What is science and what constitutes it?

[Subduction Zone]

This is a typical answer from a conventional point of view and it doesn´t call much for a further debate.

A patronizing, besserwissen and downgrading attitude without using critical analysis and recognizing any shortcomings in modern astrophysics and cosmology.

"WE alone know" and when it comes to the matter, THEY only knows of 4 % of the observable Universe. The rest is in dark mode in modern cosmology.

You appear to be one of the science deniers. If you did not want to know why ask the question?

Science is hard. That is one of the reasons that it works. You have posted in ways in the past that showed that you were a science denier. I had hopes that you understood where you screwed up, but sadly I see that I was wrong.

 

[Native]

You appear to be one of the science deniers. If you did not want to know why ask the question?

As already said:

This is a typical answer from a conventional point of view and it doesn´t call much for a further debate.

Just don´t bother to reply if you cannot find a respectful tone.

 

[Subduction Zone]

As already said:

Just don´t bother to reply if you cannot find a respectful tone.

That was respectful. Sometimes the truth hurts. I did not call you any names such as . . .well let's not even go there.

It now appears that you do not like the scientific method. What better method do you have?

 

[cladking]

Our view of the world is dictated by perspective, scale, the depth and precision of our focus, and the range of information our senses are able to present to the alchemist, mind, to interpret and make sense of.

Adjust the lense a little, look closer, or further out; see the ant, the hairs on the ant, the new leaf, or the forest; still we cannot see them all at once. There is no view from everywhere, every view is a view from somewhere. Furthermore, nothing is settled, nothing is fixed, everything in the natural world exists in relation to everything around and within it. And it is all in flux - indeed, impermanence can be said to be the defining characteristic of the material world.

I couldn't agree more.

However I believe it is possible to see all things simultaneously by using a perspective of each thing from the inside and then constructing models from this. One of the problems with reductionistic science is that we don't reassemble the results and the chief reason we don't reassemble everything is that we see all things from an infinite perspective like a blue print. From an infinite distance all of reality is a mere point.

If you are looking to science to deanimate nature, to so calibrate, calculate and define her infinite qualities, as to rob her of all mystery, I submit that you will be disappointed.

If you look at all of reality (experiment) from the inside you'll quickly come to see the enormous limitations of our knowledge. We will probably never be able to know much of anything even after our knowledge has increased many orders of magnitude.

 

[cladking]

You have posted in ways in the past that showed that you were a science denier.

I never noticed that. I doubt you have a source for that statement.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I never noticed that. I doubt you have a source for that statement.

There are endless posts here. But I doubt if you would qualify as a judge. Have you forgotten your failed paradigm already?

 

[viole]

That is not what I meant. watch the second video again. Peers will not consider any new ideas that are not in strict conformance with the paradigm

If that was true, we would still believe Newton had the correct theory of gravitation. Nor we would believe in any of that QM stuff.

ciao

- viole

 

[cladking]

If that was true, we would still believe Newton had the correct theory of gravitation. Nor we would believe in any of that QM stuff.

As the video states, it's getting worse. Einstein imposed a new paradigm but without first recruiting "Peers" he might have failed. Most new paradigms come from outside of Peers but now days Peers are entrenched, inert, and won't even communicate with outsiders. "Braindead" was the word used. I prefer "indoctrinated". Schools now teach politics and morals in the guise of "inclusiveness" and no longer teach critical thinking. Scientists often get out of school knowing all the answers just like everyone else. Peers simply will be excommunicated if they admit to considering any idea not already universally accepted.

 

[viole]

As the video states, it's getting worse. Einstein imposed a new paradigm but without first recruiting "Peers" he might have failed. Most new paradigms come from outside of Peers but now days Peers are entrenched, inert, and won't even communicate with outsiders. "Braindead" was the word used. I prefer "indoctrinated". Schools now teach politics and morals in the guise of "inclusiveness" and no longer teach critical thinking. Scientists often get out of school knowing all the answers just like everyone else. Peers simply will be excommunicated if they admit to considering any idea not already universally accepted.

This is what religious people like to believe, because they cannot possibly accept evolution having lasted so long. Surviving even Newton “untouchable” orthodoxy. Which could make it obvious to anyone rational that there are no long term sacred cows that can survive when proven wrong.
And instead of seeing the obvious, they make up conspiracies that are nowhere to be seen. Einstein recruiting peers….how ridicolous is that, lol. It is actually quite sad. It is a form of denial.

But even if those conspiracies existed, why do you guys care? Jesus is soon coming down to vindicate you, isn’t He? And if He doesn’t, I am positive you will be vindicated in the hereafter. For ever and ever. What we do here should have zero importance, compared with an eternity of truth. So, you just need to be a bit patient, be confident in the truth found in the afterlife, and let scientists do their work.

BTW, With “outside of peers” do you mean people without a clue of what they are supposed to review? In that case, I would fully agree with you. They are definitely outside of peers.

ciao

- viole

 

[cladking]

This is what religious people like to believe, because they cannot possibly accept evolution having lasted so long. Surviving even Newton “untouchable” orthodoxy. And instead of seeing the obvious, they make up conspiracies that are nowhere to be seen. Einstein recruiting peers….lol. It is actually quite sad. It is a form of denial.

I believe in no conspiracies.

But it looks like you believe religious people are conspiring to war against your "truth". I doubt this is true, though.

Jesus is soon coming down to vindicate you, isn’t He? And if He doesn’t, I am positive you will be vindicated in the hereafter. For ever and ever. What we do here should have zero importance, compared with an eternity of truth. So, you just need to be a bit patient, be confident in the truth found in the afterlife, and let scientists do their work.

In the long run we are all gone and the only things we leave behind are bits of DNA and any good work we've done. Anything to make the world a better place as we thrive is a blessing for everybody.

BTW, With “outside of peers” do you mean people without a clue of what they are supposed to review?

"Peers" are those who agree on what is real and what is not with no input from outside their sphere because Peers are by nature exclusionary. If anyone could be a Peer then everyone would get equal funding.

Despite the fact ramps are wholly debunked as a means to build pyramids and all the evidence says stones were pulled straight up the sides of five step pyramids, Peers are probably wholly unaware of these facts. They still announce almost daily that "they mustta used ramps". They've never had physical evidence and the word "ramp" is unattested but it is a simple fact to Peers that "they mustta used ramps". This behavior is pervasive throughout the soft "sciences".

It's no better in the hard sciences BUT experiment tends to be more determinative and paradigms less likely to shift. But this hardly changes the fact that "science" has become more moribund and inert even when it was said that "science changes one funeral at a time". This is the way it has always been. The status quo has always prevailed until it does no more and it's past time for some shaking across the board. It doesn't matter if you understand any of this or not. The fact is science will adapt to reflect experiment or will will become bogged down and only technology of any value at all. And even technology will soon (less than a century) stop progressing. If I am right unless we make these changes there is an excellent chance the human race will not even survive another century. You might think of it as the "rapture" but then I have difficulty understanding you. You can't fool mother nature and there is always an accounting in the end. It doesn't matter the perspective from which you see this accounting, you still have to pay the piper.

 

[cladking]

There are endless posts here. But I doubt if you would qualify as a judge.

I've read and enjoyed a great number of Native's posts. I don't always understand them but always find them insightful and wise.

I've never seen an instance where Native's posts are counter to reason and facts. I've seen many that suggest he doesn't agree with mainstream physics.

It is posters like Native that give me hope for the human race and keep me coming back.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I've read and enjoyed a great number of Native's posts. I don't always understand them but always find them insightful and wise.

I've never seen an instance where Native's posts are counter to reason and facts. I've seen many that suggest he doesn't agree with mainstream physics.

It is posters like Native that give me hope for the human race and keep me coming back.

Too often fellow believers in woo woo think that another's posts are "insightful" just because they disagree with science.

Frankly I do not see any connection with this thread and the first video. I am wondering why he even posted it.

 

[cladking]

I've never seen an instance where Native's posts are counter to reason and facts. I've seen many that suggest he doesn't agree with mainstream physics.

I myself find mainstream physics rather laughable at times. Some of the hypotheses now days are almost hilarious and paint an infinite number of ramps to build an infinite number of pyramid and not even one single pyramid built the easy way by pulling stones straight up the sides!

Imagine going to a baseball game and having your team win infinity to zero. Then imagine the difficulty getting home with all the new universes popping into existence! Every time you come to a red light an infinite number more appear as well.

If you don't find such things humorous you might just be a believer.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I myself find mainstream physics rather laughable at times. Some of the hypotheses now days are almost hilarious and paint an infinite number of ramps to build an infinite number of pyramid and not even one single pyramid built the easy way by pulling stones straight up the sides!

Imagine going to a baseball game and having your team win infinity to zero. Then imagine the difficulty getting home with all the new universes popping into existence! Every time you come to a red light an infinite number more appear as well.

If you don't find such things humorous you might just be a believer.

I don't think that you can do the math. What makes you think that such a method would be "easy"? Do you even know why they propose ramps in the first place?

 

[cladking]

I don't think that you can do the math. What makes you think that such a method would be "easy"? Do you even know why they propose ramps in the first place?

They propose ramps because they have no measureable imagination.

It has been proven that pulling stones straight up the side of five step pyramids is far easier than building ramps and dragging stones on the horizontal. It has been proven the evidence clearly shows stones actually were pulled straight up the sides and Peers are not even in the loop any longer. Are you aware that the results of 2015 "scientific" testing has been withheld from Peers?!!!!!!!!!!!! This is simply incredible but Peers don't mind because it is established theory that "they mustta used ramps" so testing doesn't matter and is irrelevant. Just like the carbon 14 dating that proves the pyramids are as old as I say they have simply decided to ignore the data. Across the board they are being shown up by all kinds of scientists but they are so insular most of them don't know or care. In no other field is staying in the good graces of the elite so important to Peers. Not only do they need funding but they need to kowtow to the authorities to get permission to work and to come with museum artifacts in hand to gain access.

Egyptology is on the very verge of irrelevancy. They claim they are linguists but it was I who noticed Ancient Language breaks Zipf's Law and there are no abstractions and no words for "thought" or "belief". If they aren't real scientist, aren't real linguists, and can't protect the artefacts then what is their function? They have failed to run simple scientific testing in a methodical fashion for over a century since Flinders Petrie left.

Is there some part of pulling stones straight up the side being a hundred times easier than ramps you don't understand?

 

[cladking]

Is there some part of pulling stones straight up the side being a hundred times easier than ramps you don't understand?

Then there is the simple fact that any forces that could be harnessed by primitive people would be very difficult to apply to ramps and far easier to apply to lifting stones straight up.

 

[Subduction Zone]

They propose ramps because they have no measureable imagination.

It has been proven that pulling stones straight up the side of five step pyramids is far easier than building ramps and dragging stones on the horizontal. It has been proven the evidence clearly shows stones actually were pulled straight up the sides and Peers are not even in the loop any longer. Are you aware that the results of 2015 "scientific" testing has been withheld from Peers?!!!!!!!!!!!! This is simply incredible but Peers don't mind because it is established theory that "they mustta used ramps" so testing doesn't matter and is irrelevant. Just like the carbon 14 dating that proves the pyramids are as old as I say they have simply decided to ignore the data. Across the board they are being shown up by all kinds of scientists but they are so insular most of them don't know or care. In no other field is staying in the good graces of the elite so important to Peers. Not only do they need funding but they need to kowtow to the authorities to get permission to work and to come with museum artifacts in hand to gain access.

Egyptology is on the very verge of irrelevancy. They claim they are linguists but it was I who noticed Ancient Language breaks Zipf's Law and there are no abstractions and no words for "thought" or "belief". If they aren't real scientist, aren't real linguists, and can't protect the artefacts then what is their function? They have failed to run simple scientific testing in a methodical fashion for over a century since Flinders Petrie left.

Is there some part of pulling stones straight up the side being a hundred times easier than ramps you don't understand?

Of course one can use a strawman to support any argument. Who says that the blocks were ever "dragged"? And you would far more likely have to drag them with your version.

Like I said, it appears that you cannot do the math since you do not know why they would have used ramps.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Then there is the simple fact that any forces that could be harnessed by primitive people would be very difficult to apply to ramps and far easier to apply to lifting stones straight up.

Another statement made without any evidence or apparently any understanding.

 

[cladking]

Who says that the blocks were ever "dragged"?

Egyptologists spout this nonsense. Even though the wheel was more than ten centuries old when the Great Pyramid was built ~2750 BC, Egyptologists say that the builders had no knowledge of the wheel. More incredibly a type of coupler they used that looks like one fourth of a pulley they believe to be a "proto-pulley". It never ends. According to Peers the only "technology" the builders had was ramps and water to wet them down!!! This is how they know they mustta used ramps. It stands to reason that if this was the only technology than they mustta used it.

Another statement made without any evidence or apparently any understanding.

Then why don't suggest a system of ramps that could be used in conjunction with the flow of water in the Nile, the wind, potential energy or any other power source that could be used. Logic dictates it's virtually impossible to use any such natural power on spiral ramps. Even were it possible to do so the simple fact is ANY power source at all would be more easily applied to the way the evidence says they moved the stones; straight up the south side one step at a time. All the evidence says they pulled the stones straight up five stepped pyramids one step at a time but Egyptology is living in another world where there are an infinite number of pyramids built with an infinite number of ramps. When they finally got off the dime and used century old technology that proved I was right by conforming to my predictions they refused to release the data even to Peers. This is the state of "science". The ship has sailed and its captain is a mystic who believes in survival of the fittest and changing course or speed would alarm the passengers as the crew is kept in the dark and we steam full ahead right into the icebergs.

It's you who can't do the math. A million dollars goes to support the status quo for every cent that goes into real research. They mustta used ramps.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Egyptologists spout this nonsense. Even the the wheel was more than ten centuries old when the Great Pyramid was built ~2750 BC Egyptologists say that the builders had no knowledge of the wheel. More incredibly a type of coupler they used that looks like one fourth of a pulley they believe to be a "proto-pulley". It never ends. According to Peers the only "technology" the builders had was ramps and water to wet them down!!! This is how they know they mustta used ramps. It stands to reason that if this was the only technology than they mustta used it.



Then why don't suggest a system of ramps that could be used in conjunction with the flow of water in the Nile, the wind, potential energy or any other power source that could be used. Logic dictates it's virtually impossible to use any such natural power on spiral ramps. Even were it possible to do so the simple fact is ANY power source at all would be more easily applied to the way the evidence says they moved the stones; straight up the side one step at a time. All the evidence says they pulled the stones straight up five stepped pyramids one step at a time but Egyptology is living in another world where there are an infinite number of pyramids built with an infinite number of ramps. When they finally got off the dime and used century old technology that proved I was right by conforming to my predictions they refused to release the data even to Peers. This is the state of "science". The ship has sailed and its captain is a mystics who believes in survival of the fittest and changing course or speed would alarm the passengers as the crew is kept in the dark and we steam full ahead right into the icebergs.

It's you who can't do the math. A million dollars goes to support the status quo for every cent that goes into real research. There mustta used ramps.

No, your last statement made me laugh. Your arguments are so poor that they tell me that you could not do the math. We are talking about your model, doing the math is part of it. You do not even understand why ramps would have been used. Here is a hint, there is another way to go up ramps without dragging them. Those that understand basic engineering can see how you are using a strawman argument.