You Can't Trust Science!

Flamed Diving

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRLR9jhP_DM

There are obviously some people in this forum who truly believe the title of this thread, and in fact see Science as some kind of corrosive force in human advancement, etc. So when I saw this video, I thought of you guys.

Remember, next time you enter your kitchen, switch the light on and get a glass of clean drinking water from your refrigerator before returning to your PC to research, you have only one thing to be thankful for.

Enjoy.

PirateShampoo

Dont trust science, trust YouTube.

TalkieWalkie

I personally have never heard before that "you can't trust science",. Religion to me, even a child has always been a control mechanism. So there was never an argument in my mind as to the trustworthiness of science. Having said that, there is a lot that science will never explain.

I would suggest.. You cant trust Religion.

PirateShampoo

I will agree with you there Walkie, never understood the whole blind faith thing.

Its probably due to the fact i grew up in Wales where religion didn't play apart in our lives what so ever.

Truthrevolution

You are tarring everybody with the one brush.Can you name these people who dont trust science?? I doubt there would be many.

Personally i dont trust most doctors and i dont trust the vaccination agenda for a multiple of reasons both personally and profesionally.There is no doubt that science is the best thing to happen mankind but also one of the most dangerous things to happen if the power of science falls into the wrong hands.

uprising2

Flamed Diving wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRLR9jhP_DM

There are obviously some people in this forum who truly believe the title of this thread, and in fact see Science as some kind of corrosive force in human advancement, etc. So when I saw this video, I thought of you guys.

Remember, next time you enter your kitchen, switch the light on and get a glass of clean drinking water from your refrigerator before returning to your PC to research, you have only one thing to be thankful for.

Enjoy.

There are obviously some people in this forum who truly believe that they "know" what others believe and a blanket statement covers all, well it doesn't, science is science, science has improved an awful lot of different things, I believe a lot of science, and know the majority of scientists are good honest men/woman, I dated a scientist for a while.
Science has brought us some real wonders that we take for granted, science has also brought us some of the most horrific/ghastly "things" that should never ever have been concieved.
Of course science has merit and worth, otherwise the powers that be would not hold it in such an iron grip, controlling all that goes in and all coming out, science and intelligence are gifts of God, hijacked by evil people.
Also I believe that science is over rated and the more they learn the more they realise they actually know nothing really, it has it's plus's but the controllers wanna use it against us in a variety of ways and thats where my problem is.

And believe it or not I'm not a religious person, I despise all religion, its a conspiracy to divide and conquer, all religion is controlled by the same "side". Although the truth is there to be found, and I am 110% sure in my heart that God is God.

Flamed Diving

Truthrevolution wrote: »

You are tarring everybody with the one brush.

Please point out where, or retract your statement.

humanji

Can everyone try and not be so judgmental and quick to take offense. Just look at the breasts in the video and be happy.

Torakx

Well first of all im very dissapointed in this thread
It took up to 2 minutes 31 seconds before i got tired of looking for those bewbs

I do want to say though that science is great.Scientists on the other hand are humans and they are not so great when it comes to honesty and integrity much like religions.
What i thought was interesting was how pythagorus discovered how to measure the circumference of a circle.A good example of early science changing the world.That obviously isnt something to be scared of but to embrace.
Yet as long as science is under the control of humans it isnt going to be all good its going to be good and bad.Im sure most if not all on this forum agree with that last statement.
The thread is funny but its good to let visitors to the Ct section of boards know that insanity can be very relative.

Pixel8

I trust Science alright, i just wouldn't trust the Politics of Science.

Undergod

Torakx wrote: »

What i thought was interesting was how pythagorus discovered how to measure the circumference of a circle.A good example of early science changing the world.That obviously isnt something to be scared of but to embrace.

Pity he's the last person we should reference on the topic of staying objective about science. He had the guy who proved the existence of irrational numbers killed.

Lab_Mouse

humanji wrote: »

C Just look at the breasts in the video and be happy.

And in fairness they are nice breasts....and I'm a skeptic

mcmoustache

Where's mysterious? I want to hear his take on it all.

EDIT:
Actually this is quite important. Troofers (I must point that there are very few Troofers here. < 3. It's a derogatory term but I'm picking on a strawman here) often claim that science is just a brainwashing excercise as opposed to an investigative excercise. Our teachers make mistakes occasionally (no, they're not in on the brainwashing) but most of what they tell us and demonstrate in experiments is correct. You can't brainwash sciance. It works or it doesn't. If quantum mechanics was a lie, your computer wouldn't work.

I know that a lot of conspiracy theories depend on science being a lie. Especially all the woo stuff about atlantis and lizards. But there are even more CTs that don't. These are the ones that I, personally, like to see discussed. I don't contribute much but I do like to lurk. There are a lot of good ideas posted here and a good discussion can only happen if both sides can agree to the same rules with regard to logic and well-tested science (people can disagree with experimental fields). Saying that sciance is the result of brainwashing when an argument is full of holes is a terrible cop-out. (90% of non-skeptic posters here don't do that by the way. They may have unorthodox ideas but at least they make logical points and don't try to claim that all science is brianwashing)

mysterious

You didn't come here to trust materialism, and bull**** outside yourself, which includes sighence, authority, government, illuminati, and all forms of society to keep you disconnected with yourself.

Science is dangerous, just like someone who claims to be enlightened on earth (aka the right brain) If you were enlightened, you wouldn't be here. So you can't trust the right brain in totalilty either.

You must must use both sides of the brain to belance your perception of reality. Science makes you focus reality from one perspective, as one way with the left brain only. This is really wrong. It takes a right brain to see that. It takes a left brain to rationalise what the right is coming from. But you cannot get anywhere with a one sided brain.

It's precisely why the world is focked up because so many can't discern what's really going on in reality or what's behind scenes.


You came here to trust yourself. not the rest.

PirateShampoo

And where did you learn about this Left side Right side stuff from?

mcmoustache

OK. There are a few things I need to know.:

Who came up with this science stuff and when?

How did they get every educational institution in the world to teach these lies?

How did they get the entire earth (Jew, Chink Rusky, Yankee, Whitey and African) to get in on the act ?

How did they stop me from verifying newton's laws for myself?

How did the get every scienbtific law to agree with experiment?

finty

uprising2 wrote: »

Also I believe that science is over rated and the more they learn the more they realise they actually know nothing really, it has it's plus's but the controllers wanna use it against us in a variety of ways and thats where my problem is.

Science overrated? compared to what?

I suggest you throw that computer of yours off a cliff and go live in a cave where SCIENCE can't be used against you

mcmoustache

finty wrote: »

Science overrated? compared to what?

I suggest you throw that computer of yours off a cliff and go live in a cave where SCIENCE can't be used against you

As much as I agree with your sentiment, uprising was making a fair point. Technology can easily be used against us once we are too dependent on it.

All that said, however, geeks are always years ahead of any government who may wish to control us.

Pixel8

Well, those that are pro science (but can't discern real science from political science), what do you think of the great global warming swindle?
I mean theres tonnes of scientific evidence to state that carbon dioxide levels increase AFTER the planet heats up first, not before, as these carbon taxing muppets would have you believe. So what do the 'scientific' boards.ie people think of this?

My problem with science is pangea theory, big bang theory, evolution theory, theory theory theory and they think its bloody fact even though we all know science is forever changing, facts dont change, theories do. Science is cool, im a gadget freak and i love technology but political science is arrogant. Political science is materialistic and won't recognise that there is a whole range of frequencies above and below what we can detect with scientific instruments, and that annoys me a lot.

Sure don't scientists say that we only know around 5% of the universe which leaves 95% of the universe undiscovered and besides that, we're all still stuck on this little planet so what the hell do we know?!

Flamed Diving

PirateShampoo wrote: »

And where did you learn about this Left side Right side stuff from?

It's an urban myth, you can't use different sides of your brain, in isolation. One 'side' may contain a region for abstract thinking and the other for languages, etc, but they are not exclusive of one another. In fact, it has been demonstrated that different cultures use different 'sides' of the brain for the same tasks. To break it down further, East Asian people use, say, the right side of the brain for maths, and Europeans use the left side for maths. And it's not because our sides are flipped around. They use the languages side for maths, we use the abstract side. Capeeesh? Ergo, what mysterious said has no basis whatsoever.

Article on this:

http://www.newsweek.com/id/233778

PirateShampoo

Flamed Diving wrote: »

It's an urban myth, you can't use different sides of your brain, in isolation. One 'side' may contain a region for abstract thinking and the other for languages, etc, but they are not exclusive of one another. In fact, it has been demonstrated that different cultures use different 'sides' of the brain for the same tasks. To break it down further, East Asian people use, say, the right side of the brain for maths, and Europeans use the left side for maths. And it's not because our sides are flipped around. They use the languages side for maths, we use the abstract side. Capeeesh? Ergo, what mysterious said has no basis whatsoever.

Article on this:

http://www.newsweek.com/id/233778

Think you missed the point i was trying to make, the whole left side right side would of spawned from medical science which is something he wouldn't trust or believe in.

Flamed Diving

PirateShampoo wrote: »

Think you missed the point i was trying to make, the whole left side right side would of spawned from medical science which is something he wouldn't trust or believe in.

Then he/you is in agreement with medical science, since they stress that both sides work, in tandem. I mean, only carnival faith healers sell the idea of the brain being split into two, independent entities. Science suggests no such thing.

uprising2

finty wrote: »

Science overrated? compared to what?

I suggest you throw that computer of yours off a cliff and go live in a cave where SCIENCE can't be used against you

Its posts like this that make this all worthwhile.
If you believe a "Cave" can prevent science from being used against me you mustn't have very much regard for it.

Ohh and I suggest you go back and read my post again, and again if need be.

bonkey

Undergod wrote: »

Pity he's the last person we should reference on the topic of staying objective about science. He had the guy who proved the existence of irrational numbers killed.

Irrational numbers and the cirumference of a circle are mathematical in nature.

Mathematics <> science.

Undergod

bonkey wrote: »

Irrational numbers and the cirumference of a circle are mathematical in nature.

Mathematics <> science.

Fair enough. Nonetheless, Pythagoras is hardly to held up as an example of the objectivity that we ought to seek in approach to maths or science- he was the leader of a mystery cult.

TalkieWalkie

Having had some time to reflect on the nature of this thread and the clip posted, I have come to the eventual conclusion that you the poster are an insecure and troubled individual. (no offense)
By singling out a particular belief system with the sole intent of ridiculing it, you have displayed a classic example of "school bully" syndrome.
It is quite anti evolutionary and is intended encourage prejudice which in turn acts as a divide between people based on your insecurities.

There is quite a bit of it going on here, so this thread will be welcomed by the rest of the gang. :rolleyes:

Flamed Diving

Undergod wrote: »

Fair enough. Nonetheless, Pythagoras is hardly to held up as an example of the objectivity that we ought to seek in approach to maths or science- he was the leader of a mystery cult.

How does that make him "non-objective"? I'm confused by your post.

bonkey

TalkieWalkie wrote: »

Having had some time to reflect on the nature of this thread and the clip posted, I have come to the eventual conclusion that you the poster are an insecure and troubled individual. (no offense)
By singling out a particular belief system with the sole intent of ridiculing it, you have displayed a classic example of "school bully" syndrome.

It is quite anti evolutionary and is intended encourage prejudice which in turn acts as a divide between people based on your insecurities.

There is quite a bit of it going on here, so this thread will be welcomed by the rest of the gang. :rolleyes:

The thread may have been borderline to start.

The responses since then have opened the door to an interesting discussion. We can do without post like this trying to slam that door shut again.

If that's not clear enough....enough with the personal jibes.

TalkieWalkie

bonkey wrote: »

The thread may have been borderline to start.

The responses since then have opened the door to an interesting discussion. We can do without post like this trying to slam that door shut again.

If that's not clear enough....enough with the personal jibes.

With all due respect Bonkey, I am entitled to give my thoughts at any time on any thread I see fit.

I merely made an observation, it was not my intention to personally jibe as I am sure it was not flamed Diving intention to ridicule religion. So I apologize flamed if I offended you.;)

Undergod

Flamed Diving wrote: »

How does that make him "non-objective"? I'm confused by your post.

As the leader of a cult, the discoveries were treated as sacred truths. There were also entrenched beliefs (ie. everything could be turned into numbers). This meant they had to deny anything that contradicted them (or kill the people that proved it), so they couldn't be objective.

I'm not saying that Pythagoras didn't contribute massively to our body of knowledge, my profession is massively indebted to him, just saying he could have gone about it a bit better.

Flamed Diving

Undergod wrote: »

As the leader of a cult, the discoveries were treated as sacred truths. There were also entrenched beliefs (ie. everything could be turned into numbers). This meant they had to deny anything that contradicted them (or kill the people that proved it), so they couldn't be objective.

I'm not saying that Pythagoras didn't contribute massively to our body of knowledge, my profession is massively indebted to him, just saying he could have gone about it a bit better.

Ok, fair enough. Sure didn't Newton have his dodgy side too?

Undergod

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Ok, fair enough. Sure didn't Newton have his dodgy side too?

Yeah, he didn't really tell people a lot of what he discovered, often because he was genuinely the only person in the world who would have understood. Also the anti-social.

Also the alchemy.

He had a bit of an agenda that he intended to prove, that's for sure.

mysterious

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Ok, fair enough. Sure didn't Newton have his dodgy side too?

I've read stories that Newton brought himself into masonry and the secret societies or was asked too ( I can't see why they wouldn't have) Its the nature of power when someone who is a genius.

Kepti

Pixel8 wrote: »

I mean theres tonnes of scientific evidence to state that carbon dioxide levels increase AFTER the planet heats up first, not before, as these carbon taxing muppets would have you believe.

What's the source of this extra heat we've been measuring? By what process does this heat generate carbon dioxide?

espinolman

I believe the sciences have been hoaxed and it has been going on for centuries , theories are taught as fact in schools and the laws of physics were supposed to be just guidellines , but they are taught as fact probably at the behest of special interest groups .

Flamed Diving

No. Science doesn't deal in fact, just models and evidence. Just look into it, instead of making things up.

Brown Bomber

Flamed Diving wrote: »

There are obviously some people in this forum who truly believe the title of this thread, and in fact see Science as some kind of corrosive force in human advancement, etc. So when I saw this video, I thought of you guys.

The capitalisation of the S in science; intentional or Freudian slip? :D:D

Brown Bomber

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Remember, next time you enter your kitchen, switch the light on and get a glass of clean drinking water from your refrigerator before returning to your PC to research, you have only one thing to be thankful for.

Enjoy.

Okay thats bollox for a start. Your talking in absolutes when I believe the vast majority of people here would view science as neutral by definiton but its application can be used for morally positive or morally negative purposes.

A single example of countless of the negative impact of science.

Warning: Pics of deformed babies from Depleted Uranium (disturbing)
http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2003/DU-Baby2003.htm

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Remember, next time you enter your kitchen

Man-made scientific advancements haven't given us the ability to "enter a room"

Flamed Diving wrote: »

switch the light

Man-made science hasn't given us the ability to see

etc etc. So we have more to be thankful for than just science.

Brown Bomber

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Remember, next time you enter your kitchen, switch the light on and get a glass of clean drinking water from your refrigerator before returning to your PC to research, you have only one thing to be thankful for.

Enjoy.

Okay thats bollox for a start. Your talking in absolutes when I believe the vast majority of people here would view science as neutral by definiton but its application can be used for morally positive or morally negative purposes.

A single example of countless of the negative impact of science.

Warning: Pics of deformed babies from Depleted Uranium (disturbing)
http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2003/DU-Baby2003.htm

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Remember, next time you enter your kitchen

Man-made scientific advancements haven't given us the ability to "enter a room"

Flamed Diving wrote: »

switch the light

Man-made science hasn't given us the ability to see

etc etc. So we have more to be thankful for than just science.

studiorat

Brown Bomber wrote: »

A single example of countless of the negative impact of science.

Warning: Pics of deformed babies from Depleted Uranium (disturbing)
http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2003/DU-Baby2003.htm

I didn't bother to look, but in fairness they could be pictures of babies pummelled with a rock or a fist or whatever. Science has nothing to do with the means by which the atrocity was carried out.

If they were beaten with a base ball bat would you blame the negative impact of sport?

Brown Bomber

studiorat wrote: »

I didn't bother to look,

Good choice.

studiorat wrote: »

Science has nothing to do with the means by which the atrocity was carried out.

That is exactly what I was trying to demonstrate.

Science in itself arguably gives a net positive return, it does IMO at least. Science can be used for good or for bad, but the OP ignores the bad in post 1. My understanding of the consensus "CT" view here and it is one that I would share is that few, if any have a deep distrust of science but moreso have a healthy scepticism of (potentially) corrupt scientific or otherwise institutions with political agendas.

studiorat wrote: »

If they were beaten with a base ball bat would you blame the negative impact of sport?

Nope but that is neither here no there. I don't blame science I blame the abuse of science.

Flamed Diving

I will choose not to answer any of your posts.

Thanks.

Brown Bomber

This is not your personal blog. If you're not interested in discussing what it is that you post, then you probably shouldn't be posting it.

Thanks.

bonkey

Brown Bomber wrote: »

This is not your personal blog. If you're not interested in discussing what it is that you post, then you probably shouldn't be posting it.

You are not a moderator. Please don't be back-seat modding by taking it upon yourself to remind others of the rules.

We've had this discussion.

TalkieWalkie

It is counter productive to believe that Science, because it has given us so much, that it can explain everything and there is nothing more than it. In my opinion any kind of single standard belief system is self and group destructive. It reduces the possibility to open our hearts and minds and diminishes the chances of alternative thinking and learning, thus limiting us to a one dimensional existence and the possibilities of growing or evolving in any other way, individually or collectively, other than technologically. Ultimately, it can only serve as a self inflicted isolated life sentence. It is negative.
While having our minds and hearts open to all possibilities serves as a gateway to every possible good eventuality and can only be positive. Open you're mind and heart, it's better for everyone.

With all science has given us, it has not helped us evolve in any other way than technologically. And how does that serve us exactly ?

Science doesn't help us care for each other, it doesn't bring us closer to each other, it doesn't help us love each other, it doesn't stop us hurting or killing each other, it doesn't stop us from being greedy, power hungry, selfish, jealous, paranoid, mean, hatefull etc, it hasn't helped the homeless or the poorest or the third world, it doesn't help us love life, nature, wildlife, earth or creation, it doesnt help us love ourselves.

On the contrary, in reality, science has done little for humanity in the way of evolving mentally, spiritually and/or collectively. It has assisted in achieving the opposite of everything good and positive and with all our great technological advancements, we are worse off now in every sense possible than ever before.

So I ask you, can you trust Science ?

Flamed Diving

It is counter productive to believe that Science, because it has given us so much, that it can explain everything and there is nothing more than it.

I agree. As would most scientists or science-enthusiasts.

In my opinion any kind of single standard belief system is self and group destructive.

I agree.

It reduces the possibility to open our hearts and minds and diminishes the chances of alternative thinking and learning, thus limiting us to a one dimensional existence and the possibilities of growing or evolving in any other way, individually or collectively, other than technologically.

Yeah, I guess...

Ultimately, it can only serve as a self inflicted isolated life sentence. It is negative.

Ok.

While having our minds and hearts open to all possibilities serves as a gateway to every possible good eventuality and can only be positive. Open you're mind and heart, it's better for everyone.

With all science has given us, it has not helped us evolve in any other way than technologically. And how does that serve us exactly ?

Well, our life expectancy has roughly doubled, in a century, while other, technologically regressive countries still languish far behind. Ditto infant mortality. Ditto average height. I could go on. This is due mainly to technology. I think you are being extremely myopic.

Screwdriver doesn't help us care for each other, it doesn't bring us closer to each other, it doesn't help us love each other, it doesn't stop us hurting or killing each other, it doesn't stop us from being greedy, power hungry, selfish, jealous, paranoid, mean, hatefull etc, it hasn't helped the homeless or the poorest or the third world, it doesn't help us love life, nature, wildlife, earth or creation, it doesnt help us love ourselves.

Science is a tool, nothing more. How we choose to use it, is up to us. What you are talking about is human nature. You could say replace science with, actually, I will just do that. See.

On the contrary, in reality, science has done little for humanity in the way of evolving mentally, spiritually collectively. It has assisted in achieving opposite of everything good and with all our great technological advancements, we are worse off now in every sense possible than ever before.

Apart from the roads, sanitation, life expectancy, infant mortality. But what have the Romans, ever done for us?

So I ask you, can you trust Science ?

The vast majority of what you said, had nothing to do with science. You really need to rethink your approach to this.

bonkey

TalkieWalkie wrote: »

It is counter productive to believe that Science, because it has given us so much, that it can explain everything and there is nothing more than it.

Not only would it be counter-productive, it would require a misunderstanding of science.

So I ask you, can you trust Science ?

I believe that I had a reasonably good understanding of what science is. From that understanding, I understand the limitations of science.

From understanding science, I can trust it. I can trust it within the boundaries of the limitations I understand it to have.

TalkieWalkie

Flamed Diving wrote: »

I agree. As would most scientists or science-enthusiasts.

Great

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Well, our life expectancy has roughly doubled, in a century, while other, technologically regressive countries still languish far behind. Ditto infant mortality. Ditto average height. I could go on. This is due mainly to technology. I think you are being extremely myopic.

Life expectancy is and everything else are meaningless if we only use our time for selfish material gain while watching others suffer as a result.

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Science doesn't help us care for each other, it doesn't bring us closer to each other, it doesn't help us love each other, it doesn't stop us hurting or killing each other, it doesn't stop us from being greedy, power hungry, selfish, jealous, paranoid, mean, hatefull etc, it hasn't helped the homeless or the poorest or the third world, it doesn't help us love life, nature, wildlife, earth or creation, it doesnt help us love ourselves.

Science is a tool, nothing more. How we choose to use it, is up to us. What you are talking about is human nature. You could say replace science with, actually, I will just do that. See.

ok, but, spirituality for example would help with all the above imo. We are not here to evolve financially or materially

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Apart from the roads, sanitation, life expectancy, infant mortality. But what have the Romans, ever done for us?
The vast majority of what you said, had nothing to do with science. You really need to rethink your approach to this.

Again, all pointless if we gaining from others suffering. I think my approach is spot on. It is positive, good and benefits everyone. Unlike in the financial or material and technological reality, only the ones who find themselves in the fortunate position to benefit, do (or think they do). again while others suffer

TalkieWalkie

bonkey wrote: »

Not only would it be counter-productive, it would require a misunderstanding of science.

Agreed.

bonkey wrote: »

From understanding science, I can trust it. I can trust it within the boundaries of the limitations I understand it to have.

Ok, it wasn't my intention to suggest it was not trusthworthy. I did mean, that given the above, is it wise to put all your trust or belief in Science and only Science. Obviously Science is not the answer to our problems here.

The first thread pointed out that religion has given us nothing and science has given so much. But the argument is not which has actually given more imo.
The fact that it was posted in the first place tells me that we have gained nothing that matters from any belief system or technological advancement. As I said, we are worse of now than ever.

mysterious

espinolman wrote: »

I believe the sciences have been hoaxed and it has been going on for centuries , theories are taught as fact in schools and the laws of physics were supposed to be just guidellines , but they are taught as fact probably at the behest of special interest groups .

Hear here

uprising2

Theories are taught as fact, science is about seeking further and further and deeper and deeper, we are all scientists to a degree, we're all curious, well most of us and like to understand things, some things cannot be understood, only guessed at, then when science does advance a little they sometimes realise this new "find" fukks up all that went before.
Science has many different area's also, and many different approach's, some science is 100% spot on, some is pure fantasy and lies, some is to heal, some is to kill, the people who like to use it to kill seem to be the top men of science now, and frankly these are madmen, sadists, occultists and string along fools.

Science has the ability to "try" save this planet, yet I only see token BS fixes, and science is mainly used to destroy, science thinks it can push nature aside, and for that science and mankind will pay heavily.

Anyway waffle aside, theory is pushed as fact where science is concerned, and it is not fact, its an idea of how something "might" work, but not definate, sometimes not even probable, yet it is pushed by the worldwide education system as fact, which is wrong.