Politics, God and Religion vs. Science

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 15181 - 15200 of total 22396 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
jstan

climber
Jul 7, 2013 - 01:13am PT
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpjwotips7E

Feynman on consciousness. Halfway in.
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Jul 7, 2013 - 02:48am PT
Thanks Jstan that was handsomely entertaining!

I guess my problem is my favorite sandwich has Mortadella in it.
Baloney with alot of fat in it. Maybe I'll go back to Liverwurst
go-B

climber
Hebrews 1:3
Jul 7, 2013 - 08:42am PT
Jesus will be there in the room!

I'll let you be the judge, but it sounds like candy land fairy tales to me, and impossible by any means the universe can function.


Dr. F. I don't know why God chooses to see Christ's righteousness instead of our unrighteousness when we believe on Jesus! But that's what the bible teaches, and if it works for God it works for me, and I'm glad He does! But I know it is because God loves us and wants to forgive us, if we just ask Him to!
MH2

climber
Jul 7, 2013 - 10:05am PT
Hurray for that clip. It gives the same impression of Feynman I get from books written by and about him. An amateur helium physicist. Ha. Susskind gets close to a description of thinking, too, the kind of thinking which gets you a good new idea.

Consciousness? My math consultant is sticking with saying it is a pony. It may also be a speed bump.
specialistclimber

climber
Jul 7, 2013 - 10:14am PT
Over the years past high school i read some qualified authority
documents about carbon dating which of course were not published by
Jehovah's Witnesses and other attack oriented creationist using
unqualified authority references.

It appeared that the authorities did not make claims of accuracy over the
10,000's of years and in the 70's and 80's while still developing
the science the inacuracies made by the authorities "testing
matters that are able to be tested" were under dated. Another words the
inaccurate over dating claims outside of the science community came
from religous groups and others outside of the sciences.
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
And every fool knows, a dog needs a home, and...
Jul 7, 2013 - 10:34am PT

Since when are you guys authority's on what the bible says?

I don't care what the bible says.

I just know this - if someone says they think the world is 6,000 years old that person is lying.

DMT
Dr. F.

Big Wall climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 7, 2013 - 10:50am PT
and if it works for God it works for me,
go-be

this is where your problem lies

We don't know if it works for god or not, just because the bible says something to that effect doesn't mean that it is the last word on the subject.

The bible is not the word of God, fact, ask the Pope
Science has proven that is was mostly written after Jesus died, by normal men, then changed 100s of times, it's a story of myths, nothing more.
Jesus has been turned into a myth, he isn't real, except in your mind, just like Santa.
Jan

Mountain climber
Okinawa, Japan
Jul 7, 2013 - 11:00am PT
Speaking of what's real or not, I watched jstan's video of Leonard Susskind on Richard Feynman and then I decided to look up Susskind. Among other articles, I came across one about him and his theories of cosmology on a Scientific American website. The title was The Bad Boy of Physics.

Following the brief synopsis of his theories, was a very interesting discussion, more philosophy than physics, and so criticized as are Susskind's theories, for lack of observable, measurable evidence. Many issues brought up on this thread were mentioned in the comments though one had the impression that it was physicists more than philosophers raising them. Definitely a thought provoker.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=bad-boy-of-physics
BASE104

Social climber
An Oil Field
Jul 7, 2013 - 11:38am PT
Carbon dating is only used for short term dating, because Carbon 14 has a half life of less than 6000 years. It is only good to a little over 60,000 years, which is such a short period that it isn't useful for geologists.

There are a number of other radiometric dating methods, but the most precise, by far, is U-Pb dating of fluid inclusions in zircons.

zircons are plenty sturdy, and can survive a lot of abuse. The Zircon dating method is quite precise.

U-Pb dating has such a long half life that it is the preferred method for rocks in the billions of years range.

Using all sorts of methods, the entire history of continental crust, its accretion, rift, wandering around, etc. has now been pretty much worked out.

I read a paper on ages of ancient terrains in basement granites of Colorado, and you could see how each little piece accreted to form larger and larger parts of continental crust.

There is no mystery here. Go try it yourself if you have doubts.

That is the way that science works. If you have issues with a paper, then try to repeat the experiment..meaning try to repeat the dating. If it can't be repeated, then there is a problem in the science.

Nature doesn't lie.
BASE104

Social climber
An Oil Field
Jul 7, 2013 - 11:40am PT
Dr. F,

There is plenty of information that leads to the probability that Jesus did indeed exist.
Tricouni

Mountain climber
Vancouver
Jul 7, 2013 - 12:26pm PT
Base:
There are a number of other radiometric dating methods, but the most precise, by far, is U-Pb dating of fluid inclusions in zircons.

zircons are plenty sturdy, and can survive a lot of abuse. The Zircon dating method is quite precise.

Just a minor correction, base. It's not the fluid inclusions that are dated, but the zircons themselves. When they form, the zircon crystal structure soaks up uranium but not lead, which is why they work for U-Pb dating.

C14 dating, as you say, only goes back 50,000 or so years. Useless for geologists like you, but great for dating ice-age moraines, prehistoric landslides, and the like. Quaternary geologists use it all the time; those who work on what's going on in Cretaceous batholiths, like me, don't.
Jan

Mountain climber
Okinawa, Japan
Jul 7, 2013 - 12:40pm PT
Carbon 14 only works on organic material so I don't see how it would be useful to geologists unless very recent history like sediment that contained charcoal from a prehistoric campfire (Old World not New) or maybe the dessicated remains of a very old tree?
jstan

climber
Jul 7, 2013 - 02:26pm PT
We all have ideas that lie outside of our expertise. Ideas that may be found interesting to others. What can one do? The internet can also function as the lowest form of publishing. The internet is just about as low as you can get after all. Anyway here is one.

In the cited lecture Jeff Hawkins discusses how his computer programming emulates how the neocortex processes streaming data. Streaming data is a major responsibility of the brain as it searches incoming sensory data for any sign in their surroundings that a predator is about end their existence. To do this in a way that is both time efficient and does not require consumption of huge amounts of energy (evolution has had to meet both of these requirements) the neocortex uses a data management strategy Hawkins calls “sparsely distributed representations”.

What’s that? Let’s suppose the incoming data has to trigger 2000 neurons to fire for the organism to reach a higher level decision that “Hey! I have seen this before. I better watch out.” To achieve time and energy efficiency Hawkins uses only a sparse 40 bits in his approach to allow the system to decide, “Yes. I have seen this before.” He makes the point 40 bits or even just 10 can give one good statistical confidence. Even 2000 will not give you certainty given that there is always noise.

This opens to us a possible understanding of Déjà Vu. In Déjà Vu we make a high level decision that we have been in this precise situation before. Maybe that decision is just an error. It can arise either because the 40 bits were not enough or just because of noise. That’s the idea.

If true, the phenomenon evolved because it was an alternative better than being so slow in response that we got eaten or to our needing so much food ourselves as to cause us to take unjustifiable risks. That evolutionary choice would have been made millions of years ago.

So forget about prior lives. This is one, of probably many, down to earth ways Déjà Vu can have come to pass.

Immensely exciting stuff is being done today. Watch it.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfUT3UbYhjM

Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
And every fool knows, a dog needs a home, and...
Jul 7, 2013 - 02:55pm PT
Carbon 14 only works on organic material so I don't see how it would be useful to geologists unless very recent history like sediment that contained charcoal from a prehistoric campfire (Old World not New) or maybe the dessicated remains of a very old tree?

Correlation - every measuring stick has to be correlated. When there is overlap in dating methods you'd expect these different methods to produce the same result for the same material. The more correlation you have the greater the confidence in your dating analysis. All rungs on the same ladder of geologic time scales... right?

DMT
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Potemkin Village
Jul 7, 2013 - 03:15pm PT
C'mon, really, the joy of aging...

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/07/opinion/sunday/the-joy-of-old-age-no-kidding.html?src=me&ref=general&_r=0
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 7, 2013 - 03:27pm PT
nice read Fructose

thanks for that
specialistclimber

climber
Jul 7, 2013 - 03:56pm PT
"Life span" of matter "after death" for monoctyledon's are not
the same as with dicotyledon's. #1 and i agreed that Pathology is
usually a waste.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dicotyledon

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

This is 1 reason some of my opinions differ from the
Church of Satan.
BASE104

Social climber
An Oil Field
Jul 7, 2013 - 04:16pm PT
Jan,

Carbon 14 is used for "very young" sediments and archeological digs. With a 5000 year half life, it is gone in 100,000 years or so. Uranium has a very long half life, and as it decays, lead (Pb) is one of the daughter elements. Measuring the ratio tells you the date, and Zircons are now a very precise way to date igneous rocks such as granite. Zircons are very rare in basaltic type rocks.

As was correctly explained above, Zircons are now the top notch method of dating igneous rocks. Paleomagnetic signatures frozen in any rock will tell you what latitude the rock was deposited in. You can therefore reconstruct the history of the wandering continents, climates, emergence of life, etc. It is all there in a granite cobble that you can pick up in the Merced River. Take that rock into a high tech lab, and you can see all kinds of amazing information from it.

I work Paleozoic rocks, which are

Cambrian
Ordovician
Silurian
Devonian
Mississippian
Pennsylvanian
Permian.

I made my best discovery in a shallow gas accumulation in the Permian. Hundreds of wells had drilled right through it, but it was so shallow that most wells didn't pull the full logging suite over it.

The midcontinent basins are Pennsylvanian in age, and there are all sorts of delta deposits and the like deposited.

Petroleum geologists like sandstones and carbonates (limestone to dolomite) because they have porosity, and that pore space is filled with only a few possible fluids: saltwater (by far the most common, and the most common form of dry holes) or hydrocarbons. It is a lot of work figuring out the stratigraphy of these deposits.

Deltas and shore face environments are the most common type of sandstone ("clastics" we call them). I could toss up maps of deltas where the distributary channels, overbank deposits, etc. look exactly like the Mississipian delta, or estuary deposits. The only difference is that they are hundreds of millions of year old and are 10,000 feet deep.

If you look at a rock like the beautiful Wingate sandstone in Indian Creek, I see an outstanding reservoir rock. It has over 20% pore space and good permeability.

I can look at a well log and tell you the depositional environments just from their signatures. As we map along, we incorporate all previous wells and their logs. It is a very advanced science, but I spend about 50K a year on data and software licenses.

I can sit in my dirty underwear and work Egypt if I wanted to.

These days, drilling rigs are covered in a number of sensors, and I can just log on and see everything in real time from the office. Steering horizontals wells in thin intervals, that kind of thing.

To sum it up, petroleum geologists know more about the Earth's history since the Cambrian of any other type of geologist. Sedimentary rocks hold information about climate, flow direction, source, you name it.

When I hear somebody poo-poo radiometric dating or paleomag, I want to hurl. Due to the high economic nature of sedimentary basins, untold billions of dollars have been spent examining them. The data is rich and pretty much dialed in in mature basins. A mature basin is a basin that has had the snot drilled out of it.

I love looking at samples that come up from the drillbit. Normally they are taken every ten feet, and over the length of time that you are drilling, you have trays and trays of samples. You examine them all with a microscope, and one of the cool things is that oil fluorescenses underneath a black or UV light. I can grap a little piece of sandstone with tweezers, but it in a dimple tray, hit it with a drop of lighter fluid, and if it contains oil, the lighter fluid causes the oil to stream out of the sample and glow yellow. It is pretty cool. We also have gas sensors and chromatographs, as well as actual devices right behind the drill bit. They send data up to the surface in low frequency pulses. Software picks that up and you can tell if you are in the right strata or not.

When a well is TD's (drilled to total depth), the geophysical logging company (schlumberger is the best) comes out and we lower very pricey instruments down the hole and then pull them up very slowly. There may be twenty different curves to look at. On a wildcat well, a well out away from established production, you are looking at something that nobody has ever seen before. Geology is a fantastic and fun topic, which any lay person could pick up as a hobby, similar to Astronomy.

I work with many religious people. Absolutely none of them drill based on faith or prayer. They plop down a million or more bucks based on the geologist's interpretation. I have never been in a meeting with management and had a single one bitch about the age of the deposits we are looking for.

It is easy to reconcile geology with religion. All you have to do is look at the Genesis account as an allegory. You can still believe that God created the universe. You just look at it and know that this is the way that God did it. No way could you explain it in one page of the bible.

The genesis account is simply an allegory based on 600 B.C. Babylonian science.

It is interesting, because Genesis is fairly unique. It is one of the few parts of the Bible, the Torah, or the Koran, that conflict with science or even discuss science. I don't know why so much emphasis is placed on it. The creationist's are so full of baloney and outright lies that I just shake my head in disgust. They are liars when they attack geology or go around looking for Noah's great flood.

People place so much emphasis on Genesis, while at the same time ignoring many old testament books, particularly the Book of Leviticus.

Leviticus isn't that long, and basically sets out a huge number or rules on how to live your life. It famously contains the lines about man laying with a man as an abomination, but if you read the book, and you should, it discusses a ton of crazy rules that even the most religious people I know do not follow or even care about. I've never seen a goat sacrificed in church, for example.

Half of the book is about sacrifices and such. I urge everyone to read it. I read it again the other day in a hospital waiting room. Wiki has a good summary, but it only takes 20 minutes or so to read.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviticus
BASE104

Social climber
An Oil Field
Jul 7, 2013 - 04:22pm PT
Correlation - every measuring stick has to be correlated. When there is overlap in dating methods you'd expect these different methods to produce the same result for the same material. The more correlation you have the greater the confidence in your dating analysis. All rungs on the same ladder of geologic time scales... right?

Correct, DMT. We look at every conceivable clue. I can show you a really good argument in favor of global warming using the analogy of the late Mesozoic hot house event.

One thing is pretty cool: Stomata density of fossil leaves compared with leaves grown under differing CO2 conditions in a lab.

The Gingko is an ancient species which survives today. You can study the leaves over time and get an idea of CO2 concentration. There are other factors involved, but if you are aware of them, you can get a good idea.

http://biology.duke.edu/jackson/post1.html
go-B

climber
Hebrews 1:3
Jul 7, 2013 - 06:28pm PT
Psalm 36:5 Your lovingkindness, O Lord, extends to the heavens,
Your faithfulness reaches to the skies.
6 Your righteousness is like the mountains of God;
Your judgments are like a great deep.
O Lord, You preserve man and beast.
7 How precious is Your lovingkindness, O God!
And the children of men take refuge in the shadow of Your wings.

...God is bigger than your doubts!
Messages 15181 - 15200 of total 22396 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