NWO/Illuminati $cience

[NEGAN]

Nothing wrong with people trusting their senses and instinct over maths I mean after all its kept you alive from day one not maths.


"Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality"

~Nikola Tesla

 

[darthbards]

Nothing wrong with people trusting their senses and instinct over maths I mean after all its kept you alive from day one not maths.


"Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality"

~Nikola Tesla

"We like to think we know one,and we know two,because one and one are two. But what we are finding is we need to learn a lot more about the and"
-Physicist Sir Arthur Eddington

"The mathematics isn't there until we put it there"
-Sir Arthur Eddington again.

 

[Procrastinator35]

Nothing wrong with people trusting their senses and instinct over maths I mean after all its kept you alive from day one not maths.


"Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality"

~Nikola Tesla

Or to put it another way: The ostensible evidence of the senses versus our conceptual, abstract apparatus.....For mine, the eyes have it.....Which is not to say that our perceptions cannot be in error. Take mirages for example.

 

[NEGAN]

Or to put it another way: The ostensible evidence of the senses versus our conceptual, abstract apparatus.....For mine, the eyes have it.....Which is not to say that our perceptions cannot be in error. Take mirages for example.

Unless manipulated tricked our senses are solid.

Mirages trick our sight but we have so many more tools to judge it.

 

[darthbards]

One of my biggest problems is the constant manipulation of scientific data from scientists to suit their own means.
The dangers are often that its followers have a tendency to swollow anything they say whole,diminishing trust in those that understand,while having their dishonesty ignored by those that don't.

 

[darth_timon]

One of my biggest problems is the constant manipulation of scientific data from scientists to suit their own means.
The dangers are often that its followers have a tendency to swollow anything they say hole,diminishing trust in those that understand,while having their dishonesty ignored by those that don't.

This applies equally to people who perpetuate conspiracies - they manipulate information to suit their agendas.

 

[Procrastinator35]

This applies equally to people who perpetuate conspiracies - they manipulate information to suit their agendas.

Like the current MSM inspired 'Russian' one you mean?.....The one we've had to put-up-with now for a full year solid, without a shred of substantiated evidence to even back the premise, much less an inquiry.

We all know Seth Rich was the DNC leaker......But hey.....Stick solid to your 'theories' there chum.

If you had a gram of political nous in your body, you'd be dangerous.

 

[darth_timon]

Like the current MSM inspired 'Russian' one you mean?.....The one we've had to put-up-with now for a full year solid, without a shred of substantiated evidence to even back the premise, much less an inquiry.

We all know Seth Rich was the DNC leaker......But hey.....Stick solid to your 'theories' there chum.

If you had a gram of political nous in your body, you'd be dangerous.

None of your gratuitous grand-standing there actually contradicts what I just said.

 

[CM86]

We all know Seth Rich was the DNC leaker......

without a shred of substantiated evidence to even back the premise, much less an inquiry.

 

[Procrastinator35]

This applies equally to people who perpetuate conspiracies - they manipulate information to suit their agendas.

This is your post.

None of your gratuitous grand-standing there actually contradicts what I just said.

Now think about it's implications re the current 'Russian' conspiracy angle as plied by the MSM.

Also....Think about it's implications re the NIST & it's 'Manipulation of info to suit the govt narrative & agenda'.

You'll get there eventually snookums.

 

[darthbards]

This applies equally to people who perpetuate conspiracies - they manipulate information to suit their agendas.

Are you seriously comparing conspiracy discussion to scientific discussion?
Your religious stand is clearly clouding your judgement on this one. People can also take or leave conspiracies,while the continued fraudulent behaviour within science can be far more damaging.

 

[NEGAN]

Wait we need a quote from the godfather of science himself to balance the ledger:

"If the facts don't match the theory, change the facts"

~Albert


"CHANGE THE FACTS"


Nice one Albert.

 

[darth_timon]

Are you seriously comparing conspiracy discussion to scientific discussion?
Your religious stand is clearly clouding your judgement on this one. People can also take or leave conspiracies,while the continued fraudulent behaviour within science can be far more damaging.

Well, since the thread title is science, and it's in the conspiracy section of the board, it seems to be a discussion about both does it not? Which would also include criticism of conspiracies, not least when they distract and divert from genuine science. Take creationism for example. That's a field which relies heavily on pseudo-science, actually is a religious notion, and one that receives a huge degree of funding, despite being demonstrated to be false as a scientific theory.

 

[darth_timon]

This is your post.



Now think about it's implications re the current 'Russian' conspiracy angle as plied by the MSM.

Also....Think about it's implications re the NIST & it's 'Manipulation of info to suit the govt narrative & agenda'.

You'll get there eventually snookums.

The thread is to do with science, or have you conveniently forgotten that? There are other threads to discussion political conspiracies.

 

[darthbards]

Well, since the thread title is science, and it's in the conspiracy section of the board, it seems to be a discussion about both does it not? Which would also include criticism of conspiracies, not least when they distract and divert from genuine science. Take creationism for example. That's a field which relies heavily on pseudo-science, actually is a religious notion, and one that receives a huge degree of funding, despite being demonstrated to be false as a scientific theory.

Again with the religious talk. Yes traditional science has its place and that's it's field. To uncover the great wonders of what we fail to understand we may need to step beyond. Your obsession with using the term psuodo science is nothing more than a desperate attempt to make your religion the be all and end all of all discussion, and fails to acknowledge the boundaries of the field you so desperately feel needs protection.

 

[CM86]

Wait we need a quote from the godfather of science himself to balance the ledger:

"If the facts don't match the theory, change the facts"

~Albert


"CHANGE THE FACTS"


Nice one Albert.

Are you sure he said that?

 

[darth_timon]

Again with the religious talk. Yes traditional science has its place and that's it's field. To uncover the great wonders of what we fail to understand we may need to step beyond. Your obsession with using the term psuodo science is nothing more than a desperate attempt to make your religion the be all and end all of all discussion, and fails to acknowledge the boundaries of the field you so desperately feel needs protection.

This isn't the first time you've confused science and religion. Creationism, a field that takes in millions every year, is a religious theory masquerading as a scientific one. Evolution is falsifiable and has passed every test asked of it so far. We have one 'idea' that is literally a religious one (I'll give you a clue, it's not the one that's been studied via scientific means), which is but one example of how conspiracies can dupe people and claim huge levels of funding too. Your derision of what you don't understand is yours.

 

[NEGAN]

Are you sure he said that?

 

[CM86]

View attachment 383019

 

[darthbards]

This isn't the first time you've confused science and religion. Creationism, a field that takes in millions every year, is a religious theory masquerading as a scientific one. Evolution is falsifiable and has passed every test asked of it so far. We have one 'idea' that is literally a religious one (I'll give you a clue, it's not the one that's been studied via scientific means), which is but one example of how conspiracies can dupe people and claim huge levels of funding too. Your derision of what you don't understand is yours.

And again this isn't the first time you have attempted to butcher language to suit your own means and agenda.
Why do you now feel the need to bring religions of faith into the discussion,no one is mentioning those seperate religions. They are in my view irrelevant to this discussion.

 

[darthbards]

Fake...there was no internet in Lincons days.

 

[CM86]

Fake...there was no internet in Lincons days.

Prove it.

 

[darth_timon]

And again this isn't the first time you have attempted to butcher language to suit your own means and agenda.
Why do you now feel the need to bring religions of faith into the discussion,no one is mentioning those seperate religions. They are in my view irrelevant to this discussion.

Well, since you don't seem to know the difference between faith and science, you leave me with little choice but to educate you

In fact, your own position contradicts itself. Science is apparently ill-equipped to explain the meta-physical and philosophical, yet science is also a religion, which is all about the meta-physical! I hope you clarify this contradiction...

But, back to the main point - namely that, for all the claims of science being dangerous and misleading and fraudulent for the purpose of money, conspiracies can be exactly the same - creationism is but one example of what is essentially a conspiracy theory doing exactly what you claim science does. People write books about conspiracies, give lectures, attend rallies, and make money off the back of them. How is this different to the science that you hate?

 

[darthbards]

Well, since you don't seem to know the difference between faith and science, you leave me with little choice but to educate you

In fact, your own position contradicts itself. Science is apparently ill-equipped to explain the meta-physical and philosophical, yet science is also a religion, which is all about the meta-physical! I hope you clarify this contradiction...

But, back to the main point - namely that, for all the claims of science being dangerous and misleading and fraudulent for the purpose of money, conspiracies can be exactly the same - creationism is but one example of what is essentially a conspiracy theory doing exactly what you claim science does. People write books about conspiracies, give lectures, attend rallies, and make money off the back of them. How is this different to the science that you hate?

Firstly I don't use the H word and believe only those that use it understand it. I'm on the fence with the religion of faith but I respect the fact it generally stays within its boundaries and is true to those boundaries.
My faith is to see the religion of science develop the technology (AI,SI) to help understand and discover the questions we all do not understand. That I believe is its role and it needs to concentrate on its role for the betterment of humanity. If SI comes to 'psuodo' conclusion I'm more than happy.
The religion of faith doesn't tell lies within its own beliefs and boundaries,people just don't agree,the religion of science unfortunately does partake in lies and deliberate manipulation.

 

[darth_timon]

Firstly I don't use the H word and believe only those that use it understand it. I'm on the fence with the religion of faith but I respect the fact it generally stays within its boundaries and is true to those boundaries.
My faith is to see the religion of science develop the technology (AI,SI) to help understand and discover the questions we all do not understand. That I believe is its role and it needs to concentrate on its role for the betterment of humanity. If SI comes to 'psuodo' conclusion I'm more than happy.
The religion of faith doesn't tell lies within its own beliefs and boundaries,people just don't agree,the religion of science unfortunately does partake in lies and deliberate manipulation.

Misconstruing science as religion is being dishonest. One is an article of faith, the other isn't. You don't 'have faith' in electronics, or the systems that keep your water flowing and the food in your fridge cool. These things exist because of scientific principles and decades of research. Science doesn't rely on faith to develop these tools - it relies on research and study. I'm not trying to say science is perfect and the only means for understanding our world, but if you want to understand the physical reality of our world, as opposed to philosophical principles, then science is the best tool we've got.