My Problem with Science

Discussion in 'Science' started by MDG045, Mar 17, 2017.

  1. MDG045

    MDG045 Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2016
    Messages:
    471
    Likes Received:
    149
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Gender:
    Male
    Before I start expressing my opinions about Science, let me just say that I am in no way religious and I believe that science helps in ways that other fields just can't. Without the field of science and the scientists that take part in the process of discovering new ideas and discovering knowledge, we as a world would be light years behind from where we are now. But, with that being said there is a huge problem I have with science.

    My issue is this, there are so many people who will listen to scientists talk about something like the Big Bang Theory or whatever and have no idea what their talking about or not even understand what they are saying and just accept it as fact and truth, without even thinking about it rationally or questioning it. Then, they will go to religious people and disparage them for doing the exact same thing but within a religious circle. There a lot of people that don't think for themselves and just take scientists on their word. Now I think I know what you are thinking, "But, the whole point of science is thinking for yourself!!!". But, if you are taking what someone says as fact without even rationally thinking about it or even considering the possibility that may be wrong you are not thinking for yourself, you are letting other think for you. For example, I think the recent statistic is that 90 something percent of all scientists say that the rapid climate change happening is being caused by man and they will just take them at their word. I am not a climate change denier, but if some guy in a lab coat tells me you know the world climate is changing and we have to stop it, I am going to question him and think rationally about it. I am not just going to take him at his word.

    Another problem I have with science and scientists is that some of the things they say that are facts and are true I just don't think make sense or I don't agree with. Like there are I think 6 something requirements, I could be wrong about that number, that scientists say something must have to be considered a living being. For example. they say that viruses aren't living things and that never made sense to me. If a virus isn't a living thing then why does it have the ability to move, why does it have the ability to reproduce. And if it has both those abilities then it must have an intellect of some kind in order to be able to move and reproduce. I don't know, maybe because I come from a history and philosophy background I have this mindset of "I think therefore I am", but something just doesn't seem right.

    So anyway, while I acknowledge sciences importance I have problems with it.
     
    TrackerSam and Moi621 like this.
  2. _Inquisitor_

    _Inquisitor_ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2010
    Messages:
    3,542
    Likes Received:
    161
    Trophy Points:
    63
    You are all way religious.
    What does science do?
    For now don't believe there is anything there until it is physically demonstrated to you. Is not it just basic common sense?
     
    Last edited: Mar 17, 2017
  3. MDG045

    MDG045 Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2016
    Messages:
    471
    Likes Received:
    149
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Gender:
    Male
    Look, I am a agnostic person I am not religious in anyway. But it is willfully ignorant and irational to say that the only thing that can be believed is what can be physically demonstrated to you. There is such a thing as inductive reasoning you know, where you can come to a conclusion using logic and reasoning with evidence that is not as concrete at deductive evidence. So for you to say what you have said is rediculous. Also I like how instead of addressing my argument you take a statement I made out of context. Nice straw man fallacy.
     
    Last edited: Mar 17, 2017
  4. _Inquisitor_

    _Inquisitor_ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2010
    Messages:
    3,542
    Likes Received:
    161
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I balded red your own statement. You believe, which means you are a believer, a religious.
    Since you cannot do a thing but spew religious beliefs and personal insults, I am not interested. Buy
     
  5. One Mind

    One Mind Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2014
    Messages:
    20,296
    Likes Received:
    7,744
    Trophy Points:
    113
    As long as science sometimes move ahead at the pace of tombstones, that is evidently a problem. As long as science is conducted by human beings who are affected by subjectivity, that too will present some problem. Yet it is the best thing humanity has and nothing is worthy to replace it. Science and humility in the scientist is very healthy, for science. But science and arrogance is an enemy to science. We hear about the arrogance, but most men of science are probably quite humble when it comes to scientific knowledge. For unlike the general population they understand the assumptions involved, and why assumptions have to be made at a deep level of the scientific endeavor.

    IMO you will get the most resistance to your OP from the arrogant non scientists, who have based their beliefs about the nature of reality upon science, when in truth science is not interested in what cannot be measured, and whether the immeasurable exists or not. Whether an immeasurable exists or not is necessarily outside of the realm of science, but yet there are those who want to use science to prove an immeasurable does not exist. LOL Science is only concerned with what can be measured. It is not concerned with philosophy. Yet all too often people on this forum mix the two together when they argue for their ideas about reality. While some of the early founders of quantum mechanics, given the nature of QM were steered towards mysticism, in personal beliefs about reality, this in no way helped nor hurt QM, for it is extraneous to QM. So what they thought of the nature of reality did not help them nor hurt them in understanding the reality at the quantum level. As one famous physicist said about this, forget about such things and just work the equations.
     
  6. MDG045

    MDG045 Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2016
    Messages:
    471
    Likes Received:
    149
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Gender:
    Male
    I find it funny how just because I used the word belief to describe science that you automatically think I am religious. You don't even know me. I dare you to prove me wrong. Prove me wrong I dare you actually debate me. I am not afraid to have an honest debate with someone. Instead of taking a word I used to mean I am religious actually ask me what I think instead of assuming what I think. I dare you to prove me wrong.
     
  7. MDG045

    MDG045 Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2016
    Messages:
    471
    Likes Received:
    149
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Gender:
    Male
    That's fair. I mentioned in my post that I have a back round in History and Philosophy, so maybe I am looking at it from a philosophical point of view. I guess my big issue with science and those that view it as the greatest tool on the face of the earth is that it's very black and white. Unfortunately, the world doesn't work in Black and White there's almost always a grey area to everything.
     
    Last edited: Mar 17, 2017
  8. _Inquisitor_

    _Inquisitor_ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2010
    Messages:
    3,542
    Likes Received:
    161
    Trophy Points:
    63
    You have not corrected your choice of word, you have not suggested any opposite interpretation of it.
    I am not to prove that spewing personal insults is wrong, it is not even wrong.
     
  9. MDG045

    MDG045 Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2016
    Messages:
    471
    Likes Received:
    149
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Gender:
    Male
    It is not wrong but what you are doing is instead of having a debate of ideas you are just taking a word I used with no malicious or religious intent at all and equating that to your perception of my views and you have assumed that I am religious from that. How about try to address my argument instead of just ignoring them and just making assumptions. If you prove me wrong I will gladly admit that I am wrong but that's not going to happen if you are so closed minded.
     
    Last edited: Mar 17, 2017
  10. _Inquisitor_

    _Inquisitor_ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2010
    Messages:
    3,542
    Likes Received:
    161
    Trophy Points:
    63
    You have not corrected your choice of word, you have not suggested any opposite interpretation of it.
    I am not to prove that spewing personal insults is wrong, it is not even wrong.
    It is wrong to read what I did not say. I did not say that it could be malicious at all. I did not say that you had even a religious slight intent.
    It is not my fault that you express yourself as a religious person with no intent to do so.
    I am not to prove that spewing personal insults is wrong, it is not even wrong.
     
  11. MDG045

    MDG045 Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2016
    Messages:
    471
    Likes Received:
    149
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Gender:
    Male
    I am starting to get the feeling that you have no argument here and you are just stalling cause you think you'll lose. I offered a debate of ideas and you have refused to do so. I have even said I am not religious yet you still hold this ridiculous assumption of me without any prior knowledge of me personally. Belief can be used in many different contexts and one of them is a religious context. I was not using it in a religious context. So if you want to continue being ridiculous and assume I am religious without any knowledge of me or what I think go ahead. But, you have yet to address my argument, you have continually been using logical fallacies over and over again. The reason you keep using these fallacies is because you have no argument. You claim to be a anti religious person, yet you act like a closed minded religious fanatic that wont' listen to reason and won't have a debate. Again I am saying DEBATE ME.
     
    _Inquisitor_ likes this.
  12. _Inquisitor_

    _Inquisitor_ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2010
    Messages:
    3,542
    Likes Received:
    161
    Trophy Points:
    63
    You are not addressing any of my statements.
     
  13. MDG045

    MDG045 Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2016
    Messages:
    471
    Likes Received:
    149
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Gender:
    Male
    You're statements are logical fallacies. It is impossible to have a reasonable debate with you because you keep spouting fallacies.
     
  14. _Inquisitor_

    _Inquisitor_ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2010
    Messages:
    3,542
    Likes Received:
    161
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Saying they are logical fallacies because you say so, does not make them logical fallacies, but is logical fallacy.
     
  15. Moi621

    Moi621 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2013
    Messages:
    19,292
    Likes Received:
    7,606
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I will type slowly for you.
    My father had a Science background in electronics engineering.
    My brother has a PhD in Neurophysiology and is a professor.
    I went to Medical School requiring lots, and lots of science.

    Experience tells me -
    Science is political. One may design an experiment for the results they desire.
    We witness it over and over with New Drugs being recalled the year of their release because of dangers.

    My father tried to sell the Navy on reusable microwave communications systems for the bomb tests in the South Pacific. But, the Navy wanted their radio tower, each time.
    The Navy was not interested in microwave communications so in use today.

    My brother did his PhD and follow up research on Spinal Cord Regeneration. He failed.
    Now with lots of publications he sits on Grant Committees and shared with me he votes down any grant on spinal cord regeneration. My brother is very conceited and he knows if he can't make it work, no one else can.

    My experience has been with corrupted drug studies at the V.A. No one cared.
    Does anyone remember, Seldane? For my allergy experience I really liked it. After years of being prescription only, it went over the counter and within a year recalled for sudden death events. Go figure! I have.

    There is no doubt in my assessment that too much global warming science is corrupted.
    One does not get a grant without the purpose, it is happening.
    Similar to Standard Oil paying for an EIR study.
    As a Biologist at heart, I believe the biological record of 1,200 years ago plus written records from China and Christian monasteries, and the disruption of ancient American civilizations at the same time demonstrates it is not as warm today, as it was then.
    Regardless of inferred, calculated, paid for, etc. CO2 levels that would say otherwise.


    Add to that the uneducated parrots who read a science digest and you create quite a peanut gallery. Just like 20 - 40 years ago and Cholesterol Theory driving people to carbs, obesity, diabetes, and its' consequences. Even the American Diabetes Association was telling diabetics to avoid meat and eat their pasta. And I would deprogram them.
    My patients on Atkins had improved blood fats and glycemic indexes.
    And it made my life harder because I was so alone, against the political science current.

    We need independent, blind, grant agencies.
    That would be a start to bring Scientific objectivity back to Science.


    Moi :oldman:

    r > g


    [​IMG]
    They needed an American to isolate Insulin!
    Across an immense, unguarded, ethereal border, Canadians, cool and unsympathetic,
    regard our America with envious eyes and slowly and surely draw their plans against us.
     
    Sunsettommy and MDG045 like this.
  16. _Inquisitor_

    _Inquisitor_ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2010
    Messages:
    3,542
    Likes Received:
    161
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Sadly there is a lot of truth in what you said.
     
    Last edited: Mar 17, 2017
    Moi621 likes this.
  17. Moi621

    Moi621 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2013
    Messages:
    19,292
    Likes Received:
    7,606
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Well it is a product of life experience.
    Not faith.

    Working in the field and being true
    costs people their job.


    Or were you just referring to the Canada part quoted?​
     
    Last edited: Mar 17, 2017
  18. _Inquisitor_

    _Inquisitor_ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2010
    Messages:
    3,542
    Likes Received:
    161
    Trophy Points:
    63
    1. Again, I concur.

    2. Not to your part, but to Canadian girls.
     
  19. HonestJoe

    HonestJoe Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2010
    Messages:
    14,839
    Likes Received:
    4,815
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You should probably start by explaining exactly what you mean when you say "science" because the word alone doesn't really mean anything without at least some context. Your examples really refer to some different things.

    That isn't really a problem with science though, it's a problem with the people. There is lots of science that requires a lot of specific technical understanding so most of us couldn't understand it even if we tried, especially not across all fields. One of the points of modern science if for experts in different fields to focus on their deep understand of that field and bring the conclusions to the rest of us. That inevitably requires a level of trust but really that applies to everything. We live in a world of specialists.

    The other point is that there is a distinction between science with immediate practical consequences and science that's really just for academic interest. We will naturally think more about scientific claims that directly impact us (say medicine or food safety) but it matters much less whether we understand or believe science about things like the Big Bang.

    That's another people problem, not science problem.

    That figure isn't science, it's politics. What climate scientists say about climate change is much more complex, in-depth and does indeed involve disagreement and questioning. The problem is that most of us don't have the level of specific knowledge and experience to properly assess the technical details and a lot of people have just enough understanding to completely misunderstand them (not to mention those deliberately spreading misinformation in various directions for various reasons).

    That's not a problem with science or scientists. If it was, it'd be just as much a problem with you - I'm sure you'd say some things are facts they wouldn't think make sense too.

    This example kind of proves my points. You (like me) clearly don't have any expertise in the area. As I understand it, it's long been recognised that there is no easy definition for life (there is the list of characteristics but it isn't a case of if it has them, it's life) and viruses have long been recognised as in a fuzzy grey area that forms part of that problem.

    Bottom line though is that this isn't a problem with science. This is science; you have a hypothesis and you're seeking evidence relating to it. You basically have a problem with yourself. ;)
     
  20. _Inquisitor_

    _Inquisitor_ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2010
    Messages:
    3,542
    Likes Received:
    161
    Trophy Points:
    63
    It is not science, it is theology.
    You express what you are indoctrinated in.
    Moi tells life experience including Canadian girls.
    I concur; and girls always liked me, too.
     
    Moi621 likes this.
  21. Bowerbird

    Bowerbird Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2009
    Messages:
    91,877
    Likes Received:
    73,632
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    My issue is people with complete misunderstanding of what "science:" is and that you can have at least one crackpot in every field

    It you want to talk the gullibility of the general public though look at how many believe in homeopathy
     
  22. yguy

    yguy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2010
    Messages:
    18,423
    Likes Received:
    886
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Seems to me your problem is not with science, but with people who profess to be scientists, or to have above average scientific acumen.

    Actually I'm pretty sure there's no scientific consensus on that either way - which tells me that biologists don't know what life is, otherwise they'd sure as hell know what it ain't.

    A robot could be built with such abilities, but I wouldn't call it a living organism. I think viruses are non-living because, AFAIK, no living organism derives sustenance from viruses, which suggests to me they have no life energy.
     
  23. _Inquisitor_

    _Inquisitor_ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2010
    Messages:
    3,542
    Likes Received:
    161
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Scientific consensus is fake science.
    In some way one does not have to be a big scientist to have an idea what life certainly is and what life certainly is not.
    As to split a hair details, thinking whether viruses are living or nonliving is not of any importance. One way or another you have to make a set of assumptions if you want to get somewhere beyond a system of beliefs.
    You can take it one way or another. It does not change virology or Moi's life struggle with viruses and Canadian girls.
    You think they are not living I think they are living, because they cannot exist in a no life environment, if to assume that the latter can exist, yet it does not matter as the science go.
     
    Last edited: Mar 17, 2017
  24. _Inquisitor_

    _Inquisitor_ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2010
    Messages:
    3,542
    Likes Received:
    161
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Let's say you convinced me that they are not living or I convinced you that they are living and we convinced a majority to come to consensus, - it has nothing to do to science, but everything to creating a religious belief.
    Just to clarify myself...
     
  25. William Rea

    William Rea Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2016
    Messages:
    1,432
    Likes Received:
    604
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Reading that back it seems to me that the problem is with your family, not science.
     
    Bowerbird and tecoyah like this.

Share This Page