why is science important?

[Tedman"Xp"]

Why is it?:confused:

[(Q)]

Are you serious? :rolleyes:

I can't imagine you are. Therefore a silly question should receive an equaly silly answer.

Anyone wish to take a stab at a it? :D

[Tedman"Xp"]

That's what i wanted but seriously i need everyone's opinion.
Would you mind?:(

[Counterbalance]

Tedman"Xp"

Don't mind "Q." He's just being Q-ish today. ;)

Plenty of people here who can give you varying opinions on the importance of Science. If I have time later I'll share a bit myself.

~~~

Counterbalance

[Tedman"Xp"]

ok...
:D

[Porfiry]

It's "important" because it is a weapon in the sociopolitical game of life.

[(Q)]

Don't mind "Q." He's just being Q-ish today.

Thanks! The world would be a better place if more people were 'Q-ish.' :D

Plenty of people here who can give you varying opinions on the importance of Science

Few people here can offer valid opinions because science, in this forum, is used to debate religion. Those that can offer valid opinions are those that do not debate science and religion.

[Porfiry]

How does engaging in religious debate invalidate one's opinions of science? Are you suggesting that those who defend science from attack are precisely the people who should not be doing so, because their opinions are invalid? And that those whose opinions are worth noting are precisely the people who refuse to share their opinions?

[(Q)]

Perhaps I've not worded my response correctly. I'm suggesting that scientists do not waste their time with meaningless debates about religion. There is already far too much relevant scientific literature in the world for one individual to absorb and comprehend. Why waste time on the rest? ;)

[daktaklakpak]

Originally posted by Tedman"Xp"
Why is it?:confused:
Do you consider accessing Internet, driving, having lights after dark, cooking, drinking, breathing, watching TV/movie important?

If no, then science is not important to you.

[Chagur]

Science is no more important than religion.

Engineering ... Now that's something else!

No modern world without it.

Take care ;)

[spacecat27]

Science- from the Latin scienta meaning "to know".... is knowledge. More specifically, it is 'organized' knowledge. At the core of this knowledge, are laws and principles that have been in place and been in action since the beginning of the universe- things like gravity, thermodynamics, electromagnetism, and so forth- can be understood and used by man- but they cannot be changed by man..... they will still be around long after we're gone.

So science is important because it seeks to explain the fundamentals of existence. Of course, that is why it is often in competition with relgion which seeks to do the same using faith instead of facts. But- these human creations like religion, government, law, politics.... are quite insignificant compared to say, gravity.

[Mr. G]

Oh, my, Chagur:

Science is no more important than religion. Engineering ... Now that's something else!

So, you are saying that you are equally willing to fly in any airplane irregardless of whether its aerodynamic behavior is based souly on faithfully revealed principles or soley on empirically revealed principles? No difference?

[goofyfish]

Originally posted by Mr. G
...irregardless...ARRRRGHHH!!

A perfectly valid and thoughtful question, killed in the prime of its life by a single word.
(pet peeve. please ignore my outburst.)
:)

By the way: "engineering." He drives the choo-choo so it's not fair to ask a question concerning aerodynamics. :D


Peace.

[Chagur]

"... based souly on faithfully revealed principles ... "

That's even worse than "irregardless", Goofyfish.

But then ... it's obvious neither of you are engineers
... rather 'Priests of Science' ... Or at least acolytes.

I'll willingly fly in any aircraft that a test pilot, usually
an engineer, certifies.

Take care ;)

[Mr. G]

"...irregardless..." adj. & adv. appears in the dictionary, as does "ain't". It appears to be a blending of irrespective and regardless.

Language is not an exact science, you see. :)

[Tristan]

(Shuffle, Scruffle, Kaplunk) (Swish, Swash, Kaboom!)

Wheres my Carl Sagan Books..............;)



(Dont have time, Have to go to school)

[TruthSeeker]

Hello!!!
Here I am, where I should be... :D

Hi goofyfish! Hi Q!... :D

Well, Tedman"Xp", it seems that people that know Science very well are not explaining it very much to you...
Well, this is it:

Science, originally, is one of the two paths to the Truth. The other one is Religion. Science was created by skeptics (people that can only believe in what they say) to give an explanation about the Universe. The first Scientists don't even believed in atoms and those kind of thing that we can't see with our eyes (as many people today don't believe in God... :rolleyes: ). The answer for the old childish questions such as "Who am I?" and "What I am doing here?". Along with some of the answers (not those there as those we didn't found yet WITH SCIENCE), came things such as technology. Technology is not so bad until you have some tons of junk which you can't put anywhere and when it is not harmful. Any of these two, is a sign of the human ignorance.

Religion seeks the same thing, but using the opposite path. I won't talk about it, as you asked for Science...

Here is a diagram to see it clearly:
Religion
............\
.............Truth
............/
Science

We forgot a little bit of Religion, but the "emotionalism" as some say will eventually come back as we see its necessity... We should be more aware about ourselves and the world we live in, and it's what Religion gives... :)

Blessings,
Nelson

[Mr. G]

Science, ..., is one of the two paths to the Truth. The other one is Religion.

There is at least a third path to Truth: speaking before a live audience. ;)

[TruthSeeker]

Yeah... and if you feel nervous, you can imagine them naked... :D
It usually works for me... unless there are only women in the audience... than I can't control myself... :p
:D :D :D
...
Just kidding... :D
...
:bugeye:

Blessings... :),
Nelson

[Mr. G]

...if you feel nervous, you can imagine them naked...

If you feel compelled to assuage your sense of authoriative inadequacy by resorting to imagining your audience to be collectively naked then you should be in the audience listening to someone more authoritative than yourself.

[TruthSeeker]

I was just kidding! Have anyone ever told you that... It was just a joke!! Can you be less serious?...Thanks!

Blessings,
Nelson

[Mr. G]

It was just a joke!! Can you be less serious?

I wasn't getting personal, I was just stating a truth -- hard won over two+ decades of active public speaking experience.

Picturing your audience naked is good for sauving your fears and getting you through your first public speaking experience/venue, or two.

However, what gets you and your audiences through the rest of your public speaking experiences is substance.

;)

[TruthSeeker]

Blessings,
Nelson

[Tristan]

(Scruffle, Schuffle) (Kaplunk!, Swish, Swash)

Ah Ha! Here it is! Though i dont feel like qouting like 20 pages. SO i suggest you read "The Demon-Haunted World" By Carl Sagan of course. And trust me, it really...well.... enlightens you. both for Scientists and religious people alike. Im at a really good part. Maybe if I have some free time later Ill comit my self to typing some good stuff from his book.

Oh and Mr.G, Carl Sagan rocks. You know why i couldnt find "non-sequitur"? Because, as you probably already know, its Latin. Meaning

Direct Quote from Carl Sagan as he outlines some Fallacies

" - non sequiter- Latin for "It Doesn't follow" (e.g. Our nation will prevail because God is great. But nearly every nation pretends this to be true; the German formulation was "Gott mit uns"). Often those falling into the non sequiter fallacy have simply failed to recognize alternative possibilites"

And Mr. G lets see if you can figure this on out. It frequently applies to religion

"Post hoc, ergo propter hoc"

[Chagur]

Is that really supposed to be a challenge when Google is available?

Hell, it took me not even ten seconds to check it out and I'm not the
brightest candle around.

Take care ;)

[glaucon]

Now, now,.. Tristan, you should know that under quantum interpretation, post hoc, ergo prompter hoc would be fallacious.
In modal logic, the law of excluded middle does not apply, neither does strict interpretations of material implication.

In any case, the answer to the Thread question is quite simple:

scince is important because it can accomplish everything Luddites cannot. :-)

[Tristan]

http://www.sciforums.com/t5445/s/thread.html
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Check it out.


"An Ancient chinese proverb advises, 'Better to be too credulous than too skeptical,' but this is from an extremely conservatice society in which stability was much more prized than freedom and where the rulers had a powerful vested interest in not being challenged. Most scientists, I believe, would say, 'Better to be too skeptical than too credulous.'"

Carl Sagan "The Demon-Haunted World"

[orthogonal]

Why is science important?
"Science is a tool for reaching goals, not for setting them."
D. Calne

The proper use of the scientific method increases the likelihood that certain of our predictions will be correct. Science is an amoral tool which may be employed to build weapons of mass destruction or it may be used to find cures for diseases.

Despite the high value I place on the scientific method, I feel it is a tragedy that our present culture values science above philosophy. We are a cult in danger of worshiping the hammer; while forgetting that the purpose of the hammer was to build ourselves a home.

Michael

[TruthSeeker]

Despite the high value I place on the scientific method, I feel it is a tragedy that our present culture values science above philosophy. We are a cult in danger of worshiping the hammer; while forgetting that the purpose of the hammer was to build ourselves a home.

There is only a word for that... : Perfection :)

That's it! Actually, I always talked at school about the importance of teaching phylosophy... they got it once... but the students didn't liked very much and they stopped... they shouldn't...

Blessings,
Nelson

[Cris]

Science is important because it is the only valid process for establishing knowledge.

Philosophy does not establish knowledge but uses the results from science as components in its arguments.

Religion is the opposite of science since it is entirely based on an alleged supernatural realm whereas science is entirely based on the real or natural.

Science is important because it provides hope for a safer, happier, healthier, and longer life for all humans.

Without science, or rather the attribute of human curiosity that led to modern science, we would still all be living in caves.

Hope that helps.
Cris

[orthogonal]

Cris,

I agree with nearly all of your above post. I thought perhaps I should take a moment to try and explain more clearly my earlier remarks.

To be perfectly frank, I was a bit worried when TruthSeeker so readily agreed with me about the importance of philosophy over that of science. I returned to this thread so that I might remind him that philosophy is not just a matter of sitting around contemplating our navels. I won't deny that philosophy itself is partly to blame for this situation, still, the low esteem that the study of philosophy is today accorded, is for the most part unwarrented. We see philosophical arguments as forever chasing their tails, never seeming to advance knowledge. On the other hand, despite a history dating back to less than one-fifth that of historical philosophy, modern science has made incredible strides. Given such a successful track record, why not throw philosophy out the window altogether?

"Reductionism and analysis is the breaking down and dissection, as crucial to science as is the synthesis and integration tempered by philosophical reflection on significance and value." E.O. Wilson

John Casti wrote, "...the point of a scientific theory is to reduce the arbitrariness of the data." He likens the success of a scientific theory to that of the success of a computer program in reproducing a set of data:

"If the shortest possible program that reproduces a set of observations is no shorter than the listing of the observations themselves, then we are justified in calling the observations random, as there are no more compact laws by which the observations might be predicted or explained."

Science owes its success to the observation that the universe experienced by humans does not appear to be random, at least on the level that we currently study it. Science assigns compact laws that predict but ultimately do not explain data. But despite our raving success with the scientific method, we mustn't let it go entirely to our heads. The information resulting from the correct employment of the scientific method must always be interpreted! Scientists may or may not be the best persons suited to perform this required interpretation.

Though not likely, we might one day understand nearly every scientific principle that describes our universe. Yet despite this grand knowledge, we will still have to decide how to govern ourselves, we will still have to decide how we should best treat each other, and ultimately, we will still have to integrate and assimilate all this scientific information into our outlook as curious human beings. The study of science is an important component for our understanding of this world, but it is by no means the end of all knowledge.

Correct science is not arbitrary. Correct philosophy is not arbitrary. (Religion, on the other hand, is arbitrary.) The tools of good science are experiments coupled by reason, and communicated by mathematics. The tools of good philosophy are necessarily a more generalized type of observation coupled by reason and communicated by language. Science is limited by the limits of our observational data. Philosophy is limited by the "fuzziness" of the observational data. Though "absolute" certainty is a rare commodity both in philosophy and in science, from the start we handicap our trust in the pronouncements of philosophy by asking for absolute certainties that we would never think to ask of science. If you ask an impossible question, you receive an impossible answer! Despite a long and misguided history of proclaiming just such certainties, philosophy will better prosper better if it limits itself to dealing with probabilities rather than certainties.

I'll be merciful and end here, but I might add that the literature on this subject is extensive and fascinating.

Regards,
Michael

[Cris]

orthogonal

Nice post I enjoyed that. And I think we essentially agree with each other, which was probably not apparent in my brief post.

But while science is taught in schools as usually compulsory topics, philosophy is not so considered, and if it is available it is always optional. Here, I suggest is the root cause of the chaos and ineptitude we see when people attempt to engage in philosophical debate; lack of appropriate education.

Modern education appears to be more about spraying facts at the students in the hope they can make sense of what they have heard. But if they are not taught how to think and organize their thoughts, then how can they assess the value of the facts they have learnt.

So I agree that science is important but within a framework where it can be properly valued and used and that requires an understanding of philosophical principles, at least in the area of critical thought, logic, and reason.

The information resulting from the correct employment of the scientific method must always be interpreted! Scientists may or may not be the best persons suited to perform this required interpretation.Yes I agree in principle, but in practice it is politicians, who may well be religiously inspired, who make these decisions. The discipline of the scientific method, or at least the components of logic and reason, still represent the best method for human thought. If politicians could use similar basic principles then I would be happy with that. But that isn’t the way the world seems to work, and I think scientists need to play a significant role in deciding how science should be used, otherwise we would potentially allow ourselves to be governed by the irrational.

.. we will still have to decide how to govern ourselves, we will still have to decide how we should best treat each other, and ultimately, we will still have to integrate and assimilate all this scientific information into our outlook as curious human beings. The study of science is an important component for our understanding of this world, but it is by no means the end of all knowledge. Here I can imagine you have the physical sciences in mind when you wrote that, although I might be wrong. If you extend your reasoning to include areas like sociology, psychology, etc, then we can see how science can be used to explore all avenues that affect human life. Not only do we want to understand how the universe operates but an understanding of the human mind and human nature would complete the picture. A scientific approach would then indeed help us to know how to govern and treat each other.

Or in other words science is important to every area of human life.

Cris

[Lua]

Originally posted by (Q)
Are you serious? :rolleyes:
I can't imagine you are. Therefore a silly question should receive an equaly silly answer.

Anyone wish to take a stab at a it? :D
because they both have one "i" and one "n" in their words.

no, really, i think science is so important because it's not only a weapon for our salvation (in the good way or bad way), but transform our lives bringing as more confortable life. it also enlighten us in how the universe works which is very valid because takes us out of our ignorance and prevents us to believe in things like "god makes the rain". i bet we would be still very petrified about this god if we still believed in things like that. abnd very much in the hand of a group of people, such as the catholic church. is resume, i think science equals with mind's developmentent.


and ThruthSeeker: i don't agree when you say that religion is a path to the thruth. i think religion is based in faith and you can't really say that faith requires thruth. all the scientific aspects in the bible for example (natural phenomena) are wrong. the bible in this subject is wrong (the others are stories, you believe them if you want). faith and thruth don't walk hand in hand, which is why most scientists don't believe in god (as the figure other people believe).


i personally love philosophy and i think it's very valid its work. but i don't think it should be more valued than science, i mean, you can't really make technolodge using philosophy, can you? and scince can bring positive things as well as negative things. it just depends on the character of the person who is using (or the character of the person who is financing it). you can't blame science for the human being's cruelty.

[TruthSeeker]

Cris,

Without science, or rather the attribute of human curiosity that led to modern science, we would still all be living in caves.

We will be soon living in caves again if one crazy guy launch a nuclear bomb. Your so beloved Science can make us live in caves again... :p
And remember the Cold War? What we built in many cities...? Yes... "caves" made by concrete which would protect us in the case of a nuclear war...
Isn't that strange? The Truth is that every excess leads directly to its opposite. Have you seen how excessfull is Science nowdays? Better watch us...

Blessings,
Nelson

[Cris]

Truthseeker,

I believe you have missed an important point. The cave scenario was hypothetical and depended on us not having imagination or curiosity. That trait will not disappear whether we use science to enhance ourselves or kill most of us. A nuclear war would be a very harsh lesson and if enough survive then they hopefully will learn from the mistake. History shows that mankind continually makes terrible mistakes before they move forward.

Science is no more to blame for human mistakes than a gun is to blame for justly killing an enemy or committing a horrendous murder. Choices are made by humans and if people do not have the required knowledge and understanding of the implications of their actions, then yes we are potentially doomed. The answer always is education, learning, a quest to understand.

Religions for example suppress imagination, curiosity, and education. Their answer is always that the supernatural is all the answers one needs, trust in God and you will be happy.

So yes science can be both our death and our savior, the real issue is whether enough of us can learn enough and fast enough to control our discoveries. Those that are watching for the singularity indicate it could go either way –

http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~phoenix/vinge/vinge-sing.html

http://members.aol.com/salaned/writings/survive.htm

It isn't nuclear war that should frighten you.

So don’t try and ignore or discard science because you will do so at your own peril. Whether you want it or not there are a sufficient number of people in the world who are going to use science for better or for worse. Hiding behind spirituality, religion or just hope in human love will not help you long term. This really is a case of adapt or die and the survival of the fittest (those equipped with knowledge).

Take care
Cris

[TruthSeeker]

Cris,

It isn't nuclear war that should frighten you.

It doesn't...

So don’t try and ignore or discard science because you will do so at your own peril. Whether you want it or not there are a sufficient number of people in the world who are going to use science for better or for worse. Hiding behind spirituality, religion or just hope in human love will not help you long term. This really is a case of adapt or die and the survival of the fittest (those equipped with knowledge).

Hiding in human Love...? If you didn't have human Love you wouldn't have children... Work in your conceptions... what's really important for you? Sorry about this example... but this will show you what I'm talking about: If your children were kidnaped and the kidnapers wanted all that you have, what would you do? Would you give everything for your children or would you keep what you have?

The knowledge is unfortunately important to survive in our society. But does Love needs knowledge? Do you need knowledge to Love your children? Don't think so...

Watch what is really important to you and defend it.

I would Love to have children, to be father... but is not my time yet... :( But it will come... everything in its right time... :)

You are very lucky... You don't know how important is to me to be father... and this is why I defend Love...

In the example... the kidnapers don't care about YOUR children, but they probably care about THEIRS. Or they don't care about theirs and it is why they can do it with yours... This is why I say to Love even your enemies, to Love everyone unconditionally.

Blessings,
Nelson

[Cris]

truthseeker,

Love is the target not the means. You need to learn how to survive first before love can be appreciated. You can't love anyone if you are dead.

Love has its place, but too much of a good thing causes devaluation. Normal people do not go around oozing love all the time. There are practical aspects to life and you need to attend them so that you can practice and experience love at the appropriate place and times.

Hiding behind love implies you expect love to solve all your problems, it won't.

Again find the balance between emotions and knowledge.

The knowledge is unfortunately important to survive in our society. But does Love needs knowledge? Do you need knowledge to Love your children? Don't think so... Yes you most certainly do. How are you going to feed, house, and protect your children. If you love them you will need to work hard to fullfill that love. How do you avoid divorce that could potentially remove your loved ones from you. You will need knowledge to plan ahead and to provide support. You need knowledge to protect them from sickness and dangers. Real love is a very practical business, and if you are to be sucessful then don't underestimate the effort it requires.

Cris

[TruthSeeker]

Originally posted by Cris
Hiding behind love implies you expect love to solve all your problems, it won't.

Love is the Truth. The Truth solves all problems, Love solves all problems. It's the ultimate Wisdom. Love is God, Love is Almighty!

Yes you most certainly do. How are you going to feed, house, and protect your children. If you love them you will need to work hard to fullfill that love. How do you avoid divorce that could potentially remove your loved ones from you. You will need knowledge to plan ahead and to provide support. You need knowledge to protect them from sickness and dangers. Real love is a very practical business, and if you are to be sucessful then don't underestimate the effort it requires.

That's true...

It's like is written in the Bible, in Proverbs 16:9
"9 The mind of man plans his way, But the LORD directs his steps"

Knowledge is a useful tool, but Love is the reason of our behavior... The exact interpretation!! :cool:

Blessings,
Nelson

[Mr. G]

Love is the Truth. The Truth solves all problems, Love solves all problems. It's the ultimate Wisdom. Love is God, Love is Almighty!

Gag me with a spoon. :rolleyes:

[TruthSeeker]

Mr G,

Gag me with a spoon.

Do you know the power of Love? I guess not...
If there weren't Love you wouldn't exist. If there weren't Love, how could your mother and your father unite themselves to create you? Love is so powerful that creates Life!! Where do you think that comes life? What do you thing is the breath, the Spirit, the light...? It's Love! Life is made by Love! Love is the basis of all existence! I think you understimate the power of Love... ;)

"Love continually recreates itself in an eternal dance of renovation."
Nelson

Love is the Truth :)

Special thanks to Jesus Christ! :)

Blessings,
Nelson

[Cris]

Truthsekker,

Love is the Truth. The Truth solves all problems, Love solves all problems. It's the ultimate Wisdom. Love is God, Love is Almighty!Holy cow! Total garbage and BS. A load of idealistic twaddle that bears no relation to reality.

Do you know the power of Love? I guess not... You certainly don’t, you only think you do based on what you think it means. You wouldn’t talk such gibberish if you really understood. And you dare to accuse others that they don’t, with your irritating condescending tone again.

If there weren't Love you wouldn't exist. If there weren't Love, how could your mother and your father unite themselves to create you? What are you talking about? Are you confusing sex with love? Sex and love do not have to coincide. They can be and often are independent of each other.

Love is so powerful that creates Life!! Where do you think that comes life? What do you thing is the breath, the Spirit, the light...? It's Love! Life is made by Love! Love is the basis of all existence! I think you understimate the power of Love...

"Love continually recreates itself in an eternal dance of renovation."
Nelson

Love is the Truth

Special thanks to Jesus Christ! Excuse me while I vomit again.

Stick to the things you know about and don’t guess.

Cris

[Chagur]

Re. "Stick to the things you know about and don’t guess."

Things like 'uploading'? (I still prefer 'downloading')

What a dull, dull world it would be.

Take care ;)

[Stryder]

"Science is important... because without it.... I couldn't be a scientist."

(Quote brought to you by myself, tempted to plagurise, would quote from who... but I'm sure he might make himself known in the future.)

[Cris]

But Chagur,

Dreaming and guessing are fine except where the dreams and guesses are being offered as facts. I'm sure you see the difference, right?

The idea of uploading is that the mind is moved from something relatively small to something larger. Now since you prefer downloading are you implying that the useful parts of your mind are so small that they could be moved into something smaller than your current mind.

Is this a new definition of small mindedness maybe? Or is that just how you see yourself? :D:D

Cris

[Stryder]

Volume and Mass...

Uploads would be implaced to a media that doesn't suffer from volume restraints, while downloading would imply that a differential of volume or mass would result in the loss or corruption of data.

[TruthSeeker]

Cris,

Holy cow! Total garbage and BS. A load of idealistic twaddle that bears no relation to reality.

You certainly don’t, you only think you do based on what you think it means. You wouldn’t talk such gibberish if you really understood. And you dare to accuse others that they don’t, with your irritating condescending tone again.

Excuse me while I vomit again.

You certainly don't know Love...
I don't want to discuss with you...

What are you talking about? Are you confusing sex with love? Sex and love do not have to coincide. They can be and often are independent of each other.

No, I'm not confusing sex with Love. I'm just connecting Spirit with Love.
Yeah... here you are almost right. They are almost allways independent of each other. It is why people like you born...

Unfortunatly the time is coming and I hope you won't be among those who won't be chosen.
My most sincerely wishes of Love, Peace and Happiness to your Soul and Spirit.

Blessings,
Nelson

[Cris]

truthseeker,

Please consider what you have written and why I am reacting as I am.

This is a science forum and you have made a series of unsupported and baseless assertions and are including emotionalism, spirits, souls and gods as part of your statements.

Either provide some support for your arguments or limit yourself to the philosophy, religion, or freethoughts forums. But even there personal opinions carry more weight if you can support them with a few facts.

Cris

[Chagur]

Re. "Dreaming and guessing are fine ... "

I do see the difference, and I do agree.

Re. "The idea of uploading is that the mind is moved from something
relatively small to something larger."

Your words, not mine, Cris. :D

So ... How 'small minded' are thee?

Thanks for the chuckle ... And, take care ;)

[TruthSeeker]

Cris,

I include those things because they have a huge importance in our lifes and we usually don't pay very much attention on them. People that have them don't see how important they are, but when they lose them they realize their importance. Don't lose them. Perhaps you don't imagine how important they are.

I'm working on my theories. They include us in the Universe... it's why is hard to work on them. Look to our theories. They don't usually include us in our own Universe. We are NOT only observes in our Universe! We have a role to play here, and this is what I'm trying to discover.

Blessings,
Nelson

[Chagur]

Re. "We have a role to play here, and this is what I'm trying to discover."

Why limit yourself? Why not the role of all life on this planet?

Talk to you again ... in a couple of centuries.

Take care ;)

[Cris]

Truthseeker,

I include those things because they have a huge importance in our lifes and we usually don't pay very much attention on them. People that have them don't see how important they are, but when they lose them they realize their importance. Don't lose them. Perhaps you don't imagine how important they are.

I'm working on my theories. They include us in the Universe... it's why is hard to work on them. Look to our theories. They don't usually include us in our own Universe. We are NOT only observes in our Universe! We have a role to play here, and this is what I'm trying to discover.I do really enormously respect your desire to learn, but I would very politely suggest that your approach is not so good. Your imagination appears vivid but fairly wild. My criticisms revolve around you asserting your imaginative ideas as if they are facts. I recognize in you much of my earlier self and the excitement that one experiences when finally seeing a potential solution to a particular phenomenon. Please try not to put forward your ideas as if you have just discovered the secrets of the universe ahead of everyone else. Be aware that most of what you consider has already been considered before by millions of others. Much to my chagrin when I have found unique solutions only to find the answer had been discovered a thousand years ago.

So remember the wisdom of humility and be prepared to learn more from others. Be also careful about the use of the term ‘theory’. You are not offering theories here but speculative hypotheses. If you understand the important difference then that should help you re-phrase and temper your arguments so you achieve greater precision and effectiveness.

Please also try not to second-guess what you think I know or how I perceive things, or in fact do the same to other people. Judging people like that, based on your own criteria, is fraught with danger and massive imprecision, and comes across as offensive and arrogant.

I’d love to help you explore your imagination, but I’ll pull you up quick when you confuse fact with fiction, or truth with speculation.

Take care
Cris

[Cris]

Chagur,

So ... How 'small minded' are thee? Ahh as you well know everything is relative. :D :D

Take care
Cris

[TruthSeeker]

Cris,
My imagination is very wild... :D
But this is what give me my ideas, and this is what gave ideas to many famous scientists in the world. The problem here is that we are getting too close to find the Truth and as we get nearer we meet with many paradoxes. The Truth MUST be paradoxal because it involves the opposites of the Universe. And as we approach the Truth, it begins to be really hard to do experiments. We have to use incredible pressures, incredible temperatures,etc.
So... I know where I'm going... :)
My idea to prove those things is starting to be very common in the world. Some things in Science are approaching Religion and Science-fiction ideas that we though it would be impossible.
If you don't believe in Religion, listen to this:
All the Religions says that there will be an "end of the world" (but they mean a transformation) in about 10 years. Eventhough their calendars are different and the region and time of their existance are different, they all point to the year 2012. Is that a coincidence?
All the Religion decribe what will happen in the exactly same way. Some uses different analogies but they all have things in common. Is that a coincidence?
Finally, Nostradamus prophesys says all those thing too. All the dates and all the happenings. Is that a coincidence?

Well, if is only a coincidence, perhaps everyone got drunk and dreamt the same thing... :p

I'm allways prepared to learn from the others... But I expect others to do the same thing. You are right, they are not theories yet. But I'm working on them...

Thanks for being more polite. :)

Blessings,
Nelson

[Cris]

Truthseeker,

I need to tie your ideas down a little bit –

The problem here is that we are getting too close to find the Truth and as we get nearer we meet with many paradoxes. The Truth MUST be paradoxal because it involves the opposites of the Universe. And as we approach the Truth, it begins to be really hard to do experiments. We have to use incredible pressures, incredible temperatures,etc. Lots of questions for you –

1. What do you mean by truth in this context?
2. Why is getting too close to truth a problem?
3. What paradoxes, describe at least one?
4. What do you mean by opposites of the universe?
5. How do you know you are approaching the truth?
6. Research experiments are always at the limits of knowledge, what evidence suggests they are becoming more difficult?

Some things in Science are approaching Religion and Science-fiction ideas that we though it would be impossible. Imagination (in this case science-fiction) always precedes actual science.

1. What things in science are approaching religion; give at least one example?

All the Religions says that there will be an "end of the world" (but they mean a transformation) in about 10 years. Eventhough their calendars are different and the region and time of their existance are different, they all point to the year 2012. Is that a coincidence? All the Religion decribe what will happen in the exactly same way. Some uses different analogies but they all have things in common. Some more questions.

1. What evidence justifies your claim of ‘all’ religions? Deism doesn’t support an end-of-world scenario, and there may be others.
2. What evidence suggests a transformation in 10 years?
3. What evidence supports your claim that all religions show the same descriptions?
4. What are the commonalities?

Finally, Nostradamus prophesys says all those thing too. All the dates and all the happenings. Is that a coincidence?Some 12 years ago I spent the best part of a year investigating the big N. I currently have every book written on the matter, well at least from 12 years ago. I even collaborated with one of the authors in the hope of producing some software to unlock what we thought was a key to the predictions. Her greatest value was her fluent French of the times of the big N. My final conclusion was that apart from some interesting coincidences that didn’t defy normal probability, his alleged predictions are sheer gibberish. But feel free to show otherwise if you can.

So you get my drift I hope. Stating your imaginative ideas as unsupported assertions doesn’t give them any value. If you make an assertion, then justify it. I know; it takes time but if you are serious about seeking the truth then you will have to do the groundwork at some time, why not start now.

Have fun
Cris

[TruthSeeker]

Cris,

Answers:
1. Means an Unified Theory about everything that we know about the Universe in one single thing. Means an essantial Truth.
2. That's not what I meant. I meant that we meet with some usual problems while we are getting closer to the Truth: like paradoxes.
3. Black Holes... The infinite warped Space-Time is a paradox. Is when to opposites "realities" meet in a single one.
4. Opposites in general. Good and bad. Happy and sad... :)
Past and Future... Infinite and Vacuum... The Truth must be neutral because it must have everything that has in the Universe. And you know... the Universe is neutral... this is essential for equilibrium.
5. I said WE... I know because opposite things start to get closer. Like the Black Hole case...
6. ... I wrote it there... we are getting to limits of energy, temperature and pressure...

I continue later... my friend want to use the computer...

Blessings,
Nelson

[TruthSeeker]

Cris,

Continuing...

quote 2:

1.pends on how you interpret it...
Singularity is an interesting example. In the infinite warped Space-Time we have an "eternal present". Taoism, for example, has the idea of eternal present.

quote 3:

1. All Religions I know have it. I never heard about "Deism". Some Religions are simply created by people to make profit. These are the modern Religions. The ancient ones all talks about an "end-of-the-world".
2. Increasing Earth activity, for example. And all the Religions talks about wars and this kind of stuff...
3. Study Religions...
4. You know... wars, earthquakes, "clouds"...

Ahhhhhhh!!!!
I continue later... again...

Blessings,
Nelson

[James R]

Truthseeker,

<i>All the Religions says that there will be an "end of the world" (but they mean a transformation) in about 10 years. Even though their calendars are different and the region and time of their existance are different, they all point to the year 2012. Is that a coincidence? All the Religion decribe what will happen in the exactly same way. Some uses different analogies but they all have things in common.</i>

That sounds like hearsay to me. I have some questions, too. Just for a start:

1. Where does Christianity say that the world will end in the next ten years?
2. Where does Islam say that?
3. Please point out the similarities between the end of the world as described by Christian and Muslim texts. Are they really "exactly the same"?
4. How do you distinguish the analogies from the true facts in this sort of thing?

As an aside, the only calendar I know of which mentions the year 2012 is the Mayan calendar. However, that date is simply the latest date accommodated by the Mayan system. As far as I am aware, it is not associated in Mayan writings with the end of the world. Am I wrong?

[Mr. G]

I propose there must exist a Quantum Theory of Philosophy: the closer one looks the less one's likely to see.

:)

[Cris]

truthseeker,

Most of the founding fathers were Deists. The USA was essentially founded on Deist principles. Deism began in the 1600's, significantly as a rejection of the corruption and irrationality of Christianity.

Try www.deism.com

Enjoy.
Cris

[TruthSeeker]

James R,
1. Cristianism says that only God know when it will happen. Many others says that the date is a mistery. But there are some that says when. And when you compare the calendars, all of them fall in about 2012, 2013...
2. I don't remember anything about Islamism now... I studied it too long ago...
3. The same above...
4. Training... I had years of training... I'm used.

Cris,
As I'm seeing, Deism is a Modern Religion. It doesn't has its basis in a deeper awareness of oneself. However, is not bad... :)

Blessings,
Nelson

[TruthSeeker]

Cris,
It's an interesting "Religion". Yeah... it's true that some churches won lots of money... and this is a real problem. But the foundations of Christianism are principles. And many people use the faith of the others to their own profit. If they don't change, I believe that Christianism will become decadent... and actually, this is written in the Bible...

Blessings,
Nelson

[ssivakami]

Originally posted by Tedman"Xp"
Why is it?:confused:

Because .....

1. It tells us more about ourselves and the universe we live in.
2. Every aspects of our lives uses some of its products/technology.
3. It has helped us significantly in our advancement as a species.
4. It is wonderful and awe-inspiring.

- Sivakami.

[TruthSeeker]

Cris,
Don't had lots of research in Nostradamus. But the sites I saw about it were interesting.

So you get my drift I hope. Stating your imaginative ideas as unsupported assertions doesn’t give them any value. If you make an assertion, then justify it. I know; it takes time but if you are serious about seeking the truth then you will have to do the groundwork at some time, why not start now.

I have background. I've been studying most of those things since about 4 years ago. Yes, there are a few of them pretty new. I'm working on them... :D

Blessings,
Nelson