Why is the scientism a masterpiece of the arrogance

@fresco,

If there were a prize for being able to write the most words that make the least sense, any one of Herald's posts would walk away with the gold.

1 Reply

@FBM,

True. He certainly has the longest mantra.

0 Replies

@fresco,

fresco wrote:

If you can't work out that I am making no "claims" other than about common psychological needs, whereas you are indulging in epistemological fantasies then you are are doomed to continue your intellectual isolation.

... and you were asked particular question: can you explain how exactly the photon can be both here and on the other side of the Universe (claim of the Quantum Mechanics, not mine) at one and the same time ... and where exactly here is 'my indulging in epistemological fantasies' and 'my doom to continue my intellectual isolation'? Honestly speaking I prefer to be intellectually disconnected from any retards than to have anything in common with people that are peppering at random pseudo-scientific 'arguments'.

fresco wrote:

Your exposition reveals that you haven't got a clue about the extensive analytical literature on "logic" or "explanation" already undertaken.

... and as you have so many clues, why don't you tell us something about the logic of the Big Bang 'theory', for example: how exactly the physical law for the conservation of energy is 'observed' by the Big Bang 'theory'; how exactly the Big Bang 'theory' complies with the requirements for consistency, especially after claiming that some Infinite Gravitation might have existed before the launching of Time ... and without a force carrier. It would be interesting to see your system of math logical equations ... and proof of consistency of the math model used there; and also the overall verification of that model in terms of physics, justified by plausible physical interpretation of all the concepts.

1 Reply

Still looking for gaps for the alien/ILF/god-thingies to fit into...

http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb192/DinahFyre/hehe.gif

1 Reply

@FBM,

FBM wrote:

Still looking for gaps for the alien/ILF/god-thingies to fit into...

Your personal problems with the aliens do not interest me.

1 Reply

@Herald,

I, on the other hand, find your desperate, fallacious and stubborn attempts to carve out an alien/ILF/god-thingy-friendly model of universe fascinating. Kinda like a train wreck... Laughing

0 Replies

@Herald,

Three essential pieces of reading for you.

1. Anything on "Philosophy of Logic" involving Godel's "Incompleteness Theorem" and Paul Cohen's work on "the Continuum Hypothesis"
2. Stanford Encyclopedia on "Scientific Explanation".
3. Kuhn's "Structure of Scientific Revolutions".

I suggest you come back when you have read them, but I know that is unlikely to happen because your self integrity is dependent on your keeping your idiosyncratic belief system intact, which such reading would seriously damage. In fact, such reading would reveal that, at the moment, your concept of "science" equates approximately to that of the apocryphal African Bushman who accepted astronomical ideas about stars, but kept asking the astronomer how he knew the names of them.

1 Reply

@fresco,

fresco wrote:

Godel's "Incompleteness Theorem"

It this the 'a lot new things in logic in the recent years' ... Goedel, 1931 ?! and Paul Cohen 1966 ?! WFM.
If you have ended up with the red herrings on grill would you present your personal definition of Time?

0 Replies

http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb192/DinahFyre/alien.jpg

0 Replies

http://disinfo.com/2015/06/pseudoscience-and-conspiracy-theory-are-not-victimless-crimes-against-science/

Quote:

Pseudoscience and conspiracy theory are not victimless crimes against science

by Eduardo Nicolas Schulz on June 4, 2015 in Science

News of anti-vaxxer movements, demands to teach creationism in schools as science, and dubious claims for the health-giving properties of strange diets is enough to make you wonder if some people have forgotten or forsaken the scientific method entirely.

Astronomer Carl Sagan once said:

In every country, we should be teaching our children the scientific method and the reasons for a Bill of Rights. With it comes a certain decency, humility and community spirit. In the demon-haunted world that we inhabit by virtue of being human, this may be all that stands between us and the enveloping darkness.

Despite the progress of education and living standards, the world must seem like a scary place for many people – full of chemicals in the sky, aliens trying to abduct us, and government or corporate conspiracies. As Stephen Hawking drily remarked: “If governments are involved in a cover-up, they are doing a much better job of it than they seem to do at anything else.”

What’s the harm in ‘alternative’ science?

What’s the harm in applying alternative medicine to treat cancer? Why should others care if I don’t vaccinate my children? Such decisions are all too often based on a poor understanding of how science works – and usually guided by someone’s commercial interest.

For example, US blogger Vani Hari, known as the Food Babe, claims to research and reveal problems with food (while receiving sponsorship from “natural” food companies). Among her profound research conclusions were that, when studying the effects of microwaves:

Microwaved water produced a similar physical structure to when the words “Satan” and “Hitler” were repeatedly exposed to the water.

The truth is that in science there are no authorities. There are experts at most, and even their opinions can be challenged by anyone – so long as there’s evidence to back up the argument. When some people are taken as “authorities” and their claims, however wacky, believed, then the subsequent decisions that millions of people may take could harm them or even bring a premature end to their lives.
...
The spread of pseudoscience can kill, and that’s exactly why we should be doing more to spread understanding of the scientific method, to equip others to apply scepticism in the face of extraordinary claims.
...

2 Replies

@FBM,

FBM wrote:

... is enough to make you wonder if some people have forgotten or forsaken the scientific method entirely.

... and which is that scientific method that 'I have forgotten entirely' as your fake and irrelevant to this discussion reference is claiming.
The Astronomer Carl Sagan once said' ... also that 'that Universe might have always existed' - where and how is that claim taken into consideration and reflected in the assumptions of the Big Bang 'theory' ... for example.

1 Reply

@FBM,

FBM wrote:

The spread of pseudoscience can kill, and that’s exactly why we should be doing more to spread understanding of the scientific method, to equip others to apply scepticism in the face of extraordinary claims.

     The Big Bang is not a random generator. Let's assume that the Big Bang (if has happened and if has created anything at all) is truly random generator of absolutely random bio-chemo-physical sequences. What does that mean?
     1. It will mean that there will exist no statistical or cognitive test to distinguish biology from physics and from chemistry, and this definitely is not true
     2. There will exist no statistical test to distinguish one chemical sequence from another chemical sequence, like for example there will be no test distinguishing acids from alkaline hydroxides - which is obviously not true - we have tests to distinguish acids from bases in any ABC book in chemistry.
     3. There will exist no statistical and cognitive test to distinguish biology from physics - one would not be able to distinguish a hedgehog form a stone for example. This is not true.
     4. There will exist no statistical test distinguishing one biological species from another, not to speak that there will be no species at all. We would not be able to make a distinction between one variety of water melon from another variety, neither even to distinguish water melon from a pumpkin - not to mention that there will be no structures and taxonomy. Thus is obviously not true - we have implicit cognitive test to distinguish unerringly the biological species and the varieties from each other.
     ... from where automatically follows that our assumption is incorrect, in other words the Big Bang does not have a behaviour of a random generator, hence it is not random generator of truly stochastic bio-chemo-physical sequences, hence the Big Bang (if has happened and if has created anything at all) is a deterministic phenomenon based on algorithm and on control structure, which supposes Intelligent Design and existence of Intelligence ... and as we are unable to find anything of the kind for now, the elementary scientific integrity would require to announce the issue as unknowable ... as it actually is.

1 Reply

@Herald,

Herald wrote:

FBM wrote:
... is enough to make you wonder if some people have forgotten or forsaken the scientific method entirely.
... and which is that scientific method that 'I have forgotten entirely' as your fake and irrelevant to this discussion reference is claiming.
The Astronomer Carl Sagan once said' ... also that 'that Universe might have always existed' - where and how is that claim taken into consideration and reflected in the assumptions of the Big Bang 'theory' ... for example.

So what? Where have I claimed otherwise? As for non sequiturs and red herrings, what does this have to do with your evidence for your alien/ILF/god-thingy-of-the-gaps?

0 Replies

@Herald,

Herald wrote:

The Big Bang is not a random generator.

You see, you'll need to support that with evidence.

Quote:

Let's assume that...

How about we not assume anything more than absolutely necessary based upon the available evidence. Where is your evidence for your alien/ILF/g0d-thingy? There's a shitload for the Big Bang. And not **** for your teleporting, invisible, divine magician(s). How about showing us something?

1 Reply

@FBM,

FBM wrote:

You see, you'll need to support that with evidence.

... and why should I do that, especially when it is obvious that you will never understand it. Why don't you tell us everything that you know about random events and random phenomena, and how many examples can you give for distinguishing randomness from something else?

1 Reply

@Herald,

Because it's your hypothesis and an intellectually honest person supports his hypothesis with evidence, shares it with the world and responds to feedback...if he has any. *cough*

0 Replies

http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb192/DinahFyre/VDOIN0.D.png

1 Reply

@FBM,

FBM wrote:

... because intellectually honest person ...

     You are the last one who may talk about intellectual honesty. What about your evidences in support of your bullshit diagrams (that are too symmetric to represent anything making any sense). Where is your evidences that 'detox' is a bullshit, for example. Can you prove that?
     BTW 'creationism' is not only religious bullock - it is widely used scientific (actually pseudo-scientific) bullock as well. The Big Bang theory relies heavily on creationism ... and the Evolution theory as well. Where is your evidence that the Universe has been created (by whom-/whatsoever)?
     Perhaps this fake diagram is depicting your 'scientific' understanding of the world?

1 Reply

@Herald,

Strawman/attempted red herring fail. I never claimed to have evidence for anything except that your 45%/30%/25% teleporting, invisible, extinct alien/ILF/god-thingy-of-the-gaps claim is fallacious and lacks the first shred of either plausibility, sanity or evidence. Laughing

1 Reply

@FBM,

FBM wrote:

I never claimed to have evidence for anything

Of course you never have any evidence about anything. All you have is a broken record that you present as an evidence.

FBM wrote:

... except that your 45%/30%/25% teleporting, invisible, extinct alien/ILF/god-thingy-of-the-gaps claim is fallacious

You don't have any evidence about that as well. All you have is a hypothesis, said in another context that you are desperately trying to misrepresent as your top discovery in phenomenology. You don't have anything except for a broken record of your own personally designed straw-man of some 'aliens of the gaps'. You never specified the Gaps, you never explained how exactly your infinite ignorance about some hypothetical Infinite Gravitation is filled by 'my aliens'. Do you know why is that: it is because you don't understand five nines of what you are reading ... and referencing. You believe to certificates, not to the truth values and consistency of what is claimed there, from where automatically follows that any crook with any fake and semi-fake certificate can tell you any fables for any idiots.

1 Reply

Why is the scientism a masterpiece of the arrogance

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know