ImageImageImageImageImage

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

Moderators: moocow007, Knickstape1214, magnumt, NoLayupRule, Capn'O, Brooklyn_Yards, Thorn, AllanH20, j4remi, Thugger HBC, GONYK, mrpoetryNmotion

User avatar
knickfan
Head Coach
Posts: 6,573
And1: 15
Joined: Mar 29, 2001
Location: Atlanta
Contact:

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

Post#1801 » by knickfan » Wed Feb 22, 2017 4:38 am

:jawdrop: that's incredible! Now we just gotta figure out how to hack it 8-)
http://www.knicksology.com - Knicks board fantasy ball
PeoplesChamp
Junior
Posts: 485
And1: 314
Joined: Feb 22, 2016

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

Post#1802 » by PeoplesChamp » Wed Feb 22, 2017 4:40 am

knickfan wrote::jawdrop: that's incredible! Now we just gotta figure out how to hack it 8-)

You can. That's what life is about. It's the secret to success.
User avatar
EnigmatiC
General Manager
Posts: 9,009
And1: 410
Joined: Mar 22, 2004
Location: Movin on yo left!
       

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

Post#1803 » by EnigmatiC » Wed Feb 22, 2017 4:40 am

So have we figured out if the eart is flat or round yet?
movingon
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,347
And1: 62
Joined: Dec 06, 2006

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

Post#1804 » by movingon » Wed Feb 22, 2017 7:38 am

WesleyExChiFan wrote:
Barcs wrote:There is absolutely nothing wrong with science having high standards of scrutiny for new ideas. In the end, if an idea has merit it will eventually be taken seriously. It's not just some random dude in an office checking off boxes on what is realistic and what's not. The evidence will speak for itself. One should always be skeptical at first when presented with any new idea. It's literally the exact opposite of religion. Don't compare hardworking scientists to religious nuts that blindly believe their one way is absolute truth. Science is constantly updating and changing as new info comes out.

To be fair, some scientific people are that way too.

I watched that movie, Religulous that Bill Maher put together. I was expecting the result you described, but what I saw was that the Catholic priests in Rome were the most open to new ideas and the scientists were the least.

That's not to endorse one side of the other btw, it's just that people in general are more complex than their religious (or non) beliefs.


I object. Scientists are trained to skeptical. If you can present them with conclusive evidence, they will come around. Evidence is absolutely useless on religious zealots, who are trained to believe in spite of any evidence you present them. How can you equate the two?
I increasingly get the feeling that the public is simply growing distrustful of some amorphous "establishment", which science gets thrown into.
That's fine, be skeptical. The scientific community can be wrong. But be just as skeptical of whatever "new ideas" come along. People only remember the new ideas that are paradigm shifting. They forget that for every one of those there 999 BS ideas which were tossed in the garbage can of history and forgotten about.

As for Catholic priests in Rome being more open to new ideas than scientists ...
Well I can't comment, since I don't know what new ideas you have in mind.
Human beings tend to be open to new ideas, which confirm their pre-existing worldview.
As scientists the entire game is to disprove new ideas. That's how discovery works. A new idea must be confronted with every possible alternative scenario.
User avatar
WesleyExChiFan
Starter
Posts: 2,356
And1: 950
Joined: Jul 05, 2013
       

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

Post#1805 » by WesleyExChiFan » Wed Feb 22, 2017 7:54 am

movingon wrote:
WesleyExChiFan wrote:
Barcs wrote:There is absolutely nothing wrong with science having high standards of scrutiny for new ideas. In the end, if an idea has merit it will eventually be taken seriously. It's not just some random dude in an office checking off boxes on what is realistic and what's not. The evidence will speak for itself. One should always be skeptical at first when presented with any new idea. It's literally the exact opposite of religion. Don't compare hardworking scientists to religious nuts that blindly believe their one way is absolute truth. Science is constantly updating and changing as new info comes out.

To be fair, some scientific people are that way too.

I watched that movie, Religulous that Bill Maher put together. I was expecting the result you described, but what I saw was that the Catholic priests in Rome were the most open to new ideas and the scientists were the least.

That's not to endorse one side of the other btw, it's just that people in general are more complex than their religious (or non) beliefs.


I object. Scientists are trained to skeptical. If you can present them with conclusive evidence, they will come around. Evidence is absolutely useless on religious zealots, who are trained to believe in spite of any evidence you present them. How can you equate the two?
I increasingly get the feeling that the public is simply growing distrustful of some amorphous "establishment", which science gets thrown into.
That's fine, be skeptical. The scientific community can be wrong. But be just as skeptical of whatever "new ideas" come along. People only remember the new ideas that are paradigm shifting. They forget that for every one of those there 999 BS ideas which were tossed in the garbage can of history and forgotten about.

As for Catholic priests in Rome being more open to new ideas than scientists ...
Well I can't comment, since I don't know what new ideas you have in mind.
Human beings tend to be open to new ideas, which confirm their pre-existing worldview.
As scientists the entire game is to disprove new ideas. That's how discovery works. A new idea must be confronted with every possible alternative scenario.

I'd and-1 but firefox is being weird.

I'm a meteorologist by trade, so I'm totally on the side of established science. See my remarks in the Kyrie thinks the world is flat thread. I was just saying, in that particular movie/documentary, that the individuals they interviewed didn't exactly marry up with the stereotypes. That's all. Human beings are complex creatures and that's the only point I was trying to make.
movingon
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,347
And1: 62
Joined: Dec 06, 2006

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

Post#1806 » by movingon » Wed Feb 22, 2017 1:25 pm

WesleyExChiFan wrote:
movingon wrote:
WesleyExChiFan wrote:


Guess I gotta watch the movie :-)
User avatar
j4remi
Forum Mod - Knicks
Forum Mod - Knicks
Posts: 30,874
And1: 6,746
Joined: Jun 23, 2008
         

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

Post#1807 » by j4remi » Wed Feb 22, 2017 6:35 pm

http://time.com/4677103/nasa-announcement-new-solar-system/?xid=time_socialflow_facebook

What has always been harder to spot are Earthlike planets — relatively small ones with a rocky surface, orbiting their sun at the not-too-close, not-too-far distance that would allow liquid water to exist. Today, however, that changed in a big way, as NASA announced that a single star relatively close to Earth is home to no fewer than seven Earthlike planets. If you're looking for extraterrestrial life, there may be no place better.

The new findings, published in the current issue of Nature, are the result of more than six years of study of the small star Trappist-1, located just over 39 light years from Earth — barely one town over in a galaxy that measures 100,000 light years across. The star got its name from a rough acronym of the telescope in the Chilean desert that has studied it the most: the Transiting Planets and Planetesimals Small Telescope. As the name suggests, the Trappist telescope looks for planets by watching for the portion of their orbit in which they transit — or pass in front of — their star, causing a tiny but regular dimming in starlight.
UFC 210 Preview: https://fteswl.com/2017/04/06/ufc-210-preview/

BAL 1.0
Pete Rock
Lauryn Hill
Mos Def
Redman
Method Man
User avatar
EnigmatiC
General Manager
Posts: 9,009
And1: 410
Joined: Mar 22, 2004
Location: Movin on yo left!
       

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

Post#1808 » by EnigmatiC » Wed Feb 22, 2017 6:37 pm

j4remi wrote:http://time.com/4677103/nasa-announcement-new-solar-system/?xid=time_socialflow_facebook

What has always been harder to spot are Earthlike planets — relatively small ones with a rocky surface, orbiting their sun at the not-too-close, not-too-far distance that would allow liquid water to exist. Today, however, that changed in a big way, as NASA announced that a single star relatively close to Earth is home to no fewer than seven Earthlike planets. If you're looking for extraterrestrial life, there may be no place better.

The new findings, published in the current issue of Nature, are the result of more than six years of study of the small star Trappist-1, located just over 39 light years from Earth — barely one town over in a galaxy that measures 100,000 light years across. The star got its name from a rough acronym of the telescope in the Chilean desert that has studied it the most: the Transiting Planets and Planetesimals Small Telescope. As the name suggests, the Trappist telescope looks for planets by watching for the portion of their orbit in which they transit — or pass in front of — their star, causing a tiny but regular dimming in starlight.



Let's send some scouts over there ASAP
Amsterdam
Starter
Posts: 2,159
And1: 1,056
Joined: Feb 18, 2016
       

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

Post#1809 » by Amsterdam » Wed Feb 22, 2017 7:13 pm

EnigmatiC wrote:
j4remi wrote:http://time.com/4677103/nasa-announcement-new-solar-system/?xid=time_socialflow_facebook

What has always been harder to spot are Earthlike planets — relatively small ones with a rocky surface, orbiting their sun at the not-too-close, not-too-far distance that would allow liquid water to exist. Today, however, that changed in a big way, as NASA announced that a single star relatively close to Earth is home to no fewer than seven Earthlike planets. If you're looking for extraterrestrial life, there may be no place better.

The new findings, published in the current issue of Nature, are the result of more than six years of study of the small star Trappist-1, located just over 39 light years from Earth — barely one town over in a galaxy that measures 100,000 light years across. The star got its name from a rough acronym of the telescope in the Chilean desert that has studied it the most: the Transiting Planets and Planetesimals Small Telescope. As the name suggests, the Trappist telescope looks for planets by watching for the portion of their orbit in which they transit — or pass in front of — their star, causing a tiny but regular dimming in starlight.



Let's send some scouts over there ASAP


:lol:
User avatar
Barcs
Senior
Posts: 544
And1: 130
Joined: Jan 27, 2013
Location: NJ
Contact:
       

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

Post#1810 » by Barcs » Wed Feb 22, 2017 9:00 pm

movingon wrote:As for Catholic priests in Rome being more open to new ideas than scientists ...
Well I can't comment, since I don't know what new ideas you have in mind.
Human beings tend to be open to new ideas, which confirm their pre-existing worldview.
As scientists the entire game is to disprove new ideas. That's how discovery works. A new idea must be confronted with every possible alternative scenario.


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. When real science finally came out and suggested that the earth wasn't the center of the universe, it led to massive backlash on Galileo who was forced to live the rest of his life in isolation for daring to question the church, even though he was right and had evidence to back it.

Today we just have religious zealots that hate science because it conflicts with literal translations of ancient mythology. They are so quick to get on the offensive when it comes to science, but don't understand 99% of it. They just KNOW it's wrong. These people make me sick and I'm glad you speak out in defense of the scientists. If you didn't, I would have. People have this misconception that science is all just a guess and you either blindly believe or you get kicked out. That is how religion works, not science. It's just these armchair philosopher types that have to point out flaws in science as if it helps their case in any way shape or form. Can't they just let science do it's thing instead of fighting it tooth and nail every step of the way? These people basically belong in the dark ages. It's simply mind boggling that people still attack science in 2017 despite all the tech it has brought us. They don't care about objective truth, they only care about myths they were taught as child.
Barcs
User avatar
Barcs
Senior
Posts: 544
And1: 130
Joined: Jan 27, 2013
Location: NJ
Contact:
       

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

Post#1811 » by Barcs » Wed Feb 22, 2017 9:23 pm

WesleyExChiFan wrote:I'm a meteorologist by trade, so I'm totally on the side of established science. See my remarks in the Kyrie thinks the world is flat thread.


Wow. I just read that thread, and I can't believe so many people actually agree with flat earth, despite the concept having ZERO merit, ZERO evidence, and ZERO falsifiability. I am literally sick thinking about how dumb people are defending that absurd idea that is debunked easily by our vantage point of the stars in the southern hemisphere and phases of the moon. People do all their research on youtube and never fact check anything. I feel like my IQ dropped just reading that crap. Just because something goes against the status quo, doesn't make it right. I feel it's a youth thing. When younger, people are more rebellious, more acceptable of the idea that the government lies to us about everything and the need to feel oppressed. Flat isn't a condition of the earth, it's a state of mind.
Barcs
PeoplesChamp
Junior
Posts: 485
And1: 314
Joined: Feb 22, 2016

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

Post#1812 » by PeoplesChamp » Thu Feb 23, 2017 12:20 am



I really dig the V-Sauce approach. HS science teachers should all be this guy.
PeoplesChamp
Junior
Posts: 485
And1: 314
Joined: Feb 22, 2016

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

Post#1813 » by PeoplesChamp » Fri Feb 24, 2017 7:03 pm

j4remi wrote:http://time.com/4677103/nasa-announcement-new-solar-system/?xid=time_socialflow_facebook

What has always been harder to spot are Earthlike planets — relatively small ones with a rocky surface, orbiting their sun at the not-too-close, not-too-far distance that would allow liquid water to exist. Today, however, that changed in a big way, as NASA announced that a single star relatively close to Earth is home to no fewer than seven Earthlike planets. If you're looking for extraterrestrial life, there may be no place better.

The new findings, published in the current issue of Nature, are the result of more than six years of study of the small star Trappist-1, located just over 39 light years from Earth — barely one town over in a galaxy that measures 100,000 light years across. The star got its name from a rough acronym of the telescope in the Chilean desert that has studied it the most: the Transiting Planets and Planetesimals Small Telescope. As the name suggests, the Trappist telescope looks for planets by watching for the portion of their orbit in which they transit — or pass in front of — their star, causing a tiny but regular dimming in starlight.


We're going to find life. I just want us to find it while I'm still alive. Let's get that Europa mission crackin
User avatar
DievsZingis
Sophomore
Posts: 180
And1: 234
Joined: Dec 14, 2016
Location: Brooklyn
       

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

Post#1814 » by DievsZingis » Fri Feb 24, 2017 8:16 pm

"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

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!

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.

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.

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.
ImageImageImageImageImageImageImage
User avatar
gavran
RealGM
Posts: 12,474
And1: 2,241
Joined: Nov 02, 2005
Location: crossing the line

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

Post#1815 » by gavran » Fri Feb 24, 2017 8:23 pm

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.
PeoplesChamp
Junior
Posts: 485
And1: 314
Joined: Feb 22, 2016

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

Post#1816 » by PeoplesChamp » Fri Feb 24, 2017 10:04 pm

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

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!

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.

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.

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.



I feel more like the more we reach out and see what this universe is made of, with the understanding that we're made out of the same stuff that's out there, it makes us that much more special. It's spiritual.
User avatar
DievsZingis
Sophomore
Posts: 180
And1: 234
Joined: Dec 14, 2016
Location: Brooklyn
       

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

Post#1817 » by DievsZingis » Sat Feb 25, 2017 6:28 am

I have no problem with us looking into the sky and finding, revealing, and learning about what's out there. It's amazing, it blows my mind the more I educate myself about it.

But there is a line between teaching us knowledge, and feeding us science fiction, and the scientific community, the astrophysicist one in particular, is bordering on that these days. The information they give out has become more and more hypothetical, and even when they present a solution, it's theoretical. It's why I quoted Tesla, a scientist who lived in the practical side of things.

For example, there was this discovery about the 7 new Earth like planets from a team of international scientists . That's awesome, and they even put this information up, it's great: http://www.trappist.one/#system.

But then NASA, the biggest and most respected space organization in the world, gets in on the action and comes out with this sci-fi fanfic: https://exoplanets.nasa.gov/alien-worlds/exoplanet-travel-bureau/

I love science fact, but when it starts blending in with science fiction, and it's coupled with just theories to back it up.....I don't know. It seems like NASA is concentrating a little too much on entertaining us rather than providing answers these days.
ImageImageImageImageImageImageImage
PeoplesChamp
Junior
Posts: 485
And1: 314
Joined: Feb 22, 2016

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

Post#1818 » by PeoplesChamp » Sat Feb 25, 2017 9:55 am

I hear you. But I also get why NASA would do something like that. They're ridiculously underfunded as it is, and most people do not understand the true value of what they do.

Those things, although misguided at times, are meant to give the general public something to play with in their imaginations. In the past, just the thought of going to the moon was enough to spark the minds of children and get them involved in STEM. Now, they're trying to use exoplanets as that carrot. And not just for the children. But for the numbnuts in Congress who decide on their money.
User avatar
Barcs
Senior
Posts: 544
And1: 130
Joined: Jan 27, 2013
Location: NJ
Contact:
       

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

Post#1819 » by Barcs » Sun Feb 26, 2017 9:04 pm

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.
Barcs
User avatar
Barcs
Senior
Posts: 544
And1: 130
Joined: Jan 27, 2013
Location: NJ
Contact:
       

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

Post#1820 » by Barcs » Mon Feb 27, 2017 6:21 am

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.
Barcs

Return to New York Knicks