Here’s wonderful short film from the Royal Institution, in which I think Jim Al-Khalili is channelling the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy’s calmer and more rational upgrade. http://www.theguardian.com/science/life-and-physics/2014/nov/13/just-a-theory
That was brilliant. It should be compulsory viewing for anyone who wishes to make a post in Alternative Theories. And they should be tested on it and sign a notarized statement acknowledging they understand and accept the points made in it! I know that is impractical, but wouldn't it be nice?
After watching this video I am convinced this 'Friend' of his is not real and just made it up for story board script convenience. I mean why would he like this other person? What would they have in common? Is he more of an acquaintance? Do they both like Elvis Presley? Do they both believe in aliens and not trust people in power? Maybe this friend of his was joking? Why would someone happen to believe all three most popular conspiracies? If he does than he has room for more.
So? Are you hoping to win the "Statement of the Blindingly Obvious" at the Oscars this year. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Totally agree! I was wondering when someone would comment on this. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
The cranks don't give a crap about intellectual honesty. IE they're not going to learn or accept anything that disagrees with their POV. They don't give a crap about real analysis. Just imaginary bullshit. Over the years I've been witness to this stuff there's never been a personal renunciation of crankdom. Pretty sure of that. LOL. Lot's of reverse renunciation.
Theories are only accepted as theories once they are tested? LOL, complete failure - nor string theory, nor all the Grand Unified Theories (GUTs) would then be theories. And that something is a theory has, in its scientific use, nothing to do with praise. Of course, there is a huge difference between scientific theories and the mentioned idioties about aliens, but, as usual in cheap popularizations, they are full of errors. (And I have the theory that this is unavoidable - because those who popularize science are, with a few exceptions, people who have failed as scientists. SCNR.)
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I also have a theory, and evidence to support it. I also have a question? Where do you fit into this world of failed scientists?
Maybe in those criteria which are important for career-oriented people? I have never cared about such things, thus, have not reached them. I'm also sure that in your opinion I'm a failed scientist, for the simple reason that I'm not a mainstream supporter. In the scientific domain, I have reached much more than I have dreamed about when I was a child. (Yes, already as a child I have not cared about career position and a lot of money or so, but about finding something really new, with Galileo as my hero.)
Let me get a few things clear Schmelzer.....Other than your postings on this forum, and a glance over some of your highly "theoretical" papers, I do not know you. I do not see you as a "failed scientist" and coupled with your views on politics, I see you more as a "non conformist" such as Fred Hoyle was. Although he never accepted the BB model of universal evolution, he was otherwise a top notch scientists and researcher. Perhaps people like him become absolutely obsessed with a personal idea, and are totally unable to let it go. Although I see you wearing your "non conformist" tag more as a badge of honour, hence in a similar way to Hoyle, you automatically take the non conformist approach without too much thought. But I could be wrong. Let me sincerely congratulate you on those sentiments, and particularly on your choice of your hero. But that also could be part of the problem with you seeing yourself also as a victim just as Galileo was. But I could also be wrong on that score.
I have no problem to let ideas go. I could not have reached what I have reached without being quite close to the mainstream in everything what is claimed to have experimental support. And you may have noticed that in my rants against politically influenced science the scientists do not appear as heros - but nonetheless as much more serious and much closer to the truth than the media or politicians. Of course, if one is open to alternative ideas, there are a lot of them around, and one will like several of them. And one will indeed not all of them evaluate really careful - for example, for climate science I have evaluated only a few test questions, enough to decide that this is politically distorted science, but not enough to be sure what is the truth (as far as we know it at all). So, indeed, sometimes I may accept a non-conformist idea without too much thought. But in such cases I'm also ready to throw it away without too much thought if somebody presents reasonable arguments. I do not see nor Galileo nor me as victims.
So when Mike Huckabee says (as he just did on the campaign trail) "the source of all truth is the (Christian) bible", is that a theory? Is the golden rule the equivalent of a theory of morality? Does it work in all cases? An ironic statement, given that a system of laws including the Constitution and even Sharia law both derive from the culture that is the same as the source of the source of truth to which Huckabee alludes. The aforementioned religious tradition responsible for that system of laws also was the first to encourage literacy among its followers, and without that, science as we understand it would have not gotten anywhere, or if it did, it would have been long forgotten had it not been set down in a form more permanent than oral tradition. I'm still uncomfortable with any politician who elevates freedom of religion above other basic rights guaranteed by the Constitution, and that's exactly what this statement does. It undermines the intent of a system of laws from its very foundation. Freedom of religion is the one that routinely gets abuse from individuals who cannot seem to help themselves from getting obsessive-compulsive about the dictates of their own religions. It is chiefly for this reason that government should distance itself from the dictates (and election!) of such individuals. A government that is not established by the consent of the governed (of ALL religious persuasions) is a template for corruption, like a crime syndicate. Crime syndicates do not have any need of morality, justice, or for that matter, religion. If what Huckabee says is not a theory, do we need a way to differentiate truth, theory, and morality for science as opposed to religion? It appears that at least Huckabee needs to understand what he is saying on a deeper level. In actual fact, we can never know the whole truth about anything, and that is as true of science as it is religion. For any theory to be useful to a finite mind such as ours, its scope must be limited, just as the scope of truth we can understand must be. What do you consider to be the "source of truth" to be? Science? What part(s)? Religion? Which one?
Above, in different degrees. What politicians claim about science are usually simply lies. But science itself is distorted too. Many good scientists - those who value scientific freedom, and most of those with politically incorrect views - switch to other, less politically influenced domains of science. Many do not start research which they expect will lead to politically incorrect results, which can lead to paradoxical results that the politically most interesting questions are not studied at all. Then, the phenomenon I have shown in the example: The abstracts have only minor objections to the politically correct position, what the scientist really thinks one can find only inside the text - and this is the case even political position of the scientist itself is almost politically correct. So, science is much more reliable than everything else, but nonetheless distorted too.
Science definitely involves politics (distortion) as you say, for all sorts of reasons unrelated to uncovering the truth about anything. I still remember the circus Feynman needed to maneuver through to find out the truth about the failed seals on the solid rocket boosters and Morton Thiokol's O-rings which caused the shuttle Challenger disaster. It should not have taken that much investigation, nor a physicist of Feynman's stature and political connections to track down the cause. Just as it should not take the equivalent of a rocket scientist to point out that the loss of life from just two causes-- tobacco and firearms, are responsible for half a trillion dollars a year (reference: Mother Jones) worth of medical expense in order to mitigate. If those causes for medical expense alone were cut by half, our government could easily afford to fund something like Obamacare indefinitely. These are low hanging fruit, budget wise. Why are they ignored? Have you noticed, the stauchest political opponents of Obamacare are also members of the party that is the most consistent supporters of Big Tobacco and the NRA? Not to mention their opposition to mitigating the effects of global warming, which has the potential for even greater health damage. To his credit, even the Pope knows when it's time to stop playing politics with policies vital to our collective survival. Science is as political as it gets, and it's been that way for too long. That's not a theory. That's a fact.
I see the scientific method as the best possible system that we can devise. The "imperfections" in the system, is more an individualistic thing than any thing else. The same goes for the political systems and capitalism with regards to science. But irrespective, science in general still works along with the scientific method and we will always have those with their proverbial heads down and arse up at the coal face doing all they can with what is available to them. They may also do their share of whinging, but they are still achieving and striving to improve things. When I here of politicians being rubbished on either side of the political spectrum, and I do plenty of it myself, I tend to ask myself, where do politicians come from? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
