The rEvolving Doorway

[Earthling]

There's no telling if the moon will still be there next Friday, some super asteroid could come and wipe it out, like it nearly wiped out the earth around 20 years ago when the scientists didn't see it coming, the sun was hiding it until the last minute and we just missed the earth by around 150,000 miles.

The scientist were caught with their pants down, as it happens so many times in so many ways. Lets face it they're a bunch of losers

Yeah, 'cause if they had their pants on at the time they would have seen Bruce Willis and the boys up there to blow it up real good!

 

[shunyadragon]

No. We make up stuff out of ignorance and fear. I am constantly being told not to criticize science while using the Internet, because science is always attributed the inventions of technology. The Internet was invented out of fear by the U.S. Army. Fear and uncertainty, like science, remains the same while evolving. The atheists criticize the "Primitive Goat Herders" who wrote the Bible to have done so out of the same fear and uncertainty.

But did they? Does that really make sense? They had answers that were, in their time, far more advanced than the science of their time.

One factual correction which reflects your ignorance: The US Army DID NOT invent the internet. The internet' like the telephone, was developed because of the motivation to improve communication, and not fear of anything. The internet developed in the private world without government funding. The first research paper that defined and developed the concept was in 1961:

https://www.livescience.com/20727-internet-history.html

Credit for the initial concept that developed into the World Wide Web is typically given to Leonard Kleinrock. In 1961, he wrote about ARPANET, the predecessor of the Internet, in a paper entitled "Information Flow in Large Communication Nets." Kleinrock, along with other innnovators such as J.C.R. Licklider, the first director of the Information Processing Technology Office (IPTO), provided the backbone for the ubiquitous stream of emails, media, Facebook postings and tweets that are now shared online every day. Here, then, is a brief history of the Internet.

1965: Two computers at MIT Lincoln Lab communicate with one another using packet-switching technology.

The US Army did develop some of the protocols in 1969 by a funding grant to improve the internet, but no did not invent the internet,

You are apparently very comfortable communicating on the internet. Where is the fear?

 

[Astrophile]

Evolution

If you read the science book that I had in school, all, or at least most of those science facts are now obsolete.

Did you have only one science book in school? Do you remember its title, or the name of the author? Did you buy any science books while you were at school, or borrow from the public library to get a better understanding of the different sciences?

I agree that a lot of the science 'facts' of the 1980s have now been superseded by later research, but the foundations are still the same: the Earth and the other planets still revolve around the Sun; the Earth is still about 4550 million years old, and the universe is between 10 and 20 billion years old; the order of the elements in the periodic table is still the same; DNA is still the carrier of the hereditary material of living things; humans are still vertebrates, mammals and primates, etc.

 

[Astrophile]

I already gave it.The Big Bang. The mass was 71 million miles in diameter. In 1974, 54 million miles, in 1983, a trillionth the diameter of a proton, now today, nothing.

I don't understand this at all; I was at university and reading about cosmology in the early 1970s, and I don't remember anything like this. Where did you give this information, and can you give references for these statements?

Perhaps you mean that Lemaitre's primeval atom was supposed to be 71 or 54 million miles in diameter, whereas in the modern Big Bang theory the initial diameter of the observable universe is the Planck length, which is about a trillionth the diameter of a proton. Also, the fact that scientists' understanding of the early history of the universe has changed drastically since Lemaitre's time doesn't mean that the whole of science is wrong.

I already corrected this error. Why are you repeating your mistake?

Can you give a link to your correction of the error?

 

[Astrophile]

There's no telling if the moon will still be there next Friday, some super asteroid could come and wipe it out, like it nearly wiped out the earth around 20 years ago when the scientists didn't see it coming, the sun was hiding it until the last minute and we just missed the earth by around 150,000 miles.

The scientists were caught with their pants down, as it happens so many times in so many ways. Lets face it they're a bunch of losers

The earth wasn't nearly wiped out by a super-asteroid 20 years ago. I don't know which asteroid you are referring to, but it must have been a very small object by asteroidal standards. Astronomers have discovered most of the large asteroids in Earth-crossing orbits and can predict their movements accurately. Any unknown asteroid that could collide with the Moon must be less than a mile in diameter and would only make a crater about 20 miles in diameter; it certainly wouldn't wipe the Moon out.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I don't understand this at all; I was at university and reading about cosmology in the early 1970s, and I don't remember anything like this. Where did you give this information, and can you give references for these statements?

Perhaps you mean that Lemaitre's primeval atom was supposed to be 71 or 54 million miles in diameter, whereas in the modern Big Bang theory the initial diameter of the observable universe is the Planck length, which is about a trillionth the diameter of a proton. Also, the fact that scientists' understanding of the early history of the universe has changed drastically since Lemaitre's time doesn't mean that the whole of science is wrong.



Can you give a link to your correction of the error?

I corrected that a while back. He made the same general sort of unsupported question. I do not know if it was then or another time that he made that error that I posted a video that explained how the singularity was not a point as he seemed to think. It was this one:

Too many people misinterpret the "Singularity" as point where in reality it is just the time in the past when Einstein's relativity no longer works.

 

[Astrophile]

Why is it ridiculous, it only correctly informs the reader how evolution is always evolving because it's WRONG!

Ptolemy thought that the Sun, the Moon and the planets all revolved around the Earth in circular orbits. Copernicus thought that the Earth and all the planets revolved around the Sun in circular orbits, and that only the Moon revolves around the Earth. Tycho thought that the planets revolved around the Sun, which itself revolved around the Earth. Kepler thought that the Moon revolved around the Earth, and that the Earth and the other planets revolved around the Sun in elliptical orbits with the Sun at one focus. Do you think that all these scientists were wrong and therefore that the Moon and the planets are all stationary?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Ptolemy thought that the Sun, the Moon and the planets all revolved around the Earth in circular orbits. Copernicus thought that the Earth and all the planets revolved around the Sun in circular orbits, and that only the Moon revolves around the Earth. Tycho thought that the planets revolved around the Sun, which itself revolved around the Earth. Kepler thought that the Moon revolved around the Earth, and that the Earth and the other planets revolved around the Sun in elliptical orbits with the Sun at one focus. Do you think that all these scientists were wrong and therefore that the Moon and the planets are all stationary?

Some theists will claim that science is dogmatic in one breath and then complain about how it changes in the next. They seem to want a dogmatic unchanging version science. They constantly ignore that the sciences are constantly improving and becoming more accurate. I think what really irritates them is that they know their primitive religious beliefs are wrong so they strike back at the sciences in the only way that they can.

 

[wandering peacefully]

I gotta admit.....he's one of the best Poes I've ever seen.

Sorry to have to ask, but that's about the third time I've see the word Poe used here. I tried Google but it didn't help. What does Poe mean? Thsnks.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Sorry to have to ask, but that's about the third time I've see the word Poe used here. I tried Google but it didn't help. What does Poe mean? Thsnks.

A poe is someone that pretends to be a creationist but is not. Google "Poe's Law".

 

[Earthling]

I gotta admit.....he's one of the best Poes I've ever seen.

Who is?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Who is?

Danny.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

I've read the textbook, I've passed the course, I've given the answers they wanted me to give. Nonsense.

Yeah, sure you did.

The general trend of Christian anti-intellectualism in this thread is fascinating. If they have such little faith in the efficacy of the scientific method then it does lead me to wonder why they bother using any form of modern technology or anything which mankind has achieved or created through the pursuit of science.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

There's no telling if the moon will still be there next Friday, some super asteroid could come and wipe it out, like it nearly wiped out the earth around 20 years ago when the scientists didn't see it coming, the sun was hiding it until the last minute and we just missed the earth by around 150,000 miles.

The scientist were caught with their pants down, as it happens so many times in so many ways. Lets face it they're a bunch of losers

If that's the case then in order to be anywhere near close to consistent you should turn off your computer, smash it and every other piece of modern technology you have, walk out of town, go live in a cave and don't you dare figure out how friction works. Because that's learning about how the world works.

If you have such little faith in the scientific method, why do you still enjoy things humans have been able to create through it like the internet or channelled electricity?

 

[Danny1988]

If that's the case then in order to be anywhere near close to consistent you should turn off your computer, smash it and every other piece of modern technology you have, walk out of town, go live in a cave and don't you dare figure out how friction works. Because that's learning about how the world works.

If you have such little faith in the scientific method, why do you still enjoy things humans have been able to create through it like the internet or channelled electricity?

Nothing significant was discovered using the scientific method. Christian scientists discovered most of the things like electricity and every other important discovery was made by Christian scientists.

In any case Christians have the monopoly on science, since the Christians started universities we own science. The Pagans can't lay claim to anything, except for witchcraft and other stupid things like that.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Nothing significant was discovered using the scientific method. Christian scientists discovered most of the things like electricity and every other important discovery was made by Christian scientists.

In any case Christians have the monopoly on science, since the Christians started universities we own science. The Pagans can't lay claim to anything, except for witchcraft and other stupid things like that.

You have evidence for these claims that electricity was discovered and came to be understood without the scientific method, of course?

You don't think anything relevant to modern medicine is "significant"? How about macro and micro scale physics? Chemistry? Engineering? All directly come from research using the scientific method.

Oh, and FYI, universities in the sense that we understand them were pioneered by the Greeks and Romans, and developed by Arabian Muslims and the Chinese before the Christian universities of Europe were practicing anything approaching what we'd call "science". But anyhoo...

 

[Danny1988]

You have evidence for these claims that electricity was discovered and came to be understood without the scientific method, of course?

Oh, and FYI, universities in the sense that we understand them were pioneered by the Greeks and Romans, and developed by Arabian Muslims and the Chinese before the Christian universities of Europe where practicing anything approaching what we'd call "science". But anyhoo...

The scientific method is the dumbest of all methods, all it does is keep trying different things until something works. It's the slowest way to discover anything, because it relies on luck. It's like playing the lottery.

Christian scientists, start out with an idea of how the finished product should look and then find the quickest way of achieving it. The scientific method just tries every possible way to achieve it with no plan or direction.

Just google Christian scientific discoveries and educate yourself

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

Nothing significant was discovered using the scientific method.

For someone who claims to disagree with science, you sure know absolutely nothing about it. Every important discovery humans have made has involved observation & experimentation. Even the basic concept of making fire would have been discovered by experimenting and observing.

Christian scientists discovered most of the things like electricity and every other important discovery was made by Christian scientists.

Incorrect. Metallurgy, making fire, creating ships; none of these were discovered by Christians. We'd already been doing them for millennia before Christianity came along. Also, modern discoveries may have been made by Christians but that does not render any truth value to your dogma.

In any case Christians have the monopoly on science, since the Christians started universities we own science.

That's a formal fallacy right there. Christians may have started universities as an institute but you did not create learning, nor can you monopolise discoveries or concepts which arose before your faith even existed - just like you do with marriage. Your ridiculous 'reasoning' fails to explain why societies like China, Persia & the Maya arose and achieved such heights as they did in an absence of Christianity.

If science really is so Christian I guess that must make you a non-Christian for hating it so much. Heretic!

The Pagans can't lay claim to anything, except for witchcraft and other stupid things like that.

We can lay claim to all the cool **** that Christian tantruming broke and ruined towards the end of the Classical Age. We can also lay claim to everything discovered before Christianity arose - which is quite a lot if you've ever read something other than the Bible.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

The scientific method is the dumbest of all methods, all it does is keep trying different things until something works. It's the slowest way to discover anything, because it relies on luck. It's like playing the lottery.

Christian scientists, start out with an idea of how the finished product should look and then find the quickest way of achieving it. The scientific method just tries every possible way to achieve it with no plan or direction.

Just google Christian scientific discoveries and educate yourself

'Thou shalt not lie'

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Ptolemy thought that the Sun, the Moon and the planets all revolved around the Earth in circular orbits. Copernicus thought that the Earth and all the planets revolved around the Sun in circular orbits, and that only the Moon revolves around the Earth. Tycho thought that the planets revolved around the Sun, which itself revolved around the Earth. Kepler thought that the Moon revolved around the Earth, and that the Earth and the other planets revolved around the Sun in elliptical orbits with the Sun at one focus. Do you think that all these scientists were wrong and therefore that the Moon and the planets are all stationary?

The iterative processof scientific advance is a constant issue for these guys. They're stuck in a dichotomous paradigm where everything must be either completely correct, or completely wrong. Don't even try to point out to them that even Christian theology and even the Bible itself followed a similar path of iterative advance, going from a state of lesser understanding to a greater one.