Istanbul NYE Nightclub Terrorist Attack

[Yazata]

Reports that a heavily-armed gunman, dressed in a Santa Claus hat, entered one of Istanbul's hippest nightclubs, crowded by an estimated 500 people on New Years Eve, and started shooting. Not clear what kind of weapon he had. Istanbul's governor says that 35 are dead and more than 40 wounded. The nightclub is popular with tourists as well as the more Westernized sort of Turkish 20-s0methings, so it is likely that there are foreigners among the dead and wounded. Stylishly dressed partiers were said to be jumping into the Bosphorus to escape the gunfire.

The gunman managed to escape. He is still on the loose. According to the Turkish Dogan News Agency, the attacker spoke Arabic.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...Year-s-Eve-gun-attack-Istanbul-nightclub.html

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/1...-new-years-attack-on-istanbul-night-club.html

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...b/news-story/fffb5e73b5db2457fb0e2cdc73867b13

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-turkey-attack-idUSKBN14K0NH

 

[Dr_Toad]

God is great.

When are the thinking people of the world going to to take religious texts away from people?

The Quran and the Bible have killed millions more than guns have. Why does insanity trump technology? Happy New Year.

 

[birch]

God is great.

When are the thinking people of the world going to to take religious texts away from people?

The Quran and the Bible have killed millions more than guns have. Why does insanity trump technology? Happy New Year.

Its ironic how many hold people accountable for logic and the rational from the world on this forum yet just like a devout religionist refuse or reluctant to look at or question science or laws of universe. Essentially, just as religionists ignore some texts in holy books that contradict many scientists are so rigid and blind to the point of assuming that the laws of the universe are perfect and always 'logical.'

Its ironic then it becomes a circular argument that well, thats people not math or science yet people are a product of this assumed perfectly and infallibly logical system or laws.

Actually its quite amusing because just as religionists hold onto god for dear life for meaning some scientists are just as extreme in worshipping assumed perfect 'logic' of the universe like a devotee because logic is what can be most counted on and consistent, even if one has to ignore huge swaths of reality in favor of sterile labs, controlled experiments, and conceptual and ideological ruminations of logic trying to find that equation that works or most consistent.

 

[Dr_Toad]

Dude, you're an idiot. Quit while you're ahead.

Oh, wait! Idiocy is celebrated and advanced here. My bad.

 

[Truck Captain Stumpy]

many scientists are so rigid and blind to the point of assuming that the laws of the universe are perfect and always 'logical.'

Uhm.... you're not very well versed in the scientific method, are you?

 

[birch]

Uhm.... you're not very well versed in the scientific method, are you?

Lmao. Then people should not be stumped why people can be illogical.

Its poignant that people make impacts on this so-called logical universe/world whether they are versed or not. Oh yes, they like to separate society from it. How convenient.

 

[Truck Captain Stumpy]

Lmao. Then people should not be stumped why people can be illogical

people can be stumped...
scientists want to know why they're illogical
there is a big difference

just sayin'

 

[birch]

Dude, you're an idiot. Quit while you're ahead.

Oh, wait! Idiocy is celebrated and advanced here. My bad.

Oh, wait! In this perfectly logical universe idiocy wouldnt be celebrated or advanced, would it? What an illogical conundrum.

I just find it uncanny how similar staunch, extremist type scientists are to religious devotees. One thinks the universe is perfectly logical implying perfection in every way even if there is blatant evidence it is not so they go back to harping on mathematics or physics as if understanding a mechanism or process or even why still implies perfection. Thats stupidity.

And just as those who believe in a god who created the universe also believe it is perfect because god is perfect. Both when it comes to inconsistencies or the fallible always (lack of logic or immorality) lay the responsibility on people but not the universe or god. You two are more aligned than you think. Lmao.

 

[Truck Captain Stumpy]

Oh, wait! In this perfectly logical universe idiocy wouldnt be celebrated or advanced, would it? What an illogical conundrum.

you do realise that makes absolutely no sense at all whatsoever... right?
i mean... there are absolutely no scientists making any claims that this universe is logical, let alone perfectly logical. if it were logical we wouldn't have Quantum Mechanics and GR/SR

is English a third or fourth language?

I just find it uncanny how similar staunch, extremist type scientists are to religious devotees. One thinks the universe is perfectly logical implying perfection in every way even if there is blatant evidence it is not so they go back to harping on mathematics as if understanding a mechanism or process or even why still implies perfection. Thats stupidity.

and again, you don't know anything about the scientific method

one more thing to add to your argument regarding your "profiling" of scientists: RULE 37

you don't regularly speak English at home, do you?

You two are more aligned than you think

this really demonstrates your complete ignorance of the scientific method

or it shows you aren't well versed in English (the Queen's English, Australian or American dialects)

perhaps you should attempt to use Google Translate to clarify?

 

[timojin]

you do realise that makes absolutely no sense at all whatsoever... right?
i mean... there are absolutely no scientists making any claims that this universe is logical, let alone perfectly logical. if it were logical we wouldn't have Quantum Mechanics and GR/SR

is English a third or fourth language?

and again, you don't know anything about the scientific method

one more thing to add to your argument regarding your "profiling" of scientists: RULE 37

you don't regularly speak English at home, do you?

this really demonstrates your complete ignorance of the scientific method

or it shows you aren't well versed in English (the Queen's English, Australian or American dialects)

perhaps you should attempt to use Google Translate to clarify?

You must be a scientist with an extreme understanding and have an IQ above 210,

 

[Dr_Toad]

How would you know? Fuckwit.

 

[birch]

this really demonstrates your complete ignorance of the scientific method

So now you are saying scientists use the scientific method to study the illogical universe. What is all this logic you are on about then? And why are you denying the repeated claims on this forum that the universe is completely logical because everything can be reduced to math? And what is the dig about english really have to do with it?

 

[birch]

How would you know? Fuckwit.

That's brilliant. Btw, logic is relative but we use it to explain what we essentially deal or know but doesnt mean its therefore logical even if it can be figured out. The whole invisible theme in that spectrum or process is that logic is the facilitator or flashlight we use to illuminate or pare down the object which itself often gets equated to logic. Logic is a non-tangible principle and merely a tool, often useful but not always. Logic just implies consistency or predicted to most layman. Without consistency you cant build or form a foundation. To scientists, the mistake or assumption often made is if it can be traversed, figured out or analyzed from point a to b however winding or convoluted, its logical just because its no longer a mystery. For many scientists, there is an implied or assumed perfection to anything they can unravel or harness to an elemental level. No, it really just is and perfection is subjective which science tries to tout the universal laws as dogmatic perfection just like math. What really is math anyways? Its a tool. I have heard scientists claim that the universe is logical because it can all be explained by math. Its logical by math not necessarily by experience and the latter is just as real. We dont live in math, its just an aspect.

 

[billvon]

Logic is a non-tangible principle and merely a tool, often useful but not always. Logic just implies consistency or predicted to most layman.

That's true. However, you should never base any of your thinking on what "most laymen" believe - you will often be disappointed.

Without consistency you cant build or form a foundation. To scientists, the mistake or assumption often made is if it can be traversed, figured out or analyzed from point a to b however winding or convoluted, its logical just because its no longer a mystery.

Well, no. Scientists have no problem understanding illogical responses (like crowd psychology, otherwise known as mob mentality) - they merely quantify such phenomena so they are more easily studied and understood.

For many scientists, there is an implied or assumed perfection to anything they can unravel or harness to an elemental level.

"Perfection" is an entirely subjective term. An artist may think that a sculpture is perfect; another may think that it's a waste of stone. A research scientist may think that Maxwell's Equations represent perfection; and at the scales he is working at he may well be right. A physicist may see those same equations and think about all the ways they don't apply at small scales or high speeds.

Sounds like you've created a pretty big strawman here; you have a concept of what a scientist is in your head that doesn't match reality.

 

[Truck Captain Stumpy]

So now you are saying scientists use the scientific method to study the illogical universe

hmm... where, exactly, did i state that?
i stated it is within the purview of science to study the universe - but your specific brand of logic doesn't enter into it
the universe simply is
that's it
period
full stop

What is all this logic you are on about then?

so English isn't your primary language. (of course, you could also be either illiterate or completely delusional)
thanks for verifying that one

you brought it up, read it for yourself: http://www.sciforums.com/threads/istanbul-nye-nightclub-terrorist-attack.158545/#post-3428659

And why are you denying the repeated claims on this forum that the universe is completely logical because everything can be reduced to math?

i never said that
however, this does demonstrate your ignorance regarding maths as well as modeling and the scientific method: the maths are a human construct (or language, if you will) that reduces the complexity of a model that describes reality. it allows for simplification and reduction to necessity. whereas math is logical, it doesn't mean the universe is logical: case in point - Quantum Mechanics

i've already explained this once - perhaps you should look into this link: http://www.readingbear.org/

And what is the dig about english really have to do with it?

because of your inability to comprehend basic clearly stated comments

either you are:
-intentionally trolling - thus you require moderation
-ignorant of English and multi-lingual - thus you require translation or some other interface for clarity
-delusional - thus you require medication and/or psychiatric help

it's not rocket surgery and there aren't any other options that define the problem you're presenting regarding the clear concise posts

EDIT

To scientists, the mistake or assumption often made is if it can be traversed, figured out or analyzed from point a to b however winding or convoluted, its logical just because its no longer a mystery. For many scientists, there is an implied or assumed perfection to anything they can unravel or harness to an elemental level.

wow... you're attempting to be a philosopher, aren't you?
no wonder you don't know anything about the scientific method or scientists!

and that isn't a subjective comment - you've displayed a lot of biased interpretations of what you think science and scientists are... and it's painfully obvious that you're actually getting your information from biased sites with either an agenda or some delusional pseudoscience/pseudo-intellectual discourse.

and no, you are also incorrect: nowhere in science is anything considered "logical" simply because they figured out something about it, or even if they figured out everything about it.

they can say that it can "logically" be predicted based upon a model, or that we can follow a set of "logical" steps regarding how it was deciphered, but you can't say it's "logical" because there is evidence found that explains [x]

 

[Truck Captain Stumpy]

Sounds like you've created a pretty big strawman here; you have a concept of what a scientist is in your head that doesn't match reality.

yep! and that's because he gets his definition of "scientists" or "science" from pseudoscience sites and "laymen" ... and as you already noted:

you should never base any of your thinking on what "most laymen" believe - you will often be disappointed.

i'm thinking this is a combination of literacy issues and pseudoscience considering the difficulty he is having with comprehending what is clear and concise communication above