Skip to main content

TR Memescape

  • Talk Rational: SteveF - A prophet is not without honour, save in his own country, and in his own house.

Topic: How real science works  (Read 695 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
  • F X
  • The one and only
Re: How real science works
Reply #25
 :parrot:
"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous he will not bite you. This is the principal difference between a dog and man."
― Mark Twain 🔭

Re: How real science works
Reply #26

Most likely Bluffy will claim the finding is a fraud,
Who gives a fuck?

Seriously.  Why do you care?
Why do you care if he cares?

  • fredbear
  • Militantly Confused
Re: How real science works
Reply #27
Fredbear is an idiot.  He has no clue what I think about astronomy.  In fact, he doesn't have much of a clue about much of anything  that I'm aware of.

My most recent focus on astronomy has been on the writings of Carmeli and Hartnett.

I don't know much about gravity waves or black holes, but I'm pretty sure there is no such thing as "dark matter" or "dark energy."
Quick question, Dave:

How long does it take light from the M31 Andromeda galaxy to get to Earth?

Most likely Bluffy will claim the finding is a fraud,
Who gives a fuck?

Seriously.  Why do you care?
Why do you care if he cares?

Hey Dave,

Was my question too complicated for you?
"...without considering any evidence at all - that my views are more likely - on average - to be correct.  Because the mainstream is almost always wrong" - Dave Hawkins

  • Pingu
Re: How real science works
Reply #28

Most likely Bluffy will claim the finding is a fraud,
Who gives a fuck?

Seriously.  Why do you care?
Why do you care if he cares?

I care because I'm fascinated at the lengths you will go to to avoid confronting the reality that you don't know very much, and the possibility that what you think you know ain't necessarily so.

The LIGO finding is beautiful.  My hope is that one day you will appreciate it.

I have a Darwin-debased mind.

  • RAFH
  • Have a life, already.
Re: How real science works
Reply #29
:parrot:
In short, "derp derp derp".

"I haven't had my name in lights for a while so .... "


Frankly, FX, while occasionally you have something interesting to contribute, most of your efforts seem to originate in your own ego. Much the same as Bluffy, but you are well in his shadow. I have to admit, he's losing ground, sort of like his favored genetic deterioation ideas. But Bluffy just doesn't have the same fire as he used to. It's just tired old PRATT ala bluffy. Maybe you have a chance.
Are we there yet?

  • RAFH
  • Have a life, already.
Re: How real science works
Reply #30

Most likely Bluffy will claim the finding is a fraud,
Who gives a fuck?

Seriously.  Why do you care?
Why do you care if he cares?
Bluffy, I don't.
 But the interesting question is if you have me on "IGNORE" as you have so famously claimed for years, why the response?
You're just a fraud, all the way around. No matter what you post, it's a lie. Somehow, someway, it;ll end up being a fraud.
Are we there yet?

  • fredbear
  • Militantly Confused
Re: How real science works
Reply #31
Dave has never really figured out that you don't do science like you 'do' scripture.

In xian circles, one need only to quote the chapter and verse, and it brings with it full weight to whatever point you are trying to make. For example, explaining to a pastor why using a non-temple prostitute is not fornication, or whatever.

Which is why he thinks it's very impressive to merely mention the names Carmeli and Hartnett.
"...without considering any evidence at all - that my views are more likely - on average - to be correct.  Because the mainstream is almost always wrong" - Dave Hawkins

Re: How real science works
Reply #32
Brushing up on my Hartnett. Saw this ...

Quote
Halton Arp expressed it in a way that applies to both secular science and creationists: "It seems the toughest thing for scientists to grasp--that a cherished paradigm ... can be wrong. ... I gloomily came to the ironic conclusion that if you take a highly intelligent person and give them the best possible, elite education, then you will most likely wind up with an academic who is completely impervious to reality."

Need to chase that one down to see if he really said it.

  • VoxRat
  • wtactualf
Re: How real science works
Reply #33
So your interest in astronomy is overshadowed by your obsession with finding nuggets from whatever source that validate your self-righteous belief that you are somehow more open-minded than well educated people. Big surprise there.

Meanwhile... as long as you're "brushing up" on your Hartnett ( ::) )
please explain the significance of Hartnett's conclusion that gravity waves don't exist (and, obviously, failed prediction that they would not be detected).
and
I don't know much about gravity waves or black holes, but I'm pretty sure there is no such thing as "dark matter" or "dark energy."
And this certainty is based on ... what?
"I understand Donald Trump better than many people because I really am a lot like him." - Dave Hawkins

  • Pingu
Re: How real science works
Reply #34
Brushing up on my Hartnett. Saw this ...

Quote
Halton Arp expressed it in a way that applies to both secular science and creationists: "It seems the toughest thing for scientists to grasp--that a cherished paradigm ... can be wrong. ... I gloomily came to the ironic conclusion that if you take a highly intelligent person and give them the best possible, elite education, then you will most likely wind up with an academic who is completely impervious to reality."

Need to chase that one down to see if he really said it.

Why would that matter?
I have a Darwin-debased mind.

  • F X
  • The one and only
Re: How real science works
Reply #35
He said it, and it's often true.

But it doesn't mean evolution is unscientific.
"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous he will not bite you. This is the principal difference between a dog and man."
― Mark Twain 🔭

Re: How real science works
Reply #36
To restate his statement another way ...

Redneck Dave (no elite science education)  is probably more in touch with reality than Lizzie and Voxrat (lots of elite science education)
  • Last Edit: June 03, 2017, 05:19:34 PM by Dave Hawkins

  • Photon
  • I interfere with myself
Re: How real science works
Reply #37
To restate his statement another way ...

Redneck Dave (no elite science education)  it's probably more in touch with reality than Lizzie and Voxrat (lots of elite science education)
LOL.

No.

  • VoxRat
  • wtactualf
Re: How real science works
Reply #38
To restate his statement another way ...

Redneck Dave (no elite science education)  is probably more in touch with reality than Lizzie and Voxrat (lots of elite science education)
Yeah.
No.
Probably not.
"I understand Donald Trump better than many people because I really am a lot like him." - Dave Hawkins

  • Faid
Re: How real science works
Reply #39
Fredbear is an idiot.  He has no clue what I think about astronomy.  In fact, he doesn't have much of a clue about much of anything  that I'm aware of.

My most recent focus on astronomy has been on the writings of Carmeli and Hartnett.

I don't know much about gravity waves or black holes, but I'm pretty sure there is no such thing as "dark matter" or "dark energy."
Hi dave! Resurrecting this thread to show you a quote:

Quote
There is strong observational evidence for dark matter. Yet, many biblical creationists remain skeptical of it. This skepticism appears to be based upon a misunderstanding of the reasons for belief in dark matter. Contrary to popular misconception, dark matter is not a rescuing device for the big bang model. It is true that dark matter is used to manipulate the big bang model, but that merely is because there is good evidence that dark matter exists and that the big bang suffers from problems that need fixes. The big bang was the dominant cosmogony for years before dark matter came to be accepted, so it is clear that the big bang model is not nearly as dependent upon dark matter than many creationists seem to think. If dark matter suddenly fell out of favor, all that it would eliminate is the current version of the big bang model. Soon, a new version would arise to take its place. Therefore, it is misguided to believe that denial of dark matter is a sort of silver bullet that would destroy the big bang model. Absent dark matter, the big bang model, in a different form, likely would survive.

I was gonna ask for your thoughts first, but I know you're going to google it up before saying anything (you're not that stupid)- so I'll save you the trouble:

https://answersingenesis.org/astronomy/cosmology/case-for-dark-matter/

Well how about that! Thoughts?
Who even made the rule that we cannot group ducks and fish together for the simple reason that they are both aquatic? If I want to group them that way and it serves my purpose then I can jolly well do it however I want to and it is still a nested hierarchy and you can't tell me that it's not.

  • Faid
Re: How real science works
Reply #40
The next paragraph (where the author honestly admits that it's creationists that use the term "opertional science", and then clearly states that the evidence for DM falls under that category) is also quite interesting.
Who even made the rule that we cannot group ducks and fish together for the simple reason that they are both aquatic? If I want to group them that way and it serves my purpose then I can jolly well do it however I want to and it is still a nested hierarchy and you can't tell me that it's not.

Re: How real science works
Reply #41
I wanted to see what stupidity you would post.
That's just trolling then




Icicles falling to the ground all around my house means it's getting colder.  Right on FX.

  • Faid
Re: How real science works
Reply #42
Fredbear is an idiot.  He has no clue what I think about astronomy.  In fact, he doesn't have much of a clue about much of anything  that I'm aware of.

My most recent focus on astronomy has been on the writings of Carmeli and Hartnett.

I don't know much about gravity waves or black holes, but I'm pretty sure there is no such thing as "dark matter" or "dark energy."
Hi dave! Resurrecting this thread to show you a quote:

Quote
There is strong observational evidence for dark matter. Yet, many biblical creationists remain skeptical of it. This skepticism appears to be based upon a misunderstanding of the reasons for belief in dark matter. Contrary to popular misconception, dark matter is not a rescuing device for the big bang model. It is true that dark matter is used to manipulate the big bang model, but that merely is because there is good evidence that dark matter exists and that the big bang suffers from problems that need fixes. The big bang was the dominant cosmogony for years before dark matter came to be accepted, so it is clear that the big bang model is not nearly as dependent upon dark matter than many creationists seem to think. If dark matter suddenly fell out of favor, all that it would eliminate is the current version of the big bang model. Soon, a new version would arise to take its place. Therefore, it is misguided to believe that denial of dark matter is a sort of silver bullet that would destroy the big bang model. Absent dark matter, the big bang model, in a different form, likely would survive.

I was gonna ask for your thoughts first, but I know you're going to google it up before saying anything (you're not that stupid)- so I'll save you the trouble:

https://answersingenesis.org/astronomy/cosmology/case-for-dark-matter/

Well how about that! Thoughts?
The next paragraph (where the author honestly admits that it's creationists that use the term "opertional science", and then clearly states that the evidence for DM falls under that category) is also quite interesting.
Hi dave. :wave:
Who even made the rule that we cannot group ducks and fish together for the simple reason that they are both aquatic? If I want to group them that way and it serves my purpose then I can jolly well do it however I want to and it is still a nested hierarchy and you can't tell me that it's not.