Why do most people find science boring?

Discussion in 'General Science & Technology' started by Magical Realist, Oct 19, 2014.

  1. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,099
    In an a legal sense you may be right, that quote would legally be considered as "hearsay" and therefore legally inadmissible as testimony in a court of law.

    Moreover, the use of quotation marks to indicate this was a actual quotation of Einstein's actual words, may be inappropriate in this case also as the actual sentence was perhaps a loose translation of Einstein's words by Barnett..

    Thus, in a technical sense, I agree with you.

    However, is it really relevant as to IF Einstein actually said something like that in conversation with Barnett.
    How would Barnett be able to cite specific substantive phrases, such as "common sense", " deposit of prejudices", "prior to the age of eighteen", if he had not personally witnessed Einstein saying something to that effect?

    If Barnett's recollection or interpretation of Einstein's actual words are suspect, then would that not disqualify the entire statement of Barnett as "fruit of the poisonous tree"?
    The legal result is inadmissability of the entire tainted statement.

    Note the use of the term "poisonous tree" over the use of the term "poisoned tree". There is a subtle but profound implication in the use of that specific phrase.

    Are you prepared to call Barnett (the Tree) incompetent or dishonest in his interpretation of what Einstein personally conveyed to him. If so, are you prepared to dismiss Barnett as a "poisonous tree"?
     
    Last edited: Jul 27, 2015
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. brucep Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,098
    Thank you for confirming that. I'll be less likely to complain about the trolling. Realizing that there is no precedent for the complaint.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Kittamaru Now nearly 40 pounds lighter. Staff Member

    Messages:
    13,439
    At this time, I am not - primarily because I know little of his works, his integrity, or his understanding of Einstein.

    I am, however, unable to find a single source that states Einstein actually said what is being attributed to him - rather, his point was that conventional knowledge will be continually tested as we discover more and more about the universe we inhabit - IE, that as our understanding grows, what is considered "common knowledge" will change as a result, and that we have to be malleable in our concepts of what is true because of this.

    It doesn't mean that things like good judgement or the scientific method should be tossed out for every flight of fancy someone poses
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Kittamaru Now nearly 40 pounds lighter. Staff Member

    Messages:
    13,439
    I would ask that you continue to report such things - my hope is that if the site leadership sees a renewed interest in actual academic discussion and good debate that things will change for the better
     
  8. river

    Messages:
    9,793
    True and True

    We have just begun our understanding of this Universe.

    We haven't even gone into space yet. Someday we will. Then we will know won't we Kitt.
     
  9. Kittamaru Now nearly 40 pounds lighter. Staff Member

    Messages:
    13,439
    ER... what? We have most certainly gone to space - we got people up there right now in the International Space Station
     
  10. river

    Messages:
    9,793
    I mean travelling in space. Not just being in space.
     
  11. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,647
    Of course we have got into space.
    We certainly have a lot to learn, but just as certainly have extrapolated our gathering of knowledge over the last 100 years or so, ten fold.
    We have now in a period of the first space effort until now, 60 years around, been to every planet in the solar system.....We have four emissaries on there way to the stars...We have three active robot emissaries on Mars.
    We've come a long way and have a long way to go.
     
  12. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,647

    We have also been to the Moon, and in time we'll be back, just as in time we'll be On Mars.
     
  13. river

    Messages:
    9,793
    You don't understand pad. Its galactic travel that I'M referring to.
     
    Last edited: Jul 27, 2015
  14. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,099
    Frankly, I had never heard of Barnett, so I cannot vouch for him either.
    Yes, you do have a single source who states that Einstein said this to him personally, or at least something to that effect, Barnett himself. If it was a private conversation without other witnesses, then Barnett would be the one and only source. Thus it comes down to the veracity of Barnett's story.

    The only reason why I pursued this minor point is that in a previous post I said something very similar, from my own understanding of the "conditioning to commonly held beliefs", during the formative years of children. So, I don't really care who else said it, other than that it seems to confirm my own viewpoint.

    But no matter, it is a minor point.
     
  15. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,647
    You need to make yourself clearer.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    On second thought...........
    But anyway, yeah in time, in time.
     
  16. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,099
    I agree, but the OP as presented, was never an academic scientific question or even a theory.

    That is why I suggested earlier that the thread be moved to Psychology (not Alternative Theories), because that's where the OP question really belongs and can be properly addressed by experts in the Human Sciences.

    Otherwise, I completely endorse your resolve to clean up the entire forum. Ad hominem does not belong on any forum frequented by civilized people seeking civil informative discourse.
     
    Last edited: Jul 27, 2015
  17. brucep Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,098
    It's kinda tough in my estimation. To moderate very technical subjects you need folks who are expert on the topics discussed and be willing to be involved consistently. When I joined you had three young PHD's. Even so you didn't have a consistent protocol for dealing with cranks. There's other great stuff about this site.
     
  18. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,647
    Good points.
    The thing is bruce, these cranks and alternative nuts have no other outlets, and forum's such as this draw them like a moth to a flame, hoping that they can create confusion, disrupt legitimate scientific discussions and be a total nuisance.
    Certainly more heavier moderation is required to give assistance to those at present that are run off their feet at times, specifically when we are attacked by thos spamming idiots.
     
    Daecon likes this.
  19. river

    Messages:
    9,793
    I find those that insult others are insecure about what they know. They can't fathom a deeper understanding.
     
  20. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,647
    Not really. People that are interested in science find them totally disruptive and trollish, such as yourself as you have proven over the years.
     
  21. river

    Messages:
    9,793
    Of disruptive to your comfortable bed of thinking.

    Science is evolving everyday pad.
     
  22. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,647
    Science evolves without IDIOTS.
     
  23. river

    Messages:
    9,793
    Define idiots.

    You think that you can perceive this attribute better than anybody else. Do you think this is a good thing? And how?
     

Share This Page