Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => General Topics => Topic started by: tbombz on June 02, 2011, 11:59:27 PM
-
so today in the paper there is an article titled "uc berkely astronomer wins prize: researcher will share $500,000 award for work on dark matter". it just baffled me. so this researchers name is marc davis. obviously a very smart guy to be a professor and researcher at uc berkely. he just discovered evidence that confirms the existence of "dark matter". dark matter is cold and dark and it makes up most of the universe. before now, this was only theoretical in the field of science. at the end of the article the reearcher says that they are now looking into dark matter itself, trying to find out its inner nature. he said " if..the large hadron collider... doesnt tell us anything, we're never going to know what it(dark matter) is".
wtf??!!!!
was this not glaringly obvious to even ancient man? that the universe is a cold, dark place ?
how does this knowledge help answer any questions about ANYthing? what use can it be ?
these researchers and astrnomers are looking for the nature of the universe by disecting its components... how misguided! from the outset logic dictates that a search into the mechanics of relaity will be fruitless... infinite complexity means an impossibility of closure... yet these misguided souls continue to look to science for answers..
to top it all offf... he ends by saying.. "if the hadron collider doesnt figure out what dark matter is, we will never know". are u fucking stupid dude? what makes you any different from the ancient man who thought lightning was unexplainable?
i swear... some people...
these silly, slly scientists, mostly atheists, who cant see past their own shit.
-
so today in the paper there is an article titled "uc berkely astronomer wins prize: researcher will share $500,000 award for work on dark matter". it just baffled me. so this researchers name is marc davis. obviously a very smart guy to be a professor and researcher at uc berkely. he just discovered evidence that confirms the existence of "dark matter". dark matter is cold and dark and it makes up most of the universe. before now, this was only theoretical in the field of science. at the end of the article the reearcher says that they are now looking into dark matter itself, trying to find out its inner nature. he said " if..the large hadron collider... doesnt tell us anything, we're never going to know what it(dark matter) is".
wtf??!!!!
was this not glaringly obvious to even ancient man? that the universe is a cold, dark place ?
how does this knowledge help answer any questions about ANYthing? what use can it be ?
these researchers and astrnomers are looking for the nature of the universe by disecting its components... how misguided! from the outset logic dictates that a search into the mechanics of relaity will be fruitless... infinite complexity means an impossibility of closure... yet these misguided souls continue to look to science for answers..
to top it all offf... he ends by saying.. "if the hadron collider doesnt figure out what dark matter is, we will never know". are u fucking stupid dude? what makes you any different from the ancient man who thought lightning was unexplainable?
i swear... some people...
these silly, slly scientists, mostly atheists, who cant see past their own shit.
T, either you on some good shit, or you need to go to sleep...either way, email this to those PhDs at Berkerley so that they can have a good laugh...
-
It's better than reading a silly book of "fairy tales".
Research into the atom could also conceivably have been viewed as a waste of time. Only once the science is done can the application of that science reap benefits. Just cos you don't see it doesn't mean it isn't there.
-
so today in the paper there is an article titled "uc berkely astronomer wins prize: researcher will share $500,000 award for work on dark matter". it just baffled me. so this researchers name is marc davis. obviously a very smart guy to be a professor and researcher at uc berkely. he just discovered evidence that confirms the existence of "dark matter". dark matter is cold and dark and it makes up most of the universe. before now, this was only theoretical in the field of science. at the end of the article the reearcher says that they are now looking into dark matter itself, trying to find out its inner nature. he said " if..the large hadron collider... doesnt tell us anything, we're never going to know what it(dark matter) is".
wtf??!!!!
was this not glaringly obvious to even ancient man? that the universe is a cold, dark place ?
how does this knowledge help answer any questions about ANYthing? what use can it be ?
these researchers and astrnomers are looking for the nature of the universe by disecting its components... how misguided! from the outset logic dictates that a search into the mechanics of relaity will be fruitless... infinite complexity means an impossibility of closure... yet these misguided souls continue to look to science for answers..
to top it all offf... he ends by saying.. "if the hadron collider doesnt figure out what dark matter is, we will never know". are u fucking stupid dude? what makes you any different from the ancient man who thought lightning was unexplainable?
i swear... some people...
these silly, slly scientists, mostly atheists, who cant see past their own shit.
You obviously don't know shit about theoretic physics, multiple universes, quantum mechanics, gravity, theory of relativity, etc. etc.
You're making a fool out of yourself in this thread.
Just stick to what you do best, sucking dick through a hole in the wall.
-
go back to your bible you fucking tool, while you're at it spend some time with the easter bunny and santa.
-
so today in the paper there is an article titled "uc berkely astronomer wins prize: researcher will share $500,000 award for work on dark matter". it just baffled me. so this researchers name is marc davis. obviously a very smart guy to be a professor and researcher at uc berkely. he just discovered evidence that confirms the existence of "dark matter". dark matter is cold and dark and it makes up most of the universe. before now, this was only theoretical in the field of science. at the end of the article the reearcher says that they are now looking into dark matter itself, trying to find out its inner nature. he said " if..the large hadron collider... doesnt tell us anything, we're never going to know what it(dark matter) is".
wtf??!!!!
was this not glaringly obvious to even ancient man? that the universe is a cold, dark place ?
how does this knowledge help answer any questions about ANYthing? what use can it be ?
these researchers and astrnomers are looking for the nature of the universe by disecting its components... how misguided! from the outset logic dictates that a search into the mechanics of relaity will be fruitless... infinite complexity means an impossibility of closure... yet these misguided souls continue to look to science for answers..
to top it all offf... he ends by saying.. "if the hadron collider doesnt figure out what dark matter is, we will never know". are u fucking stupid dude? what makes you any different from the ancient man who thought lightning was unexplainable?
i swear... some people...
these silly, slly scientists, mostly atheists, who cant see past their own shit.
You're not particularly intelligent, are you? Indeed, one might say with some authority that you're a complete moron.
But hey, idiocy is entertaining!
Good boy.
-
so today in the paper there is an article titled "uc berkely astronomer wins prize: researcher will share $500,000 award for work on dark matter". it just baffled me. so this researchers name is marc davis. obviously a very smart guy to be a professor and researcher at uc berkely. he just discovered evidence that confirms the existence of "dark matter". dark matter is cold and dark and it makes up most of the universe. before now, this was only theoretical in the field of science. at the end of the article the reearcher says that they are now looking into dark matter itself, trying to find out its inner nature. he said " if..the large hadron collider... doesnt tell us anything, we're never going to know what it(dark matter) is".
wtf??!!!!
was this not glaringly obvious to even ancient man? that the universe is a cold, dark place ?
how does this knowledge help answer any questions about ANYthing? what use can it be ?
these researchers and astrnomers are looking for the nature of the universe by disecting its components... how misguided! from the outset logic dictates that a search into the mechanics of relaity will be fruitless... infinite complexity means an impossibility of closure... yet these misguided souls continue to look to science for answers..
to top it all offf... he ends by saying.. "if the hadron collider doesnt figure out what dark matter is, we will never know". are u fucking stupid dude? what makes you any different from the ancient man who thought lightning was unexplainable?
i swear... some people...
these silly, slly scientists, mostly atheists, who cant see past their own shit.
In my ongoing research I've discovered something that I call, "Doesn't Matter"®.
This is pretty much what you, Joe Weider and other fags, liberals and the rest of society's dross are made up of. Thus endeth the scientific lesson for this early Friday morn.
-
Just stick to what you do best, sucking dick through a hole in the wall.
Yes, I agree that he should get back to what he does best. Intelligent discussion is not for him, I'm afraid. He's such a complete fucking retard that it's pointless to try to converse with him at all.
-
thread back fire
loooooooooooooool.jpeg
-
thread back fire
loooooooooooooool.jpeg
Ouch! This seems to be happening a lot lately. :'(
-
Seems that patients at the asylum have Internet access too. :-\
-
HAHA!
How does this knowledge help to answer anything? It provides information about something "real". What scientists will do with this information is up to them. Think of this world as a big puzzle. Proving that Dark Matter exists, is a puzzle piece that has been added to the big picture. It's just a small fragment, but maybe it helps someone else add another fragment.
Mathematics has a lot of pseudo-futile theorems, proofs etc., but even if they're futile right now, they might become useful in the future. When group theory was developed, nobody saw its potential in physics, chemistry, cryptography... yet today, they use group theory in all those subjects.
It's better to have some information that is "true" and maybe never use it, than to not have it.
-
so today in the paper there is an article titled "uc berkely astronomer wins prize: researcher will share $500,000 award for work on dark matter". it just baffled me. so this researchers name is marc davis. obviously a very smart guy to be a professor and researcher at uc berkely. he just discovered evidence that confirms the existence of "dark matter". dark matter is cold and dark and it makes up most of the universe. before now, this was only theoretical in the field of science. at the end of the article the reearcher says that they are now looking into dark matter itself, trying to find out its inner nature. he said " if..the large hadron collider... doesnt tell us anything, we're never going to know what it(dark matter) is".
wtf??!!!!
was this not glaringly obvious to even ancient man? that the universe is a cold, dark place ?
how does this knowledge help answer any questions about ANYthing? what use can it be ?
these researchers and astrnomers are looking for the nature of the universe by disecting its components... how misguided! from the outset logic dictates that a search into the mechanics of relaity will be fruitless... infinite complexity means an impossibility of closure... yet these misguided souls continue to look to science for answers..
to top it all offf... he ends by saying.. "if the hadron collider doesnt figure out what dark matter is, we will never know". are u fucking stupid dude? what makes you any different from the ancient man who thought lightning was unexplainable?
i swear... some people...
these silly, slly scientists, mostly atheists, who cant see past their own shit.
What if matter has concsience?
-
Dark Matter
-
thought this is a post about this ???
(http://www.supplements365.com/images/MHP-darkmatter.gif)
-
It's in man's nature to be inquisitive and seek to understand his world. Whether by chance or design, it's how we are. Why not celebrate it and only damn us for only for the unwise application of what we learn?
I haven't followed the story but his comments about the LHC just sound like an endorsement of its potential.
The question of God is a philosophical issue. Scientific inquiry doesn't weigh in the for or against column.
-
Armed with -maybe- a jr. college degree, our local village idiot is again calling out some of the smartest thinkers around for being 'stupid.' Colour me surprised.
-
It's in man's nature to be inquisitive and seek to understand his world. Whether by chance or design, it's how we are. Why not celebrate it and only damn us for only for the unwise application of what we learn?
I haven't followed the story but his comments about the LHC just sound like an endorsement of its potential.
The question of God is a philosophical issue. Scientific inquiry doesn't weigh in the for or against column.
I take issue with your disinterest in kangaroo meat. >:( It is delicious.
-
Armed with -maybe- a jr. college degree, our local village idiot is again calling out some of the smartest thinkers around for being 'stupid.' Colour me surprised.
Lord of Simians, you have become a tad bit....more acerbic in your old age? Non? An interesting transformation to say the least....
-
Lord of Simians, you have become a tad bit....more acerbic in your old age? Non? An interesting transformation to say the least....
Ach. C'mon, bro, a high school graduate calling out scientists that study the cosmos!? Those people are educated beyond belief, and have then again singled themselves out for their incisive and probing thinking only to have our bell-bottom philosopher call them out!? Staggers credibility, it does. ;D
-
Tbomz takes dark matter up the ass :-\
-
Tbomz takes dark matter up the ass :-\
Now that is incisive and probing. :-X
-
You obviously don't know shit about theoretic physics, multiple universes, quantum mechanics, gravity, theory of relativity, etc. etc.
You're making a fool out of yourself in this thread.
Just stick to what you do best, sucking dick through a hole in the wall.
Tbomz takes dark matter up the ass :-\
Ahem...
-
Now that is incisive and probing. :-X
Ahem...
Ron, can we get a 'puking' smiley face?
-
You obviously don't know shit about theoretic physics, multiple universes, quantum mechanics, gravity, theory of relativity, etc. etc.
You're making a fool out of yourself in this thread.
Just stick to what you do best, sucking dick through a hole in the wall.
Says the homo who thinks blowing a ladyboy isn't gay ::)
-
Armed with -maybe- a jr. college degree, our local village idiot is again calling out some of the smartest thinkers around for being 'stupid.' Colour me surprised.
Carl Sagan had something to do with this.
-
Ach. C'mon, bro, a high school graduate calling out scientists that study the cosmos!? Those people are educated beyond belief, and have then again singled themselves out for their incisive and probing thinking only to have our bell-bottom philosopher call them out!? Staggers credibility, it does. ;D
It is pretty funny.
-
Go back to biting your lip on webcam and soliciting young boys over youtube.
-
Armed with -maybe- a jr. college degree, our local village idiot is again calling out some of the smartest thinkers around for being 'stupid.' Colour me surprised.
You would suck off an older dude with 6 PHD's because he would be able to demonstrate scientifically that it is necessary for you do do so.
You are such a waste of semen.
-
Science, could that be the religion of the atheists? ???
-
Carl Sagan had something to do with this.
>:(
-
In my ongoing research I've discovered something that I call, "Doesn't Matter"®.
This is pretty much what you, Joe Weider and other fags, liberals and the rest of society's dross are made up of. Thus endeth the scientific lesson for this early Friday morn.
Holy shit i laughed out loud haha.
-
I take issue with your disinterest in kangaroo meat. >:( It is delicious.
It is rumoured that Groink uses it heavily to achieve square jawedness.
Ach. C'mon, bro, a high school graduate calling out scientists
>:(
Our Dr. Chimps. Another GB GED holder, Hulk green with envy.
-
::)
wow yall are some morons for real ;D
let me say this one more time= infinite complexity means an impossibility of closure.. .
;)
-
>:(
Our Dr. Chimps. Another GB GED holder, Hulk green with envy.
I did my undergrad at DeVry, and my grads at University of Phoenix, I'll have you know. >:( ;D
-
let me say this one more time= infinite complexity means an impossibility of closure.. .
;)
It's not a question of this assumed 'infinite complexity.' As I understand it, gravitational theory didn't gel with observed phenomena, such as galaxy rotation speed, and someone proposed dark matter. There's dark energy proposed too, which I know nothing about, but I'm quite sure that there's no spiritual truth to be extrapolated from the indifferent mechanics of nature.
I did my undergrad at DeVry, and my grads at University of Phoenix, I'll have you know. >:( ;D
Sounds like the way to go. Last time I wandered onto a campus, they told me that maintenance vehicles weren't permitted in the guest parking lot and I'd be required to wear overalls with a nametag at all times.
-
::)
wow yall are some morons for real ;D
let me say this one more time= infinite complexity means an impossibility of closure.. .
;)
hey dickhole, i see you raided your mom's wallet again this week, so you don't have to go out and get a job. but that doesn't mean you should violate the sanctity of the internet with your stupid shit, ok, bottom twink?
-
so today in the paper there is an article titled "uc berkely astronomer wins prize: researcher will share $500,000 award for work on dark matter". it just baffled me. so this researchers name is marc davis. obviously a very smart guy to be a professor and researcher at uc berkely. he just discovered evidence that confirms the existence of "dark matter". dark matter is cold and dark and it makes up most of the universe. before now, this was only theoretical in the field of science. at the end of the article the reearcher says that they are now looking into dark matter itself, trying to find out its inner nature. he said " if..the large hadron collider... doesnt tell us anything, we're never going to know what it(dark matter) is".
wtf??!!!!
was this not glaringly obvious to even ancient man? that the universe is a cold, dark place ?
how does this knowledge help answer any questions about ANYthing? what use can it be ?
these researchers and astrnomers are looking for the nature of the universe by disecting its components... how misguided! from the outset logic dictates that a search into the mechanics of relaity will be fruitless... infinite complexity means an impossibility of closure... yet these misguided souls continue to look to science for answers..
to top it all offf... he ends by saying.. "if the hadron collider doesnt figure out what dark matter is, we will never know". are u fucking stupid dude? what makes you any different from the ancient man who thought lightning was unexplainable?
i swear... some people...
these silly, slly scientists, mostly atheists, who cant see past their own shit.
Stick to doing drugs and taking black cocks in your ass, you dumb fat bloated pig
-
I can't take sides in this "intelligent" conversation, but I am dumb enough to see the positive side of both sides and I have to disagree with each of you a little bit.
In an effort to solve this dilemna (?) here's my recommendation to Bomz - Find a copy of Dancing Wu Li Masters and read it thoroughly. It's the most simple explanation of Quantum Mechanics I've been able to find and once you get beyond the first 65 pages or so, you wo't be able to put it down. It's kid of like dropping an Alkaseltzer into your cranium.
You appear to me to be a lot more smart than myself, so I think you'll enjoy it and get a lot out of it. And maybe you'll even be able to carry on a discussion about that very subject with one of those smart guys in Berkeley. (or with some of the smarter guys here on this board).
And to DR. CHIMPS: I are dumb when it comes to discussions with QM 'Scientists' but last year we had a family get-together and one family member just so happened to be one of those UCB scientists who is involved with Quantum Mechanics and since I am an avid reader of DANCING WU LI MASTERS, I 'called him out' with the hope that he would explain some of the 'fallicies' I found in the book such as one's inability to see anything at all while traveling beside a beam of light at the same speed and in the same direction and the problems I had with Schroder's Cat (spelling??).
And actually.... my dumb questions turned out to be pretty damn smart as they opened up a couple of new 'thoughts' in his Quantum Mechanical mind regarding some QM research he was currently involved in.
SO after he answered each of my dumb questions (I had no idea what he was saying, but in an attempt to be polite, I simply kept on nodding my head) .... he thanked me and headed back to UCB with new thoughts in his head. (Thanks to me and my dumb questions.)
So I will admit that I am pretty darn dumb when it comes to discussing QM with qualified QM masters but I learned many years ago from a formally uneducated DI that, "There is no such thing as a dumb question, but when you ask one, you gotta pick up the dog-shit while I provide the answer!"
And that was always followed by, " .... you miserable piece of whale turd!" ("Whale-turds supposedly being the lowest things on planet-earth back then.)
So one of these UCB smart guys just might come across the comments Bomz has offered above and start "re-think'n". And that new think'n could lead to bigger thoughts which could eventually solve bigger problems.
Some Get Biggers say Bomz has only offered lemons .... while others think of the lemonade possibilities.
Smart guys such as these QM dudes only see the lemonade .... even if the lemons are stale and rotten.
I like to think that my discussion with that UCB QM expert will lead to the eventual discovery and introduction of QUANTUM-mechanical Computers to the masses.
I hope they give me credit, but I doubt it.
And I are too damn dumb to make an objection.
FOR BOMZ .... and I think that the Falcon may find if to be of interest. But it's best to get the book. http://www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/dancingmasters.pdf
-
so today in the paper there is an article titled "uc berkely astronomer wins prize: researcher will share $500,000 award for work on dark matter". it just baffled me. so this researchers name is marc davis. obviously a very smart guy to be a professor and researcher at uc berkely. he just discovered evidence that confirms the existence of "dark matter". dark matter is cold and dark and it makes up most of the universe. before now, this was only theoretical in the field of science. at the end of the article the reearcher says that they are now looking into dark matter itself, trying to find out its inner nature. he said " if..the large hadron collider... doesnt tell us anything, we're never going to know what it(dark matter) is".
wtf??!!!!
was this not glaringly obvious to even ancient man? that the universe is a cold, dark place ?
how does this knowledge help answer any questions about ANYthing? what use can it be ?
these researchers and astrnomers are looking for the nature of the universe by disecting its components... how misguided! from the outset logic dictates that a search into the mechanics of relaity will be fruitless... infinite complexity means an impossibility of closure... yet these misguided souls continue to look to science for answers..
to top it all offf... he ends by saying.. "if the hadron collider doesnt figure out what dark matter is, we will never know". are u fucking stupid dude? what makes you any different from the ancient man who thought lightning was unexplainable?
i swear... some people...
these silly, slly scientists, mostly atheists, who cant see past their own shit.
Do you even have a clue as to the actual data and calculations of emperical data that goes into this before it can be published and accpeted?
-
You obviously don't know shit about theoretic physics, multiple universes, quantum mechanics, gravity, theory of relativity, etc. etc.
You're making a fool out of yourself in this thread.
Just stick to what you do best, sucking dick through a hole in the wall.
THIS. BRB LECTURING A N0BLE PRIZE WINNER IN PHYSICS WH0 ARE 0NE 0F THE SMARTEST MEN 0N EARTH.
-
::)
wow yall are some morons for real ;D
let me say this one more time= infinite complexity means an impossibility of closure.. .
;)
Shut the fuck up.
-
Ever had your dark matter pushed in?
-
real infinites do not exist, prove they do?
wtf is infinite complexity? Just like irreducible complex? that failure?
your again making an unfounded assumption.
-
Ach. C'mon, bro, a high school graduate calling out scientists that study the cosmos!? Those people are educated beyond belief, and have then again singled themselves out for their incisive and probing thinking only to have our bell-bottom philosopher call them out!? Staggers credibility, it does. ;D
One would have to agree that most scientists are horrible philosophers though.
-
One would have to agree that most scientists are horrible philosophers though.
That's your favourite line. ;D
-
One would have to agree that most scientists are horrible philosophers though.
Wrong. Have you ever read Carl Sagan?
-
Wrong. Have you ever read Carl Sagan?
talking to yourself? :D
-
One would have to agree that most scientists are horrible philosophers though.
philosophy is dead for the most part.
-
philosophy is dead for the most part.
I'll bet you think that about all things. ;D
-
Is "discovery of dark matter" code for becoming a mudshark?
-
It's not a question of this assumed 'infinite complexity.'
I'm quite sure that there's no spiritual truth to be extrapolated from the indifferent mechanics of nature.
infinite complexity is not assumed but logical fact
... now yoru getting somewhere
the guy is an idiot, besides being extremely intelligent. to say "well if the hadron collidor doesnt find anyting then we will never know" is so presumptious and arrogant and anyone with a basic philosophy course knows that such a statement is ludacris especially coming from an estalished scientist. just like ancient man thought we could never explain lightning because his current technologies didnt allow it, so will futur man mae more "discoveries" about dark matter, atoms, etc etc... to infinite. the discoveries of science will never end, never reach a point where they answer any meanginful questions. science is incapable of answering meaningful questions.
philosophy is not dead, it has been forgotten. did we need someone to tell us about cold, dark "matter"? this is common sense. just like we knew about atoms way back in antiquity, and leibnez created the best metaphysics based on atoms at a time when there was zero scientific evfidence to support such a thing.
scientists are stupid
-
Wrong. Have you ever read Carl Sagan?
QFT
-
so today in the paper there is an article titled "uc berkely astronomer wins prize: researcher will share $500,000 award for work on dark matter". it just baffled me. so this researchers name is marc davis. obviously a very smart guy to be a professor and researcher at uc berkely. he just discovered evidence that confirms the existence of "dark matter". dark matter is cold and dark and it makes up most of the universe. before now, this was only theoretical in the field of science. at the end of the article the reearcher says that they are now looking into dark matter itself, trying to find out its inner nature. he said " if..the large hadron collider... doesnt tell us anything, we're never going to know what it(dark matter) is".
wtf??!!!!
was this not glaringly obvious to even ancient man? that the universe is a cold, dark place ?
how does this knowledge help answer any questions about ANYthing? what use can it be ?
these researchers and astrnomers are looking for the nature of the universe by disecting its components... how misguided! from the outset logic dictates that a search into the mechanics of relaity will be fruitless... infinite complexity means an impossibility of closure... yet these misguided souls continue to look to science for answers..
to top it all offf... he ends by saying.. "if the hadron collider doesnt figure out what dark matter is, we will never know". are u fucking stupid dude? what makes you any different from the ancient man who thought lightning was unexplainable?
i swear... some people...
these silly, slly scientists, mostly atheists, who cant see past their own shit.
You truly are a self-assured moron, you know that?
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
I must consult my Marvel/DC Comics and the latest Gene Roddenberry novel on this topic of "Dark Matter", before I make a truly educated contribution to this thread.
-
thought this is a post about this ???
(http://www.supplements365.com/images/MHP-darkmatter.gif)
MHP was able to capture dark matter from the far corners of the universe and harvest it into the greatest muscle building supplement ever known to man...something that was only previously available to the aliens. This stuff will give you 453% greater gains than the competitors' products.
-
MHP was able to capture dark matter from the far corners of the universe and harvest it into the greatest muscle building supplement ever known to man...something that was only previously available to the aliens. This stuff will give you 453% greater gains than the competitors' products.
*Ahem, the universe is still expanding, so therefore, no corners...
-
philosophy is for confused first year college twinks that live by the bible, science is for smart decisive men who live on fact and proven theories.
-
*Ahem, the universe is still expanding, so therefore, no corners...
Are you suggesting that this supplement could be worthless :o
-
PHILI0S0PHY IS THE M0ST USELESS T0PIC 0N EARTH. EVERY PHIL0S0PHER HAS HIS 0WN 0PINI0N. T0 C0MPARE PHIL0S0PHY WITH SCIENCE IS INSANE.
-
philosophy is for confused first year college twinks that live by the bible, science is for smart decisive men who live on fact and proven theories.
In before "science is only a bunch of unprovable theories". ::)
-
In before "Broscience is only a bunch of unprovable theories". ::)
fixed
-
Wrong. Have you ever read Carl Sagan?
I hope you don't seriously think Sagan is anywhere near a halfway decent philosopher. His logical errors in thinking are so easy to detect that one has to wonder if his intellectual capabilities are even sufficient for a decent scientist.
-
philosophy is for confused first year college twinks that live by the bible, science is for smart decisive men who live on fact and proven theories.
lol
-
I hope you don't seriously think Sagan is anywhere near a halfway decent philosopher. His logical errors in thinking are so easy to detect that one has to wonder if his intellectual capabilities are even sufficient for a decent scientist.
what's up adam
-
I hope you don't seriously think Sagan is anywhere near a halfway decent philosopher. His logical errors in thinking are so easy to detect that one has to wonder if his intellectual capabilities are even sufficient for a decent scientist.
I'm sure bringing Sagan up has touched a raw nerve with you before lol. I think the guy did a pretty damn good job doing what he did, that's the main thing. Cosmos alone as a stand alone series hasn't been bettered in 30 years.
-
Modern philosophers are still discussing the nature of the reality based on 100 year old knowledge.
Philosophy is dead.
-
I must consult my Marvel/DC Comics and the latest Gene Roddenberry novel on this topic of "Dark Matter", before I make a truly educated contribution to this thread.
Well said, for within their pages you shall discover that which binds multiple universes. The truth of FM. Fuckin' Magic. ;D
-
infinite complexity is not assumed but logical fact
... now yoru getting somewhere
the guy is an idiot, besides being extremely intelligent. to say "well if the hadron collidor doesnt find anyting then we will never know" is so presumptious and arrogant and anyone with a basic philosophy course knows that such a statement is ludacris especially coming from an estalished scientist. just like ancient man thought we could never explain lightning because his current technologies didnt allow it, so will futur man mae more "discoveries" about dark matter, atoms, etc etc... to infinite. the discoveries of science will never end, never reach a point where they answer any meanginful questions. science is incapable of answering meaningful questions.
philosophy is not dead, it has been forgotten. did we need someone to tell us about cold, dark "matter"? this is common sense. just like we knew about atoms way back in antiquity, and leibnez created the best metaphysics based on atoms at a time when there was zero scientific evfidence to support such a thing.
scientists are stupid
Why come when i look up candycolon on youtube i not find your profile page? Im tired of having to go search that thread to link that video of you making kissy faces and biting your lips.
-
Why come when i look up candycolon on youtube i not find your profile page? Im tired of having to go search that thread to link that video of you making kissy faces and biting your lips.
This
-
Im sure this man will go down as one of the greatest philosophers on our generation. He will be compared to the greats:
Nietzsche
(http://www.iep.utm.edu/wp-content/media/Nietzsche-274x300.jpg)
Plato
(http://filipspagnoli.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/plato3.jpg)
And of course... CandyColon
His philosophies on taking dark matter in his butt and caramelizing his colon with semen will be remembered for centuries.
-
I'm sure bringing Sagan up has touched a raw nerve with you before lol. I think the guy did a pretty damn good job doing what he did, that's the main thing. Cosmos alone as a stand alone series hasn't been bettered in 30 years.
He just can't be considered a (good) philosopher and rightfully so, isn't. Along with all the other neo positivists warming up century old nonsense. His ability of bringing scientific knowledge to the broad public is not the topic, something he might have been very good at.
-
I feel stupider for having read this thread. :'(
...Some of you imbeciles (looking at you, "Tbombz",) should really stick to discussing bodybuilding... The other stuff appears to be out of your depths...
-
Nietzsche
that you think nietsche is worth a damn, u are very very far out of your league
He just can't be considered a (good) philosopher and rightfully so, isn't. Along with all the other neo positivists warming up century old nonsense. His ability of bringing scientific knowledge to the broad public is not the topic, something he might have been very good at.
what are your thoughts on leibnez monadology predicting modern science, even quantum mechanics to a degree
-
that you think nietsche is worth a damn, u are very very far out of your league
what are your thoughts on leibnez monadology predicting modern science, even quantum mechanics to a degree
That post was way over your head.... Which is ironic because your head is so big it is kind of hard to miss :)
-
infinite complexity is not assumed but logical fact
... now yoru getting somewhere
the guy is an idiot, besides being extremely intelligent. to say "well if the hadron collidor doesnt find anyting then we will never know" is so presumptious and arrogant and anyone with a basic philosophy course knows that such a statement is ludacris especially coming from an estalished scientist. just like ancient man thought we could never explain lightning because his current technologies didnt allow it, so will futur man mae more "discoveries" about dark matter, atoms, etc etc... to infinite. the discoveries of science will never end, never reach a point where they answer any meanginful questions. science is incapable of answering meaningful questions.
philosophy is not dead, it has been forgotten. did we need someone to tell us about cold, dark "matter"? this is common sense. just like we knew about atoms way back in antiquity, and leibnez created the best metaphysics based on atoms at a time when there was zero scientific evfidence to support such a thing.
scientists are stupid
dark matter is not common sense, lol. It was proposed because particular mathematical equations did not become solvable until an unknown factor, ie dark matter was assumed. Nothing about this is common sense, in fact dark matter and energy are very counterintuitive.
infinite complexities are in fact illogical, not logical. Real infinites create paradox's that become illogical to the core.
-
dark matter is not common sense, lol. It was proposed because particular mathematical equations did not become solvable until an unknown factor, ie dark matter was assumed. Nothing about this is common sense, in fact dark matter and energy are very counterintuitive.
infinite complexities are in fact illogical, not logical. Real infinites create paradox's that become illogical to the core.
This was an interesting watch.
-
This was an interesting watch.
I think a debate between Candy and Lawrence would be worth a watch.
-
That post was way over your head.... Which is ironic because your head is so big it is kind of hard to miss :)
yes or no, is nietsche philosophy worth a damn ? :)
dark matter is not common sense, lol. It was proposed because particular mathematical equations did not become solvable until an unknown factor, ie dark matter was assumed. Nothing about this is common sense, in fact dark matter and energy are very counterintuitive.
infinite complexities are in fact illogical, not logical. Real infinites create paradox's that become illogical to the core.
dark matter, dark energy.. yes this is common sense.. the details , the particulars? no of course not... but that the universe is made of mostly cold darkness that is transparant and some kind of mystical force is driving all of it.. umm.. duhhhh.... :) scientists arent figuring anything out... they are putting labels and disecting components... they reach no answers ancient man could not.. :)
-
its very funny.. mr atheist wittgenstein was so right when he said that there are no philosophical problems... and this is such a strong truth in the reality that is God. :) "its philosophers who muddle the waters"
-
yes or no, is nietsche philosophy worth a damn ? :)
dark matter, dark energy.. yes this is common sense.. the details , the particulars? no of course not... but that the universe is made of mostly cold darkness that is transparant and some kind of mystical force is driving all of it.. umm.. duhhhh.... :) scientists arent figuring anything out... they are putting labels and disecting components... they reach no answers ancient man could not.. :)
Dude, seriously...get help about this.
-
The really sad thing is that "Tbombz" actually believes that he has made valid points...
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
dark matter is not common sense, lol. It was proposed because particular mathematical equations did not become solvable until an unknown factor, ie dark matter was assumed. Nothing about this is common sense, in fact dark matter and energy are very counterintuitive.
infinite complexities are in fact illogical, not logical. Real infinites create paradox's that become illogical to the core.
I had a teacher at college who had a saying, "If the math works,...it's probably so."
-
My dark mater weight set just arrived, assembling the leg press as we speak.
Will you be upright rowing 3852 lb as planned, BDB?
-
yes or no, is nietsche philosophy worth a damn ? :)
I thought you would have been all for doubting Apollonian truths, Candy. ???
-
I thought you would have been all for doubting Apollonian truths, Candy. ???
tbombz looked long into the abyss that's his boyfriend's a-hole, and was heartbroken when it didn't look back at him.
-
so today in the paper there is an article titled "uc berkely astronomer wins prize: researcher will share $500,000 award for work on dark matter". it just baffled me. so this researchers name is marc davis. obviously a very smart guy to be a professor and researcher at uc berkely. he just discovered evidence that confirms the existence of "dark matter". dark matter is cold and dark and it makes up most of the universe. before now, this was only theoretical in the field of science. at the end of the article the reearcher says that they are now looking into dark matter itself, trying to find out its inner nature. he said " if..the large hadron collider... doesnt tell us anything, we're never going to know what it(dark matter) is".
wtf??!!!!
was this not glaringly obvious to even ancient man? that the universe is a cold, dark place ?
how does this knowledge help answer any questions about ANYthing? what use can it be ?
these researchers and astrnomers are looking for the nature of the universe by disecting its components... how misguided! from the outset logic dictates that a search into the mechanics of relaity will be fruitless... infinite complexity means an impossibility of closure... yet these misguided souls continue to look to science for answers..
to top it all offf... he ends by saying.. "if the hadron collider doesnt figure out what dark matter is, we will never know". are u fucking stupid dude? what makes you any different from the ancient man who thought lightning was unexplainable?
i swear... some people...
these silly, slly scientists, mostly atheists, who cant see past their own shit.
Your ignorance is astounding. Please....go to university and get educated....then come back and tell us your thoughts.
-
"Stupid Scientists", oxymoron or a paradox---or both? The world may never know...
-
Your ignorance is astounding. Please....go to university and get educated....then come back and tell us your thoughts.
No amount of education can help a man with zero aptitude, such as "Tbombz". Even "Physics 101" at the local community college is far beyond his abilities of comprehension.
-
tbombz looked long into the abyss that's his boyfriend's a-hole, and was heartbroken when it didn't look back at him.
LOL.
-
what are your thoughts on leibnez monadology predicting modern science, even quantum mechanics to a degree
You mean Leibniz?
I generally don't thing scientific theories should be related to philosophic ones an vice versa.
-
It is amazing the ability of someone to write multiple paragraphs on a subject and not say even a single factual or even logical thing regarding such subject. It is incredible. They should give this imbecile, "Tbombz", and award for this. I am not joking.
And the really incredible thing is that he really believes that he is being a genius and having Earth-shattering insights. He really does. It is amazing. Lmao......
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
dark matter, dark energy.. yes this is common sense.. the details , the particulars? no of course not... but that the universe is made of mostly cold darkness that is transparant and some kind of mystical force is driving all of it.. umm.. duhhhh.... :) scientists arent figuring anything out... they are putting labels and disecting components... they reach no answers ancient man could not.. :)
I believe you are confusing the concept of darkness, ie absence of light with the word dark in dark matter. Science can answer all of the questions worth answering, name one then cannot. Science is simply observation and testing to find truth, it is the purest way of discerning truth, it is objective unlike philosphy. Philosophy has nothing new to say and has not for a long long time. The same arguments are being presented and the same rebuttals. Philosophy is working with logic and reason, science goes beyond that using math and instruments that enhance our perceptions. Quantum mechanics, string theory etc are all counterintuitive and defy logic, they defy cause and effect, temporal logic and so on.
Science can answer questions philosophy couldn't even dream up, namely because it uses a language that requires testing,knowledge and experience. It is a language that surpasses our limited vocabulary and points at the true nature of existence, math.
-
I believe you are confusing the concept of darkness, ie absence of light with the word dark in dark matter. Science can answer all of the questions worth answering, name one then cannot. Science is simply observation and testing to find truth, it is the purest way of discerning truth, it is objective unlike philosphy. Philosophy has nothing new to say and has not for a long long time. The same arguments are being presented and the same rebuttals. Philosophy is working with logic and reason, science goes beyond that using math and instruments that enhance our perceptions. Quantum mechanics, string theory etc are all counterintuitive and defy logic, they defy cause and effect, temporal logic and so on.
Science can answer questions philosophy couldn't even dream up, namely because it uses a language that requires testing,knowledge and experience. It is a language that surpasses our limited vocabulary and points at the true nature of existence, math.
it answers questions not worth answering. when the time we spend after we leave this earth is always an infinite amount greater than the time we spend while here.. :)
i understand that dark matter is not simply the absence of light.. :)
have science answer this = how should one live their life ? :)
-
You mean Leibniz?
I generally don't thing scientific theories should be related to philosophic ones an vice versa.
he was able to discern the mechanics of reality through pure intellect.. a priori if you will..
-
I thought you would have been all for doubting Apollonian truths, Candy. ???
joke? of course not.. nietszche is a fucking clown.. died a virgin because he was such a mental fuck up no woman would ever want to be around him.. fucking creeper if you will.. his hateful, angry, pessemistic philosphies were bore out of his own self hatred... had he ever calmed his ass down for a second, took a breath of freash air, and got some pussy.. he may have seen the light. but he died as all men like him do, out of touch and suffering greatly. look to the agonizing last weeks of david humes life, where he was tortured so much by his own atheist philosophies.. crying all day into his maids arms ... relaizing the implications of his dictations...
-
joke? of course not.. nietszche is a fucking clown.. died a virgin because he was such a mental fuck up no woman would ever want to be around him.. fucking creeper if you will.. his hateful, angry, pessemistic philosphies were bore out of his own self hatred... had he ever calmed his ass down for a second, took a breath of freash air, and got some pussy.. he may have seen the light. but he died as all men like him do, out of touch and suffering greatly. look to the agonizing last weeks of david humes life, where he was tortured so much by his own atheist philosophies.. crying all day into his maids arms ... relaizing the implications of his dictations...
That just depends how you view atheism. It can be a depressing thing if you don't view it correctly.
-
That just depends how you view atheism. It can be a depressing thing if you don't view it correctly.
::) atheism means you dont exist. none of us do. there is no you, there is no me.
hume, probably the best atheist philosopher to date, was a very cheerful atheist his entire life. took great pleasure in telling others that god was a llie, how they were so foolish to believe.
spent his final weeks in pure emotional agony.
-
::) atheism means you dont exist. none of us do. there is no you, there is no me.
hume, probably the best atheist philosopher to date, was a very cheerful atheist his entire life. took great pleasure in telling others that god was a llie, how they were so foolish to believe.
spent his final weeks in pure emotional agony.
Is that your definition?
-
.
-
::) atheism means you dont exist. none of us do. there is no you, there is no me.
hume, probably the best atheist philosopher to date, was a very cheerful atheist his entire life. took great pleasure in telling others that god was a llie, how they were so foolish to believe.
spent his final weeks in pure emotional agony.
so? so we should believe something because it makes us feel better?
you realize that you dont know if god exists, namely because you are human like any other and thus do not have access to knowledge others do not.
chris hitchens is dying with terminal esphogeal cancer and is a stedfast atheist and finds the thought disgusting in the face of certain death. Either story does not help the position of the theist or atheist. I prefer to believe something because there is evidence to do so and because it is true, not because it makes me feel good.
science definitely has something to say about how one should live their life. It answers all the important questions, the how's the why's do not matter and can be shown in most cases to be useless to debate.
-
I hope you don't seriously think Sagan is anywhere near a halfway decent philosopher. His logical errors in thinking are so easy to detect that one has to wonder if his intellectual capabilities are even sufficient for a decent scientist.
Proof please. I don`t think you have any.
-
it's as if these people think the human brain is the most complex thing in existence, that nothing can surpass it's creations (thoughts/logic). We can only sense so much, we can only understand concepts within reason, science extends that as does math.
the human body is more complex then the brain and quantum computers will eventually surpass our best thinkers.
-
it's as if these people think the human brain is the most complex thing in existence, that nothing can surpass it's creations (thoughts/logic). We can only sense so much, we can only understand concepts within reason, science extends that as does math.
the human body is more complex then the brain and quantum computers will eventually surpass our best thinkers.
People like that are always the ones who claim to know everything but in fact know very little. Ironic how that works.
-
Is that your definition?
no its fact
so? so we should believe something because it makes us feel better?
you realize that you dont know if god exists, namely because you are human like any other and thus do not have access to knowledge others do not.
chris hitchens is dying with terminal esphogeal cancer and is a stedfast atheist and finds the thought disgusting in the face of certain death. Either story does not help the position of the theist or atheist. I prefer to believe something because there is evidence to do so and because it is true, not because it makes me feel good.
science definitely has something to say about how one should live their life. It answers all the important questions, the how's the why's do not matter and can be shown in most cases to be useless to debate.
chris hitchens puts on a front, just like hume did. during his time everyone of his friends spoke of his courage in the face of death, how he showed no remorse or hestitation to endorse his atheistic views while knowing he would die. it was only after the fact when his personal caretaker told of his sleepless nights filled with sobbing screams of terror, dreadful agonies of displeasure.. putting on a good face for company so as to keep his "reputation".. likewise hitchns is probably suffering quite a deal
it's as if these people think the human brain is the most complex thing in existence, that nothing can surpass it's creations (thoughts/logic). We can only sense so much, we can only understand concepts within reason, science extends that as does math.
the human body is more complex then the brain and quantum computers will eventually surpass our best thinkers.
no its as if YOU think the human brian is the most complex thing in the world! its you who denies the omnipotent!
your incredibly dull if you think a machine can attain wisdom
-
no its fact
chris hitchens puts on a front, just like hume did. during his time everyone of his friends spoke of his courage in the face of death, how he showed no remorse or hestitation to endorse his atheistic views while knowing he would die. it was only after the fact when his personal caretaker told of his sleepless nights filled with sobbing screams of terror, dreadful agonies of displeasure.. putting on a good face for company so as to keep his "reputation".. likewise hitchns is probably suffering quite a deal
no its as if YOU think the human brian is the most complex thing in the world! its you who denies the omnipotent!
your incredibly dull if you think a machine can attain wisdom
You're making up stories about Hume. They were created after he died to defame the man.
-
You're making up stories about Hume. They were created after he died to defame the man.
am i making them up or did someone else? get your story straight ;D
-
am i making them up or did someone else? get your story straight ;D
Both. Neither is true. Hume died quietly without the crap you claim he was spouting.
-
Shortly after Hume’s death, it appears that Hume’s housekeeper – probably Margaret Irvine – was riding in a stagecoach with three other passengers – including the father-in-law of Hume’s friend James Edmonstone. The subject of Hume’s death arose, and the passengers were commenting on the philosopher’s peaceful state of mind. Irvine then volunteered her firsthand experience. Hume indeed appeared tranquil in the presence of visitors, Irvine related, but it was all a show. In private, he was gripped with anguish to the point that his bed shook and he did not want to be left alone; he stated that he had been in search of light all his life but was now in greater darkness than ever. Five items discuss this story from what seems to be three independent sources. The most detailed narrative of Irvine’s account is “On the Death-Bed of Hume the Historian” in the Christian Observer (1831) which reprints an article that “appeared many years ago in an Edinburgh newspaper.” The most convincing authentication of the story is in Alexander Haldane’s Memoirs (1852), which traces it from Hume’s housekeeper, to Mr. Abercromby of Tullibody (Edmonstone’s father-in-law) who was on the coach, to Abercromby’s neighbours, the Haldane family. What can we say about the authenticity of this story? First, it is reasonable to believe that Margaret Irvine was on a stagecoach with Abercromby and others, and that she indeed discussed Hume’s dying days – though probably not in the exact words that the narrators ascribe to her. Second, it is reasonable to believe that she witnessed Hume in anguish, especially in his final weeks, and that Hume’s mannerisms changed when his guests left. Third, it is not clear, however, whether the anguish she perceived was the result of Hume’s reflections on an afterlife, his possible declining mental state, or his suffering from a terminal illness. In any event, we must conclude that the reports of Hume’s thoroughly tranquil decline by Boswell, Cullen, and Smith are not as accurate as history has assumed.
-
off to exercise my negative friend. adu
-
Yep. I'm sorry. Sadly, Twodongz is right. His story checks out on wikipedia. :-\
-
http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/3932444/TTC_VIDEO_-_Dark_Matter__Dark_Energy
I haven't found time to watch it yet so I expect a 3 sentence summary by this time tomorrow. Pool's closed.
-
i know mar. 500,000 is not that much when it comes to these sort of things.
-
Shortly after Hume’s death, it appears that Hume’s housekeeper – probably Margaret Irvine – was riding in a stagecoach with three other passengers – including the father-in-law of Hume’s friend James Edmonstone. The subject of Hume’s death arose, and the passengers were commenting on the philosopher’s peaceful state of mind. Irvine then volunteered her firsthand experience. Hume indeed appeared tranquil in the presence of visitors, Irvine related, but it was all a show. In private, he was gripped with anguish to the point that his bed shook and he did not want to be left alone; he stated that he had been in search of light all his life but was now in greater darkness than ever. Five items discuss this story from what seems to be three independent sources. The most detailed narrative of Irvine’s account is “On the Death-Bed of Hume the Historian” in the Christian Observer (1831) which reprints an article that “appeared many years ago in an Edinburgh newspaper.” The most convincing authentication of the story is in Alexander Haldane’s Memoirs (1852), which traces it from Hume’s housekeeper, to Mr. Abercromby of Tullibody (Edmonstone’s father-in-law) who was on the coach, to Abercromby’s neighbours, the Haldane family. What can we say about the authenticity of this story? First, it is reasonable to believe that Margaret Irvine was on a stagecoach with Abercromby and others, and that she indeed discussed Hume’s dying days – though probably not in the exact words that the narrators ascribe to her. Second, it is reasonable to believe that she witnessed Hume in anguish, especially in his final weeks, and that Hume’s mannerisms changed when his guests left. Third, it is not clear, however, whether the anguish she perceived was the result of Hume’s reflections on an afterlife, his possible declining mental state, or his suffering from a terminal illness. In any event, we must conclude that the reports of Hume’s thoroughly tranquil decline by Boswell, Cullen, and Smith are not as accurate as history has assumed.
Actually, you can't presume to know anything of the sort, you idiot. In fact, I dare you to put that thesis in a paper/essay, hand it in, and see what the prof says about it. Cripes. Your bong water is deeper than you, bomz.
-
Actually, you can't presume to know anything of the sort, you idiot. In fact, I dare you to put that thesis in a paper/essay, hand it in, and see what the prof says about it. Cripes. Your bong water is deeper than you, bomz.
;D idiot... i didnt write that... i took it off of a page written by a phd holding philosophy professor at the university of tennessee, educated at purdue... his writing, the above piece i quoted, is endorsed by the philosophy department of stanford. ;D
-
no its fact
no its not its the furthest thing from a fact, you can't dispute facts unless you are retarded. It's conjecture, its odd that the smartest people on earth are atheists huh? that religiousity declines with education.
chris hitchens puts on a front, just like hume did. during his time everyone of his friends spoke of his courage in the face of death, how he showed no remorse or hestitation to endorse his atheistic views while knowing he would die. it was only after the fact when his personal caretaker told of his sleepless nights filled with sobbing screams of terror, dreadful agonies of displeasure.. putting on a good face for company so as to keep his "reputation".. likewise hitchns is probably suffering quite a deal
you have no idea if he is putting on a front, in fact if you have watched any of his recent talks or debates it would have to be concluded that it is the opposite. Either way it has nothing to do with the truth of god, saying aha! look a suffering dying old man who was scared and probably delusional because of his wasting converted to god proves god is terrible. His life's work speaks for itself, i would take what someone says when dying with little thought chris hitchens pointed this out, he said if stories come out about him then he wasn't himself and was probably delusional from the meds/pain and starvation.
no its as if YOU think the human brian is the most complex thing in the world! its you who denies the omnipotent!
your incredibly dull if you think a machine can attain wisdom
i don't i already outlined that it is not, not sure how you figure i do.
what the hell is wisdom? is it some nebulous esoteric entity that somehow human brains can only acquire? lol.
-
;D idiot... i didnt write that... i took it off of a page written by a phd holding philosophy professor at the university of tennessee, educated at purdue... his writing, the above piece i quoted, is endorsed by the philosophy department of stanford. ;D
It is a presumption, and I (now) assume his thesis, which would either be supported convincingly or unconvincingly by his 'research.' It is not, in any way, 'fact,' so be very careful, my pocket Einstein. ;)
-
It is a presumption, and I (now) assume his thesis, which would either be supported convincingly or unconvincingly by his 'research.' It is not, in any way, 'fact,' so be very careful, my pocket Einstein. ;)
Probably got his information from Richard Nixon.
-
Proof please. I don`t think you have any.
Look up his famous article about the dragon. Ridiculous.
-
look up his famous article about the dragon. Ridiculous.
some people are so blind
-
some people are so blind
It's unbelievable what unspeakable nonsense is called Philosophy these days.
-
It's unbelievable what unspeakable nonsense is called Philosophy these days.
3 more posts dude, cmon. You're almost there. ;)
-
It's unbelievable what unspeakable nonsense is called Philosophy these days.
descarte nailed it
-
3 more posts dude, cmon. You're almost there. ;)
LOL, just realized it ;D
OK, so here is an old post about Sagan:
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=198162.msg2819808#msg2819808
-
LOL, just realized it ;D
OK, so here is an old post about Sagan:
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=198162.msg2819808#msg2819808
'Mindfucked' is how i would describe my emotional state after reading those posts.
Im going to curl up in bed and cry now :'(
-
'Mindfucked' is how i would describe my emotional state after reading those posts.
Im going to curl up in bed and cry now :'(
Lol, I have to admit I feel the same way.
-
LOL, just realized it ;D
OK, so here is an old post about Sagan:
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=198162.msg2819808#msg2819808
:'( literally, tears of joy
im not alone !!!
way to explain things in an understandable way, absolutely destroying deicide and others
bravo wavelength, bravo
-
and you were arguing for descartes philosophy too, albeit you never said it explicitly. wonderful. wave, come to cali turn gay and marry me :-*
-
and you were arguing for descartes philosophy too, albeit you never said it explicitly. wonderful. wave, come to cali turn gay and marry me :-*
LOL, my GF might have objections ;D
-
LOL, my GF might have objections ;D
"I'm straight, I'm straight!" Monster 10k post.
-
Haha, isn't that what we really are here for? Prooving we can still be straight looking at oiled-up, thonged men with muscles prancing around to funny music? ;D
BTW, Just saw that the Sagan discussion started here:
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=198162.msg2759951#msg2759951
-
that thread was painful to read. He actually argues that the world does not exist if we are not conscious. That's raping objectivity right there, things exist whether we perceive them or not, that has been proven over and over.
The what is space, what is time etc questioning is ridiculous as well, you cannot answer a question that is posed improperly. If i ask you what music is you have to describe it using its parts there is no other way to answer such questions. The fact that reductionism is the only way to answer these what questions is stepped over and then denied from being acceptable answers.
What are philosophical answers to what is space? Answer it without reducing it. reductionism is based on observation, if you cannot observe it there is no point in talking about it since all bets are off and any conjecture can be true. Logic is also failed, at least when discussing the nature of reality since the true nature has been shown to be counter-intuitive. Suggesting there is something more to existence then the substances it is made of gets us no where and can never be articulated since only things that are material and observable (directly or indirectly) can truly be elucidated, otherwise it's just a guesses.
the human mind can only do so much, it is bound by it's limitations, namely that of our senses and experiences, science is not. You pick which view equates to truth.
science includes our logic but extends it also.
show something exists that is immaterial, eternal and infinite. It's impossible by definition.
-
by the way hiding behind the guise of "it's philosophy" as if its some sort of sacred goat not be questioned is disingenuous. My friend and smartest man i know has a phd in philosophy and working on one in chaos theory i believe could talk circles around anyone here and realizes that philosophy is dead. Nothing new has been presented, its the same arguments that are outdated, they don't hold true, reality is too weird to comprehend with logic and with our brains. Help is needed, thats were math comes in.
-
by the way hiding behind the guise of "it's philosophy" as if its some sort of sacred goat not be questioned is disingenuous. My friend and smartest man i know has a phd in philosophy and working on one in chaos theory i believe could talk circles around anyone here and realizes that philosophy is dead. Nothing new has been presented, its the same arguments that are outdated, they don't hold true, reality is too weird to comprehend with logic and with our brains. Help is needed, thats were math comes in.
STFU
you must respect the tdongz
-
STFU
you must respect the tdongz
come at me bro!
-
by the way hiding behind the guise of "it's philosophy" as if its some sort of sacred goat not be questioned is disingenuous. My friend and smartest man i know has a phd in philosophy and working on one in chaos theory i believe could talk circles around anyone here and realizes that philosophy is dead. Nothing new has been presented, its the same arguments that are outdated, they don't hold true, reality is too weird to comprehend with logic and with our brains. Help is needed, thats were math comes in.
and yet philosophy IS science -- the gay science, as Nietzsche called it -- the science under which all particular branches coalesce. as long as people are trying to understand the world and bend it to their will, philosophy will be alive. the more particular a concern, the more "scientific" it is, but there is no fundamental difference between the two.
-
the human mind can only do so much, it is bound by it's limitations, namely that of our senses and experiences, science is not. You pick which view equates to truth.
science includes our logic but extends it also.
show something exists that is immaterial, eternal and infinite. It's impossible by definition.
lol. science is not bound by our sense and experience? give one example ;D
the simple fact is that existence requires magic.
get that in your head and then you can begin to understand.
-
candi-tay, is it true that you have a thing for dark matter?
-
candi-tay, is it true that you have a thing for dark matter?
yes, very true. tight and juicy, thick and long.. either way, fantastic
-
[/ youtube]
fail. >:(
-
that thread was painful to read. He actually argues that the world does not exist if we are not conscious. That's raping objectivity right there, things exist whether we perceive them or not, that has been proven over and over.
The what is space, what is time etc questioning is ridiculous as well, you cannot answer a question that is posed improperly. If i ask you what music is you have to describe it using its parts there is no other way to answer such questions. The fact that reductionism is the only way to answer these what questions is stepped over and then denied from being acceptable answers.
What are philosophical answers to what is space? Answer it without reducing it. reductionism is based on observation, if you cannot observe it there is no point in talking about it since all bets are off and any conjecture can be true. Logic is also failed, at least when discussing the nature of reality since the true nature has been shown to be counter-intuitive. Suggesting there is something more to existence then the substances it is made of gets us no where and can never be articulated since only things that are material and observable (directly or indirectly) can truly be elucidated, otherwise it's just a guesses.
the human mind can only do so much, it is bound by it's limitations, namely that of our senses and experiences, science is not. You pick which view equates to truth.
science includes our logic but extends it also.
show something exists that is immaterial, eternal and infinite. It's impossible by definition.
Wasn't me who stopped argueing in the original thread. Repetition of already disproven statements won't make them true, neither then nor now.
-
by the way hiding behind the guise of "it's philosophy" as if its some sort of sacred goat not be questioned is disingenuous. My friend and smartest man i know has a phd in philosophy and working on one in chaos theory i believe could talk circles around anyone here and realizes that philosophy is dead. Nothing new has been presented, its the same arguments that are outdated, they don't hold true, reality is too weird to comprehend with logic and with our brains. Help is needed, thats were math comes in.
^^^ Funny how you make philosophic statements not based in science and at the same time believe that philosophy is dead. What's the name of your friend, he must be well known in the philosophic community for being the one who brought it down.
-
^^^ Funny how you make philosophic statements not based in science and at the same time believe that philosophy is dead. What's the name of your friend, he must be well known in the philosophic community for being the one who brought it down.
it has come down on itself, name one recent philosophical argument that has any huge impact on human thought?
i would side to a certain extent with pragmatism, logic is not adequate to explain reality, what don't you get about that?
you never assert anything, you don't even make arguments, you skirt about topics because you have no substance. Asking questions with no value like what is space?
tell me the answer? tell me why that question matters?
dualism is done, its a retarded philosophy.
do you believe in dualism? in immaterial things, the word thing is self refuting for this concept but for the sake of the pseudo intellectuals out there lets consider it a valid question.
-
describe the experience of being human necrosis.
now compare that to what it might be like to "be" a computer.
similar? u think a computer can feel emotion?
where exactly in the nuerons is information held?
what holds an atom together?
where did all of the "conceptual determinations" come from that created everything?
how did the first piece of material form out of energy?
:)
-
name one recent philosophical argument that has any huge impact on human thought?
once something is perfected it can not be improved :) descartes, leibnez, and to a lesser degree wittgenstein, hume and others have already nailed it down. everyone since then has been garbage.
-
plus .. get this in yoru head
lol. science is not bound by our sense and experience? give one example ;D
the simple fact is that existence requires magic.
get that in your head and then you can begin to understand.
-
once something is perfected it can not be improved :) descartes, leibnez, and to a lesser degree wittgenstein, hume and others have already nailed it down. everyone since then has been garbage.
sure, give me some of the arguments you think prove a magical nessecity? Ever think that maybe we know more about reality now, or are you saying they had all the answers.
I am unaware of any philosophical argument for god that is not ripe with logical fallacies and unfounded assumptions. Give me some.
-
Why am I not surprised that Tbombz is upset that 'Dark Matter' wasnt refferring to some black guy named Jerome and a bottle of lube.
-
so today in the paper there is an article titled "uc berkely astronomer wins prize: researcher will share $500,000 award for work on dark matter". it just baffled me. so this researchers name is marc davis. obviously a very smart guy to be a professor and researcher at uc berkely. he just discovered evidence that confirms the existence of "dark matter". dark matter is cold and dark and it makes up most of the universe. before now, this was only theoretical in the field of science. at the end of the article the reearcher says that they are now looking into dark matter itself, trying to find out its inner nature. he said " if..the large hadron collider... doesnt tell us anything, we're never going to know what it(dark matter) is".
wtf??!!!!
was this not glaringly obvious to even ancient man? that the universe is a cold, dark place ?
how does this knowledge help answer any questions about ANYthing? what use can it be ?
these researchers and astrnomers are looking for the nature of the universe by disecting its components... how misguided! from the outset logic dictates that a search into the mechanics of relaity will be fruitless... infinite complexity means an impossibility of closure... yet these misguided souls continue to look to science for answers..
to top it all offf... he ends by saying.. "if the hadron collider doesnt figure out what dark matter is, we will never know". are u fucking stupid dude? what makes you any different from the ancient man who thought lightning was unexplainable?
i swear... some people...
these silly, slly scientists, mostly atheists, who cant see past their own shit.
If you want to find dark matter, look no further, it's in your cranium.
-
This morning I found out what dark matter really is, when I was out of toilet paper.
-
its very funny.. mr atheist wittgenstein was so right when he said that there are no philosophical problems... and this is such a strong truth in the reality that is God. :) "its philosophers who muddle the waters"
The later Wittgenstein promoted a therapeutic end for philosophy, to reverse the bewitchment of intellect by the vagaries of language, meaning he probably would have shirked at empirical (scientific) absolutism. Philosophy isn't dead, our short-sighted culture only considers our near contemporaries and it will be centuries before we appreciate the significance of Wittgenstein.
-
it has come down on itself, name one recent philosophical argument that has any huge impact on human thought?
i would side to a certain extent with pragmatism, logic is not adequate to explain reality, what don't you get about that?
you never assert anything, you don't even make arguments, you skirt about topics because you have no substance. Asking questions with no value like what is space?
tell me the answer? tell me why that question matters?
dualism is done, its a retarded philosophy.
do you believe in dualism? in immaterial things, the word thing is self refuting for this concept but for the sake of the pseudo intellectuals out there lets consider it a valid question.
The dualism issue ("material" and "immaterial") has been discussed to death in the original thread. There is no need for dualism for the topic at hand. Doesn't make sense to repeat everything here once again, it has been repeated over and over there.
Of course questions like "what is space" are of value. You can argue that you are not interested in them since they cannot be tackled by science. One philosophic conclusion about space and time was e.g. that they are the pure forms of human perception (Kant, "Kritik der reinen Vernunft").
-
The dualism issue ("material" and "immaterial") has been discussed to death in the original thread. There is no need for dualism for the topic at hand. Doesn't make sense to repeat everything here once again, it has been repeated over and over there.
Of course questions like "what is space" are of value. You can argue that you are not interested in them since they cannot be tackled by science. One philosophic conclusion about space and time was e.g. that they are the pure forms of human perception (Kant, "Kritik der reinen Vernunft").
ok, what the hell is he basing this conclusion off? why would space made of material be a pure form of perception? why not water, why not rocks?
it's a untestable, un-provable position thus its pointless.
-
ok, what the hell is he basing this conclusion off? why would space made of material be a pure form of perception? why not water, why not rocks?
it's a untestable, un-provable position thus its pointless.
It's a philosophic deduction, a few hundred pages long. Very interesting and challenging to read.
Using scientific testability as an argument against philosophy is self-contradicting as shown in the original thread:
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=198162.msg2780852#msg2780852
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=198162.msg2783709#msg2783709
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=198162.msg2786207#msg2786207
-
question:
why are a bunch of weightlifting meatheads on a bodybuilding forum discussing highly advance space science.
I'm sure NASA would love your input on these kind of things ???
-
I is too dumb to read all this dark matter stuff ...... but I found a 'simple explanation' (see below) and I are still to darn dumb to understand it. I'll just stick with Quantum Mechanics until I smarten up a bit.
DARK MATTER for Dummies: When the Universe was young, it was nearly smooth and featureless. As it grew older and developed, it became organized. We know that our solar system is organized into planets (including the Earth!) orbiting around the Sun. On a scale much larger than the solar system (about 100 million times larger!), stars collect themselves into galaxies. Our Sun is an average star in an average galaxy called the Milky Way. The Milky Way contains about 100 billion stars. Yes, that's 100,000,000,000 stars! On still larger scales, individual galaxies are concentrated into groups, or what astronomers call clusters of galaxies.
An overlay of an optical image of a cluster of galaxies with an x-ray image of hot gas lying within the cluster
The cluster includes the galaxies and any material which is in the space between the galaxies. The force, or glue, that holds the cluster together is gravity -- the mutual attraction of everything in the Universe for everything else. The space between galaxies in clusters is filled with a hot gas. In fact, the gas is so hot (tens of millions of degrees!) that it shines in X-rays instead of visible light. In the image above, the hot X-ray gas (shown in pink) lying between the galaxies is superimposed on an an optical picture of the cluster of galaxies. By studying the distribution and temperature of the hot gas we can measure how much it is being squeezed by the force of gravity from all the material in the cluster. This allows scientists to determine how much total material (matter) there is in that part of space.
Remarkably, it turns out there is five times more material in clusters of galaxies than we would expect from the galaxies and hot gas we can see. Most of the stuff in clusters of galaxies is invisible and, since these are the largest structures in the Universe held together by gravity, scientists then conclude that most of the matter in the entire Universe is invisible. This invisible stuff is called 'dark matter', a term initially coined by Fritz Zwicky who discovered evidence for missing mass in galaxies in the 1930s. There is currently much ongoing research by scientists attempting to discover exactly what this dark matter is, how much there is, and what effect it may have on the future of the Universe as a whole.
-
ok, what the hell is he basing this conclusion off? why would space made of material be a pure form of perception? why not water, why not rocks?
it's a untestable, un-provable position thus its pointless.
My understanding is that it's not so much a Milesian question of elemental substance. It's simply that the existence of an object with x-y-z dimensions presupposes that there is space in which the object exists. Eliminate the canvas and you've eliminated the painting. Similarly, motion, or just continued stationary existence, couldn't occur without time. Therefore, time exists.
Kant should have hired me. I would have saved him a fortune in quills.
-
T, either you on some good shit, or you need to go to sleep...either way, email this to those PhDs at Berkerley so that they can have a good laugh...
lol
-
sure, give me some of the arguments you think prove a magical nessecity? Ever think that maybe we know more about reality now, or are you saying they had all the answers.
I am unaware of any philosophical argument for god that is not ripe with logical fallacies and unfounded assumptions. Give me some.
didnt quantum physics just prove that particles can 'pop' into existence, out of nothing.. :) thats magic ;)
doesnt the big bang theory prove that the entire universe suddenly appeared out of nothing :) thats magic ;)
doesnt the idea of a solid particle prove that there must be some kind of energy holding it together, and that there must have been some kind of original conceptual design in order for anything at all to have ever developed? :) where did the original design come from? :)
argument for god free of logical fallacies... ok.. any piece of matter is by definition infinitely divisible.. think about it.. what does that tell you ...
that solid particles actually dont exist at all ;) 8)
-
My understanding is that it's not so much a Milesian question of elemental substance. It's simply that the existence of an object with x-y-z dimensions presupposes that there is space in which the object exists. Eliminate the canvas and you've eliminated the painting. Similarly, motion, or just continued stationary existence, couldn't occur without time. Therefore, time exists.
badda big badda booom
modern scientists are fuckin stuuuuuuuuupid
-
I don't agree with your 'stupid scientists' arguments but you said that 'solid particles actually dont exist at all' .....
And that is precisely how DANCING WU LI MASTERS (Basic QM) concludes.
-
badda big badda booom
modern scientists are fuckin stuuuuuuuuupid
so things can onlyh exist in time is the logical conclusion of that argument, therefore eternity cannot exist. However, something has to exist which its essence is for it to exist, because nothing cannot create something therefore something always was, eternity must exist.
Oh wait, thats aquinas and random babble bullshit, things pop into existence from nothing in quantum mechanics, i geuss that argument fails.
-
didnt quantum physics just prove that particles can 'pop' into existence, out of nothing.. :) thats magic ;)
nothing magical about it, not sure why you assume it;s magical
doesnt the big bang theory prove that the entire universe suddenly appeared out of nothing :) thats magic ;)
no it says nothing about that, it says that a point of infinite mass and density expanded rapidly. Sigularities are problems in math fyi not real occurences.
it says nothign about what was before the big bang, it could be cycles of big bangs and collapses. Bubbles of universes creating others all kinds of things, you are jumping to one wild assumption.
doesnt the idea of a solid particle prove that there must be some kind of energy holding it together, and that there must have been some kind of original conceptual design in order for anything at all to have ever developed? :) where did the original design come from? :)
argument for god free of logical fallacies... ok.. any piece of matter is by definition infinitely divisible.. think about it.. what does that tell you ...
that solid particles actually dont exist at all ;) 8)
matter is not infinitely divisible, string theory may discover the base particles. Are you arguing that concepts exist before matter? yet concepts can only exist with a brain no? how can you have conceptual design without a mind?
-
nothing magical about it, not sure why you assume it;s magical
no it says nothing about that, it says that a point of infinite mass and density expanded rapidly. Sigularities are problems in math fyi not real occurences.
it says nothign about what was before the big bang, it could be cycles of big bangs and collapses. Bubbles of universes creating others all kinds of things, you are jumping to one wild assumption.
matter is not infinitely divisible, string theory may discover the base particles. Are you arguing that concepts exist before matter? yet concepts can only exist with a brain no? how can you have conceptual design without a mind?
either things pop into exist magically, or they dont. you cant have it both ways. pick one, and then follow it to its logical conclusion. either way... :)
if you cant accept the infinite divisibilty of matter then....... your just not being honest with yourself? or maybe you really arent so smart after all?
if something exists. it can be measured. if something has a measurement, that measurement can be divided in half. and again. and again. forever. :)
-
badda big badda booom
modern scientists are fuckin stuuuuuuuuupid
Not sure how you moved from the Kantian canvass to that conclusion but then I never was one much for book lernin'.
-
My understanding is that it's not so much a Milesian question of elemental substance. It's simply that the existence of an object with x-y-z dimensions presupposes that there is space in which the object exists. Eliminate the canvas and you've eliminated the painting. Similarly, motion, or just continued stationary existence, couldn't occur without time. Therefore, time exists.
Kant should have hired me. I would have saved him a fortune in quills.
I wouldn't start with the scientific properties assigned to an object by science. What is presupposed when talking about an object that exists is that, out of which this object can manifest itself. The word existence alone presupposes something like that. In any case, it is clearly a philosophic topic since space and time are fundamental to science and not explained from within.
-
I wouldn't start with the scientific properties assigned to an object by science. What is presupposed when talking about an object that exists is that, out of which this object can manifest itself. The word existence alone presupposes something like that. In any case, it is clearly a philosophic topic since space and time are fundamental to science and not explained from within.
you cant use outside explanations to explain something, you cant suppose something outside the universe to explain its existence. You for one can say nothing about it and pretty much open pandoras box as everything requires an exterior explanation.
science isn't assigning any properties, they are the properties which already exist, we use language to describe them if that is what you are talking about, we aren't creating anything, its already there. We are just observing and communication, observation and testing is the only true way to know something.
-
either things pop into exist magically, or they dont. you cant have it both ways. pick one, and then follow it to its logical conclusion. either way... :)
if you cant accept the infinite divisibilty of matter then....... your just not being honest with yourself? or maybe you really arent so smart after all?
if something exists. it can be measured. if something has a measurement, that measurement can be divided in half. and again. and again. forever. :)
whats magical about it? i didnt know magic was the default position when someone doesn't know something, lmao, god of the gaps much? there are numerous theories to account for virtual particles, just because you dont know them doesn't make it magic, im sure thunder would have looked like magic to you if you lived in the 1800's but alas we know its not magic and that nothing magical has ever been found.
you are applying math to matter, numbers can be infinitely indivisible however, true infinites cannot exist its an artifact of math like a singularity. strings would be non-reducible in theory. You are combining topics and theories haphazardly into a amalgam of non-sense.
-
you cant use outside explanations to explain something, you cant suppose something outside the universe to explain its existence. You for one can say nothing about it and pretty much open pandoras box as everything requires an exterior explanation.
science isn't assigning any properties, they are the properties which already exist, we use language to describe them if that is what you are talking about, we aren't creating anything, its already there. We are just observing and communication, observation and testing is the only true way to know something.
The "it" you are talking about in "it's already there" is the problem. Same as what is meant by "communication, observation, and testing". Philosophy also uses these methods, just in a broader sense. And a pure scientist can't say anything about what's there and what's not. The statement "it's already there" can never be scientifically tested. You are obviously a philosopher.
-
The "it" you are talking about in "it's already there" is the problem. Same as what is meant by "communication, observation, and testing". Philosophy also uses these methods, just in a broader sense. And a pure scientist can't say anything about what's there and what's not. The statement "it's already there" can never be scientifically tested. You are obviously a philosopher.
no, you see since the time of kant,hume we have discovered so much more about the world, paradoxs that could not even be imagined, simple logic does not work anymore, for example the universe is expanding, the logical sequence of thoughts is then into what?
the answer is nothing, then we get into a long diatribe about how can something expand into nothing, there has to be something outside the universe and other illogical quips. Math has demonstrated things that thought cannot conceive, how dont you see that?
truth is truth, the purest form of which is scientific reasoning and experimentation. It has provided more truth then philosophy ever has, you haven't even said what branch of philosophy you ascribe to. Science contains philosophy not the other way around.
-
1.) no, you see since the time of kant,hume we have discovered so much more about the world, paradoxs that could not even be imagined, simple logic does not work anymore, for example the universe is expanding, the logical sequence of thoughts is then into what? the answer is nothing, then we get into a long diatribe about how can something expand into nothing, there has to be something outside the universe and other illogical quips. Math has demonstrated things that thought cannot conceive, how dont you see that?
2.) truth is truth, the purest form of which is scientific reasoning and experimentation.
3.) It has provided more truth then philosophy ever has,
4.) you haven't even said what branch of philosophy you ascribe to.
5.)Science contains philosophy not the other way around.
1.) The basic scientific principles aren't changed by new scientific discoveries.
2.) Can't be since this statement itself is not derived from science.
3.) Says who?
4.) Irrelevant to the topic at hand.
5.) That's exactly the error of scientific positivism which has been disproven (still unchallenged) in the linked thread.
-
1.) The basic scientific principles aren't changed by new scientific discoveries.
2.) Can't be since this statement itself is not derived from science.
3.) Says who?
4.) Irrelevant to the topic at hand.
5.) That's exactly the error of scientific positivism which has been disproven (still unchallenged) in the linked thread.
1) yes they can? since when has science operated in this fashion? EBM for example which is the cornerstone of research wasn't implemented for a long time in science. Relativity does not mesh with quantum mechanics, both germane to our reality. Are you in anyway involved in science? thats a very odd conjecture to make if you actually study science, in particular cosmology. Before the atom we never could of imagined how strange the world truly is, quantum entanglement challenges our beliefs about space and time, showing that two electrons remain intertwined despite distances through patterns of coherence and decoherence
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement
one of the things that changed the basic scientific principle of classical physics.
2) sure it is, im arguing that objectivity is more true then your experience of reality, of all of ours, subjectivity is flawed.
3) theology for example has provided nothing at all, not one argument that hasn't been debunked, maimonides arguments were claimed to be proof but as usually they suck. Science provides one with a view of objective reality, one that is much better then a flawed subjective view. It has been shown that awareness and personality are products of a material brain. Its undeniable, to think a material object can transcend itself is ridiculous. science has provided us with medicine, evolution, quantum mechanics, why the sky is blue, where does thunder come from etc..
4) i dont think so, if your claiming any thought is a philosophical one then saying that science cannot be philosophy. It shares all of its principles and the philosophy of science is a study area. Also i feel many areas of philosophy are valid as it really is logic and reason, however, theology for example is useless as is many philosophical angles.
5)i see it the other way, i read the thread i did not find your arguments convincing nor did i feel your rebuttal to mmc even made logical sense. Philosophy of science is a branch of philosophy, philosophy can never contain scientific facts because of its lack of objectivity and removal of human error, what im saying is science goes beyond what philosophy can offer, while philosophy cannot do likewise.
-
Like tbombz and other homos, it still Doesn't Matter¯® ©2011 FuckThatNoise™ ;D
-
1) yes they can? since when has science operated in this fashion? EBM for example which is the cornerstone of research wasn't implemented for a long time in science. Relativity does not mesh with quantum mechanics, both germane to our reality. Are you in anyway involved in science? thats a very odd conjecture to make if you actually study science, in particular cosmology. Before the atom we never could of imagined how strange the world truly is, quantum entanglement challenges our beliefs about space and time, showing that two electrons remain intertwined despite distances through patterns of coherence and decoherence
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement
one of the things that changed the basic scientific principle of classical physics.
2) sure it is, im arguing that objectivity is more true then your experience of reality, of all of ours, subjectivity is flawed.
3) theology for example has provided nothing at all, not one argument that hasn't been debunked, maimonides arguments were claimed to be proof but as usually they suck. Science provides one with a view of objective reality, one that is much better then a flawed subjective view. It has been shown that awareness and personality are products of a material brain. Its undeniable, to think a material object can transcend itself is ridiculous. science has provided us with medicine, evolution, quantum mechanics, why the sky is blue, where does thunder come from etc..
4) i dont think so, if your claiming any thought is a philosophical one then saying that science cannot be philosophy. It shares all of its principles and the philosophy of science is a study area. Also i feel many areas of philosophy are valid as it really is logic and reason, however, theology for example is useless as is many philosophical angles.
5)i see it the other way, i read the thread i did not find your arguments convincing nor did i feel your rebuttal to mmc even made logical sense. Philosophy of science is a branch of philosophy, philosophy can never contain scientific facts because of its lack of objectivity and removal of human error, what im saying is science goes beyond what philosophy can offer, while philosophy cannot do likewise.
The problem with all the above is that it's all philosophy and that my simple logic prove is still unchallanged. Logically prove that my deduction is wrong and I'm converted. Noone in the original thread could, including yourself. Makes no sense to reply to every argument you brought here (which I could) as long as this fact remains.
-
The problem with all the above is that it's all philosophy and that my simple logic prove is still unchallanged. Logically prove that my deduction is wrong and I'm converted. Noone in the original thread could, including yourself. Makes no sense to reply to every argument you brought here (which I could) as long as this fact remains.
what specific deduction?
that there is more to this world then science can examine? specifically argue for something, you are to vague.
science encompasses all that is measurable and observable, that is it.
please state it for me one more time if you dont mind, and please be specific and make a claim that is falsifiable.