|
|
Post by ray on Jan 16, 2020 10:58:52 GMT
LKeet6Do I get my diplomacy badge for debating like an adult for a change??? Lol
|
|
|
|
Post by LKeet6 on Jan 16, 2020 11:32:57 GMT
LKeet6Do I get my diplomacy badge for debating like an adult for a change??? Lol  You were an absolute Saint my friend, well done! |
|
|
|
Post by jeff on Jan 16, 2020 13:46:39 GMT
Ray and Leon, thank you for the civil discussion. This is one of those issues that can get emotional very quickly. Then bad things happen. I don't want that here. I like you guys!  <Sidebar> Ray, I think you were hard done by TGCTours. I saw no reason for them to ban you, much less permanently. You brought up a legitimate fairness issue and when you called them on it, they reacted overly defensively. I thought that when one of the mods said, essentially, "Hey! Look over here! See how much hard work Doyley put into this tournament? Isn't that great?" they had given up on trying to defend the arbitrary rules change and the competitive inequality it created. Leon, I spent over 2 hours hunting down links that I thought might give people pause to think, "What if humans aren't driving climate change?". I'll admit that it wasn't my best Internet research, because I've read more compelling papers and presentations than those. I just couldn't find them last night. I blame the whisky and beer and late hour. But any in-depth debate on climate change will require a time investment, and I share your weariness in trying to sort through all the data and opinions. I don't keep a file of "killer anti-anthropogenic climate change research papers" because I don't often try and debate it any more. But I got a wild hair last night and here we are. I like to think "what if?" about a lot of things. I encourage anyone else to do the same. A thousand years ago we knew the Earth was flat. Five hundred years ago we knew the Earth was the center of the solar system. I wonder what we know today that won't be true in a hundred years? |
|
|
|
Post by ray on Jan 16, 2020 15:26:47 GMT
jeff, they were probably fair. I pushed the envelope and had been banned a lot. Sometimes out of being belligerent, other times from poking the same person (Ron) often enough within the rules for him to complain about me and be a pain in their ass. I get along well with Doyley when he’s streaming and I pop in for a chat. They understood I was using the forums as a way to vent because of RL stuff with my health. I knew what I was doing (being an ass), they knew what I was doing (taking it out on strangers rather than those I loved), it just got a bit much some times. I’m ok with it, but I appreciate you seeing my point. 👍🇦🇺👍
|
|
|
|
Post by polekatt/josia on Jan 16, 2020 18:12:08 GMT
I think its cool to see you guys talking about this , both sides, with no one upset.
I generally shy away from discussions like this, as they get too heated and people end up getting mad over things that they shouldn't be mad at each other over.
Personally, I'm pretty close to the same opinions as jeff . But I am old, and pretty set in my ways, so rather than debating points, I am usually just happy to share what I think, then agree that I disagree with others, and vice versa, and everyone stays happy and friends.
Regarding climate change/global warming, I think the earth just goes through cycles. I have seen so many scientific points that were presented as gospel truth in my lifetime, and are now proven refuted, that I usually just form my own opinions and take most scientific reports with a grain of salt. I mean, I clearly remember back in the 70's when they were adamant that we were on the verge of another ice age, and would be extinct by now. Thats not something I just read about, thats something I clearly remember. And those like my dad that did not buy it, were laughed at and made fun of. And personally, I dont' believe that there is any way to know what it was like over a thousand or so years ago. Records weren't really kept back then, (other than a flood) and theories are only just that. No way at all to prove any theories, because there isn't anything to compare to.
|
|
|
|
Post by hammers1man on Jan 16, 2020 19:32:39 GMT
I think its cool to see you guys talking about this , both sides, with no one upset. I generally shy away from discussions like this, as they get too heated and people end up getting mad over things that they shouldn't be mad at each other over. Personally, I'm pretty close to the same opinions as jeff . But I am old, and pretty set in my ways, so rather than debating points, I am usually just happy to share what I think, then agree that I disagree with others, and vice versa, and everyone stays happy and friends. Regarding climate change/global warming, I think the earth just goes through cycles. I have seen so many scientific points that were presented as gospel truth in my lifetime, and are now proven refuted, that I usually just form my own opinions and take most scientific reports with a grain of salt. I mean, I clearly remember back in the 70's when they were adamant that we were on the verge of another ice age, and would be extinct by now. Thats not something I just read about, thats something I clearly remember. And those like my dad that did not buy it, were laughed at and made fun of. And personally, I dont' believe that there is any way to know what it was like over a thousand or so years ago. Records weren't really kept back then, (other than a flood) and theories are only just that. No way at all to prove any theories, because there isn't anything to compare to.
1000 years ago seems like yesterday when science can predict that earth's sister planet Mars died 3.5 to 4 billion years ago and have convincing theories why. |
|
|
|
Post by LKeet6 on Jan 16, 2020 20:42:48 GMT
I understand why people point towards science not getting it completely right (sometimes even wrong!) But who are you then putting your faith in?? I hear so much now "I'm sick of listening to experts," because people don't like being talked down to, but the fact is, invariably, they DO know much more than you. Just because they're not right ONE HUNDRED PERCENT of the time, you choose not to believe them? They get stuff right WAY more than anyone else. Josia, (or Jeff) I'm NOT calling you out here, I swear, you're both good guys, that's clear from your presence here in our society. I'm talking about a general trend I see. You absolutely CAN know what the general weather trends were 1000, 10k, 100k, 1million years ago. They pump huge tubes into the ground and pull up the soil and analyse all the levels, a bit like looking at the rings of a tree. They also can analyse the fossil record and carbon dating for a similar look to the past. It's really very precise. They know how many ice ages this planet has had, and when they happened within a few thousand years. They know how much C02 was in the air from analysing plant fossils etc etc. They even know some of this stuff (in less detail) for other planets and moons! Like how they were formed, that there used to be water on some of them, that mountains there could've been volcanoes. It's fascinating stuff! You should look into it! As another example of looking back in time, people who criticise vegans as a "modern fad," I learned from Mike Tyson's podcast that many/most of the Roman centurions were vegan. How do they know that? They found bones and analysed the bone marrow and compared to modern day humans and could tell who ate what. All kinds of things are possible in science. The people in the 70s saying the world would be over by now (not sure that was the timescale, or definitively decided) only got how quickly it would happen wrong?! They didn't get the overall effect wrong?! Everything they said would happen has happened or started to happen, as far as I can see. I really feel like this trend away from science (happening in medicine too) is such a backward step in our world. Ok, I've gone on way too much. Sorry if I've said too much, hope I didn't go too far. I'm very passionate about this stuff, and have tried to keep it friendly We're all here to play golf in a friendly society and we're great at that! (But if people say stuff about something I'm passionate about, they should expect to hear back from me!  ) |
|
|
|
Post by hammers1man on Jan 16, 2020 21:52:22 GMT
I understand why people point towards science not getting it completely right (sometimes even wrong!) But who are you then putting your faith in?? I hear so much now "I'm sick of listening to experts," because people don't like being talked down to, but the fact is, invariably, they DO know much more than you. Just because they're not right ONE HUNDRED PERCENT of the time, you choose not to believe them? They get stuff right WAY more than anyone else. Josia, (or Jeff) I'm NOT calling you out here, I swear, you're both good guys, that's clear from your presence here in our society. I'm talking about a general trend I see. You absolutely CAN know what the general weather trends were 1000, 10k, 100k, 1million years ago. They pump huge tubes into the ground and pull up the soil and analyse all the levels, a bit like looking at the rings of a tree. They also can analyse the fossil record and carbon dating for a similar look to the past. It's really very precise. They know how many ice ages this planet has had, and when they happened within a few thousand years. They know how much C02 was in the air from analysing plant fossils etc etc. They even know some of this stuff (in less detail) for other planets and moons! Like how they were formed, that there used to be water on some of them, that mountains there could've been volcanoes. It's fascinating stuff! You should look into it! As another example of looking back in time, people who criticise vegans as a "modern fad," I learned from Mike Tyson's podcast that many/most of the Roman centurions were vegan. How do they know that? They found bones and analysed the bone marrow and compared to modern day humans and could tell who ate what. All kinds of things are possible in science. The people in the 70s saying the world would be over by now (not sure that was the timescale, or definitively decided) only got how quickly it would happen wrong?! They didn't get the overall effect wrong?! Everything they said would happen has happened or started to happen, as far as I can see. I really feel like this trend away from science (happening in medicine too) is such a backward step in our world. Ok, I've gone on way too much. Sorry if I've said too much, hope I didn't go too far. I'm very passionate about this stuff, and have tried to keep it friendly We're all here to play golf in a friendly society and we're great at that! (But if people say stuff about something I'm passionate about, they should expect to hear back from me! ) As someone who reads alot of science fiction books, I find alot of recent science discoveries fascinating. My trip to the Kennedy Space Centre was my highlight of my time in Florida as unfortunately I didn't get a chance to play golf while I was there. As you have an interest in science Leon and mentioned water on other planets check out this article in forbes. Also BBC's The Planets with professor Brian Cox is superb, hugely recommend it and it's on BBC iplayer. www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2019/05/14/this-is-why-mars-is-red-and-dead-while-earth-is-blue-and-alive/ |
|
|
|
Post by jeff on Jan 17, 2020 0:33:29 GMT
I fear “science” has moved more toward a religious institution as opposed to what we usually consider science as an institution to be.
The traditional scientific method of formulating a hypothesis, testing that hypothesis through experimentation, analyzing the data and constructing a theory that is testable and falsifiable, has nearly vanished from many scientific disciplines.
Instead, we get told that we already know all the science that could ever be known through thought experiments and mathematical models, and that the only thing left is to fill in the details. It was Stephen Hawking’s modus operandi and I believe it has corrupted science deeply and harmfully.
Example? Dark matter. The observable matter in the universe and it’s gravitational effect is insufficient to keep the matter in galaxies coherent in their rapidly spinning spiral configurations. Do cosmologists look for an alternate, well-known, stronger force than gravity to explain the stability of spiral galaxies? Nope. Instead they invent an invisible, unmeasurable, untestable and irrefutable concept called dark matter. How much dark matter is there in the universe? Why, just enough to make the equations in mathematical models of the universe balance. How convenient! And if you challenge establishment cosmologists and point out how absurd the concept of dark matter or dark energy is, you get greeted with vitriol that rivals religious zealotry. Don’t do it.
|
|
|
|
Post by polekatt/josia on Jan 17, 2020 2:10:12 GMT
I understand why people point towards science not getting it completely right (sometimes even wrong!) But who are you then putting your faith in?? I hear so much now "I'm sick of listening to experts," because people don't like being talked down to, but the fact is, invariably, they DO know much more than you. Just because they're not right ONE HUNDRED PERCENT of the time, you choose not to believe them? They get stuff right WAY more than anyone else. Josia, (or Jeff) I'm NOT calling you out here, I swear, you're both good guys, that's clear from your presence here in our society. I'm talking about a general trend I see. You absolutely CAN know what the general weather trends were 1000, 10k, 100k, 1million years ago. They pump huge tubes into the ground and pull up the soil and analyse all the levels, a bit like looking at the rings of a tree. They also can analyse the fossil record and carbon dating for a similar look to the past. It's really very precise. They know how many ice ages this planet has had, and when they happened within a few thousand years. They know how much C02 was in the air from analysing plant fossils etc etc. They even know some of this stuff (in less detail) for other planets and moons! Like how they were formed, that there used to be water on some of them, that mountains there could've been volcanoes. It's fascinating stuff! You should look into it! As another example of looking back in time, people who criticise vegans as a "modern fad," I learned from Mike Tyson's podcast that many/most of the Roman centurions were vegan. How do they know that? They found bones and analysed the bone marrow and compared to modern day humans and could tell who ate what. All kinds of things are possible in science. The people in the 70s saying the world would be over by now (not sure that was the timescale, or definitively decided) only got how quickly it would happen wrong?! They didn't get the overall effect wrong?! Everything they said would happen has happened or started to happen, as far as I can see. I really feel like this trend away from science (happening in medicine too) is such a backward step in our world. Ok, I've gone on way too much. Sorry if I've said too much, hope I didn't go too far. I'm very passionate about this stuff, and have tried to keep it friendly We're all here to play golf in a friendly society and we're great at that! (But if people say stuff about something I'm passionate about, they should expect to hear back from me! )
You didn't go too far, we're good! I don't mind at all talking as long as people are civil and discuss things without getting mad, or putting each other down for their opinions and beliefs.
When I was talking about not believing experts, or taking things with a grain of salt, I wasn't talking about the ones that simply didn't get things right or make mistakes. I know people won't get things right 100 percent of the time. What I'm referring to is stuff that had been fabricated to push agendas, portrayed to me in school, and then after I became an adult, and did my own research, finding out that what was taught to me as truth, was proven not to be someone that was simply wrong, but it was intentional fabrications, to convey something as fact, when in reality they were only theories, or even worse, political agendas. You see enough of that in your life, as I have, and it makes you question everything and research it yourself.
But just so you know where I personally am coming from. It will probably explain a lot of my opinions. I am a creationist, and I simply believe things differently than you. Nothing wrong with what you believe, or what I believe, I hope, we just see things through a different lens. I know all about carbon dating, and looking at the soil tubes, and all of it. I've read lots of articles, I love geology, and history, and am fascinated by it. But quite simply, for every article you may reference, I can point you to articles that refute it. Its not that I don't know about how they can tell me things that happened 1000, 10,000, millions of years ago. Its more that I don't believe it. Carbon dating is only reliable to about 5000 yrs back and even then, it has flaws that have not been fully proven.
So I hope no one holds my beliefs against me! I don't really try to push them on anyone, nor do I want to get all up in arms and argue about things. But I will stand up and say what I believe, and occasionally give my opinion on something. Just thought I'd let you know that, so you know where I'm coming from. I actually do read a lot about stuff, and know all the stuff that is out there. Its just that our core belief is different, and I chose to believe different experts than you.
|
|
|
|
Post by LKeet6 on Jan 17, 2020 9:09:43 GMT
I fear “science” has moved more toward a religious institution as opposed to what we usually consider science as an institution to be. The traditional scientific method of formulating a hypothesis, testing that hypothesis through experimentation, analyzing the data and constructing a theory that is testable and falsifiable, has nearly vanished from many scientific disciplines. Instead, we get told that we already know all the science that could ever be known through thought experiments and mathematical models, and that the only thing left is to fill in the details. It was Stephen Hawking’s modus operandi and I believe it has corrupted science deeply and harmfully. Example? Dark matter. The observable matter in the universe and it’s gravitational effect is insufficient to keep the matter in galaxies coherent in their rapidly spinning spiral configurations. Do cosmologists look for an alternate, well-known, stronger force than gravity to explain the stability of spiral galaxies? Nope. Instead they invent an invisible, unmeasurable, untestable and irrefutable concept called dark matter. How much dark matter is there in the universe? Why, just enough to make the equations in mathematical models of the universe balance. How convenient! And if you challenge establishment cosmologists and point out how absurd the concept of dark matter or dark energy is, you get greeted with vitriol that rivals religious zealotry. Don’t do it. Completey disagree with all of that mate Especially the bit about science being done differently now. In my opinion, the theory of dark matter is being put forward in the right way. It's ticking ALL the boxes you say scientific enquiry needs. It is not being put forward as fact yet. I haven't seen any "vitriol" from the scientists themselves. I don't see anything "absurd" about the theory. I mean, obviously it's "convenient" that it balances the equations, if it exists (which it clearly does, in my eyes,) it's also pretty damn INCONVENIENT that we've been unable to see it and measure it up till now?! Which counter theory to why the equations don't balance do you prefer? |
|
|
|
Post by LKeet6 on Jan 17, 2020 9:21:24 GMT
These guys do really great science explanations for normal people like us. If anyone wants to tell me how this is presented as anything OTHER than unproven theories, or wants to challenge the idea that there is definitely something interacting with gravity out there that we've not been able to see and measure yet, I'm all ears. To me, there is nothing "absurd" about that idea, at all.
Because all I'm hearing in the video (a summary of what science knows at this point) is "could be" and "we think" and "we're not sure exactly" and then some suggestions about what it COULD be.
I'm sure Jeff has experienced "vitriol" many times. Because we all do. It's the way people talk now. Opinions have to be binary, and have to be defended to the death. But the idea that scientists are doing that, or that people being silly and arguing about stuff makes the theory wrong, that's not making sense to me...
|
|
|
|
Post by LKeet6 on Jan 17, 2020 9:30:49 GMT
I understand why people point towards science not getting it completely right (sometimes even wrong!) But who are you then putting your faith in?? I hear so much now "I'm sick of listening to experts," because people don't like being talked down to, but the fact is, invariably, they DO know much more than you. Just because they're not right ONE HUNDRED PERCENT of the time, you choose not to believe them? They get stuff right WAY more than anyone else. Josia, (or Jeff) I'm NOT calling you out here, I swear, you're both good guys, that's clear from your presence here in our society. I'm talking about a general trend I see. You absolutely CAN know what the general weather trends were 1000, 10k, 100k, 1million years ago. They pump huge tubes into the ground and pull up the soil and analyse all the levels, a bit like looking at the rings of a tree. They also can analyse the fossil record and carbon dating for a similar look to the past. It's really very precise. They know how many ice ages this planet has had, and when they happened within a few thousand years. They know how much C02 was in the air from analysing plant fossils etc etc. They even know some of this stuff (in less detail) for other planets and moons! Like how they were formed, that there used to be water on some of them, that mountains there could've been volcanoes. It's fascinating stuff! You should look into it! As another example of looking back in time, people who criticise vegans as a "modern fad," I learned from Mike Tyson's podcast that many/most of the Roman centurions were vegan. How do they know that? They found bones and analysed the bone marrow and compared to modern day humans and could tell who ate what. All kinds of things are possible in science. The people in the 70s saying the world would be over by now (not sure that was the timescale, or definitively decided) only got how quickly it would happen wrong?! They didn't get the overall effect wrong?! Everything they said would happen has happened or started to happen, as far as I can see. I really feel like this trend away from science (happening in medicine too) is such a backward step in our world. Ok, I've gone on way too much. Sorry if I've said too much, hope I didn't go too far. I'm very passionate about this stuff, and have tried to keep it friendly We're all here to play golf in a friendly society and we're great at that! (But if people say stuff about something I'm passionate about, they should expect to hear back from me! ) As someone who reads alot of science fiction books, I find alot of recent science discoveries fascinating. My trip to the Kennedy Space Centre was my highlight of my time in Florida as unfortunately I didn't get a chance to play golf while I was there. As you have an interest in science Leon and mentioned water on other planets check out this article in forbes. Also BBC's The Planets with professor Brian Cox is superb, hugely recommend it and it's on BBC iplayer. www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2019/05/14/this-is-why-mars-is-red-and-dead-while-earth-is-blue-and-alive/Really interesting link, thanks mate I knew about mars losing its atmosphere and magnetic field, but not sure I knew about the lime/sulphur thing and the chemical reaction. Fascinating I've seen the planets stuff on BBC4, LOVED it. Mind blowing, I enjoy seeing stuff and going "whaaaaaaaaat?!" And science is VERY often the thing that does that to me For me, one of the biggest recent discoveries, that went a bit under the radar, I actually learned in the first blue planet series! That life does not need light from the sun to exist. They discovered this when in the Mariana trench. (You've probably seen this) There were thermal vents at the bottom of the trench, pumping out heat and chemicals that produced microbes (I think I've got that right) that animals could feed on. So there were crabs and shellfish and flat worms and smaller creatures all living there completey independent from the sun. Didn't need light themselves, and didn't feed on anything that the sun had given energy to. This has lead me to think there could be life (tiny and basic!) On that moon of Saturn. Not titan, I think it's Europa? The one that is constantly shifting shape because its orbit isn't regular, so when it goes near Saturn, the whole planet is like twisting and shifting. They know there is ice there, so I'm wondering if deep down there are vents in the cracks of the crust that are pumping up heat and chemicals that might be able to support life. Probably not! But definitely not a crazy theory... |
|
|
|
Post by LKeet6 on Jan 17, 2020 9:38:30 GMT
I understand why people point towards science not getting it completely right (sometimes even wrong!) But who are you then putting your faith in?? I hear so much now "I'm sick of listening to experts," because people don't like being talked down to, but the fact is, invariably, they DO know much more than you. Just because they're not right ONE HUNDRED PERCENT of the time, you choose not to believe them? They get stuff right WAY more than anyone else. Josia, (or Jeff) I'm NOT calling you out here, I swear, you're both good guys, that's clear from your presence here in our society. I'm talking about a general trend I see. You absolutely CAN know what the general weather trends were 1000, 10k, 100k, 1million years ago. They pump huge tubes into the ground and pull up the soil and analyse all the levels, a bit like looking at the rings of a tree. They also can analyse the fossil record and carbon dating for a similar look to the past. It's really very precise. They know how many ice ages this planet has had, and when they happened within a few thousand years. They know how much C02 was in the air from analysing plant fossils etc etc. They even know some of this stuff (in less detail) for other planets and moons! Like how they were formed, that there used to be water on some of them, that mountains there could've been volcanoes. It's fascinating stuff! You should look into it! As another example of looking back in time, people who criticise vegans as a "modern fad," I learned from Mike Tyson's podcast that many/most of the Roman centurions were vegan. How do they know that? They found bones and analysed the bone marrow and compared to modern day humans and could tell who ate what. All kinds of things are possible in science. The people in the 70s saying the world would be over by now (not sure that was the timescale, or definitively decided) only got how quickly it would happen wrong?! They didn't get the overall effect wrong?! Everything they said would happen has happened or started to happen, as far as I can see. I really feel like this trend away from science (happening in medicine too) is such a backward step in our world. Ok, I've gone on way too much. Sorry if I've said too much, hope I didn't go too far. I'm very passionate about this stuff, and have tried to keep it friendly We're all here to play golf in a friendly society and we're great at that! (But if people say stuff about something I'm passionate about, they should expect to hear back from me! )
You didn't go too far, we're good! I don't mind at all talking as long as people are civil and discuss things without getting mad, or putting each other down for their opinions and beliefs.
When I was talking about not believing experts, or taking things with a grain of salt, I wasn't talking about the ones that simply didn't get things right or make mistakes. I know people won't get things right 100 percent of the time. What I'm referring to is stuff that had been fabricated to push agendas, portrayed to me in school, and then after I became an adult, and did my own research, finding out that what was taught to me as truth, was proven not to be someone that was simply wrong, but it was intentional fabrications, to convey something as fact, when in reality they were only theories, or even worse, political agendas. You see enough of that in your life, as I have, and it makes you question everything and research it yourself.
But just so you know where I personally am coming from. It will probably explain a lot of my opinions. I am a creationist, and I simply believe things differently than you. Nothing wrong with what you believe, or what I believe, I hope, we just see things through a different lens. I know all about carbon dating, and looking at the soil tubes, and all of it. I've read lots of articles, I love geology, and history, and am fascinated by it. But quite simply, for every article you may reference, I can point you to articles that refute it. Its not that I don't know about how they can tell me things that happened 1000, 10,000, millions of years ago. Its more that I don't believe it. Carbon dating is only reliable to about 5000 yrs back and even then, it has flaws that have not been fully proven.
So I hope no one holds my beliefs against me! I don't really try to push them on anyone, nor do I want to get all up in arms and argue about things. But I will stand up and say what I believe, and occasionally give my opinion on something. Just thought I'd let you know that, so you know where I'm coming from. I actually do read a lot about stuff, and know all the stuff that is out there. Its just that our core belief is different, and I chose to believe different experts than you.
My dad is a bit of a genius, he has 3 degrees. He always tells me about his physics professor, who he hugely admired and respected. And who was also a "scientific creationist!" So basically, he would have agreed with me on everything I've said here! And then just said afterwards, "yes, but God did it." It definitely takes all sorts in this world |
|
|
|
Post by ray on Jan 17, 2020 10:46:46 GMT
I always liked this Tim Minchin quote on Faith and Science.
Science adjusts its views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that belief can be preserved.
|
|
)