Science cannot solve the final mystery

[cladking]

Dog probably has fewer than 500 words.

It's the logic that ties the words together and their ability to "think" in three dimensions that make animals capable and "intelligent". They don't know much because their languages are too simple to accumulate knowledge across the generations but they still employ the "magic" of mathematics in their thinking and behavior. This is what keeps individuals alive or culls them from the pack because this "magic" assures they all engage in different behavior caused by the variability in their genes.

 

[tas8831]

No. Cubits of water can be directly converted to inches of mercury which is standard measure for pressure.

Google:

pascal
Pressure—the effect of a force applied to a surface—is a derived unit, obtained from combining base units. The unit of pressure in the SI system is the pascal (Pa), defined as a force of one Newton per square meter. The conversion between atm, Pa, and torr is as follows: 1 atm = 101325 Pa = 760 torr.

and torr?

The torr (symbol: Torr) is a non-SI unit of pressure defined as 1/760 of an atmosphere.

Millimeters of mercury is sometimes used, but inches of mercury.has very specific applications (such as in aviation). It is far from "standard".

Are you aware there is a growing chorus of educated people who are saying we wholly misunderstand ALL ancient languages.

Wowee!

Do tell!

Give us, say, 10 names from this "chrous"?

To us "water" is just a word. It was thrown on Helen Keller to teach her the meaning of the sign (symbol) for water. To ancient people "water" was something cold and wet than made things slippery and served this purpose in a sentence. It made things in the sentence "wet" when it was the subject and made one look for something wet when it was of predicate. The easiest way to learn Ancient Language is to forget deconstructing sentences and look for the literal meaning.

What about the word 'wasser'? 'Aqua'? 'Ap'?

Which Ancient Language does the modern English word 'water' derive from, pray tell?

 

[tas8831]

Egyptologists must know this by now and their lack of comment is just a form of "whistling past the graveyard" of their Look and See Science.

As opposed to your 'wish and believe' assertions...

 

[Thief]

Cause and effect

 

[tas8831]

You always end with the exact same conclusion as the assumptions you made originally. Few people ever even notice this so they never notice where Darwin went wrong.

You're too much...

 

[tas8831]

ancient people were ignorant and superstitious.

ig·no·rant

adjective

1. lacking knowledge or awareness in general; uneducated or unsophisticated.
   
   
   • lacking knowledge, information, or awareness about a particular thing.
     "they were ignorant of astronomy"

su·per·sti·tious

adjective

1. having or showing a belief in superstitions.
   "many superstitious beliefs and practices are connected with sneezing"
   synonyms: mythical, irrational, illusory, groundless, unfounded, unprovable;
   traditional
   "superstitious beliefs"
   credulous, prone to superstition;
   naive, gullible
   "Joe is incredibly superstitious"

Yes.
Many people are still this way today, and of course we cannot know everything, so we will always be ignorant of things. Fewer are superstitious today since we have explanations for things that many in the ancient world attributed to the supernatural.

How can you deny this?

Yet, the only way you can see to look is with modern science. You know there can be no other means to process facts and reason.

If one wants to approach or arrive at 'truths' about the natural world, generally yes.

Can you show a 'truth' about the natural world that was derived via religion?

And it meets it because you know almost everything. In your world it doesn't matter that we don't understand gravity because everywhere you look you see your models. This is the EXACT SAME THING we all see; exactly what we believe.

You will not respond to facts and logic unless they fit your models. You haven't yet.

Look at you, all condescending even as you've yet to provide any actual reason to think you are the ultimate authority on anything! Aren't you precious!

 

[tas8831]

I say we're wrong across the board.

To include your laughable quips about Darwin and your evidence-free gibberish about Egypt.

Cool.

 

[tas8831]

You can't recognize the facts and logic I am continually putting forth because they go against your beliefs.

Despite all of your accusations regarding everyone else's ignorance, and your being the only one who knows the truth about everything, and these claims of facts and logic and evidence, you've presented exactly NOTHING but your self-righteous ranting opinions devoid of any basis in facts or logic.

Put up or shut up.

 

[tas8831]

Appears to be? Based on what? Care to share where you read that?
Well, there ya go. cladking has solved the mystery of what causes autism. Please hurry up and tell the anti-vaxers that it's OK to get their kids vaccinated.
Do you never tire of posting completely unsupported nonsense?

Nope, he does not.

But he BELIEVES it, and he has lots of condescending bombast that PROVES what he believes is beyond the comprehension of mere mortals - regardless of topic.

We should be awed by his mere presence.

 

[Phaedrus]

“Science cannot solve the ultimate mystery of nature. And that is because, in the last analysis, we ourselves are part of nature and therefore part of the mystery that we are trying to solve.”


Relativity, the Absolute, the Human Search for Truth: Nobel Laureate and Quantum Theory Originator Max Planck on Science and Mystery

Science is not in the business of trying to solve philosophical woo. Religion and spirituality are weak, fallible, human understandings of what may lie beyond our perception of reality, but in no way is there any truth to what remains wishful imaginative musings.

 

[tas8831]

By seeing only what confirms their belief and their belief in their own omniscience..

All your vacuous ranting and all I ever see is a comical lack of self-awareness.

Surely, so amazing an intellect as your want to be seen as is familiar with the concept of psychological projection and transference?

 

[tas8831]

I agree logic and facts are tools against ignorance. When are you going to present some?

It seems that he believes that his every utterance is factual, and stringing together several paragraphs of self-aggrandizing rhetoric is logic.

 

[tas8831]

When I say that we all see what we believe this is EVIDENCE.

No, it is a mere ASSERTION.

I know this will come as a shock,. but simply because some dude calling itself 'cladking' in the interwebs declares something, it is not by mere decree, a fact.

 

[tas8831]

Well, there ya go. Got no evidence to support your beliefs? Can't present evidence ya don't have? No problamo! Just assert you won't present any evidence because I wouldn't see the logic of your evidence.

It is, after all, the charlatan's way...

 

[tas8831]

There is evidence and logic in every one of my posts but you can't see it. You see what you believe.

And you merely believe that evidence is unsupported assertions and logic is gibberish.

You believe what you assert.

 

[atanu]

Religion and spirituality are weak, fallible, human understandings of what may lie beyond our perception of reality, but in no way is there any truth to what remains wishful imaginative musings.

How do you know that there is no truth in any of religion and spirituality? Have you practised any path?

 

[tas8831]

I think you are wrong and aren't trying to understand me.

Projection.

Science is based in belief or not.

What we call 'table salt' consists of crystals of what we call, by convention/definition, sodium and chloride ions.

You may believe that or not. If you do not believe it, then you are wrong.

That is a fact.

It is a fact that table salt is made up of sodium and chloride whether one believes it or not.

This is how good science operates.


It does not operate by mere assertion.

Our opinion has no effect on the reality. God doesn't evaporate when an atheist walks in the room and He doesn't reform when a religious person comes in.

Yet one can form an opinion on the existence of this God based on facts, evidence, and logic.

The facts, evidence, and logic do not point favorably to the existence of this God, or any god. Even if you really want it to.

One may choose to believe this God exists despite the dearth of facts, logic, and evidence in its support.

One may claim that because it cannot be 'proven' that God does NOT exist, that the default position is that God does exist. But that is rather pathetic logic, no?

 

[tas8831]

Over and over and over I cite evidence and the logic that shows my interpretation of that evidence could be correct but most people see no evidence.

cite
/sīt/

verb
verb: cite; 3rd person present: cites; past tense: cited; past participle: cited; gerund or present participle: citing

1. 1.
   quote (a passage, book, or author) as evidence for or justification of an argument or statement, especially in a scholarly work.
   synonyms: quote, reproduce More
   • mention as an example.
     "medics have been cited as a key example of a modern breed of technical expert"
     synonyms: refer to, make reference to, mention, allude to, adduce, instance, give as an example, point to; More
   • LAW
     refer to a former tried case as a guide to deciding a comparable case or in support of an argument.
2. 2.
   praise (someone, typically a member of the armed forces) for a courageous act in an official dispatch.
   synonyms: commend, pay tribute to, praise, recognize, give recognition to
   "he has been cited many times for his contributions in this area"
3. 3.
   summon (someone) to appear in a court of law.

NOPE.

 

[shunyadragon]

How do you know that there is no truth in any of religion and spirituality? Have you practised any path?

Practicing any one path just gives you the subjective relative experience of practicing that path, and only the 'truth' if you believe it so.

As per the thread topic , , , the there is no solution to the final mystery from the fallible human perspective.

 

[tas8831]

I've proven that the pyramids were said by their builders to be not the tomb of the king but the king himself. I've debunked ramps. I've shown through a preponderance of evidence that ramps were not used to build the pyramids

WHERE have you done this?

Surely in none of your meandering rants on here - WHERE have you done this???

Dr Hawass has specifically stated several times in the last four years that no data that doesn't support the paradigm will be released.

Quote please.

I merely stumbled on the truth. Anyone could have done it. It is unfortunate it was me and the nature of the truth is unfortunate since it paints Egyptology and, by extension, all soft sciences in a very poor light. If I could go back to 2006 I would be more careful of my footing and let some Egyptologist figure it out someday. I might never have known we are the stinky footed bumpkins that Egyptology believes the ancients were.

You're a regular Walter Mitty!

The simple fact is I predicted the results of the tests they now refuse to publish and spent years cajoling them to do the tests.

And your evidence of all this is......????

Your assertions on discussion forums that this really happened?

None of this is relevant.

Very true - especially because it looks an awful lot like fantasy or confabulation.

In around 1996, I brought mt graduate advisor's mail to him. He quickly looked through the stack to see what was of interest. He stopped at a post card, which he looked at for a moment.... grinned... gave it to me.

The postcard was covered - literally covered, on pretty much every available space - with punctuation-free rants about how my advisor refused to see the TRUTH about dinosaurs. This was comical, since my advisor studied mammals. My eyes glazed over after about 10 lines of nonsense, I handed it back to my advisor. Without even looking, he pitched it into the trash.

I am betting that this crazy person used the fact that my advisor never replied to his zany ranting as PROOF that he was just refusing to let the TRUTH see the light of day.