Is science under attack?

Remove this Banner Ad

Yeah it might be under attack, but I don't think that's the main problem.

It's general image is one of a lack of respect really. Opinions seem to carry more weight than data, especially coming from celebrities. People love listening to professional bullshit artists like Pete Evans or anti vax crackpot websites.

An emotional mother on YouTube banging on about how injections gave her child autism outweighs any real evidence.

Eejits listen to eejits.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Lemma said:
I'm just imagining this happening with gravity. "Gravity:does it really exist?. We speak to a denier"
Click to expand...
they'd grab a flat earther for that, as gravity doesn't fit their model
 
darth_timon said:
Science is hard (or can be hard), and as such people tend to overlook it in favour of easy answers. People also listen to pseudo-scientific nonsense over actual science, because it sounds vaguely clever.

Sent from my D5803 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Agree, just look at the thread below. So the universe is apparently a simulation. That's ok, could very well be. But how about some evidence to back it up? Where does infinite energy comes from? hardware? computers? It's easy to claim its a simulation cause it makes sense to you, but you cannot back it up with credible evidence. This is why Science is frustrating. Just take the easy route and say God is infinite and energy is infinite and computer is a perfect one. Its the same logic as religion, dressed up in pseudo science.
 
Umm... actually logically the simulation theory is infailable. Rubbish maybe, but philisophicly sound.

Mind you so is capitalism.

You know what's really bullshit? The multiverse theory. And that has waaay more popular support - even from some parts of the (quantum) scientific community.
 
SwampCreature said:
Umm... actually logically the simulation theory is infailable. Rubbish maybe, but philisophicly sound.
Click to expand...

What is philosophically sound as "god turned on the computer"? why does god need a computer in first place? there is no way way to test this empirically and mind you this is the science board. Lets not get away with all the metaphysical talks. Could we be living in a dream? possible, but how are you going to prove the hypothesis?
 
SwampCreature said:
But you can logically prove the hypothesis of the sim theory. Whether that's science is for better minds than mine.
Click to expand...
Does it make sense to statistically extrapolate facts about a meta universe from data gathered in our universe? Until you show me a single simulation as perfect as the reality we live in, I'm going to take it as far-fetched that we live in some simulated reality. If we have no experience of a reality outside the world we currently live in, then it is meaningless to talk about or make claims of that other reality.

Anyway this is not a simulation thread, lets talk in the other thread.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

SwampCreature said:
You know what's really bullshit? The multiverse theory. And that has waaay more popular support - even from some parts of the (quantum) scientific community.
Click to expand...

The multiverse theory isn't necessarily 'bullshit' - it just falls in to the realm of scientifically and mathematically based philosophical speculation. This puts it into the category of other realms of physics, including string and M theory and supersymmetry.

Logical philosophical speculation based on mathematical models is a valid realm of science. It is what led Schwarzchild to take Einstein's theory of General Relativity and calculate that black holes could exist. Most scientists thought this speculation was ridiculous, but eventually (starting in the 1970's) we have actually found strong evidence they exist.

Philosophical speculation is important in science, as it can lead to new types of observations being made, or reevaluation of existing data. The recent detection of gravitational waves is another example; the LIGO project cost well over a billion dollars, and was again based purely on philosophical speculation based on General Relativity.

An interesting article on multiverse speculation can be found here.
 
volcboy said:
The multiverse theory isn't necessarily 'bullshit' - it just falls in to the realm of scientifically and mathematically based philosophical speculation. This puts it into the category of other realms of physics, including string and M theory and supersymmetry.

Logical philosophical speculation based on mathematical models is a valid realm of science. It is what led Schwarzchild to take Einstein's theory of General Relativity and calculate that black holes could exist. Most scientists thought this speculation was ridiculous, but eventually (starting in the 1970's) we have actually found strong evidence they exist.

Philosophical speculation is important in science, as it can lead to new types of observations being made, or reevaluation of existing data. The recent detection of gravitational waves is another example; the LIGO project cost well over a billion dollars, and was again based purely on philosophical speculation based on General Relativity.

An interesting article on multiverse speculation can be found here.
Click to expand...
Very well said. Finally some common sense.
 
On facebook when a a pic of the earth taken from space is posted and people ask why dont you see stars, you know that education system has failed us. Facebook seems to be worst of them all, so many uneducated opinions. Here we are exploring Saturn's rings and some people are still living in stone age.
 
Last edited:
One only needs to set foot in the conspiracy boards to see just how misled some people can be. Unsubstantiated ideas can suddenly take on the same weight as genuine theories, despite all the problems that leads to.
 
darth_timon said:
One only needs to set foot in the conspiracy boards to see just how misled some people can be. Unsubstantiated ideas can suddenly take on the same weight as genuine theories, despite all the problems that leads to.
Click to expand...
Honestly, i do not think they are serious actually. They cannot be this stupid. Everything should be questioned, that's why science has potential falsifications. You only need to go and see how they regard people like Tom Campbell as a scientist but not Lawrence Krauss or anyone in Caltech. I think that board is just for frustrated people venting, but in reality, such people like ... (you know who) exist. They genuinely believe everything scientific is nothing but a propaganda. The peer review process is not perfect, yet its the best we have. We need to develop the process further, instead of saying we should eliminate it.

Evolution has to be the most scrutinized scientific theory till date, yet it has passed every test with flying colours. Yet some people reckon these theories get a free pass? i blame our education system for most people believing we came from monkeys or evolution is just magic fish growing legs.

Here is more information about Campbell which these guys think is a scientist. Although he has worked for NASA (yes the same NASA these guys love to grill lol talk about selective bias)

Apparently, he has discovered a theory of "everything" already. :drunk:

More info here: http://www.my-big-toe.com/about/

So a person claiming to have worked for NASA, claiming to have worked in reputed science projects refuses to give out his credentials or research publications? This is why scientists get a bad name. His qualifications are not listed and i am unable to verify his credentials. No transperency = fraud. They are no gatekeepers of science but pseudo science mostly.

I think there is no point talking pseudo science here, is science under attack? yes! but mostly from people who don't understand science.
 
Last edited:
darth_timon said:
One only needs to set foot in the conspiracy boards to see just how misled some people can be. Unsubstantiated ideas can suddenly take on the same weight as genuine theories, despite all the problems that leads to.
Click to expand...
I really wouldn't pay any attention to what is discussed in Conspiracy threads. Under the safety of anonymity and Mods some people post the most ridiculous things just for the attention it receives. Don't respond and they will get bored and stop posting. However, it was fun baiting them and getting them worked up.
 
Present Not Past said:
I really wouldn't pay any attention to what is discussed in Conspiracy threads. Under the safety of anonymity and Mods some people post the most ridiculous things just for the attention it receives. Don't respond and they will get bored and stop posting.
Click to expand...
I never would have imagined in my wildest dreams that grown up men believe in FE in this day and age. Not kidding. Our education system has failed us, honestly or they are just trolling, either way, i aint posting there anymore, enough is enough.
 
Total Power said:
I never would have imagined in my wildest dreams that grown up men believe in FE in this day and age. Not kidding. Our education system has failed us, honestly or they are just trolling, either way, i aint posting there anymore, enough is enough.
Click to expand...
I believe they are simply doing it for the attention. Once we stop posting there, so will they. It's the way of that Board.
 
Total Power said:
Here is more information about Campbell which these guys think is a scientist. Although he has worked for NASA (yes the same NASA these guys love to grill lol talk about selective bias)

Apparently, he has discovered a theory of "everything" already. :drunk:

More info here: http://www.my-big-toe.com/about/

So a person claiming to have worked for NASA, claiming to have worked in reputed science projects refuses to give out his credentials or research publications? This is why scientists get a bad name. His qualifications are not listed and i am unable to verify his credentials. No transperency = fraud. They are no gatekeepers of science but pseudo science mostly.
Click to expand...

Did you try looking on his Wikipedia page for his qualifications?
 
sorted said:
Did you try looking on his Wikipedia page for his qualifications?
Click to expand...
Yes i did, the only page where i can find something. Wikipedia is not a reliable source for anything provided his own website doesn't state his qualifications.

If he has worked for NASA on a space program i would expect it to be on his profile, or just about anyones profile.

Look up on the discussion forum i linked in the post, they are also stating the same thing
 
Total Power said:
Yes i did, the only page where i can find something. Wikipedia is not a reliable source for anything provided his own website doesn't state his qualifications.

If he has worked for NASA on a space program i would expect it to be on his profile, or just about anyones profile.

Look up on the discussion forum i linked in the post, they are also stating the same thing
Click to expand...

So you would accept if he quoted his qualifications on his own website? But not on Wikipedia? That doesn't make much sense.
 
sorted said:
So you would accept if he quoted his qualifications on his own website? But not on Wikipedia? That doesn't make much sense.
Click to expand...


I did not say that, but his work experience as claimed in wikipedia does not match his website. Either way, his books been rejected by mainstream science, considering he has a theory of everything. If his credentials are legitimate why wouldn't you just post them there? Why wouldn't they be made available in general? You couldn't even quote Tom for a college paper with no leg to stand on, considering he has worked for NASA and other hi-tech space programs he surely operates in stealth mode. This whole thing seems fishy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top