The Importance of Pseudosciences

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience' started by Asexperia, Nov 5, 2017.

  1. KUMAR5 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    459
    Don't scientific understandings come wrong? Many drugs, well studied previously, still got banned due to serious adverse effects even to fatal level, on field applications. Does it not make science as doubtful or skeptical? Say for eg. a man started climbing a mountain and could yet climb say 50% and still climbing. Yes he can reach on top on any day. But if he found, path was right having much odds or he crash down, how then you can claim, man took right path without doubts?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,048
    No. Errors or unforeseen results happen in any human activity. That does not call their validity or usefulness into question.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Gawdzilla Sama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,791
    This.

    Law, theory, hypothesis. Some people do not understand any of the three.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. KUMAR5 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    459
    Yes but such human activities are science based backed by strict studies. Moreover, serious side affects remain involved. So, there should not be human error or unforseen results. If it is anticipated as normal then it is justified to doubt science esp that science which can give side effects. Some weakness or limitation can be maintainable but not the errors or unforseen results.
     
  8. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,048
    Don't be stupid. Even aeroplanes sometimes crash. Does that mean you "doubt" that you will survive a plane journey?

    Nothing is without error in this life.
     
  9. KUMAR5 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    459
    Yes, so every system should be doubted.....scientific or non-scientific. We do take more risk in traveling by a plane then by walking.
     
  10. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,208
    Sure. Unfortunately, that logic leads to living in a hermetically-sealed plastic bubble your entire life, lest you risk the side effects of living.

    All things must have their benefits weighted against their risk of adversity.


    Do we?

    Do you know the rates of injury per unit distance travelled, by foot and by plane? I think you'd be surprised.

    You are actually almost 100 times more likely to die walking than flying.

    Walking is penultimate on the list of deaths-per-mile, next only to motorcycles.

    http://961theeagle.com/what-is-the-safest-way-to-travel-by-plane-car-train-space-shuttle/
     
    Last edited: Dec 10, 2017
  11. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,696
    The point that you persist in missing (or ignoring) is that some systems (e.g. science) should be doubted less than others (e.g. pseudoscience).
     
  12. Michael 345 Next for NT Anzac Day 2018 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,950
    And THAT will never happen

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    It's cherubs

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    KUMAR5 original post and all of the following you appear to be trying to pin down and fix many different ideas into one all encompassing solid unchangeable state

    Doesn't work. Yes the laws of physics ARE fixed. Yes we do not know exactly how they work. Yes even if we work out exactly how they worked we would not know why they came into being to work the way they do work

    Religion answer = god = magic

    Science answer = don't know = would like to know = do know not magic

    Do know (suspect, reasonably certain, any other qualifiers you care to add) not magic because magic has never (subject to the laws of physics being changed, and any other qualifiers you care to add) been observed (perhaps we were looking in the wrong place, wrong time and any other qualifiers you care to add)

    Have I been skeptical enough?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  13. KUMAR5 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    459
    Nature has kept us exised since million of years without modern science. Don't we underestimate it?

    Death by mistakes and accidents are not inherent risks.These are just odd happenings. Inherent risk by walking and by plane need to be compared. Most people die naurally but few on bomb blast. Does it mean bomb blast is less risky?
     
  14. Michael 345 Next for NT Anzac Day 2018 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,950
    Laws of physics existed just after the Big Bang
    Science really is just science, and is a investing PROCESS
    Life existed for millions of years because it adapted to do so
    Discoveries from investigating have certainly discovered ways of extending some life entities
    Death comes to every living entitiy
    HOW it will come is pure chance
    One of the posters here has a profile saying
    Life is fatal
    That sums up everything

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  15. KUMAR5 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    459
    Yes but that was without intervention of modern science. Healthful life is more natural.
    Discoveries from investigating have also certainly discovered ways to destruct life--pollution tools, highly deadly weapens, stress, sed. life style etc.
    Nature affect both sides for its balance.
    Yes, modern discoveries could just restrict it but couldn't resist or stop it.
     
  16. Michael 345 Next for NT Anzac Day 2018 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,950
    KUMAR5 <<<<<------ me thinks from responses ----->>>>>> bot

    No emotion - responses have mechanical feel

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  17. KUMAR5 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    459
    Sorry. ????
     
  18. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,696
    So what?

    Of course they are.
     
  19. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,208
    He is saying your responses seem mechanical, suggesting you could be a bot.

    I don't think it fits.

    Although I gotta say, there is nothing more off-putting than having some tell us how we should be thinking - as if it's our problem that you're not getting the reactions you desire. The onus is on you to express your case, not to try to manage our thinking processes.
     
  20. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,208
    No. Death is more natural.
    Early death is far, far far more common in the natural world - including prehistoric man - than in the modern world.
    So is extinction.
     
  21. KUMAR5 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    459
    We need to be sure, which type of death is more natural, older type when living under natural conditions or today's type living under too much unnatural conditions? Only few healthy fruits are sustained on a fruit tree. Many fall down prematured. I do not know if all fruits are sustained, whether they all will be natural and healthy or not.
     
  22. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,360
    "Natural" means early death from a poor diet, loss of ability to eat (loss of teeth) and accident, disease and neglect. During the time the Pyramids were being built, for example, people lived about 45 years on average,
    Fruits evolved to fall off a tree. That's how the tree spreads its fruit. It has nothing to do with human lifespan.
     
  23. KUMAR5 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    459
    Whatever. Natural may be truth but may not serve to all esp when excess. Fruits should be best natural food by which our purpose of food, tree purpose of seed dispersal and nature's purpose to maintain food & trees, are fulfilled. Seems to be no violence in it esp when fall after full ripening.
     

Share This Page