General Science Discussion Thread!

GalacticPetey said:
Sorry if this is a stupid question, but what are creationists thoughts on Dinosaurs? Do they simply deny their existence?
Click to expand...
I believe the words of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, and when aliens were making the planet Earth, they manufactured and placed the skeletons in the Earth's crust for our amusement.
 
Hypochondriac Mario said:
That doesn't logically connect, though. Faith's existence, again, is to explain local phenoma and to set standards for society.
Click to expand...

Logic and Faith don't really ever go hand-to-hand.

Are there not things that science cannot explain? String Theory and Contiential shift theory for example? If it was true, then it wouldn't be called "Theory" correct? Heck, there are things smaller than atoms, and there is no real proof that it does exist. The thing is that there are mathematical formulas that explains that there are these things that fills gaps in figuring things out.

Faith is simply knowing that even though there is no evidence - something you cannot see, physically feel, smell, touch, taste - that it doesn't mean that it does not exist.
 
Anna said:
If it was true, then it wouldn't be called "Theory" correct?
Click to expand...

Incorrect. "A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on knowledge that has been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experimentation."
 
I think faith rose from explanations. Ancients see patterns, they attribute them to deities, and then they go further to believe in these deities to help them guide through their lives and guide people as well by letting them believe in deities.

There are some faiths, however, that have no deity, such as Buddhism, but the basic idea is believing in something to advance oneself.

I'll leave it up to people to decide if there is an all-powerful force governing the universe or not. They can believe and explain whatever they can; it doesn't offend or concern me. In a public school setting, however, explaining how the world works from a religious view should not be taught alongside scientific explanations as if they're both science or religion. And again, since this thread is about science, you can't treat these two subjects as part of the same branch.

Anna said:
Hypochondriac Mario said:
That doesn't logically connect, though. Faith's existence, again, is to explain local phenoma and to set standards for society.
Click to expand...

Logic and Faith don't really ever go hand-to-hand.

Are there not things that science cannot explain? String Theory and Contiential shift theory for example? If it was true, then it wouldn't be called "Theory" correct? Heck, there are things smaller than atoms, and there is no real proof that it does exist. The thing is that there are mathematical formulas that explains that there are these things that fills gaps in figuring things out.

Faith is simply knowing that even though there is no evidence - something you cannot see, physically feel, smell, touch, taste - that it doesn't mean that it does not exist.
Click to expand...
There is a difference between the common usage of "theory" and scientific usage of "theory", which is why I somewhat cringe when people often confuse the two. A theory is "a well-confirmed type of explanation of nature, made in a way consistent with scientific method, and fulfilling the criteria required by modern science. " Gravity, for instance, is a "just" theory.
 
There's so much in this thread that could be explained; so much knowledge that could be learned if only people knew the proper definitions of words. This is just one example and that's all I care to get into but

Anna said:
If it was true, then it wouldn't be called "Theory" correct?
Click to expand...

Like really? Did you not take any science course at all or did you just take the Science-Lite courses that are allowed thanks to Intelligent Design being forced into schools even though it's unconstitutional? Scientific Theories have a different meaning than the layman's 'theory'.

As for everyone in this topic, it would be really nifty you you could all at least research the bullshit you're fucking saying, that way I won't have to be ashamed to be associated with you in some way.



Pretty much the last 2 posts, what they said, but typed much faster than I.
 
Those theories may have strong evidence and logically explanation, but it does not mean that it is set-in-stone the real thing. Do we truly know if there was such a thing as Pangea? There is very strong evidence and plenty of logical explanations for it to have happened, but is it 100% the real thing? We don't know.

EDIT - It's not polite to swear at people just because you might not agree with them. Aren't we supposed to have a civil debate?
 
Hypochondriac Mario said:
I think faith rose from explanations. Ancients see patterns, they attribute them to deities, and then they go further to believe in these deities to help them guide through their lives and guide people as well by letting them believe in deities.
Click to expand...
no, i just explained that christianity doesn't follow that pattern

...

and i can't even use the "love is something you have to have faith in" example, because you apparently don't love anyone

blast. how am i supposed to explain what faith is to you?
Anna said:
If it was true, then it wouldn't be called "Theory" correct?
Click to expand...
this is a bad argument and please never use it again

ever
 
Anna said:
Those theories may have strong evidence and logically explanation, but it does not mean that it is set-in-stone the real thing. Do we truly know if there was such a thing as Pangea? There is very strong evidence and plenty of logical explanations for it to have happened, but is it 100% the real thing? We don't know.

EDIT - It's not polite to swear at people just because you might not agree with them. Aren't we supposed to have a civil debate?
Click to expand...

Because it's not 100% accurate in every way, shape, and form, that must mean we should cast an enormous shadow of doubt over it and allow such things as "well we don't know what it really is since we can't prove or disprove it except what the bible says so let's just go with that" as having more merit and weight.

Let's all go back to 3rd grade.

Also I'm swearing because I can, not because it's at you. And my "you"s in my previous post were in the generalized "you", not specifically YOU.
 
I was just giving an example. My point was that while we may have any scientific explanations and lots of logical reasonings behind things, there are still gaps and mysteries within many scientific theories and concepts that leave it questionable as to what may be missing. A lot of mysterious things happen, such as the bubble that becomes light when popped underwater using soundwaves. We don't really have a scientific explanation for that.

Thus, a lot of things in Science are only mathematical statements as to what may be those missing pieces of the puzzles. I mean, I'm sure that we've never really seen what an Atom looks like, or the asymmetry of matter vs. antimatter and how they came to be, or the whole big bang theory.
 
on the matter of things we don't understand yet, and to MOVE THIS DISCUSSION AWAY FROM FLAME TERRITORY

i sincerely hope that someone manages to resolve the divide between gravitational energy and electromagnetic energy. because the idea of directly turning gravity into electricity or electricity into gravity is just awesome
 
Anna said:
I was just giving an example. My point was that while we may have any scientific explanations and lots of logical reasonings behind things, there are still gaps and mysteries within many scientific theories and concepts that leave it questionable as to what may be missing. A lot of mysterious things happen, such as the bubble that becomes light when popped underwater using soundwaves. We don't really have a scientific explanation for that.

Thus, a lot of things in Science are only mathematical statements as to what may be those missing pieces of the puzzles. I mean, I'm sure that we've never really seen what an Atom looks like, or the asymmetry of matter vs. antimatter and how they came to be, or the whole big bang theory.
Click to expand...

That is why we do science. Science does not just end at "well we don't know the answer immediately as we come upon a question so let's just give up". We take one supported detail of a thing and ask another question; we then get support for an answer from that which builds into another and another and another. It doesn't just end. There will always be questions and I'm sorry that you view the existence of a question as an inherent fault, because I view it as something that is inspiring. There's more out there for us to know. More out there for us to learn. More out there for us to do. The fact that many theories have unanswered questions does not lend to any assertion that instead it must be some omnipotent being. I guess if you really want to say so, an omnipotent being may potentially be one of the answers (and support thereof still must exist, whether it's a being that someone claims can just exist void of proof; if you're interested in that there's totally a ton of science about that stuff too like holy shit watch some Through The Wormhole with Morgan Freeman they cover that question in like 3 hour-long episodes) but it is not the default answer for when you start scratching your head. That hinders progress.

As for never seeing an atom lol are you a time traveler from 50 years ago because we cracked that shit open and looked inside and have done a ton of wicked cool shit with it. It's some really neat stuff and if it interests you, I hope you get encouraged to answer these questions instead of just leaving them be.
 
Morty said:
As for everyone in this topic, it would be really nifty you you could all at least research the bull*bleep* you're *bleep*ing saying, that way I won't have to be ashamed to be associated with you in some way.
Click to expand...

I did read some tidbits in relevant articles in Wikipedia, though, specifically the creationism vs. evolution debate one...

I agree with Morty, though.
 
Morty said:
Anna said:
I was just giving an example. My point was that while we may have any scientific explanations and lots of logical reasonings behind things, there are still gaps and mysteries within many scientific theories and concepts that leave it questionable as to what may be missing. A lot of mysterious things happen, such as the bubble that becomes light when popped underwater using soundwaves. We don't really have a scientific explanation for that.

Thus, a lot of things in Science are only mathematical statements as to what may be those missing pieces of the puzzles. I mean, I'm sure that we've never really seen what an Atom looks like, or the asymmetry of matter vs. antimatter and how they came to be, or the whole big bang theory.
Click to expand...

That is why we do science. Science does not just end at "well we don't know the answer immediately as we come upon a question so let's just give up". We take one supported detail of a thing and ask another question; we then get support for an answer from that which builds into another and another and another. It doesn't just end. There will always be questions and I'm sorry that you view the existence of a question as an inherent fault, because I view it as something that is inspiring. There's more out there for us to know. More out there for us to learn. More out there for us to do. The fact that many theories have unanswered questions does not lend to any assertion that instead it must be some omnipotent being. I guess if you really want to say so, an omnipotent being may potentially be one of the answers (and support thereof still must exist, whether it's a being that someone claims can just exist void of proof; if you're interested in that there's totally a ton of science about that stuff too like holy shit watch some Through The Wormhole with Morgan Freeman they cover that question in like 3 hour-long episodes) but it is not the default answer for when you start scratching your head. That hinders progress.

As for never seeing an atom lol are you a time traveler from 50 years ago because we cracked that shit open and looked inside and have done a ton of wicked cool shit with it. It's some really neat stuff and if it interests you, I hope you get encouraged to answer these questions instead of just leaving them be.
Click to expand...

All I was trying to do is compare faith with the questions of Science. In no way did I say that just because we don't know that we should be like "God confirmed" or give up and just call it being faithful that it is there rather than trying to find a scientific reasoning behind it. I was doing this since there are a lot of people that seem to think that everything in Science disproves an omnipotent being.

I know we've done wicked cool shit with atoms btw. We fired electron particles at it, we have an electron microscope, we create nuclear reactions by splitting atoms.

But atoms are smaller than the wavelengths of light. No matter how good the microscope may be, a single Atom is not visible. Saying that people have seen atoms is incorrect. We have detected the presence of atoms, but seen it with our own eyes? No.
 
The Robot Masters said:
Evolution or Creationism?
Click to expand...
0bd0dda3_30621480.jpeg
Click to expand...

Deist way of thinking

I'm an atheist who 100% believes in evolution btw. I'll tolerate other beliefs but i'll personally think it's wrong.
 
Good. I don't want to debate.
 
I can tolerate others beliefs, but not always their practices
some religions/beliefs involve treating others in negative ways, witch doctor practices, lack of human rights, cannibalism, mutilation of people/animals, forced ignorance, child abuse, etc.
so I say there is a limit to the point I will respect someones religious rites, legal rights however, I'm all for


as for science, how about a new topic besides science vs creationism
lets stick to just science from now on


if you want a debate how about environmentalism vs humanitarianism (imo environmentalism is more key to the survival of the whole world, humanitarianism isn't saving the planet)
 
Michell said:
as for science, how about a new topic besides science vs creationism
lets stick to just science from now on
Click to expand...
okay, how about
Michell said:
if you want a debate how about environmentalism vs humanitarianism
Click to expand...
e39.png

i have a better idea
Thrawn said:
on the matter of things we don't understand yet, and to MOVE THIS DISCUSSION AWAY FROM FLAME TERRITORY

i sincerely hope that someone manages to resolve the divide between gravitational energy and electromagnetic energy. because the idea of directly turning gravity into electricity or electricity into gravity is just awesome
Click to expand...
 
another question, o great sciencey homies


is there any proof angels and demons exist

sincerely yours

Spiny M. Aster
 
No. They, like the afterlife, are abstract ideas.
 
Mario4Ever said:
No. They, like the afterlife, are abstract ideas.
Click to expand...
so like all those freaky clips of people with weird eyes and 'live excorcisms' are all fake

idk i mean i kinda believe it bc oh shit man but then again theres no proof of angels so
 
I think those events are explainable via other means (e.g. the power of suggestion, seizures, undiagnosed conditions, etc.).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back