrote on Dec 28th, 2009 at 1:26pm:
So, in your science dropping something on the floor and watching it hit the floor is not science?  Has it ever failed to hit the floor in your lifetime on earth?


No that is not science. Measuring the acceleration, develop formulas to predict the velocity at a certain time IS science.

Quote:
Theory means anything but absolute truth.  It is now reduced to the level of religious beliefs.


You putting a meaning to a word different from ALL other people's meaning of the word, doesn't give anything to the debate, and it destroys your own credibility. Evolution should not be a theory, simply because I think it will fail some tests. Relativity theory and theory of gravity and number theory are ALL theories that have passed every single test. Number theory has even been proven! It is still a theory: Collection of facts and explanations to them, and tools to make predictions.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
metha
Full Member
***
Offline


Seek Truth!

Posts: 100
Re: Absolute Evidence
Reply #17 - Dec 29th, 2009 at 5:38am
 
About gravity and watching a stone fall to the ground... Science take into account that the stone might not fall the next time we try. To PROVE that the stone will always fall, we have to record all events and possibilities. This is clearly impossible. It could be that ONE time the stone doesn't fall, and so hence the theory is wrong. That is all it takes to disprove the theory of gravity: ONE single example or event when the predictions fail. You have not watched every stone that fell to the ground, and all the stones that will fall to the ground in the future, so you cannot say that it always will. You also have to record the acceleration each time, because that is what real science make predictions about. You cannot prove it. BUT you can say it with VERY high certainty. That is what scientists mean when they say that we cannot talk about absolute proof in science, but only in mathematics.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
metha
Full Member
***
Offline


Seek Truth!

Posts: 100
Re: Absolute Evidence
Reply #18 - Dec 29th, 2009 at 5:39am
 
Now, since absolute proof exists, by your standards. Prove to me that F=ma.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Simianus
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


Seek Truth!

Posts: 26
Re: Absolute Evidence
Reply #19 - Dec 29th, 2009 at 7:03pm
 
metha wrote on Dec 29th, 2009 at 5:38am:
About gravity and watching a stone fall to the ground... Science take into account that the stone might not fall the next time we try. To PROVE that the stone will always fall, we have to record all events and possibilities. This is clearly impossible. It could be that ONE time the stone doesn't fall, and so hence the theory is wrong. That is all it takes to disprove the theory of gravity: ONE single example or event when the predictions fail. You have not watched every stone that fell to the ground, and all the stones that will fall to the ground in the future, so you cannot say that it always will. You also have to record the acceleration each time, because that is what real science make predictions about. You cannot prove it. BUT you can say it with VERY high certainty. That is what scientists mean when they say that we cannot talk about absolute proof in science, but only in mathematics.


Exactly! A point worth repeating.

David Hume argued much the same point in his argument against causality. (Not meaning to come off as an arrogant arse here, I just think you've made a really important point.)

His argument amounts to this: despite what we think the outcome of any process will be, we can never really know, because it hasn't happened yet. Science can't call itself science and claim to divine the future. A science without humility is indistinguishable from religion.

He argued that the sun rised yesterday, the day before, and last week, so can we say it is a fact that the sun will rise tomorrow? Of course not, it hasn't happened. You cannot find with absolute certainty a cause in any effect because science isn't synonymous with fortune telling. You can only make an intelligent hypothesis as to why something has happened and test it's likelihood. Science is about what has already been observed, only making predictions as to what will probably happen again.

Falling into the trap of over-confidence by seeking absolute "truths" via science only preserves the medieval headspace that resulted in alchemy, astronomy and alchemy, and all kinds of superstition. Quite frankly, too many things have been disproven in the past, and modern science won't be embarassed like that again. It will espouse probabilities and "theories" but will never champion absolutes. Modern science is nothing but hypothesis, testing, theories, and probabilities. It is not witchcraft.

Volcanogirl and Prolescum, I wish I had a good blush icon, perhaps one that doesn't induce epileptic seizures. Cheesy
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Simianus
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


Seek Truth!

Posts: 26
Re: Absolute Evidence
Reply #20 - Dec 29th, 2009 at 7:07pm
 
I apologise for the typos, since I can't seem to correct them.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
prolescum
Junior Member
**
Offline


LoLtering for the sake
of it

Posts: 93
Re: Absolute Evidence
Reply #21 - Dec 30th, 2009 at 2:34am
 
Here's some absolute evidence.


Of insanity.
Back to top
 

screenshot1.png (104 KB | 147 )
screenshot1.png

http://dictionary.reference.com/

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/

http://www.merriam-webster.com/
WWW  
IP Logged
 
glowingape
Full Member
***
Offline


wut?

Posts: 135
Re: Absolute Evidence
Reply #22 - Dec 30th, 2009 at 2:42am
 
prolescum wrote on Dec 30th, 2009 at 2:34am:
Here's some absolute evidence.

Throw me a PM on youtube. I'm the author of that video :]
Back to top
 

Quote:
Diamond are no longer carbon, they are diamonds.  Moron! ~ GSFY

Quote:
Photosynthesis is a carbon digesting process. ~ GSFY
 
IP Logged
 
prolescum
Junior Member
**
Offline


LoLtering for the sake
of it

Posts: 93
Re: Absolute Evidence
Reply #23 - Dec 30th, 2009 at 2:58am
 
glowingape wrote on Dec 30th, 2009 at 2:42am:
prolescum wrote on Dec 30th, 2009 at 2:34am:
Here's some absolute evidence.

Throw me a PM on youtube. I'm the author of that video :]


Lollers!
Back to top
 

screenshot4_001.png (185 KB | 148 )
screenshot4_001.png

http://dictionary.reference.com/

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/

http://www.merriam-webster.com/
WWW  
IP Logged
 
glowingape
Full Member
***
Offline


wut?

Posts: 135
Re: Absolute Evidence
Reply #24 - Dec 30th, 2009 at 3:04am
 
Teh stupid! Eet burnz! D:
Back to top
 

Quote:
Diamond are no longer carbon, they are diamonds.  Moron! ~ GSFY

Quote:
Photosynthesis is a carbon digesting process. ~ GSFY
 
IP Logged
 
Simianus
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


Seek Truth!

Posts: 26
Re: Absolute Evidence
Reply #25 - Dec 30th, 2009 at 4:56am
 
Err... I'm trying not to be judgemental. I honestly would like to hear an explanation for that... It's a bit stunning, though.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
glowingape
Full Member
***
Offline


wut?

Posts: 135
Re: Absolute Evidence
Reply #26 - Dec 30th, 2009 at 6:03am
 
Simianus wrote on Dec 30th, 2009 at 4:56am:
Err... I'm trying not to be judgemental. I honestly would like to hear an explanation for that... It's a bit stunning, though.
The problem is, because it always boils down to "it's obvious" or "Are you really that stupid?" or "you were indoctrinated (or something)". It never comes down to explanation, let alone deal in someway with scientifically backed  statements.

So far, we didn't get the acknoledgment, that he actually understands science at all.
Back to top
 

Quote:
Diamond are no longer carbon, they are diamonds.  Moron! ~ GSFY

Quote:
Photosynthesis is a carbon digesting process. ~ GSFY
 
IP Logged
 
Simianus
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


Seek Truth!

Posts: 26
Re: Absolute Evidence
Reply #27 - Dec 30th, 2009 at 6:50am
 
Yeah. Debate does seem a bit futile at the moment.




Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
prolescum
Junior Member
**
Offline


LoLtering for the sake
of it

Posts: 93
Re: Absolute Evidence
Reply #28 - Dec 30th, 2009 at 7:13am
 
There was never any debate. GSFY doesn't want to debate; he wants to proselytize. I'm pretty certain that he genuinely believes he's some kind of Guru, but misses the fundamental characteristics of teachers :

Patience
Knowledge
Understanding
Experience
Charm
or failing the above, idiots, some guns and a compound.

I'd be worried if there were people convinced by anything he's ever said here (or the myriad collection of sites he frequents), but seeing as it's so painfully easy to spot each and every mistake, contradiction and non-sequitur even the kids he swears at on Youtube can see 'em a mile off.

When I joined here, I hoped that I'd be able to discuss where he was coming from, what his arguments for evolution were, and what he proposed to replace it with because youtube isn't exactly conducive to serious discussion. Lol @ me.

As a humorous aside, I've attached GSFY's understanding of President Obama's 'socialized medicine' bill.
What's hilarious about this, is that GSFY has posted two videos on the subject, one a commercial, and one edited from the Michael Moore film Sicko (which he hadn't seen, given his comments on the video) taken out of context.

If we ever need an example of HEMG, check out GSFY's second hand (and ignorant) opinions on this topic. Lol.
Back to top
 

screenshot2.png (15 KB | 155 )
screenshot2.png

http://dictionary.reference.com/

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/

http://www.merriam-webster.com/
WWW  
IP Logged
 
prolescum
Junior Member
**
Offline


LoLtering for the sake
of it

Posts: 93
Re: Absolute Evidence
Reply #29 - Dec 30th, 2009 at 7:15am
 
Er, arguments against evolution...

Sod it, GSFY makes enough mistakes.
Back to top
 

http://dictionary.reference.com/

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/

http://www.merriam-webster.com/
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 
Send Topic Print