Politics, God and Religion vs. Science

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 11381 - 11400 of total 22395 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Jan

Mountain climber
Okinawa, Japan
Feb 7, 2013 - 04:12am PT
Those duck calls fooled my dogs. I played them on my computer while the dogs were in another room and they went crazy thinking the neighbors chickens had gotten into our yard again.
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
-A race of corn eaters
Feb 7, 2013 - 11:40am PT
Proposition:

Today's "deep physics" is hurting modern secular efforts to move beyond ol' time religions and their archaic, pre-scientific, truth-claim misrepresentations.
MH2

climber
Feb 7, 2013 - 11:57am PT
strange similarity in tone:


That's because you're terrible scientists.

You waste 9 billion dollars to smash some sh!t in a tube and still don't know sh!t.

In the future we will know more they say.

Give us 9 billion more so we can make more toys that don't do sh!t.

As modern science progresses the world is keeps getting worst and worst to where people are now wondering if we're all going to go extinct.


vs.


GREAT ACHIEVEMENT great work you climbed a hill like a few stupid beatniks, if you idiots would shave and look presentable, but you are 3 big slobs.

So you climbed El Capitan.. what a great thing to do. It has a great future for you, you can now rest on your laurels as the 3 pigs that climbed up a stone steep grade.

Get your heads examined.
Malemute

Ice climber
the ghost
Feb 7, 2013 - 12:05pm PT
^^ In both cases, it's the armchair peanut gallery talking out their butts
Dr. F.

Big Wall climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 7, 2013 - 12:17pm PT
Credit: Dr. F.
Mother plant with surrounding seedlings

Plants have amazing behaviors that would blow you away. They do have the ability to chose for themselves to survive just like we do.

and what are these choices that plants can make??

IMO
They do not make choices nor can they intervene in their circumstances related to their habitat.

They can respond to stimuli, they can grow around and out of harms way.
But they can't run away from a flood or a cow that wants to eat them.

In simple terms, they are completely helpless.
But hopefully another seed will grow and replace the mother plant.
Plants are perfect examples of how the "Selfish Gene" works, they live to spread their genes,
the individual plant is of no great significance, only the seeds have a purpose --> to continue the genetic line.
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
-A race of corn eaters
Feb 7, 2013 - 12:57pm PT
(1) Atheism's more incomplete than wrong insofar as it's thought of as a replacement for religion.

(2) Atheism's incompleteness, insofar as it exists, points to a need for something more. (The Next Best Thing?)

(3) Whatever follows in the wake of atheism and theism has a tough row to hoe...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DinEKqtCDkg
MH2

climber
Feb 7, 2013 - 01:03pm PT
Let's keep kicking the can down the road.


Dr. F.

Big Wall climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 7, 2013 - 01:04pm PT
moosedrool
Trad climber
lost, far away from Poland Feb 6, 2013 - 07:48pm PT


As Far as we know, there are no highers, nor anything above human intelligence in the entire universe
To say there is, is pure speculation

Hmm, that would make us special. Like we used to believe the Earth was the center of the Univers, perhaps?

Moosedrool
are you saying there are highers??
Please show one to me.

I didn't say we were special, I just said it is pure speculation to say there is, UNTIL you show us a higher or an advanced alien from another planet.
Getch

Mountain climber
Flagstaff, AZ
Feb 7, 2013 - 01:11pm PT
healyje and spider:

The idea of free will can be reduced (in my opinion) to that of causality; or a singular influence produces the same result every time. We use science not to PROVE anything, rather we show that the null hypothesis (or opposite to the hypothesis) is possible thereby making the original theory (free will in this case) less plausible. Good scientists will never talk in terms of proof, rather plausibility.

I use the term singularity to refer to both the singular influence on an outcome, or god. I think these perspectives are the same essentially. In order to PROVE that an outcome had a singular influence, you would need to define and measure all other possible influences, which would require the perspective of omnipresence; did that make any sense?

So, we can disprove the notion of "free will" by first saying will is the singular influence of one's mind or desires on an outcome behaviour. If we can show that an influence outside of the person had an impact on the outcome, then we can say freedom of choice or free will is not observed. I think this is a great example of this:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-21358995

I really need to do that prodigal trip report soon, my buddy sat at the base with a 5dmk3 and took a time lapse of our successful failure.
locker

Social climber
FukUville
Feb 7, 2013 - 01:53pm PT



...

TomCochrane

Trad climber
Santa Cruz Mountains and Monterey Bay
Feb 7, 2013 - 02:10pm PT
I didn't say we were special, I just said it is pure speculation to say there is, UNTIL you show us a higher or an advanced alien from another planet.

what are you folks trying to hide?

there's probably higher probablity of this than what is being used to 'confirm' the Higgs Boson

NASA Ames Research Center
Using publicly available data from NASA's Kepler Mission space telescope, astronomers at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics (CfA) estimate that six percent of red dwarf stars in the galaxy have Earth-size planets in the "habitable zone," the range of distances from a star where the surface temperature of an orbiting planet might be suitable for liquid water.

The majority of the sun's closest stellar neighbors are red dwarfs. Researchers now believe that an Earth-size planet with a moderate temperature may be just 13 light-years away.

"We don't know if life could exist on a planet orbiting a red dwarf, but the findings pique my curiosity and leave me wondering if the cosmic cradles of life are more diverse than we humans have imagined," said Natalie Batalha, Kepler mission scientist, NASA's Ames Research Center in Moffett Field, Calif.

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/kepler/news/kepler-data-suggests-earth-size-planets-next-door.html[/quote]
TomCochrane

Trad climber
Santa Cruz Mountains and Monterey Bay
Feb 7, 2013 - 02:16pm PT
IMO
They do not make choices nor can they intervene in their circumstances related to their habitat.

They can respond to stimuli, they can grow around and out of harms way.
But they can't run away from a flood or a cow that wants to eat them.

In simple terms, they are completely helpless.


check out the two volume book 'Edible Forest Gardens' about how native peoples on the eastern seaboard were intimately involved with care taking the forests

it seems that forest plant and trees communities communicate information over long distances, relative to nutrients, and medicines; and coordinate budding, flowering, fruiting; relative to pollinators, pests, seasons, and major weather events

http://www.edibleforestgardens.com/
Dr. F.

Big Wall climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 7, 2013 - 02:35pm PT
Just because there are many earth like planets, doesn't mean that there is life on them.

It's just speculation to say there is, until you find the life.

and it's even more speculative to say that the life is a "higher", or more advanced than human.

I won't bother on the plant issue, believe what you want.
Palnt communication is just a response to stimuli, not free will or a sign of intelligence.
TomCochrane

Trad climber
Santa Cruz Mountains and Monterey Bay
Feb 7, 2013 - 03:22pm PT
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 7, 2013 - 11:35am PT
Just because there are many earth like planets, doesn't mean that there is life on them.

It's just speculation to say there is, until you find the life.

and it's even more speculative to say that the life is a "higher", or more advanced than human.
I won't bother on the plant issue, believe what you want.
Palnt communication is just a response to stimuli, not free will or a sign of intelligence.


i hope you have a well developed fall-back plan
Spider Savage

Mountain climber
The shaggy fringe of Los Angeles
Feb 7, 2013 - 04:08pm PT
Good scientists will never talk in terms of proof, rather plausibility.

Agreed. The British Columbia alcohol death survey sited in your link is not conclusive. There could be other factors not accounted for such as a rise in the quality of good television causing people who would have normally killed themselves by drink to pass out in front of the boob-tube.

--



Still trying to catch up with you guys on the Free Will - Determinism lingo.

I found this great article in the process:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Certainty


Spider Savage

Mountain climber
The shaggy fringe of Los Angeles
Feb 7, 2013 - 04:19pm PT
On Free Will and Plants

I don't see why a plant cannot have free will despite being fixed in place.

Relatively speaking, humans are fixed in place within our limited biosphere of hard land, air, food, and water needs.

Symbiotic relationships can be manipulated to exercise free will. eg. Flowering to attract insects for cross pollination. Perhaps other undiscovered relationships. When you shut down your mind to possibilities, you have no chance of harvesting the fruit of observation.

Here is example of how we are finding out new things:
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/02/magnetic-salmon/
moosedrool

Trad climber
lost, far away from Poland
Feb 7, 2013 - 04:37pm PT
Dr. F. says,

Just because there are many earth like planets, doesn't mean that there is life on them.

Some scientists actually try to calculate the number of civilizations in our galaxy.

Drake’s equation:

N = RfpneflfifcL
In this equation, N is the number of detectable civilizations in our galaxy. The other variables are described below:
• R is the rate of star formation in the galaxy
• fp is the fraction of stars that form planets
• ne is the number of planets hospitable to life (i.e., Earth-like planets)
• fl is the fraction of these planets on which life actually emerges
• fi is the fraction of these planets on which intelligent life arises
• fc is the fraction of these planets with intelligent beings capable of interstellar communication
• L is the length of time such a civilization remains detectable

The only variable known with any degree of certainty is the rate of stellar formation, R. In the Milky Way, a typical spiral galaxy, new stars form at a rate of roughly four per year [source: Cain]. The variable astronomers feel most uncertain about is L, the length of time a civilization remains detectable. A variety of estimates have been used for L, ranging from 10 years to 10 million years.
Astronomers can make educated guesses about the rest of the variables. For example, of the nine planets in our solar system, only four are what astronomers call terrestrial planets -- those that have a solid surface. Of those terrestrial planets, only Earth supports life. If we take our solar system as representative, then we might argue that ne equals 1/4 or 0.25. Similar guesses have been made about the other variables and, interestingly, they all end up having very similar values, usually in a range between 0.1 and 1.0. So, a typical calculation might look like this:

N = 4 x 0.5 x 0.25 x 0.2 x 0.2 x 0.2 x 3,000,000

which gives us a value of 12,000 civilizations in our galaxy.

http://science.howstuffworks.com/space/aliens-ufos/extraterrestrial-life-odds.htm
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
-A race of corn eaters
Feb 7, 2013 - 04:39pm PT
Tomorrow's young person,
Don't give a damn 'bout Grandma's religion,
She's living in the past, it's a new generation.
Malemute

Ice climber
the ghost
Feb 7, 2013 - 04:51pm PT
I still equate God to Santa in terms of existence.

* No one has ever seen flying reindeers, except Santa, Mrs. Claus and their elves, of course. However, since there are over 300,000 species of living organisms that are unclassified (though they are mostly insects and germs), we can give them benefit of doubt.
* According to the Populations Reference Bureau, there are about 2 billion children (defined as under 15) in the world. Assuming that Santa caters to Christian children only and do not bother himself about children of other religion, he still has 15% of the above children population to think about.
* 15% of 2 billion means 300 million children, which is certain an enormous workload, even for benevolent and kindly Santa.
* Let's assume that there are about three children in each household and at least one of them is good. Thus, Santa has to visit 100 million homes during Christmas Eve.
* Let's assume Santa starts distributing gifts, starting from 5 pm to midnight (which makes 7 hours). Since earth rotates and there is a difference of full 24 hours overall due to different time zones, we can say that Santa has 31 hours to finish his work. We can also assume that Santa works from East to West to use this time difference to his full advantage.
* Visiting 100 million homes in 31 hours means that Santa has to visit 896 homes per second.
* Thus, he has about 1/1000th of a second to do everything mentioned above such as parking his sleigh, looking for the right gifts, climbing down the sleigh and chimney, binge on snacks, fill the stockings, come up again and rush to his next stop.
* Even if we assume that all households are distributed evenly throughout the earth for convenience of Santa and Santa Claus works non-stop for 31 hours (both of which are very big assumptions that are almost impossible!), Santa has to travel about 75.5 million miles in 31 hours and 650 miles per second.
* Now the fastest man-made vehicle moves at 27.4 miles per second and normally reindeers can run at the speed of 15 miles per hour. 650 miles per second is 3000 times faster than the speed of sound.
* On an average, each toy for a child weighs about 2 pounds; the sleigh has to carry over 321,000 tons plus the Santa with his big belly and his reindeers.
* Known reindeers can only pull 300 pounds at once. If flying reindeers can pull up to 3000 pounds, about 214,000 reindeers will be needed to pull Santa's sleigh, which means sleigh must carry over 353,000 tons.
* 353,000 tons traveling at 650 miles per second in the air will create enormous friction and Santa, his reindeers and his sleigh will instantly burn to death, just like meteors that occasionally enter earth's atmosphere.
WBraun

climber
Feb 7, 2013 - 05:25pm PT
There's "life" on every planet.

The mental speculator "dog" above has no clue what "Santa Clause" really is.

This why he's still only has "dog mentality" ......
Messages 11381 - 11400 of total 22395 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews