Science: Wonders, causality and the indeterminable

[Lowpro]

All this changes nothing I have said. Consider it or not.

You're right, they don't change anything as far as the "Thor/Odin/FMS" part goes because all of them have no value as an explanation. To have value of an explanation, you need evidence*. Now, we DO have good inference (not evidence but inference from evidence) on how, say, the Universe arose, and it comes from the mathematics of the Big Bang as well as the understanding of particle interactions within the time frame. While we cannot demonstrate it in the same scale of the actual BB (cmon CERN!), we have the mathematics for it which is why it's a very good inference. Now, you can be a Xtian Apologetic and claim that this is evidence for God in the instigator but the math doesn't require God so really, I don't see how you can make the claim that what we've found so far:

to the extent that science is the rigorous pursuit of the truth,
Science is man's basic understanding of the Physical Evidences of God.

Is unfounded because you still haven't told us what the evidence for God is/should be. The way I see it, and the way the evidence we have is laid out actually removes the possibility for God altogether.

*You can hold out for that value if you think it's there, but while you're doing that, don't discredit the value of evidence we already do have, whether it affirms or destroys your beliefs. That's just reality.

If you like Zacharias you'll love Dinesh D'souza.

 

[JudeBrando]

If you like Zacharias you'll love Dinesh D'souza.

He's alright too.

 

[Doubt]

Exploding stars, black-hole galaxies, atomic particles, and anything else viewed through an instrument, are "scientific" objects.

I think you missed the real error in the op. Objects are just objects. They have properties that can be investigated using science. This includes any physical thing that we have observed. Big astronomical phenomena get lots of attention. But there is a lot of scientific observations surrounding any ordinary hunk of rusted steel sitting on the ground.

 

[quarky]

I tried to watch the vids of Zacharias.
I didn't get far.
I'm not sure what the point is.

 

[Jonesboy]

I fancy the Indeterminable

I fancy The Indeterminable. Why? I will tell you.

The Interminable is a mystery. This is empty metaphysics.
The Indeterminable is infinity. This is empty mathematics.
The Indeterminable is lost meaning. This is empty grammar.
The indeterminable is lost results. This is chemistry.

God, there are ever so many choices. Hmm.
And that is why I just fancy The Indeterminable.
You should too. It's heaven ever so.

 

[Jonesboy]

It was science that showed us those things. No one had ever seen the Whirlpool galaxy or the Eagle nebula until scientists invented telescopes powerful enough to see those things. Nobody knew there were volcanoes and geysers on the moons of Jupiter and Saturn until scientists sent spacecraft to the outer planets. Astrologers and homeopaths didn't do those things. We know about them thanks to science.

Steve S

It wasn't Science that showed us.
If I use a ladder to find a block in the guttering, then has the ladder showed me what a block in the guttering is?
And what if I climb up? What shows me then?

 

[Jonesboy]

Speaking of seeing things directly, it was the lenses produced by science which permitted us to see microbes. Which led us to modern medicine and a tripling of average lifespan. And half our children no longer die before the age of 5. Did you know that in Puritan Massachusetts, the average marriage lasted 12 years? Not divorce, you understand - puerperal fever.

Crafts were passed down. Not science. This science myth becomes boring, very very quickly. We ALWAYS could do things methodically. Even our church was the bastion of method. Science was a breakaway movement.

 

[Dinwar]

So it's a little presumptious for science proselytes to speak of "the wonders of science". When will they stop?

Your error is in assuming, without any justification or explanation, that it is the scientists who are wrong. This is not correct--it is the rest of the world who splits the universe between scientific wonders and the mundane. Scientists realize that ALL objects are wonders, from the smallest to the largest and everything in between.

You hate scientists. That's become obvious. Why do you bother to continue to post here?

The proselytes started the myth of Science and the wonders of science as a retort, a sort of parting slap in the face to some Church following a local, internal astronomical disagreement on where the Sun and Earth were placed in the Solar system.

Ah. This explains it. You're upset because science doesn't support your pet god (and it IS a pet, tame, docile, and obedient).

Here's the thing, kid: science is a way to gather INFORMATION. If there are any "wonders of science" it's the theories--gravity, electromagnatism, plate tectonics, and all the rest. The objects are in nature, and almost no scientist today talks of objects as "wonders of science" except in the most poetic sence (I get the impression that you don't understand that scientists can use metaphores, but really, we do). Again, it's NOT the scientists who divided the world between science and the mundain. There's a story of a lab where the blackboard got a film over it every night. Being a lab, someone took a sample and analized it for fun. Turned out to be something of an important discovery, in that it demonstrated some disturbing issues with old computer monitors. Another example is the entire field of geology: geologists quite literally are facinated BY DIRT. The quickest way to shut me up for an hour is to find a rock the size of my fist--any rock will do--and ask me to tell you all I can about it. And I'm hardly unique in that. Scientists are facinated by everything.

 

[Jonesboy]

Prosletyzing where exactly?

Some sort of refeerence?

I don't remember that once at college or high school, are you talking about entertainment TV?

It doesn't matter. Read the whole sentence.

 

[Jonesboy]

Your error is in assuming, without any justification or explanation, that it is the scientists who are wrong. This is not correct--it is the rest of the world who splits the universe between scientific wonders and the mundane. Scientists realize that ALL objects are wonders, from the smallest to the largest and everything in between.

You hate scientists. That's become obvious. Why do you bother to continue to post here?

Ah. This explains it. You're upset because science doesn't support your pet god (and it IS a pet, tame, docile, and obedient).

Here's the thing, kid: science is a way to gather INFORMATION. If there are any "wonders of science" it's the theories--gravity, electromagnatism, plate tectonics, and all the rest. The objects are in nature, and almost no scientist today talks of objects as "wonders of science" except in the most poetic sence (I get the impression that you don't understand that scientists can use metaphores, but really, we do). Again, it's NOT the scientists who divided the world between science and the mundain. There's a story of a lab where the blackboard got a film over it every night. Being a lab, someone took a sample and analized it for fun. Turned out to be something of an important discovery, in that it demonstrated some disturbing issues with old computer monitors. Another example is the entire field of geology: geologists quite literally are facinated BY DIRT. The quickest way to shut me up for an hour is to find a rock the size of my fist--any rock will do--and ask me to tell you all I can about it. And I'm hardly unique in that. Scientists are facinated by everything.

Scientists are no more or less, right or wrong, in their judgement powers than anyone else.


The rest was funny. You are a little firebox!
Rest assured. A good old chinwag wasn't it though. I have a degree in Chemistry and LRIC biocemistry. I worked in the chemical industry creating new methods for making novel aromatic compounds. Oh, and the MA in analytic Philosophy. Hm! Should suffice, me thinks.

Edited by jhunter1163: 

Edited for civility.

 

[Jonesboy]

Must have the precious. They stole it from us. Sneaky little scientists. Wicked, tricksy, false! We kill science, take the precious... and we be the master!

That's pretty much how it is. The natural vs the unnatural.
Bit daft though, to make it a charged issue.

 

[Lowpro]

Scientists are no more or less, right or wrong, in their judgement powers than anyone else.

Scientists tend to have a more trained mind for critical thinking (I'm sure that's a broad statement) but more importantly scientists have information that give them better inference. Scientists have a lot of knowledge, knowledge which is NOT exclusive to them, but good scientists will not survive the rigors of their own discipline without that knowledge.

Basically, scientists know more because they have to know more, and in that their ability to make correct decisions is probably stronger because they HAVE to have the information if they want to be taken seriously. That's just part of how the discipline of science works.

Since you're a chemistry inclined individual, you would be able to make better predictions of bond formation due to your knowledge of electron density and localization; because you have that knowledge YOUR judgement is better than someone who DOESN'T have that knowledge. Now, if scientists HAVE to have this knowledge, that should imply that their judgement is more correct because it is more informed. This does NOT mean that the information is exclusive, but not everyone has it either, it needs to be demonstrated and taught; that in ITSELF is a wonder of science because science requires all knowledge to be explanatory and demonstrable.

 

[Dinwar]

Scientists are no more or less, right or wrong, in their judgement powers than anyone else.

True. The main difference is that scientists, as a group, decided to recognize this and to take steps to systematically correct it.

It always amazes me when people say garbage like this as if it's surprising to scientists. The whole scientific method is designed around the concept that scientists are not infalliable, and are often wrong. Peer review PRESUMES that scientists are no more or less, right or wrong, in their judgement powers than anyone else. Experimentation PRESUMES that scientists are no omre or less, right or wrong, in their judgement powers than anyone else. IT'S BUILT INTO THE SYSTEM.

What you said is the same as saying "carpenters work with wood".

Also, what in the name of all that's logical does this have to do with ANYTHING I said? I never said that scientists were better, worse, or anything else--I simply said that it's not scientists who divide the universe into wonders and the mundane. We're discussing a phrase, not the relative value of science (THAT is beyond debate, at least by anyone using a computer). A person with a philosophy degree should understand that whole "staying on topic" thing.

Rest assured. A good old chinwag wasn't it though. I have a degree in Chemistry and LRIC biocemistry.

And yet you don't understand science. See, this is why we have no authorities in science, only experts: even those with credentials can be wrong.

Hm! Should suffice, me thinks, what say you now o loon faced clown?

I say, first off, drop the pretentious verbage. I grew up with an English professor--vapid prattle is a specialty of mine (well, cutting through it). As for your credentials sufficing, again, people with much better credentials than you have ben wrong. Science looks at evidence and logic--both of which you have completely ignored. If your philosophy degree is worth the spit it takes to say "philosophy degree" you'd have learned something about the formulation of an argument. I suggest you start using that knowledge.

To put it simply enough for you to grasp: No one here is going to be impressed by degrees or quoting long-dead poets, not in this subforum anyway. So skip that, and focus on the issue at hand. You'll go further.

 

[MattusMaximus]

In other words,

to the extent that the common interest is the rigorous pursuit of the truth,

The Wonders of Science

are glimpses of

The Wonders of God.

Please define "God", JB.

 

[MattusMaximus]

If Jonesboy wants indeterminism, then he/she should study quantum mechanics. But this would mean he/she would actually have to study some science, as opposed to making incoherent statements about it on message boards.

 

[Jonesboy]

If Jonesboy wants indeterminism, then he/she should study quantum mechanics. But this would mean he/she would actually have to study some science, as opposed to making incoherent statements about it on message boards.

You don't STUDY concepts man!
Get the right picture of science. It offers no factual concepts.

 

[SezMe]

If a star goes supernova in a far far away galaxy and no one is around, does it make a sound?

No. No medium to support pressure waves => no sound.

 

[MattusMaximus]

You don't STUDY concepts man!
Get the right picture of science. It offers no factual concepts.

No factual concepts, eh?

Then I challenge you to jump off the nearest tall building in an effort to disprove the supposedly non-factual concept of gravity.

Get back to us with the results of your experiment, okay?

 

[trvlr2]

Scientists are no more or less, right or wrong, in their judgement powers than anyone else.


The rest was funny. You are a little firebox!
Rest assured. A good old chinwag wasn't it though. I have a degree in Chemistry and LRIC biocemistry. I worked in the chemical industry creating new methods for making novel aromatic compounds. Oh, and the MA in analytic Philosophy. Hm! Should suffice, me thinks, what say you now o loon faced clown? (Shakespeare, Macbeth).

BJU?

Sampling the acid?

Wot?

 

[Jonesboy]

Your error is in assuming, without any justification or explanation, that it is the scientists who are wrong. This is not correct--it is the rest of the world who splits the universe between scientific wonders and the mundane. Scientists realize that ALL objects are wonders, from the smallest to the largest and everything in between.

You hate scientists. That's become obvious. Why do you bother to continue to post here?

Ah. This explains it. You're upset because science doesn't support your pet god (and it IS a pet, tame, docile, and obedient).

Here's the thing, kid: science is a way to gather INFORMATION. If there are any "wonders of science" it's the theories--gravity, electromagnatism, plate tectonics, and all the rest. The objects are in nature, and almost no scientist today talks of objects as "wonders of science" except in the most poetic sence (I get the impression that you don't understand that scientists can use metaphores, but really, we do). Again, it's NOT the scientists who divided the world between science and the mundain. There's a story of a lab where the blackboard got a film over it every night. Being a lab, someone took a sample and analized it for fun. Turned out to be something of an important discovery, in that it demonstrated some disturbing issues with old computer monitors. Another example is the entire field of geology: geologists quite literally are facinated BY DIRT. The quickest way to shut me up for an hour is to find a rock the size of my fist--any rock will do--and ask me to tell you all I can about it. And I'm hardly unique in that. Scientists are facinated by everything.

You said that only scientists realize that all things are wonders? How do you realize a wonder. Is that what a scientist does? Realize a wonder?