University propaganda?

[JoeTerp]

@Smiling Dave

A reply to a few posts:

So would you say we should stop questioning these theories and reject any challenges to them based on the premise that the “science is settled?”

Ain’t that a straw man? We should stop questioning them until contradictory evidence shows up. But it’s beyond a reasonable doubt that such evidence will ever show up, there being millions and billions of pieces of evidence supporting them, and none refuting them.

So it’s not for all cases. How is this explained? It isn’t.

Physics never explains anything. It only describes things. Have you heard any explanations of gravity? Or of why F = ma? Physics asserts that within certain boundaries, neither too big [TY to DD5] nor too small, all of Newton’s Laws apply. There is no room to reasonably doubt such an assertion. Not a single educated person in the Universe doubts that, and if he does, he need only do experiment after experiment till he is convinced. Same with all the other stuff I mentioned.

There may be a better theory for explaining such phenomena.

Of course there may be. There may be little green men under your bed too. it’s not impossible. But no one doubts that the present theories as taught in standard textbooks describes the universe accurately, which is all they claim to do.

Skepticism is how we leave room for new theories to replace old ones.

Scepticism is wonderful, but it is improper to be equally sceptical of all things. Some are way more likely than others, and have an incredible preponderance of evidence in their favor, like several trillion to zero. Are you sceptical of this assertion: If you let go of something in your hand, like a pencil, it will drop to the floor?

We need not live in a state of perpetual uncertainty to leave room for new theories. When the new evidence comes along, if it ever does, then we can rethink things. Until then we are totally justified and can sleep well nights trusting the laws of physics as currently taught.

Just as we would all see from common sense observation, the Sun orbits the Earth. Through mathematics and experimentation, we were able to show that this is false. The old scientific theory wasn’t completely correct, and the current one might not be, either.

This is an excellent example. Until there was contrary evidence, one was but a fool to assume the Sun is stationary. When contrary evidence came up [which I am not certain it did, I seem to remember that something about the Earth indicates that it’s spinning around its axis, but I don’t remember what] then and only then was the time to start being sceptical.

Actually, it doesn’t describe it at the macro level either. For that you need relativity.

TY for the correction.

If no one is out there questioning things and doing research, then its likely no contrary evidence is going to just pop up out of nowhere.

[alimentarius]

@liberty student

Whenever someone says that something is beyond doubt in science, run the other way.

Should I run to creationism because my biology teacher says that evolution is a scientific fact?

[Smiling_Dave]

If no one is out there questioning things and doing research, then its likely no contrary evidence is going to just pop up out of nowhere.

So you suggest we question and research the law of gravity? Drop things and see if they fly up?

Research and questions are useful at the frontiers of a subject, the places and topics where the scientific community is unsure of what’s going on. But no one who is going to go round reinventing the wheel will suddenly discover that a square wheel rolls better than a round one. And no one is ever going to find that F is not equal to ma. When a theory has held up for 300 years of constant experiment, it is unlikely in the extreme to be upset suddenly.

[Knight_of_BAAWA]

@alimentarius

Although the precise consequences of this greenhouse effect are still subject to discussion, the global impact of CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion is now accepted as beyound reasonable doubt.

@liberty student

Now that is a lie. Science is inquiry and skepticism. Whenever someone says that something is beyond doubt in science, run the other way.

Well, it does say beyond reasonable doubt (although certainly it isn’t). But such things as electromagnetism, water being 2 parts hydrogen to 1 part oxygen…I think you get the picture.

[Smiling_Dave]

But such things as electromagnetism, water being 2 parts hydrogen to 1 part oxygen…I think you get the picture.

At last!

[Spideynw]

@alimentarius

Is it pure propaganda?

Yes.

[DanielMuffinburg]

@alimentarius

@liberty student

Whenever someone says that something is beyond doubt in science, run the other way.

Should I run to creationism because my biology teacher says that evolution is a scientific fact?

No. Creationism is also touted as fact. LS, point is to not believe them, etc. Not to run to another theory that is touted as fact.

[alimentarius]

So I shouldn’t believe in evolution?

[DanielMuffinburg]

@alimentarius

So I shouldn’t believe in evolution?

??? No. Don’t believe the people who touted fact.

[alimentarius]

A friend of mine doesn’t believe in Climategate because the media hasn’t been covering it. What should I send him?

[DanielMuffinburg]

@alimentarius

A friend of mine doesn’t believe in Climategate because the media hasn’t been covering it. What should I send him?

Ask him if he believes everything that Glenn Beck spews out, after all, Glenn Beck is part of the media.

[alimentarius]

He hasn’t heard of Glenn Beck. He’s a Norwegian socialist, and he doesn’t trust Fox News.

[DanielMuffinburg]

@alimentarius

He hasn’t heard of Glenn Beck. He’s a Norwegian socialist, and he doesn’t trust Fox News.

Why doesn’t he trust Fox News, isn’t it part of the media?

[alimentarius]

He considers it right wing propaganda. The Norwegian media functions like a socialist indoctrination machine.

[DanielMuffinburg]

@alimentarius

He considers it right wing propaganda. The Norwegian media functions like a socialist indoctrination machine.

So what does he consider CNN and NBC news to be, objective? Ask him why Rupert Murdoch donated to Obama.

[alimentarius]

He hasn’t heard of any of them. He only reads/watches Norwegian media.

[DanielMuffinburg]

@alimentarius

He hasn’t heard of any of them. He only reads/watches Norwegian media.

But he knows that Fox News is right-wing propaganda?

[nirgrahamUK]

@alimentarius

He hasn’t heard of any of them. He only reads/watches Norwegian media.

try googling norwegian domains and the word climategate.

http://nyheter.uib.no/?modus=vis_leserbrev&id=45380