Regardless of what you may think of Mark's assertions, Bert, what you have replied with here reeks of intellectual hubris and arrogance and really isn't called for in this forum. I know you have strong opinions on subjects like this, but whatever you may think of the subject matter, it doesn't make the people who believe in it fools, necessarily. They maybe misguided, yes, and many maybe ignorant of scientific "reality" but they only become fools when they persist in following a belief that is clearly been shown to be false. However, don't ever state that science has the only way to provide the answers we seek or that it is infallible. You say greater minds than ours have slowly extracted the truth from reality. Well I can say quite unequivocally that those minds (except for the most conceited and arrogant of them) would counter your statement by asking the question of you..."what's real to begin with??" They would also be mindful of the fact that nothing is written in stone and that they don't have all the answers, no matter what they believe in.
I will agree that science is far preferable to superstitious ignorance or educated ignorance but it is not the answer to everything. Delusion, Bert, is a multifaceted monster and an over confidence in science can be just as deluded as anything else. Being spiritual doesn't make you deluded. Many of the world's greatest scientists have a degree of spiritual belief, or a belief in a greater intelligence operating at some level, however they may have defined it. Some were actually quite religious. But they never let either science or spiritual belief act as antagonists. They knew when and where either or both were applicable and quite often integrated both where it was appropriate. But in the final analysis, they let both speak for themselves in their appropriate circumstances. Oh, and yes, some are/were atheists too, but that is just their own opinions...something we're all entitled to regardless of their efficacy.
It's upto you what you think you need to say or do, but I feel that an apology is in order here...not because of what or what not either of you may believe or not believe in, but because what you wrote was out of order.
If I have offended any one I am not sorry! I find this quasi scientific religious claptrap that now permeates our society to lead the ignorant astray due to a major failing in our education system. Clear thinking has been thrown out.
I did not advocate anyone to think like me.
To advocate a 'clinic' on these forums needs some comment.
I will not resile as these perpetrators of quasi religious claptrap have no place here.
This is an Astronomy Forum.
If people want a 'quack cure' for cancer they can find it some where else.
I did not address intellectual hubris as all my life people have mumbled something along those lines.
If I have offended any one I am not sorry! I find this quasi scientific religious claptrap that now permeates our society to lead the ignorant astray a major failing in our education system. Clear thinking has been thrown out.
I did not advocate anyone to think like me.
To advocate a 'clinic' on these forums needs some comment.
I will not resile as these perpetrators of quasi religious claptrap have no place here.
This is an Astronomy Forum.
If people want a 'quack cure' for cancer they can find it some where else.
Bert
I agree with you, Bert. There's a lot of very fuzzy thinking going on and there are people who are taking advantage of this. But what you have to do is look at the fundamental causes of this, not shoot people down for their feelings or beliefs on the matter. What's deficient in society that is creating this situation. It's more than educated ignorance, or crackpot belief systems or old superstitions. People invariably turn to a belief, knowledge system or code of conduct when they feel it most suits them or they feel that what's presently on offer doesn't add up itself. Meaning in their lives is one reason, but meaning in itself is not the whole answer. As a society I feel we all need to sit down and really take a good look at ourselves and think/debate about this then take positive steps to sort things out.
Your a cranky man Bert. Off with their heads. Burn all the heretics at the stake
The problem with anything like this, where you feel strongly about something, is that it can get rather carried away with. Then people become offended and that's when trouble starts. Freedom of speech is not a right, it's a privilege, one that has to be earned and/or agreed upon by the body politic. Never, anywhere in the whole of history or existence has it been shown that absolute freedom of speech and thought have existed. There have always been limits imposed on the thoughts and actions of people, their beliefs and such. However, where the right to say what you like and to have an opinion was and is respected, it's also incumbent upon those who exercise those privileges to responsibly handle the power that this brings and to be mindful of others who may not share your views. Doesn't mean you have to agree with them, it just means that even if you're right about something, sometimes it's better to hold your tongue and look for another way to express your opposition to a position held. Or to express it in a way that cause the least amount of hassles to everyone concerned. The is more than one way to skin a cat.
Actaully its not even a good idea in the nursing home. Some of those nurses like to lash out when the relatives arnt looken and then accuse you of being senile. Life's a b<T%H
I'm not talking about the superluminal solutions to SR, Steven, I'm talking about solutions like the Alcubierre Metric etc.
I wasn't talking about superluminal solutions either.
The Alcubierre metric has been discredited for reasons I have already given.
It only works in Star Trek not in our Universe.
Despite what you may think I am not in the role of being the defender of the faith. It's a sad state of affairs this thread has gone into hyperbole mode.
If I have offended any one I am not sorry! I find this quasi scientific religious claptrap that now permeates our society to lead the ignorant astray due to a major failing in our education system. Clear thinking has been thrown out.
I did not advocate anyone to think like me.
To advocate a 'clinic' on these forums needs some comment.
I will not resile as these perpetrators of quasi religious claptrap have no place here.
This is an Astronomy Forum.
If people want a 'quack cure' for cancer they can find it some where else.
I did not address intellectual hubris as all my life people have mumbled something along those lines.
Bert
Oh dear-me Bert!
First of all, no offense taken here; I can roll with anything.
"It is no good hiding behind the term 'spiritual' as this is beyond science to probe as it is a fiction in the mind of the deluded."
Well that's a nice opinion Bert, and since you've been so kind as to share your viewpoint of my philosophy openly, please allow me to share my viewpoint of your philosophy openly...I've seen it all before Bert, people running around pointing the finger and playing the Professor, standing on the soap-box and proclaiming to the world the ten commandments of the scientific Esquires Club...and then something happens to them, Nature rolls the dice and they end up with the short straw.
What happens then? Well all of a sudden, the steadfast ways of the 'Pensioner Police' are humbled by nature's throwing of the dice and the words of their doctor. Nature deals them something unexpected and the Golden Calf of Science is forgotten as they run for help...all of a sudden a believer appears.
You can tout all you like about my belief Bert, but when the proverbial gun gets put to one's head, trust me, thinking with your head gets replaced with feeling with your gut in less than a heartbeat. The tables get turned and the Pillars of Science become the "Quasi Scientific Clap-Trap".
This might be an Astronomy Forum, but it's a 'General Chat' section which you are corresponding on, or has your high powered observations and investigative techniques failed you today? (sounds similar to some scientific inquiries actually). Further, if it pains you to hear the 'General Chat' of others, why do you participate? I'm happy to read the views of others, you never know what you might learn. You'll need to look in the mirror to assign blame on this point.
"If I cannot be a disagreeable old bloke at 60, how long do I have to wait?"...well that's a convenient 'Get out of Jail Free' card isn't it? The simple truth Bert is that you have replaced Majesty with Math. That will only breed discontent. The place where you currently are at is called Dukkha (meaning unsteady and disquieted) and leads to Samsara. You really need to stop and learn from this stuff.
Cheers
Mark The Quasi Scientific Religious Clap-Trap Mung Bean.
PS. PSSST! Just quietly Bert, you're in a minority group, just like the dinosaurs.
I don’t believe anyone here is (a) “assuming” that our current level of understanding on the speed of light is deficient. We are “allowing for the possibility” that our current level of understanding is deficient. There is a world of difference. We aren’t (b) “assuming” that someone in the future is going to come up with a better idea, experiment or observation. We are allowing for the possibility that someone will; And as for (c) when is a fully informed opinion decided? Well you know, maybe there is no such thing as certain. Evolution is perhaps the most respected scientific theory ever but I don’t think anyone says that it is certain. It is constantly subjected to challenge and so it should be. Newtons notions of gravity were the bible until Eisenstein came along. That’s true science in my opinion.
Regards
Claude
I was highlighting the logical fallacy "argumentum ad ignorantiam" where a premise can be assumed to be false, or alternatively that another preferred but unproven premise is true instead.
The assumption that today's theories will be replaced in the future because history proves this is an example of this fallacy.
If I have offended any one I am not sorry! I find this quasi scientific religious claptrap that now permeates our society to lead the ignorant astray due to a major failing in our education system. Clear thinking has been thrown out.
I did not advocate anyone to think like me.
To advocate a 'clinic' on these forums needs some comment.
I will not resile as these perpetrators of quasi religious claptrap have no place here.
This is an Astronomy Forum.
If people want a 'quack cure' for cancer they can find it some where else.
I did not address intellectual hubris as all my life people have mumbled something along those lines.
Bert
Oh, one point I forgot to mention Bert, and since you’re quite the logical mind, allow me to elaborate in logical terms.
Buddha: one of those Religious Clap-Trappers, taught follower how to be content and happy in one’s life no matter the adversity; he taught followers to be able to identify with suffering and to disconnect from it, right?!
Well, if science is so much more than religion or mysticism, why is it that science has not offered you a release from suffering…since all I have read from all of your words, in every one of your post, is hostility and a cantankerous disposition to the opinions of others. Science has imprisoned you in frustration...for what...what could it offer you that is worth the trade?
Buddha taught follower to be accepting of the opinions of others, and if someone did something wrong or thought outside the truth, that there should be a level of forgiveness, for they know not what they do.
So if science is the pursuit of truth, then the truth is-is that science is nowhere near as powerful as even a simple ancient doctrine in the betterment of human life, at the most fundamental level.
Perhaps if you know so much about science, you should do as Buddha did, and lead by example in the education of others (Dharma teachings). Not point the finger and cast stones unto the ones who "permeate our society to lead the ignorant astray due to a major failing in our education system".
"Clear thinking has been thrown out.", obviously Bert! Replacing happiness with science is really not clear thinking at all.
The other side of the coin is that there are people out there who aren't happy unless they're upset about something...surely you don't aspire to be this?
I wasn't talking about superluminal solutions either.
The Alcubierre metric has been discredited for reasons I have already given.
It only works in Star Trek not in our Universe.
Despite what you may think I am not in the role of being the defender of the faith. It's a sad state of affairs this thread has gone into hyperbole mode.
Steven
Yes, however the assertions as to its discredit are still conjectural and based on the opinions of researchers who may (or may not, I shall conceded here) have it wrong.
I'll quote here from wiki...
"However, if certain quantum inequalities conjectured by Ford and Roman hold, then the energy requirements for some warp drives may be absurdly gigantic, e.g. the energy equivalent of 1067 grams might be required to transport a small spaceship across the Milky Way galaxy. This is orders of magnitude greater than the mass of the universe. Counterarguments to these apparent problems have been offered,but not everyone is convinced they can be overcome."
The operative words here are: "However, if certain quantum inequalities conjectured by Ford and Roman hold"...it's if they hold, not whether they do or that they do (or not). They don't know, and it's conjecture in any case. That's why I said quite a few posts ago that they should set about (starting) with experiments to see if those conditions and arguments are the case or not. If they do preclude the Alcubierre Metric, then that's just it. However, that doesn't mean that something else won't work. That's what makes this so interesting...we have argument and counterargument going to and fro. The reasons as to why some seem reticent about overcoming those roadblocks is precisely because they're have present knowledge uppermost in their minds and aren't sure it can be circumvented. That's fair enough and understandable. From all our experiments and observations (so far) it appears it's impossible, but that doesn't mean it ultimately is.
As for saying it doesn't work in our universe, only in Star Trek's (rather quaint)...how do we even know unless we try. Like I said previously, if we all thought that way, we'd still be living in the Stone Age. We wouldn't try anything if we thought initially that it was impossible to do. Even if previous experience said that it was...sometimes it takes persistence in the face of all accepted wisdom to finally bring about something which is thought to be impossible to achieve. Think of Faraday and his lightbulb and countless other examples of persistence. Quite often, experimentation points us in directions we haven't previously considered and engenders new ideas. That's why the work needs to be done and not declare that everything we've done discredits these ideas, therefore we don't do a thing. There's more to testing an idea than scribbling "hieroglyphics" out on a blackboard or the back of an envelope. Sometimes what looks perfectly fine in theory doesn't always measure up in reality, when everything is put to experiment and testing.
This rationale also applies to String Theory too...or any other theory for that matter. No matter how solid a theory appears or what we derive from it, testing its validity will always be an ongoing exercise.
If we really knew the final answers, we wouldn't have to test them.
First of all science is not in the business of replacing non sense beliefs.
Irrational beliefs are just that.
As to your assertion "Well, if science is so much more than religion or mysticism, why is it that science has not offered you a release from suffering…since all I have read from all of your words, in every one of your post, is hostility and a cantankerous disposition to the opinions of others. Science has imprisoned you in frustration...for what?"
I have never heard so much self satisfied drivel. I am not unhappy with myself. I find when the idiotic ignorant try to lead the rest of the ignorant down a blind path with their simple platitudes, this is what grates against my mindset.
I spent many years teaching PhD students in the finer points of our craft and many of them are now employed in the best Universities and Research Institutes.
You are entitled to your opinion no matter how deluded it is.
If you think I need an invisible friend to round out my life you are even further deluded. The smartest Jesuit priests lost that battle long ago.
I am not getting into a slanging match with anyone that thinks the undetectable is real. It is even worse when they quote ancient scriptures written by people that would think it was a miracle to converse on line.
I come from a place where rational criticism is assumed and encouraged.
