Science

[Hawkeye10]

There DO seem to be a fair number of scientists these days that deny science. 'Science' is one of the most used buzzwords in media today.

There are way too many people who call themselves scientists who start with the conclusion they want and then write a report "justifying" their conclusion either by cherry picking data or writing gibberish.

Often times they are very well paid for their lies.

 

[jacksonsprat22]

There are way too many people who call themselves scientists who start with the conclusion they want and then write a report "justifying" their conclusion either by cherry picking data or writing gibberish.

Often times they are very well paid for their lies.

What are you talking about?!

 

[Mott the Hoople]

There are way too many people who call themselves scientists who start with the conclusion they want and then write a report "justifying" their conclusion either by cherry picking data or writing gibberish.

Often times they are very well paid for their lies.

Jesus you guys are ignorant on science. If that was even remotely true, which it isn’t, such work would never survive independent verification or peer review. You’re conspiracy “theories” are bay shit crazy.

Y’all should actually study some science and do work in it before you pop off your silly nonsense.

 

[AProudLefty]

Go back and look it up yourself. RQAA.

Number, please.

If you are lying, just say so.

 

[Into the Night]

lol, dude......if you consider something philosophically there is a philosophy......

Reversal fallacy. Philosophy IS considering something philosophically, not the other way around.

 

[Into the Night]

interestingly, Google even uses it as the example.....

https://www.google.com/search?q=philosophy+definition&rlz=1CAYGYA_enUS828US828&oq=philospy&aqs=chrome.2.69i57j0l7.5960j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Google is not a valid source. It does not define 'science' or 'philosophy'. It does not own either word.
Philosophy is an argument and it's reasoning behind it. About the only rule in it is that the argument and it's predicates must come from the one making the argument, not by stealing the arguments from others.

Philosophy defines 'science', what it is, and why it is defined the way it is. It also defines 'religion' and why it is defined the way it is.
Philosophy also defines 'real' and 'reality' and why it is defined the way they are.

Science is a set of falsifiable theories. That's it. That's all. It does not use supporting evidence. Only religions do that. Science requires no license, credential, university, government, scientist, group of scientists, voting bloc, or any political organization.

Among the theories denied by the Church of Global Warming for example:
The 1st law of thermodynamics: E(t+1)=E(t)-W where E is energy, 't' is time, and 'W' is work.
The 2nd law of thermodynamics: e(t+1) >= e(t) where 'e' is entropy, and 't' is time.
The Stefan-Boltzmann law: r = C * e * t^4 where r is radiance in watts per square area, 'C' is a natural constant, 'e' is a measured constant known as emissivity, or how well a surface can radiate light, and 't' is temperature in deg K.

Each of these are theories only. They are not proven True. They could be falsified at any time. So far, they haven't. They are still theories of science, and they cannot just be discarded.

Science has no theories about past unobserved events. There are, however, many nonscientific theories about such events, including:
The Theory of Abiogenesis, the Theory of Creation, the Theory of Evolution, the Theory of the Big Bang, and the Theory of the Continuum. All of these remain circular arguments, with arguments extending from them, the very definition of a religion. They may be True, they may be False. We simply don't know. They must be taken on faith, and on faith alone.

Someone that tries to prove a circular argument commits the circular argument fallacy. This is what a fundamentalist does.

 

[Into the Night]

it isn't different from philosophy......however, it is different from the philosophy of history for example......

There is no such thing as 'philosophy of history' either. There is just philosophy. It does have one branch, which concerns how observations are affected by our interpretations, call 'phenomenology'. This branch manages to define 'real' and 'reality' pretty well.

 

[Bourbon]

 

[Into the Night]

View attachment 16080

This topic falls in the category as. Why am I talking to you?
When it's correct it can't be argued. What's your goal?

Mathematics is not science.

Science is an open functional system. It has no proofs and cannot predict by itself. Mathematics is a closed functional system. With that comes the power of the proof, and the power of prediction.

Only when a theory of science is transcribed into a closed functional system (usually mathematics), does the theory gain the power of prediction.

 

[jacksonsprat22]

There is no such thing as 'philosophy of history' either. There is just philosophy. It does have one branch, which concerns how observations are affected by our interpretations, call 'phenomenology'. This branch manages to define 'real' and 'reality' pretty well.

It is comical how little you know about philosophy.

 

[Sailor]

What exactly has the WHO done during this pandemic?

 

[Into the Night]

Well that’s a pretty retarded bit of reductionism. The falsification principle is just one aspect of theory. Just as all theories must, in principle, be falsifiable they must also have a factual basis among other criteria as well.

Buzzword fallacy. A 'fact' is not a 'proof' nor a 'Universal Truth'. Learn what a 'fact' is. Facts exist in fiction too, you know.

 

[Into the Night]

There are way too many people who call themselves scientists who start with the conclusion they want and then write a report "justifying" their conclusion either by cherry picking data or writing gibberish.

Often times they are very well paid for their lies.

Quite true. That payment is usually through a government grant as well.

 

[jacksonsprat22]

Quite true. That payment is usually through a government grant as well.

Who should pay for every science department to do research? Private companies?

 

[Into the Night]

Jesus you guys are ignorant on science.

Inversion fallacy, as evidenced by this post of yours.

If that was even remotely true, which it isn’t, such work would never survive independent verification or peer review.

Science does not use consensus. There is no voting bloc in science. There is no 'elite' high priests to sanctify a theory into a theory of science. That only exists with publishers, religions, and government.

You’re conspiracy “theories” are bay shit crazy.

These scientists are paid from the same source: the government. The conspiracy exists, no matter how you deny it.

Y’all should actually study some science

Science isn't a 'study' or a 'research'. Science is a set of falsifiable theories.

and do work in it before you pop off your silly nonsense.

Science isn't a 'work', or a career, or a job. It is nothing more than a set of falsifiable theories.

 

[Into the Night]

WHO is not science. It is a political organization, nothing more. They have their agendas, same as with any political organization. It is a branch of the UN.

 

[Into the Night]

It is comical how little you know about philosophy.

Mantra 12. No argument presented.

 

[Hawkeye10]

Quite true. That payment is usually through a government grant as well.

To many scientists care more about their careers having big paydays than they do science, so they line up to work on what ever pays the best, regardless of why the money is being handed out. Bret and Heather talk about this when they say that Science has been corrupted by market forces, that market ideology is being used to decide what science works on when it has no place here. Furthermore everyone had to understand that this was a bad idea, not enough cared.

Once they know what is wanted in return for their pay and esteem they tend to try to provide it, so that they can get more of that.

"Science" has all to often become quackery, very dishonest, the opposite of truth as science is.

 

[jacksonsprat22]

Mantra 12. No argument presented.

you're a troll.

 

[Into the Night]

What exactly has the WHO done during this pandemic?

Quoted a bunch of made up numbers, rather like the WMO and UNEP has over the years, and denied science and mathematics.