Why do you think I've been writing these essays Q?
See Ben's OP.
Why do you think I've been writing these essays Q?
Hi (Q)---
I have no problems with people proposing off the wall theories. The problem is when those people refuse to listen to any sort of reason whatsoever. In that sense, those people are no better than any of the other science haters in the world.
I love to think about physics. That is what I do. And if someone has a question, then I love to think about it and try to give an answer when possible. What I absolutely despise is when someone claims that all of modern science is wrong, with little or no understanding of the mathematical underpinnings.
How many physicists do you know personally? Or are you just judging this based on physicists' responses to your "XYZ Explained"-type theories?But worst of all, within science there's more intellectual arrogance from people who know something about physics, but think they know it all. But again they don't have the answers, so they don't know it all.
This is how most cranks like to see scientists who don't appreciate being told how to do their jobs. It's easier for such people than accepting that their ideas are of no substance, and that they simply have no understanding of how science works or even what scientists look for in an "explanation".They learn physics from a book, but they don't do it. Original thought is not allowed. They learn to sneer at new ideas, to disregard them as psuedoscience, psychobabble.
People who whine along these lines typically have zero appreciation for how real scientific models are structured. It's the mathematics that makes the difference between a complete and well-defined theory, and a nonsensical string of undefined terms and concepts. This is especially true where models deal with scales and phenomena humans are unfamiliar with, and human intuition never evolved to deal with.They convince themselves that physics is maths,
You can always ask why things are the way they are. There's no such thing as a self-evident theory, if that's what you're on about.that a postulate is an explanation,
Proof that an axiom is "true"? Axioms in scientific theories are judged by the accuracy of the resulting theories' predictions. No axiom or theory can be proven beyond all doubt.that an axiom is a proof.
Have you properly studied these theories, or are you dismissing them on the grounds that the conclusions are just too absurd to be true in your personal opinion?And they talk earnestly about time travel, and parallel universes, and black hole elephants in two places at once, and why it's all too complicated to explain to the layman. It's just dogmatic nonsense.
Building what basically amounts to fairy tales around physical theories won't help anyone. If anything, it will mislead. I'd personally love it if more people were interested in physics for the discipline it was, and not for some inaccurate portrayal of what it is or should be.I will do my bit for physics. I want to do my bit to make it accessible, interesting, understandable, thrilling, and if I can I'll contribute to the advancement of science.
What problem would that be? It's you and many others who, for whatever reason, have a problem with the standards of objectivity and rigour demanded by physicists.I might get something wrong. I might make a wrong turn. But if you guys don't want to engage and don't want to help, you are most definitely part of the problem, not the solution.
Farsight said:I think the underlying problem is that physics doesn't offer enough "grasp" these days. People have an innate curiosity, they want to understand the world, but physics doesn't have the answers. So people try to supply answers themselves.
IMHO the trouble starts when people who do know about physics fail to respond sincerely. There's a lack of engagement, plus an unwillingness to be open and rational. So the gap grows.
This isn't something new. Science has always suffered like this. That's why Einstein, an outsider at the time, didn't get a Nobel prize for Special Relativity, but got one for something else seventeen years later.
MetaKron said:The people who sold us the bill of goods that is sometimes called "AIDS" did so by ignoring most of the data, by refusing to listen to any sort of reason whatsoever, and literally, in the person of Robert Gallo, threatening the careers of scientists who opposed that theory. Those who he threatened chose their jobs over the truth, and here we are.
I would have to say that your characterization of dissidents as "cranks" and "science haters" is false, and is more likely to be the consequence of a St. Patrick's Day drinking binge than any straight thinking. That's what happens when you drink during the parade. Your metabolism is royally screwed up by the afternoon and your hangover today must be phenomenal.
So you say that people who oppose one theory of science oppose or hate all science. That shows your arrogance. You are also deliberately misrepresenting their positions. This shows that you are not to be trusted.
DH said:The crackpots flock to this site for the simple reason that they are cherished here. Threads are sent to the cesspool very reluctantly. Legitimate (non-spammer) users have to work very hard to get banned from this site.
The crackpot is a product of the internet and post-modernistic thought. The internet is the first media in all of history that enables crackpots to disseminate their views widely. Post-modernistic thought teaches that all opinions are valid. It is mean old science, which does not hold that all opinions are equally valid, that is wrong. The crackpot is right and can now shout it out to the world!
The National Geographic channel recently aired a program "Conspiracy Moon Landing" (reshowing this evening and tomorrow at 5PM Eastern) that covered the moon landing hoax conspiracy. Bottom line: The moon landing was real (duh!) and those who promulgate the hoax are "cultural vandals".
But I can't understand how people can be ignorant to the point of debating with experts. This just blows my mind.
I heartily agree that science should be an aristocracy of sorts, but never a democracy.
Have you seen the statistics that a third of Americans believe that 9-11 was faked?
This thread should be discontinued.
No socially public place can work like that. It will destroy this site without question to let this continue.
But not the crackpot threads?
This is post-modernistic thought run amok. Science is brutal; it is run by fact, not opinion. In science, all opinions are not equally valid.
The crackpots flock to this site for the simple reason that they are cherished here. Threads are sent to the cesspool very reluctantly.
Legitimate (non-spammer) users have to work very hard to get banned from this site.
The crackpot is a product of the internet and post-modernistic thought.
The internet is the first media in all of history that enables crackpots to disseminate their views widely.
Post-modernistic thought teaches that all opinions are valid. It is mean old science, which does not hold that all opinions are equally valid, that is wrong.
The crackpot is right and can now shout it out to the world!
The National Geographic channel recently aired a program "Conspiracy Moon Landing" (reshowing this evening and tomorrow at 5PM Eastern) that covered the moon landing hoax conspiracy. Bottom line: The moon landing was real (duh!) and those who promulgate the hoax are "cultural vandals".
Ahh yes. I am arrogant and not to be trusted, because I have called a spade a spade. I was only using you as an example, as your claims clearly represent a minority opinion with little or no scientific basis. I can't speak about HIV/AIDS research because I don't care about these things. If you ever come up with a theory of time or energy, though, you know where to post it.
MetaKron said:And since you mentioned me as a derogatory example, I am fitting you for a shoe up your ass. I hope you don't mind