|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
| Author |
Message |
SDR
millennium club
Joined: 02 Oct 2004
Posts: 1716
Location: San Francisco
|
 Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2008 10:38 pm Post subject: |
    |
|
There certainly are Americans who claim that the mood landing was a hoax.
The point of science is that it proves its claims. That is the point of the scientific method. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method Persons who deride science as a hoax are being willfully ignorant. Why they would do this, I don't know -- unless it is to make themselves feel better about the corresponding unprovability of religious claims.
The two systems of thought are not equal and opposite systems of truth; rather, one is based on intellectual rigor and the other is a matter of belief and faith. One is not "better" than the other; they both have their place in the scheme of things for man.
Why some religious persons are now trying to usurp the place of science and install their religious beliefs "in its place" is an open question. It seems clear, however, that this move has a basic dishonesty at its core.
SDR |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ArchiMotion
Joined: 31 May 2008
Posts: 315
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2008 11:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SDR wrote: | There certainly are Americans who claim that the mood landing was a hoax.
The point of science is that it proves its claims. That is the point of the scientific method. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method Persons who deride science as a hoax are being willfully ignorant. Why they would do this, I don't know -- unless it is to make themselves feel better about the corresponding unprovability of religious claims.
The two systems of thought are not equal and opposite systems of truth; rather, one is based on intellectual rigor and the other is a matter of belief and faith. One is not "better" than the other; they both have their place in the scheme of things for man.
Why some religious persons are now trying to usurp the place of science and install their religious beliefs "in its place" is an open question. It seems clear, however, that this move has a basic dishonesty at its core.
SDR |
Your arguments are quite extreme, and obviously you have not read the article which I commented on. Now, of course science must prove it's claims. The point, still is being missed, with regard to the article. Much of science still is theory, and science tries it's best to prove the same, yet still is not completely able to do so, due to the complexity of our universe.
Further, it is not the case of religious people attempting to usurp the place of science and replace science with religious views. This is a convenient branding. It is a presumption not based on fact. It is rather insulting and offensive in it's basic assertion, full of insinuation that does not correspond to reality. Even the idea that religious people are questioning science, only to replace it with religious views is repugnant. Such a contriving idea certainly lays behind the minds of those who oppose ideas they do not understand, or which oppose their pre-conceived world views.
Further, it is easy to paint a picture of science as always completely experientially proven, referring over to the scientific method, and then in turn display the faith based claims into allegations that cannot be proven, to the contrary of science, which according to this view is always proven, as it resorts to the scientific method. This ignores the fact that there are still hundreds of theories in science that still lack experimental confirmation, but nonetheless are regarded as ultimate fact by the majority, and even by the distortions of facts placed on us by media, public institutions, and other organizations bent on spreading their own visions of the truth of science. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Richard Haut
millennium club
Joined: 18 Apr 2004
Posts: 1152
Location: Nice, France
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 2:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
Mr. Motion, the paranoia (feigned or real) of yourself and your imaginary friend is quite amusing, but what SDR says is not "extreme" but rational observation.
There is "good" and "bad" science - but to damn scientists in total on the (unsupported) claim of bad maths is propaganda.
Religion has had a strong influence in architecture - and to pretend that religion implies little learning is dishonest.
Western societies today are based on the principles of reason which is why the deceit and hysteria promoted by the Neo-Cons (and their Shills) is so offensive.
This forum is not some clique, but a small group - with many observers and occasional visitors - who share one common interest: architecture.
_________________
Richard Haut has worked with the architectural profession for over 25 years and produces the weekly Richard Haut's Competitions, which has given architects details of many thousands of projects for which they can apply across Britain and Europe. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ArchiMotion
Joined: 31 May 2008
Posts: 315
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 10:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hello Richard,
Now I realize SDR is right, as he is referring to this link I posted -->>
http://ether.sciences.free.fr/bases.htm
Truly these guys are mixing religion with science, an error in deed. So in light of this I apologize for the mis-understanding, since what you refer to as my "paranoia" is not paranoia, but was simply a mis-understanding of the context and reference to which another member was referring, as when the other member chris also referred to a particular statement as well, without explaining, causing confusion with regards to what he was referring to on another occasion. I was able to clarify that, however with no clear response still..... and now the same here, as SDR was not clear in his reference. But upon further analysis, I concluded also that this link above is not founded on science, but rather on ancient religious traditions that claim all the fundamentals of modern science are built on their ideas. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Richard Haut
millennium club
Joined: 18 Apr 2004
Posts: 1152
Location: Nice, France
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 11:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
Motion
the problem with this, as I see it, is not that one person or a few hold extreme views, but that there have been and continue to be very real attempts to push their doctrines into both mainstream thinking and education.
the most dramatic of these revisionist views has concerned evolution, and by pushing the anti-evolution thinking so far does damage both to science and to religion.
it is a dumbing down which appears to act as a vehicle for furthering even more dangerous agenda.
we only have to consider the idiotic and simplistic attitude to Islam and then see to it alongside the false-science arguments that Depleted Uranium is somehow 'harmless'.
or - if one was harsh about it - if WTC7 did not come down by some form of demolition, what brought it down ? faith ?
_________________
Richard Haut has worked with the architectural profession for over 25 years and produces the weekly Richard Haut's Competitions, which has given architects details of many thousands of projects for which they can apply across Britain and Europe. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ArchiMotion
Joined: 31 May 2008
Posts: 315
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 1:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Richard Haut wrote: | Motion
the problem with this, as I see it, is not that one person or a few hold extreme views, but that there have been and continue to be very real attempts to push their doctrines into both mainstream thinking and education.
the most dramatic of these revisionist views has concerned evolution, and by pushing the anti-evolution thinking so far does damage both to science and to religion.
it is a dumbing down which appears to act as a vehicle for furthering even more dangerous agenda.
we only have to consider the idiotic and simplistic attitude to Islam and then see to it alongside the false-science arguments that Depleted Uranium is somehow 'harmless'.
or - if one was harsh about it - if WTC7 did not come down by some form of demolition, what brought it down ? faith ? |
Personally I don't see how exposing this charade of current day thinking on evolution can do us any dis-favor. To the contrary. There are other points of view that are just as much science and scientifically valid, so the lies are being propagated, that there is no evidence for alternate points of view. It is as the entire world is a big ostridge, hiding it's head in the sand and refusing to listen to or consider anything else outside the dogmas of modern evolution, which has become a sort of religion in and of itself - a religion of systems that are geared to support a pre-disposition to rule out anything that does not fit the mold of this theory. It is thus as I said, we conform our observations according to the pre-disposed views we have. This is a natural human characteristic, and there is no way to avoid it. It all goes back to our value system, or belief systems, and our openness or failure of being open to consider if there could be evidence for other camps. I doubt anyone posting here has really analyzed the evidence of other camps that demonstrate the fallacies of modern scientists. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
csintexas
millennium club
Joined: 06 Feb 2006
Posts: 1919
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 2:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I doubt anyone posting here has really analyzed the evidence of other camps that demonstrate the fallacies of modern scientists.
You would be wrong. I'm the one who read and referenced the Einstein hoax paper.
_________________
Chris Stewart
Modern Texas Home Project |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Richard Haut
millennium club
Joined: 18 Apr 2004
Posts: 1152
Location: Nice, France
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 2:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Western societies today are based on the principles of reason which is why the deceit and hysteria promoted by the Neo-Cons (and their Shills) is so offensive. |
QED
_________________
Richard Haut has worked with the architectural profession for over 25 years and produces the weekly Richard Haut's Competitions, which has given architects details of many thousands of projects for which they can apply across Britain and Europe. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ArchiMotion
Joined: 31 May 2008
Posts: 315
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 8:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
"Western societies today are based on the principles of reason which is why the deceit and hysteria promoted by the Neo-Cons (and their Shills) is so offensive."
These people agree on something without clarifying.
One can't assume "born in the bush" deceit and hysteria is representative of all neo-conservatives. And this depends on which arena one is referring to - in this case, political.
Last edited by ArchiMotion on Mon Jun 09, 2008 10:28 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lekizz
millennium club
Joined: 11 Jan 2006
Posts: 1104
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 9:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sometimes in a community (especially, I think, after only ostensibly being here for a week) you need to agree to disagree, accept that not everyone will share the same conservative views, not just name-call and throw your toys out of the pram. Otherwise your cover might be blown. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ArchiMotion
Joined: 31 May 2008
Posts: 315
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 10:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Some speak in abbreviated forms as a way to codify their conservative approach, by having been around long enough to communicate by suggestion. Only a little wit it takes to grasp the underlying intent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
djswan
Joined: 17 Aug 2007
Posts: 839
Location: Montana, USA
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 9:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ArchiMotion wrote: | | Some speak in abbreviated forms as a way to codify their conservative approach, by having been around long enough to communicate by suggestion. Only a little wit it takes to grasp the underlying intent. |
Just figuring out where people stand on very important issues regarding design, the future, planet, no big deal, don't worry.
How 'bout that zennith event scenario? Theory? Do I get a Noble Prize?
like blowing a bubble, and then popping it. eh, probally already thought of, but it might explain gravity. Whoops, I'm thinking out loud again. 
String theory.
Science is cool. It's all cool
_________________
n/a |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
solidred
Joined: 05 Jan 2006
Posts: 621
Location: Scotland
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 2:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
It takes a little time to get to know one another, especially on this method of typewritten posts exchanged between people who otherwise don't know one another. The way I see it is that the dynamic easily stumbles upon the limitations of the exchange technique: one unwittingly becomes the spokesperson for a general position, the interpretation by others of which embraces other views covered by the same generality but not necessarily endorsed by the individual being so held to account by the label they've been given. 'Paranoia' too, has been mentioned. This is a condition commonly understood as one in which a person suffers delusions and is, in fact, incorrect in their fears. Whereas it's not insane nor is it unreasonable to become defensive when reading between the lines in an environment one is, as yet, unsure about. This is simply caution...
My own reading between the lines here goes somewhat counter to that which appears on the surface. This isn't an argument between the advocates of religion and he defenders of science. In the highly capable understanding of some, this is no contest: a deep understanding of both need not be mutually exclusive. But even if you hold that they are... hehe see, I'm no good at fighting. I hate fighting. I hate conflict. For me, conflict = misunderstanding. That's why I'm generally in support of understanding rather than advocacy...
Apologies. I thought I'd started off rather well then but now I'm crumbling  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
csintexas
millennium club
Joined: 06 Feb 2006
Posts: 1919
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 6:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
I appreciate your sensibilities but it would get pretty boring around here if we all agreed on everything.
_________________
Chris Stewart
Modern Texas Home Project |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SDR
millennium club
Joined: 02 Oct 2004
Posts: 1716
Location: San Francisco
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 7:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Gotta agree with that ! Good words, though, Solid; a little humility goes a long way, when we can manage it. . .
"It is thus as I said, we conform our observations according to the pre-disposed views we have. This is a natural human characteristic, and there is no way to avoid it." [ArchiMotion]
My respose: "I know you are, but what am I ?" This statement, directed at "science" by "religion," is a hoot. . .
George Carlin just left the planet. Here's something I found in a news article:
"The whole problem with this idea of obscenity and indecency, and all of these things — bad language and whatever — it's all caused by one basic thing, and that is: religious superstition," Carlin told the AP in a 2004 interview. "There's an idea that the human body is somehow evil and bad and there are parts of it that are especially evil and bad, and we should be ashamed. Fear, guilt and shame are built into the attitude toward sex and the body. ... It's reflected in these prohibitions and these taboos that we have." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
blogger
del.icio.us
digg
slashdot
