Are all scientists this stupid?

PrayingForWar said:

It's because they've drawn a conclusion already:

That there has to be other intelligent life elsewhere in the universe, and (in many cases) there could not possibly be a God. Finding mold on a rock outside our gravity would a smoking gun to prove it. Therefore any evidence that could be used to argue in favor of that theory shall be trumpeted from the mountaintops, and any information that diminishes it will not be factored.

If my pointing out the stupidity of saying,



illustrates ignorance on my part, believing such a statement certainly illustrates profound naivete.


I do not take issue with that statement because I have a problem with the concept of other worlds inhabited with highly intelligent peoples or because such believes compromise my belief in God. My problem is "scientists" and other "educated" elites making insipid statements, and millions of people accepting them as fact. Just like the MMGW hoax, only more so because there are so many scientists that dispute these theories, but are ridiculed by the "educated" elites in the leftwing fringe of both the scientific community and the media.


If I were God, I'd have planets all over the universe teeming with life. He probably likes watching wars, and eventually we'll be involved in intergalactic battles. In any case, in His infinite wisdom, he seems to have spaced the planets so far apart the rest of the universe is safe from liberalism.

Click to expand...

You seem to be drawing a conclusion ahead of time as well, although you are not too far off for some of my fellows. However, before you assume all scientists are from Berkeley, remember many are highly positive about live existing on other planets because they want it to be true, which is because they are NERDS, and want scifi to become reality.

irish52084 said:

You talk about fudge factors being so terrible and that the real numbers should be everything, yet you claim that the world as we know it will be gone before "they" figure that stuff out. Where are your real numbers for that statement? Unless I misunderstood and you meant the nanosecond changes in our world that happen an infinite amount of times in a second that make our world as we knew it gone before we figure out faster than light travel or some approximation of it.

Click to expand...

Revelation

rodbender said:

I didn't get that from the article. IMHO, a fudge factor anywjere in science or statistics is a no-no, no matter which direction you fudge. Let's get the real numbers. The rest of your comment means nothing to me as the world, as we know it, will be gone long before they figure that stuff out.

Click to expand...

What scientific or statistical training do you have, if I might inquire? It seems you expect absolutely perfect measurements, rather than realistic ones, which is odd to me.

Tawnos said:

What scientific or statistical training do you have, if I might inquire? It seems you expect absolutely perfect measurements, rather than realistic ones, which is odd to me.

Click to expand...

In physics and many other physical sciences its the theory and analysis that is imperfect. the measurements are usually stupid accurate.

Daylen said:

You seem to be drawing a conclusion ahead of time as well, although you are not too far off for some of my fellows. However, before you assume all scientists are from Berkeley, remember many are highly positive about live existing on other planets because they want it to be true, which is because they are NERDS, and want scifi to become reality.

Click to expand...

I was speaking off the cuff of course, so I should declare that I do not view all scientists with any sort of contempt. The fault in the statement that raised my ire could also be blamed on piss poor journalism to be fair. I just hate to see such nonsense printed so often, without any challenge at all. So just to be clear, thank God for scientists, at least the ones who do their research without an agenda, in the pursuit of truth and advancement of our people.Liberals of all professions disgust me, I wish scientists would invent a pill that cured marxism.That would advance mankind for sure!!

Well its been awhile and I'm writing this off the top of my dinosaur skull but if I remember right after Plank time the universe expanded quickly and cooled off just as quickly. Universe is mostly Hydrogen, some anomalies in the new universe had higher gravitational pulls then others and gathered gas, when enough gas gathered it started to clump making planets and stars. Under the tremendous pressures under the weight of the new clumps new atoms were made, common atoms like silicon, iron, carbon, oxygen, nitrogen and the list goes on.

Fast forward 15 billion years and we have a planet in a temperate zone of a star with liquid water on the planet, the chemicals that make up amino acids and proteins are abundant, energy is supplied through heat, radiation from the earth core if underground or from the sun if above ground. It is not a matter of if life will form but when.

We are a carbon based life form sitting here at our keyboards. Amino acids make up proteins and proteins are our building blocks. In our soft easily bruised sweaty body we have flesh, muscle, bones, nerve tissue, and other fine organs that make life so miserable if they fail to function. Basic chemistry, Carbon, Oxygen, Hydrogen, nitrogen, trace elements galore make us work but these are the basic ingredients. Same as the slime under the earth in old caves, under rocks next to the wetlands, and exactly the same in mosquitoes, jelly fish, tigers and your next door neighbor no matter what you think of him.

We do not have a monopoly on these elements they are everywhere in the universe and if those elements are in the presence of energy and water eventually there will be life. It is that simple. Basic Chemistry..........well okay, advanced chemistry but simple enough a bright 12 year old can understand the basics.

I like the cut of your jib, grumpy old man

rodbender said:

Revelation

Click to expand...

Are you about the biblical revelations? I'm going to respond under the assumption you are, but if that is inaccurate disregard my impending response.

Your response to my question of what your real numbers are is the supposed word of god, written down by human hands. How is that in any way, shape or form a "real" numbers kind of information? It seems you are holding scientists and people with opposing opinions to a completely different standard of proof than your self or your beliefs. Simply by believing the revelations, you are subscribing to belief in a system that is no more accurate than the fudge factors these researchers may have used to determine the possible number of potentially habitable, life forming planets. Yet you bashed their use of such liberties in their pursuit of knowledge, how is this not hypocritical and down right rude?

i mean no offense to your religious views, so please don't take it as such. I am merely trying to draw a comparison and draw light to the fact that there was no real need to bash these people for postulating that a planet with the correct conditions might harbor life.

Very clearly put Old Grump.

Tawnos said:

What scientific or statistical training do you have, if I might inquire? It seems you expect absolutely perfect measurements, rather than realistic ones, which is odd to me.

Click to expand...

I have no scientific or statistical training whatsoever. I don't expect the numbers coming out of a calculation should be perfect, but the ones going in should be exactly what we have, not some number that has been changed or pulled out of the air. If you have the number for a factor right in front of you, use it. If you don't, go find the right number to use, at least as close as you can possibly get.

rodbender said:

I have no scientific or statistical training whatsoever. I don't expect the numbers coming out of a calculation should be perfect, but the ones going in should be exactly what we have, not some number that has been changed or pulled out of the air. If you have the number for a factor right in front of you, use it. If you don't, go find the right number to use, at least as close as you can possibly get.

Click to expand...

With no such training or background, how can you even claim to adequately evaluate those claims made, the formulas used, and the theories presented? You sound like an oil changer (can't even call it a car mechanic) criticizing a neurosurgeon for the choice of probe used when cauterizing a tumor. With no standard by which to judge the claim, and no means by which to evaluate it, it seems you instead latch onto the lowest common denominator - the words used to dumb down an explanation so that the majority might have a chance of somewhat comprehending it.

Old Grump said:

Well its been awhile and I'm writing this off the top of my dinosaur skull but if I remember right after Plank time the universe expanded quickly and cooled off just as quickly...

Click to expand...

Well, you've got a mighty good memory if you can remember that far back.

Fudge factors are inserted to account for general unknowns, known error rates or sometimes just an educated guess. It wasn't very long ago that it was generally accepted that nothing could be measured more accurately than 3-1/2 significant digits. We have gotten much better in the past few dacades with stricter quality control and new manufacturing methods but not a great deal. We put men on the moon using that old theory and it wasn't until after the first few men had been in space that it was determined that a lot of things had to be remeasured including the survey line from Cape Canaveral to Houston. It wasn't the 3.5 digits that was the problem but getting it to that rate.

Every scientific finding is going to have some error associated with it no matter what, it is just a matter of how much error are we willing to accept before throwing out the baby with the bath water.

Old Grump said:

We do not have a monopoly on these elements they are everywhere in the universe and if those elements are in the presence of energy and water eventually there will be life. It is that simple. Basic Chemistry..........well okay, advanced chemistry but simple enough a bright 12 year old can understand the basics.

Click to expand...

Yes. The theory that nothing can become something. That dead can miraculously live by itself. That information, in the form of DNA, can create itself. That life is random and meaningless.

I've never really bought into those theories. Lot's of other bright folks don't buy into them either. Some scientists believe that all you need for life to occur is the essentials. My belief is that the essentials are the least important part.

chiefjason said:

Yes. The theory that nothing can become something. That dead can miraculously live by itself. That information, in the form of DNA, can create itself. That life is random and meaningless.

I've never really bought into those theories. Lot's of other bright folks don't buy into them either. Some scientists believe that all you need for life to occur is the essentials. My belief is that the essentials are the least important part.

Click to expand...

Know how I know you don't know what you're talking about?

chiefjason said:

Yes. The theory that nothing can become something. That dead can miraculously live by itself. That information, in the form of DNA, can create itself. That life is random and meaningless.

I've never really bought into those theories. Lot's of other bright folks don't buy into them either. Some scientists believe that all you need for life to occur is the essentials. My belief is that the essentials are the least important part.

Click to expand...

Lots of folks still believe the world is flat, the sun is the center of the universe and that fossils in the earth were all created in one day so we would have something to dig up and talk about. Most of those people are either simple minded or are charlatans taking advantage of the simple minded. Some people still believe that turning the other cheek means standing still and defenseless while goons rape and murder your family, I call those people simple minded. Some people believe their ethnic group or their nationality or their church is superior to all others and no allowances must be made, their mind is closed because they already know all their is to know. Those people are simple minded too.

I prefer to believe God created a world with physical laws that make sense and provided all the material and energy needed for the creation of life. Believing in science isn't anti-religious, its using the common sense and intelligence granted me by a higher power. If I didn't believe that I wouldn't be a Catholic.

I find that POV as narrow-minded as you portray the ones you decry. It is designed to dismiss opposing views before they are even expressed.

Your choice. Moving on.

(sarcasm on)Remember reporters are 100% right about every article they write. They never misquote, misunderstand, or take out of context any idea, law, or concept presented. I have NEVER, NEVER I tell you, have seen a story with errors or information omitted to help the masses understand the subject in whole. We all know that articles written about gun rights are 100% correct in every way. (sarcasm off)

eye95 said:

I find that POV as narrow-minded as you portray the ones you decry. It is designed to dismiss opposing views before they are even expressed.

Your choice. Moving on.

Click to expand...

It's a perfectly valid form of debating a point. He is merely preempting common yet obviously poorly-thought-out points of view. People may still argue them, but he can answer with a simple "I've responded to that point above, and will continue here."

Just because people want to remain bull-headedly closed-minded about the functions of the universe does not mean we should limit our discourse to their level. I quote the late Carl Sagan:

In some respects, science has far surpassed religion in delivering awe. How is it that hardly any major religion has looked at science and concluded, “This is better than we thought! The Universe is much bigger than our prophets said, grander, more subtle, more elegant. God must be even greater than we dreamed!”? Instead they say, “No, no, no! My god is a little god, and I want him to stay that way.”

Click to expand...

I have a wonderful little pill that'll cure Marxism for sure and best of all, the Marxist sufferers only need take one and are cured within a few minutes, sometimes not even!