Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Dec 15, 2016 - 09:12am PT
|
Answers aren't clear in sociology. They are always statistical, and they always have exceptions. You can't measure those qualities as easily as the wattage ouput of the sun.
in some ways, all answers are "statistical," and they always have exceptions... for instance in your example, it is not so easy to measure the wattage output of the Sun, first, you have to define what radiation you're talking about (the Sun emits energy as neutral and charged particles other than photons) and even when talking about photons, you have to specify which frequency range your measurement is performed in...
It wasn't until the past couple of decades that we understood the rate of neutrino production in the Sun.
It wasn't until 1920 that we even had a physical model of the energy production in the Sun, less than 100 years ago... before Eddington's public speculation about fusion, there were no physical models consistent with the observations.
Imagine that, the most influential phenomenon to life on planet Earth had no physical explanation.
Before Newton? Pyrois, Eous, Aethon, and Phlegon...
more literary, perhaps...
another wonderful mystery laid low by the philistine scientists... statistically...
http://www-sk.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/sk/physics/solarnu-intro-e.html
|
|
donini
Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
|
|
|
Dec 15, 2016 - 09:16am PT
|
Chorus....do you hear what I hear?
do you hear what I hear?
Thankfully.....NO!
|
|
eeyonkee
Trad climber
Golden, CO
|
|
|
Dec 15, 2016 - 11:33am PT
|
Just checked out HFCS's last link. I recently read both of Jerry Coyne's books, Why Evolution is True and Faith vs. Fact. They are both excellent! I'm definitely on the Coyne (and Dawkins') side of the Group Selection debate.
I don't know that anybody can be logically persuaded away from a religious belief, but, if it's possible, I could believe that either or both of these books could do the trick. The evidence against religion is deep and profound.
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Southern Arizona
|
|
|
Dec 15, 2016 - 05:14pm PT
|
Don't be on a side, dude. Everything is true, in its own way . . . Even science.
|
|
eeyonkee
Trad climber
Golden, CO
|
|
|
Dec 15, 2016 - 05:50pm PT
|
And that's a point of contention between us, MikeL. I would say that experience happens in an arena (space-time) with science as its rules. Religious experience is a form of experience (duh!). It is something experienced by organisms with brains. Organisms with brains experience things in space-time. Prior to around 3.4 billion years ago on this planet, there was nothing that could experience things.
Science exists outside of experience. To conflate the two is a misunderstanding on your part, in my opinion.
I've been thinking a lot lately about how philosophy fits into this. I would conjecture that of the four main branches of philosophy (as defined in Wikipedia), three of them; metaphysics, epistemology and logic/math are defined by the space-time/science rules, which exist outside of experience. Value theory, which includes ethics and aesthetics, is the only category that is a legitimate subject of philosophy that couldn't be done better by scientists.
|
|
BASE104
Social climber
An Oil Field
|
|
|
Dec 15, 2016 - 05:59pm PT
|
I don't know that anybody can be logically persuaded away from a religious belief, but, if it's possible, I could believe that either or both of these books could do the trick. The evidence against religion is deep and profound.
I've tried NOT to dissuade Go-B from his faith. From what I've learned over the past 30 years, dealing with rocks of unimaginable age (that most of you stand over) that it is a no-brainer for me.
That irritates the religious, because it casts a dark light on a central tenet of most religions: A Creator.
Whoever that Creator was either doesn't exist, or has gone to great lengths to build a planet and a universe that absolutely does not fit various Creation stories. It would be TERRIFIC if they did, but they don't. Nothing fits. It is hard to find a rock less than a million years old. It takes that long for sedimentary rocks at least to lithify. Of course we have new volcanics being laid down every day.
I just spent my afternoon working on the paleobotany collection. Here is how it works. The collector (in most cases L.O. Wilson, a famous palynologist, a guy who specializes in spores and pollen) wrote down samples 342 A thru K are from the Rowe Coal.
I know the stratigraphy, so I fill out the dates: Phanerozoic Eon, Paleozoic Era, Pennsylvanian Period, Desmoinesian Stage, Krebs Group, Senora Formation, and then Rowe Coal as a horizon. There are thousands of samples, and I have to date every one, and they are from all over the world. I have to find the stratigraphy of every state, because states use different names, and different countries, which have names that are also not the same. Equivalent rocks aren't given the same name the world over. It is a huge pain in the ass that is constantly being straightened out.
I have become pretty good at this. Every day I see a name that I don't know, because I'm a subsurface geologist, and surface geology, where the deep zones outcrop, almost always have different names. It isn't that taxing, but I've learned a hell of a lot about surface geology. The subsurface people do a much better job of naming the same rock the same thing, but the Arbuckle Formation in Oklahoma is called the Ellenburger in Texas. Same strata. Same age. They have different surface names in Arkansas, where the limestones outcrop along the Ozark uplift.
The idea of a 12,000 year old Earth, and a 6 day creation just doesn't fit. It isn't even close. It is laughable, it is so bad.
My boss in the collection is a devout Jew. He takes off on all of the odd Jewish holidays. Great guy. Today we had a long conversation on all sorts of stuff that happened in the deep past. I also know many devout Christian geologists. How they reconcile it with the Bible, I don't know.
I assume that they view the creation story as an allegory or myth. They can still believe that a God created everything, it is just that this is how he did it. Very slowly and extravagantly. There isn't just one star. There are trillions of others in our galaxy, out of which 80% have their own planets. And there are trillions of galaxies, all of which have light that left them millions to billions of years ago. The age of the Earth isn't in question, and the Creationist/Intelligent Design folks are just quaint dullards. I don't push this on anyone. My dad is very religious, but he doesn't debate me on the age of rocks or stars or galaxies. He concentrates mainly on the new testament, which makes no such claims that I know of.
It is a tough thing tearing down someone's comforting beliefs. Dawkins believes that guys like me should be ACTIVE atheists. Fighting religion at every turn. I don't feel that way.
For one, it is too much trouble. I went to a Dawkins lecture once, and he spent most of it tearing down religion. He spent about 15 minutes talking about an interesting discovery in evolution. I felt ripped off. Dawkins is a famous evolutionary biologist, but lately he has been getting rich attacking religion. I'd rather just do the work.
So Go-B, keep at it, man. Just don't try to teach it in public schools.
I know people who either home school their children to keep them from learning evolutionary biology in high school, or send them to private Christian schools. All over two things: evolution and the age of the planet. That is extravagant, and I wouldn't choose for my child to be purposely ignorant at what are bald facts.
The history of life changed through time. A lot. Vast extinction events occurred. Whole branches of the tree of life came and failed long ago. Some survive to this day, like the Ginkgo Tree. That one has been around for hundreds of millions of years. The Dawn Redwood is another living fossil. They were found in a small area in China and then widely planted as an ornamental tree. I have a Ginkgo in the front yard and a Dawn Redwood in the back yard. The only surviving members of larger genera.
Life changed. There is no getting around it. It doesn't matter so much how they changed. The evidence is plain to see that it has. Big time. That is evolution. Look how we took wolves and turned them into Chihuahua's in only a few hundred years. Look at drug resistant bacteria. You can see evolution at work in bacteria, because they reproduce so quickly. You can easily observe thousands of generations. With most macro fossils, the life span was much much longer. It takes thousands of generations for most species to change. We can't observe it in long lived animals, but we can look at whales, which are recent critters, and see that they have fingers and toes in their flippers. That was a species that went from land to sea. The anatomy is hard to argue against.
Also, the one thing that hit me when I was in my early teens, and had me doubting Christianity, was the sheer number of religions around the world. It seems like every culture has their own, and they all conflict with each other. How the hell am I to know which one is right? They all say that they are right.
|
|
BASE104
Social climber
An Oil Field
|
|
|
Dec 15, 2016 - 06:14pm PT
|
I just saw Ed's post. Curious people look harder and harder at things.
I find it really weird that right now a blizzard of Neutrinos is passing right through me.
The other night, on National Geographic's channel, or the Science Channel, they SHOWED radiation. They built a little cloud chamber about as big as a shoebox and placed a bit of Uranium Ore in it. You could see the little (neutrons?) darts bursting in lines through the cloud chamber. They were easily visible with the naked eye.
That was pretty cool. It also showed how serious radiation is. Right now we just play in low Earth orbit. Beyond our atmosphere and magnetosphere, we will be getting whacked with all sorts of high energy cosmic rays. That makes going to Mars a tough nut to crack. It will be difficult to shield astronauts from.
|
|
eeyonkee
Trad climber
Golden, CO
|
|
|
Dec 15, 2016 - 06:15pm PT
|
Base said.
Also, the one thing that hit me when I was in my early teens, and had me doubting Christianity, was the sheer number of religions around the world. It seems like every culture has their own, and they all conflict with each other. How the hell am I to know which one is right? They all say that they are right.
Religions are like languages; they are localized geographically. On the other hand, religion has experienced a more efficient winnowing (natural selection) to a few major ones as compared to languages. It is clearly a fundamentally faster process to change one's religion. More often than not, the conquered took on the conqueror's religion, but not always.
This map makes me wonder about the genesis of Islam in Indonesia.
|
|
BASE104
Social climber
An Oil Field
|
|
|
Dec 15, 2016 - 06:20pm PT
|
Just go into ISIS territory and start handing out bibles.
Kiss your head goodbye. That's how serious they take their religion. They are stuck in the 7th century. I have no idea how they feel about evolution and the old Earth.
That said, Saudi Aramco sends many geology students over here to get their doctorates in Earth Sciences. I would still be afraid to say that their oil fields produce from the Cenozoic.
This is a cool link about the biggest oil field in the world. It is truly a monster:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghawar_Field
170 billion barrels from one field. By contrast the largest field in North America is Prudhoe Bay, with around 25 billion barrels of reserves, most of which have been produced.
|
|
i-b-goB
Social climber
Wise Acres
|
|
|
Dec 15, 2016 - 08:37pm PT
|
Jesus Christ Is Lord
Romans 14:7-12
Followers of Jesus would agree that whether we live or die, we do so for Christ. But His sovereignty is not limited to those who claim Him as King. The entire world—the whole universe, in fact—is subject to His authority. At the final judgment, every knee will bow and every tongue will confess and praise God.
In the here and now, relatively few people recognize the Lord’s rule and seek to remain in His will. Most refuse to see that all of our human constructs—such as government, culture, and society—thrive or falter in the palm of God’s hand. Moreover, nonbelievers resist Christ’s sovereignty in their own lives. People who won’t surrender their will to the Lord’s great purpose assume control of their own destiny. However, the Lord’s supreme reign cannot be thwarted.
It’s common for men and women today to believe that there are no consequences for rejecting the lordship of Jesus Christ. You may have heard people say things like, “That Christian stuff works for you, but it’s not for me. I’ll live on my own terms.” Yet Jesus’ parable of houses built on either solid rock or sand offers a different perspective (Matt. 7:24-27). Only those who make their abode in the Lord can withstand the upheavals of this world.
Kneeling before Jesus Christ as the Lord of your life is the wisest decision you can make. The sovereign Ruler of the universe loves you and desires to bless all of your days. Make your eternal home in the safety of His kingdom, and forever delight in Him.
https://www.intouch.org/read/magazine/daily-devotions/jesus-christ-is-lord
...Get on the Rock!
|
|
Mark Force
Trad climber
Ashland, Oregon
|
|
|
Dec 15, 2016 - 09:14pm PT
|
"By their fruits ye shall know them."
Matthew 7:16
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
Dec 15, 2016 - 09:30pm PT
|
Wow. That's something! Probably beyond what my programs could do.
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Dec 16, 2016 - 08:06am PT
|
Sean Carroll was a Gifford Lectures speaker at Glasgow this year (2016). His final fifth lecture focused on morality and meaning and purpose.
I thought it was very good and I thought it summed up the emerging zeitgeist in 21st century arts and sciences re these topics (at least for some of us) very nicely.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNdCYYQsZGA
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Dec 16, 2016 - 11:02am PT
|
Your "just don't teach it in public schools" proves uninformed, mighty geologist.
I wonder... does not understanding the context, or else not bothering to appreciate it, prove informed? prove artfully nuanced? prove sympathetic to the issue?
mighty geologist...
lol
....
re: cultural literacy
I wonder... in this day and age esp, and at least from the perspective of the Responsible Citizen and their standard, can we have a truly laudable "cultural literacy" without an attendant science literacy?
I don't think there's any "science type" here (other than the standard caricature) who stands against teaching Abrahamic mythology or Abrahamic allegory or Abrahamic narrative as part of human psychology or history or literature. Correct me if I'm wrong, please. Personally I think the biblical stories are outstanding - they just shouldn't be taught as fact - historical or operational - as many if not most of our ancient ancestors did - re how the world or life actually works. A position, it seems to me, easy peasy to understand and appreciate.
...
https://youtu.be/VNdCYYQsZGA?t=39m22s
"So one thing we might want to do is to embrace this idea of disequilibrium. I know there is a certain set of philosophies out there that encourage you to seek stillness, to meditate, to silence the chatter that is going on in your brain; and I am all for it, I am not saying it is a bad idea. What I am saying is it is limited in its ability to achieve true stillness..." -Sean Carroll
|
|
donini
Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
|
|
|
Dec 16, 2016 - 11:20am PT
|
FACT....no one on this thread is going to change their beliefs because of what they read here nor will their arguments change the beliefs of anyone else.
I am a believer and will be so for my lifetime. I believe that there is no personal, monotheistic god and that all religions are human constructs. I will not argue with someone who has different beliefs....live and let live.
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Dec 16, 2016 - 11:37am PT
|
I post for personal learning and reinforcement sake. I read posts for personal learning and reinforcement sake.
Donini, I am glad to read you embrace being a believer. I am a believer as well. I believe in a great many things, including the joy of rock climbing and the wonders of today's revelations from science.
I've never subscribed to being a nonbeliever, period, without any context, as so many do. To do so only indicates to me someone is thinking and expressing themselves from a religious frame and not from outside it (perhaps because their thinking hasn't matured enough to move outside it?).
I have political beliefs, science beliefs, philosophical beliefs, general life beliefs. Further, I cultivate them, I subject them to quality control; I update them as new information rolls in. By and large, all these beliefs are evidence-based beliefs. All this means... I am a believer. All this means I am not a nonbeliever (or none), I have never - at least not since age 12, identified with the term nonbeliever.
...
Sean Carroll, in his Gifford lectures, speaks to the point (raised by an early critic, for example, who only skimmed his book, The Big Picture) that scientists incl physicists (in the spirit of Sagan, Tyson, Asimov and others) should get involved in culture, in sociopolitics, etc and express their views and worldviews to the extent they have the interest or passion to do so (as citizens, humans).
|
|
eeyonkee
Trad climber
Golden, CO
|
|
|
Dec 16, 2016 - 11:41am PT
|
Don't participate in the thread then, Jim. Easy enough.
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Southern Arizona
|
|
|
Dec 16, 2016 - 04:05pm PT
|
Faith is an investment and a commitment to make something real. It increases its importance and gives it substance. As it’s been said: “Tell me what’s important to you, and I’ll tell you who you are.” It’s all beliefs and the faith that helps to support them. As Ed says: it’s pretty much all provisional.
Base: . . . just don’t teach it in public schools.
What then *should* be taught? Only things that can be empirically proven? Only things that are material or physical? Only things that one knows for certain?
Donini: . . . no one on this thread is going to change their beliefs because of what they read here nor will their arguments change the beliefs of anyone else.
I take that as a comment on the particular people who show up here. In that, you may be right, . . . but maybe not. How does anyone ever shift their ideas or beliefs? It probably happens incrementally, slowly over time and exposure, with conversations, experiences, reflections, and personal attachment to the things discussed. To the extent that we can be empathetic, hear others, and make sure our brains and hearts are engaged before shooting off our mouths, they could be the bases for greater understanding.
Jgill, I just read something and thought of you and the images you show us. It goes something like this:
An unpsychological life, a life not in pursuit of love and beauty, looks at the world and sees scientific classifications, microscopic structures, and new resources for consumers. When placed at the center of things, however, one’s soul (psyche, that mysterious “thing” with all of its depths which you are) makes beauty absolutely important: a vital, sensitive aesthetic sense of how one finds intimacy in the world.
Science exists outside of experience.
(Think about what you write; take the words one at a time and see what they are implying, logically.)
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!