ImageImageImageImageImage

O.T. .::THE SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY THREAD::.

Moderators: moocow007, Knickstape1214, magnumt, GONYK, Thorn, j4remi, Thugger HBC, King of Canada, mrpoetryNmotion, Capn'O, NoLayupRule, Deeeez Knicks

User avatar
gavran
RealGM
Posts: 12,646
And1: 2,343
Joined: Nov 02, 2005
Location: crossing the line

Re: O.T. .::THE SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY THREAD::. 

Post#1821 » by gavran » Mon Feb 27, 2017 6:57 am

Barcs wrote:
gavran wrote:
Barcs wrote:
Good posts, man.

Sure the Catholic priests and pope are more open to new ideas NOW. Back in the middle ages, pretty much all good ideas to them were the invention of torture devices for non believers. That's pretty much what all scientific development went into back then aside from weapons and armor.

Complete BS. You should dig into history a bit more.


Nope. It's not complete BS. Exaggerated sure, but to pretend they didn't painfully execute folks for blasphemy, well... you should check the history on that because it was ugly.

Don't change the subject. That has **** all to do with medieval scientific advancement.
User avatar
DievsZingis
Sophomore
Posts: 240
And1: 330
Joined: Dec 14, 2016
Location: Brooklyn
       

Re: O.T. .::THE SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY THREAD::. 

Post#1822 » by DievsZingis » Mon Feb 27, 2017 2:54 pm

Barcs wrote:
DievsZingis wrote:"Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality"-Nikola Tesla


That quote is from like 100 years ago, he isn't talking about today. He's likely taking a shot at Einstein. He's only talking about theoretical physicists. Most people pretty much know that theoretical physics is based on mostly math rather than physical evidence and testing. It has been that way for a while. That's why string theory isn't a scientific theory, but a math theory. It's also why relativity is treated as fact while string theory is not. Einstein's relativity was originally mostly math as well, but science has confirmed a large amount of it to be accurate. Science and math are 2 different things. There is nothing wrong with using math to explore possibilities, but it's not science because it lacks empirical testing. Math is not greater than the scientific method, but that doesn't mean we can't learn things from it.

Scientists these days need to take a step back into reality a little. They are beginning to sound like the religious zealots who give us fantasies about the afterlife to look forward to. Look at what's hot these days...space movies. That is our new passion, because you know what, it's out there, we've found other Earth like planets, we are making warp drives, we will find them!


Again, it's not even close to fantasies about the afterlife. Sure, there is definitely some philosophy involved, but there is also massive testing. I don't see the harm in having the world's stop scientists putting their heads together to work on something like that.

This gives us a false notion that this world isn't that special, it's not the only one we have, yet all of their looking and prodding shows us otherwise. It's human nature, we **** this up, we'll get another one. I think that's dangerous.


Earth like planets are still VERY rare, but who cares if it shows us the world isn't that special?? What matters is the truth, not people's perception of how special they are. And yeah, learning how to travel long distances to other habitable planets could save the human race one day, should a proto planet or large enough asteroid head our way. The only dangerous thing is people who are afraid of science and fight it every step of of the way for no reason. It's not perfect, it doesn't tell us everything, but it points us in the right direction and eventually arrives at the answer.

We can't even get past the radiation belts surrounding our planet, we can't get far out enough to see our planet with our own eyes, yet people have fantasies about going to Mars and beyond. I'm talking about man, not probes.


Well if you're just going to flat out deny all humans that have worked in space or gone to the moon, I really can't argue. You can believe whatever you want, but it doesn't reflect reality.

Warp drives, hyper drives, bla bla, all based on MATHEMATICAL THEORIES, not practical experiments. Give me something when it's real, until then, this isn't just my world, this is my universe, and I hope everybody gets on board to take care of it.


Nobody's forcing you to follow math theories and treat them like gospel. Stop acting like it affects you negatively. Just ignore it and live in your little bubble and scientists will continue to research and develop things that can benefit the human race as a whole whether you approve or not. Nasa is super under funded and military is way over funded. We spend way more money on finding ways to kill each other and protect us from ourselves than we do on space exploration and research. It's a shame because that research could one day save us all. Continuing to have arms races and military conflicts could lead to our demise.


Thank you for taking the time to post. However, you're saying that I live in a bubble, things aren't affecting me negatively, I don't believe in the moon landings, etc....like I'm some kind of crazy person with a tin foil hat instead of a person with just some questions that arise from critical thinking, not from reading religious scriptures, and it seems like it's being assumed that's where I'm coming from. If that's the way it's going to go, then have a nice day. You guys are just as tough to have a meaningful conversation with without making it personal as religious people. That was the gist of my post, thanks for proving it.

I thought this was a Science AND Philosophy thread .

Science: the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.

Philosophy: the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence, especially when considered as an academic discipline.

I was actually curious, and wanted to talk more about the Orion project. Orion engineer Kelly Smith said that we must gather more information and data on the Van Allen Belts "before we send people through this region of space". The Van Allen belts start at only 345 miles above Earth. It's 2017. That was intriguing to me. I didn't clarify this before, but I assumed the rocket scientists here would know what I was talking about, not come to the conclusion that I was a moon landing hoaxer. The questions that I have are formed from the exact information that I'm given from people I look to for answers, not because of some personal beliefs.

"Within mere days of launch, the Van Allen Probes showed scientists something that would require rewriting textbooks."-NASA

Look up "The Tyranny of the Rocket Equation". Don Pettit, a chemical engineer and NASA astronaut, explains that in order to do something other than to go to space, come back and say "I"m a good boy" (Apollo guys), we must be more resourceful in order to gain anything of use. And it's next to impossible because we are still relying on rockets, therefore we can't bring anything with us to wherever we are going because almost 90 percent of the payload is fuel. The fact that we went to the moon in a near empty vessel gives people this false notion that we are headed to other planets soon to do anything worthwhile. According to him, with the resources that we have on Earth, it is impossible to go into not even that deep space. But one thing we can do is come up with math theories and make up things that won't exist to quench our thirst. And that's fine, I love reading that stuff...the what if's. But that doesn't mean I'm gonna start believing it's gonna happen. I would be no different than somebody who's waiting for Jesus. The more you look into it, the more you realize, we are very, very far behind. And that was my point, and you are shooting it down saying it will do humanity good one day. We will be extinct by then, through our own doing or naturally.

You're hanging onto the quote, but the point of bringing up Tesla was to point out what he was about, a practical scientist who invented things, where is that today? It's just computers, computers, computers. Bill Gates and his guys made a machine that made water out of ****...we need more things like that. the 50's and 60's were a great time, we saw actual physical machines, like the Blackbird, doing amazing things, not numbers thrown in the air and what if's. Where are they? We just spent 100 billion dollars on a fighter jet that can't outperform the one that it's replacing, it lost in a dogfight to a plane from decades ago. Really?

Anyway, I just posted some thoughts, and I'm told to mind my own business and let the scientists work because the world that's deteriorating around us while we look up at the sky doesn't affect me. OK. Yes, I do live in a bubble, but guess what? You live in the same one. And it's 24,901 miles in circumference.

I'm not here to make this a philosophy VS science thread, so I'll move along.
ImageImageImageImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Barcs
Senior
Posts: 566
And1: 130
Joined: Jan 27, 2013
Location: NJ
Contact:
       

Re: O.T. .::THE SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY THREAD::. 

Post#1823 » by Barcs » Mon Feb 27, 2017 5:09 pm

gavran wrote:
Barcs wrote:
gavran wrote:Complete BS. You should dig into history a bit more.


Nope. It's not complete BS. Exaggerated sure, but to pretend they didn't painfully execute folks for blasphemy, well... you should check the history on that because it was ugly.

Don't change the subject. That has **** all to do with medieval scientific advancement.


How is that changing the subject? There wasn't much scientific advancement during the middle ages, that was my point. Most research and development (if you can call it that)was geared toward weapons and armor for their armies and if something didn't jive with scripture it was often neglected or dismissed even with evidence. And yes they had people whose job specifically was to develop the most painful possible ways to die for capital punishment. Galileo was at the tail end of the middle ages when it was getting better and he was still forced to live in isolation and was excommunicated from the church even though he had hard evidence of heliocentrism. I'm not saying there was no scientific development, there definitely was, but it was only a certain type of research that was tolerated, so it was very limited.
Barcs
User avatar
Barcs
Senior
Posts: 566
And1: 130
Joined: Jan 27, 2013
Location: NJ
Contact:
       

Re: O.T. .::THE SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY THREAD::. 

Post#1824 » by Barcs » Mon Feb 27, 2017 5:32 pm

DievsZingis wrote:Thank you for taking the time to post. However, you're saying that I live in a bubble, things aren't affecting me negatively, I don't believe in the moon landings, etc....like I'm some kind of crazy person with a tin foil hat instead of a person with just some questions that arise from critical thinking, not from reading religious scriptures, and it seems like it's being assumed that's where I'm coming from. If that's the way it's going to go, then have a nice day. You guys are just as tough to have a meaningful conversation with without making it personal as religious people. That was the gist of my post, thanks for proving it.

I thought this was a Science AND Philosophy thread .

Science: the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.

Philosophy: the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence, especially when considered as an academic discipline.

I was actually curious, and wanted to talk more about the Orion project. Orion engineer Kelly Smith said that we must gather more information and data on the Van Allen Belts "before we send people through this region of space". The Van Allen belts start at only 345 miles above Earth. It's 2017. That was intriguing to me. I didn't clarify this before, but I assumed the rocket scientists here would know what I was talking about, not come to the conclusion that I was a moon landing hoaxer. The questions that I have are formed from the exact information that I'm given from people I look to for answers, not because of some personal beliefs.

"Within mere days of launch, the Van Allen Probes showed scientists something that would require rewriting textbooks."-NASA

Look up "The Tyranny of the Rocket Equation". Don Pettit, a chemical engineer and NASA astronaut, explains that in order to do something other than to go to space, come back and say "I"m a good boy" (Apollo guys), we must be more resourceful in order to gain anything of use. And it's next to impossible because we are still relying on rockets, therefore we can't bring anything with us to wherever we are going because almost 90 percent of the payload is fuel. The fact that we went to the moon in a near empty vessel gives people this false notion that we are headed to other planets soon to do anything worthwhile. We are very, very far behind.

Anyway, I just posted some thoughts, and I'm told to mind my own business and let the scientists work because the world that's deteriorating around us while we look up at the sky doesn't affect me. OK. Yes, I do live in a bubble, but guess what? You live in the same one. And it's 24,901 miles in circumference.

I'm not here to make this a philosophy VS science thread, so I'll move along.


The only reason I assumed you were a lunar conspiracy guy is because you said, "We can't even get past the radiation belts surrounding our planet, we can't get far out enough to see our planet with our own eyes" and that is completely untrue. I wasn't trying to offend, I was trying to clear up any misunderstandings you may have about the science.

http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm

The Van Allen belt is not a problem for space travel, but space missions absolutely have to take it into account. The Apollo mission only flew through the thin layers of the outer belt and for a very short time. Not nearly enough time to expose somebody to lethal radiation. The levels of radiation are not uniform around the whole planet. The Apollo mission planned for minimum exposure. Satellites also have to take this into consideration. In fact, many of them completely shut off when going through areas of the belt with higher levels of radiation as it interferes with the sensors and devices. The Hubble does this as well as others.

You guys are just as tough to have a meaningful conversation with without making it personal as religious people. That was the gist of my post, thanks for proving it


I didn't realize I made it personal, I apologize if it seemed that way, it wasn't my intent. I thought I was addressing your argument, not you personally. I saw the Van Allen thing and thought that meant you were a lunar hoax guy, not that there's anything wrong with that, there are just a lot of flawed arguments used by them. The Van Allen belt problem is one of them.

Also, there are benefits to doing this research; even failures in science teach us things. We can learn A LOT about our own planet by studying other planets. You disparaged mathematical theories and theoretical physics, but real scientists and mathematicians do not see it as useless. Einstein sure didn't think it was, and he was mostly correct. I guess I just get bothered when folks try to dismiss the work of scientists who have literally spent decades researching their respective fields, developing things for OUR benefit. It's like a slap in the face to them, especially when you have laughably wrong things like flat earth theory and young earth creationism floating around there.

What do you mean by "the world is deteriorating around us". Sure there are plenty of problems, but the world has been getting better, when compared with how things were just a thousand or so years ago, or even 50 years ago. I wasn't trying to be mean or tell you to mind your own business, I just don't see what can possibly be gained by talking negatively about science. Claiming it's just science fiction is a much worse message to put out there than to suggest we may one day have a "warp drive". We're not not looking at other planets so we can destroy this one and run. It's for the advancement of scientific knowledge and hence the advancement of humankind. The earth isn't going to last forever. If humans can last long enough there will be major hurdles to overcome and we will need to eventually move. I just think back to Thomas Edison's famous quote, "I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work". That's what science is. Every failed experiment gets you closer to the answer. It absolutely cannot hurt to try to advance ourselves.
Barcs
User avatar
gavran
RealGM
Posts: 12,646
And1: 2,343
Joined: Nov 02, 2005
Location: crossing the line

Re: O.T. .::THE SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY THREAD::. 

Post#1825 » by gavran » Mon Feb 27, 2017 6:03 pm

Barcs wrote:
gavran wrote:
Barcs wrote:
Nope. It's not complete BS. Exaggerated sure, but to pretend they didn't painfully execute folks for blasphemy, well... you should check the history on that because it was ugly.

Don't change the subject. That has **** all to do with medieval scientific advancement.


How is that changing the subject? There wasn't much scientific advancement during the middle ages, that was my point. Most research and development (if you can call it that)was geared toward weapons and armor for their armies and if something didn't jive with scripture it was often neglected or dismissed even with evidence. And yes they had people whose job specifically was to develop the most painful possible ways to die for capital punishment. Galileo was at the tail end of the middle ages when it was getting better and he was still forced to live in isolation and was excommunicated from the church even though he had hard evidence of heliocentrism. I'm not saying there was no scientific development, there definitely was, but it was only a certain type of research that was tolerated, so it was very limited.

Yes, and this is what is complete horsesh*t, myth, an urban legend that was fabricated during Enlightenment age to delegitimize the Catholic church. The fact the this is still thought in Western schools (among other things) shows that we are still far away.

Same with Galileo. He wasn't oppressed the the Church, as the myth goes. He presented his theory to the Catholic scholars (scientist like him, not some random kiddie f*****s), and lost the scientific debate, because he could not prove his theory. He didn't have sufficient evidence to back up his discoveries at the time. Of course, time proved his right (well, not him, Copernicus)

Galileo had no astronomical proof to offer, partly because his own observations did not align properly with his theory. He insisted that planets move in perfect circles (based on Aristotle’s hypothesis) and rejected the theories of Johannes Kepler, who proposed in his Astronomia nova (1609) that planetary orbits are elliptical. Instead, Galileo proposed as proof a flawed and unconvincing theory that the tides were evidence of the Earth’s rotation (and, incidentally, specifically denying that lunar attraction was involved). In 1616 the Church ordered him to cease and desist his public advocacy of the unproven theory.


http://www.bethinking.org/does-science-disprove-god/conflict-myths-galileo-galilei
User avatar
Barcs
Senior
Posts: 566
And1: 130
Joined: Jan 27, 2013
Location: NJ
Contact:
       

Re: O.T. .::THE SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY THREAD::. 

Post#1826 » by Barcs » Mon Feb 27, 2017 6:11 pm

gavran wrote:
Barcs wrote:
gavran wrote:Don't change the subject. That has **** all to do with medieval scientific advancement.


How is that changing the subject? There wasn't much scientific advancement during the middle ages, that was my point. Most research and development (if you can call it that)was geared toward weapons and armor for their armies and if something didn't jive with scripture it was often neglected or dismissed even with evidence. And yes they had people whose job specifically was to develop the most painful possible ways to die for capital punishment. Galileo was at the tail end of the middle ages when it was getting better and he was still forced to live in isolation and was excommunicated from the church even though he had hard evidence of heliocentrism. I'm not saying there was no scientific development, there definitely was, but it was only a certain type of research that was tolerated, so it was very limited.

Yes, and this is what is complete horsesh*t, myth, an urban legend that was fabricated during Enlightenment age to delegitimize the Catholic church. The fact the this is still thought in Western schools (among other things) shows that we are still far away.

Same with Galileo. He wasn't oppressed the the Church, as the myth goes. He presented his theory to the Catholic scholars (scientist like him, not some random kiddie f*****s), and lost the scientific debate, because he could not prove his theory. He didn't have sufficient evidence to back up his discoveries at the time. Of course, time proved his right (well, not him, Copernicus)

Galileo had no astronomical proof to offer, partly because his own observations did not align properly with his theory. He insisted that planets move in perfect circles (based on Aristotle’s hypothesis) and rejected the theories of Johannes Kepler, who proposed in his Astronomia nova (1609) that planetary orbits are elliptical. Instead, Galileo proposed as proof a flawed and unconvincing theory that the tides were evidence of the Earth’s rotation (and, incidentally, specifically denying that lunar attraction was involved). In 1616 the Church ordered him to cease and desist his public advocacy of the unproven theory.


http://www.bethinking.org/does-science-disprove-god/conflict-myths-galileo-galilei


LMAO. What kind of source is THAT? First off that site is a religious apologetic site, you shouldn't take them at face value. To say Galileo wasn't oppressed is a bit laughable. He was put on trial by the church, ex communicated and then forced to live the rest of his life on house arrest... but that's not oppression right?

Plus you are wrong. There WAS evidence based on the phases of Venus as well as the moons of Jupiter. He also did a lot of work with the tides and comets and how it showed the motion of the earth.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_affair

The Galileo affair was a sequence of events, beginning around 1610,[1] culminating with the trial and condemnation of Galileo Galilei by the Roman Catholic Inquisition in 1633 for his support of heliocentrism (Italian: il processo a Galileo Galilei).[2]

In 1610, Galileo published his Sidereus Nuncius (Starry Messenger), describing the surprising observations that he had made with the new telescope, namely the phases of Venus and the Galilean moons of Jupiter. With these observations he promoted the heliocentric theory of Nicolaus Copernicus (published in De revolutionibus orbium coelestium in 1543). Galileo's initial discoveries were met with opposition within the Catholic Church, and in 1616 the Inquisition declared heliocentrism to be formally heretical. Heliocentric books were banned and Galileo was ordered to refrain from holding, teaching or defending heliocentric ideas.[3]

Galileo went on to propose a theory of tides in 1616, and of comets in 1619; he argued that the tides were evidence for the motion of the Earth. In 1632 Galileo, now an old man, published his Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, which implicitly defended heliocentrism, and was immensely popular. Responding to mounting controversy over theology, astronomy and philosophy, the Roman Inquisition tried Galileo in 1633 and found him "vehemently suspect of heresy", sentencing him to indefinite imprisonment. Galileo was kept under house arrest until his death in 1642.


Galileo was found guilty, and the sentence of the Inquisition, issued on 22 June 1633,[51] was in three essential parts:

-Galileo was found "vehemently suspect of heresy," namely of having held the opinions that the Sun lies motionless at the center of the universe, that the Earth is not at its centre and moves, and that one may hold and defend an opinion as probable after it has been declared contrary to Holy Scripture. He was required to "abjure, curse, and detest" those opinions.[52]
- He was sentenced to formal imprisonment at the pleasure of the Inquisition.[53] On the following day this was commuted to house arrest, which he remained under for the rest of his life.
- His offending Dialogue was banned; and in an action not announced at the trial, publication of any of his works was forbidden, including any he might write in the future.[54]


Not a myth despite what religious apologists claim. You can claim he wasn't oppressed, but being given house arrests for life over scientific ideas sure sounds like oppression to me. He's lucky he didn't live prior to 1000AD, he probably would have been executed.
Barcs
User avatar
gavran
RealGM
Posts: 12,646
And1: 2,343
Joined: Nov 02, 2005
Location: crossing the line

Re: O.T. .::THE SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY THREAD::. 

Post#1827 » by gavran » Mon Feb 27, 2017 6:30 pm

I've never said there wasn't evidence, I've said there wasn't sufficient evidence, which I'm pretty sure you have missed on purpose. My point still stands, start digging in history in a deeper level to challenge your outdated views. Just like the church should.
User avatar
Barcs
Senior
Posts: 566
And1: 130
Joined: Jan 27, 2013
Location: NJ
Contact:
       

Re: O.T. .::THE SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY THREAD::. 

Post#1828 » by Barcs » Mon Feb 27, 2017 7:59 pm

gavran wrote:I've never said there wasn't evidence, I've said there wasn't sufficient evidence, which I'm pretty sure you have missed on purpose. My point still stands, start digging in history in a deeper level to challenge your outdated views. Just like the church should.


I love when people just arbitrarily tell you that you are wrong and just say, "do the research". LOL. I posted legitimate sources, you posted Christian apologetics. 'nuff said.

Galileo didn't just "lose" a scientific debate, he was put on trial BY THE CHURCH who deemed it heretical. He had the evidence, they just wouldn't listen to it because they hated the implications. He was using a new type of telescope that others had not looked through. Is there a better explanation for the phases of Venus based on evidence? That would be the scientific approach. You need to do research beyond Christian apologetic sites, sorry. It's not a myth that people were tortured and executed for blasphemy in the middle ages and that scientific research was only allowed if it agreed with the bible. This is confirmed and happened in many places. It wasn't everywhere, obviously, but Galileo was lucky not to have been sentenced to life in prison or worse, SIMPLY FOR FRIGGIN STUDYING THE SOLAR SYSTEM and publishing his findings. What part of that is myth?
Barcs
KnickFan33
Senior
Posts: 579
And1: 48
Joined: Nov 08, 2006

Re: O.T. .::THE SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY THREAD::. 

Post#1829 » by KnickFan33 » Tue Feb 28, 2017 6:41 pm

I'd be very much interested in seeing whether or not the people who believe in the conspiracy theories are influenced by by their personal/religious beliefs. I find it quite mind boggling that heaps of empirical evidence can be thrown out the window and be replaced with other ideas with no evidence whatsoever (eg - no satellites, everything is ground based).
User avatar
j4remi
Forum Mod - Knicks
Forum Mod - Knicks
Posts: 31,104
And1: 7,032
Joined: Jun 23, 2008
         

Re: O.T. .::THE SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY THREAD::. 

Post#1830 » by j4remi » Tue Feb 28, 2017 7:04 pm

KnickFan33 wrote:I'd be very much interested in seeing whether or not the people who believe in the conspiracy theories are influenced by by their personal/religious beliefs. I find it quite mind boggling that heaps of empirical evidence can be thrown out the window and be replaced with other ideas with no evidence whatsoever (eg - no satellites, everything is ground based).


Man...I've been trying to explain to my nephew that the Earth's not flat for a minute...Kyrie's tweet was like confirmation for duke :lol: I'm gonna try to get him to sit and watch Cosmos and old Knicks games. Between the Cavs love and the flat Earth, I'm not sure which one I need to focus on changing.
A French guy, a Lithuanian and a Spanish guy walk into a bar...Melo takes all the shots.

https://fteswl.com/2017/06/22/bellator-180-preview/
PeoplesChamp
Senior
Posts: 519
And1: 331
Joined: Feb 22, 2016

Re: O.T. .::THE SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY THREAD::. 

Post#1831 » by PeoplesChamp » Sat Mar 18, 2017 2:01 pm

This is either very scary or very exciting, depending on your opinion of all encompassing A.I. Personally, I'd trust an evolved Super A.I. that has surpassed humanity with my neo cortex over any human at the controls.

https://futurism.com/kurzweil-claims-that-the-singularity-will-happen-by-2045/

2029 is the consistent date I have predicted for when an AI will pass a valid Turing test and therefore achieve human levels of intelligence. I have set the date 2045 for the ‘Singularity’ which is when we will multiply our effective intelligence a billion fold by merging with the intelligence we have created.
User avatar
j4remi
Forum Mod - Knicks
Forum Mod - Knicks
Posts: 31,104
And1: 7,032
Joined: Jun 23, 2008
         

Re: O.T. .::THE SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY THREAD::. 

Post#1832 » by j4remi » Thu Mar 23, 2017 2:08 pm

http://gizmodo.com/sting-operation-reveals-sciences-insane-fake-news-probl-1793523135?utm_medium=sharefromsite&utm_source=Gizmodo_twitter

This is scary to watch unfold since we've already got so much ignorance toward information...now you can basically pay some predatory journals and they'll put out anything without much review. On top of that pricing models and the way things are set up for the legit journals make it impossible to have a hand on everything coming out these days from the legit guys and with publishing fees, open access fees, etc. getting legitimate research out and shared isn't exactly a walk in the park. What I don't like about this article is that the journals it mentions by name are legit ones, some of the strongest performers in terms of cited material. I hope people don't start to conflate journals that have good information but some frustrating pricing models with journals that are flat out full of crap and just collecting researcher fees.

“What this boils down to is that scholarly papers published in these types of journals are far less likely to have undergone any kind of quality check, including proper peer review,” one of the scientists leading the sting from the University of Sussex, Katarzyna Pisanski, told Gizmodo in an email. “It could result in (and probably already has) thousands of scientific articles that have essentially gone ‘un-checked’... If we cannot trust the academic publishing system, who can we trust?”
A French guy, a Lithuanian and a Spanish guy walk into a bar...Melo takes all the shots.

https://fteswl.com/2017/06/22/bellator-180-preview/
KnickFan33
Senior
Posts: 579
And1: 48
Joined: Nov 08, 2006

Re: O.T. .::THE SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY THREAD::. 

Post#1833 » by KnickFan33 » Tue Mar 28, 2017 3:01 am

http://time.com/4711023/how-to-keep-your-dna-from-aging/

Scientists have found a way to reverse DNA aging in mice
User avatar
TheBigBoss
General Manager
Posts: 9,866
And1: 3,201
Joined: Sep 02, 2002
         

Re: O.T. .::THE SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY THREAD::. 

Post#1834 » by TheBigBoss » Wed Mar 29, 2017 12:19 am

KnickFan33 wrote:http://time.com/4711023/how-to-keep-your-dna-from-aging/

Scientists have found a way to reverse DNA aging in mice


This is awesome! The part that really caught my attention:

“The idea is to protect the body from radiation exposure here on earth, either naturally occurring or doctor-inflicted,” he says. “If I were going to have an X-ray or a CT scan, I would take NMN beforehand.” He already has plans to go even farther than earth: NASA is collaborating with Sinclair’s group on the human tests to see if it’s possible to insulate astronauts from the effects of cosmic radiation in space.


Hopefully by the time I am 50-60 years old this will be available so I can look like I am still a twenty something. 8-)
spaceballer
Head Coach
Posts: 6,335
And1: 2,499
Joined: Mar 05, 2012

Re: O.T. .::THE SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY THREAD::. 

Post#1836 » by spaceballer » Wed Apr 19, 2017 9:49 pm

South Indian frog exudes mucus with nontoxic peptides that destroy flu viruses. Potential for a flu vaccine againsst resistant strains. Makes you wonder how many other potential insights we lose with the destruction of biodiversity and the solutions produced over eons of evolution.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/04/south-indian-frog-oozes-molecule-that-inexplicably-decimates-flu-viruses/
User avatar
gavran
RealGM
Posts: 12,646
And1: 2,343
Joined: Nov 02, 2005
Location: crossing the line

Re: O.T. .::THE SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY THREAD::. 

Post#1837 » by gavran » Thu Apr 20, 2017 7:36 am

PeoplesChamp
Senior
Posts: 519
And1: 331
Joined: Feb 22, 2016

Re: O.T. .::THE SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY THREAD::. 

Post#1839 » by PeoplesChamp » Fri May 26, 2017 11:53 am



This is mind blowing.
PeoplesChamp
Senior
Posts: 519
And1: 331
Joined: Feb 22, 2016

Re: O.T. .::THE SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY THREAD::. 

Post#1840 » by PeoplesChamp » Fri May 26, 2017 11:53 am

gavran wrote:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/05/22/europe-birthplace-mankind-not-africa-scientists-find/


The headline is misleading.

Return to New York Knicks