- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Science is debunking itself again
Posted on 9/26/23 at 7:56 pm to NC_Tigah
Posted on 9/26/23 at 7:56 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:So far the only criticism I've seen you make against the scientific method is that you don't like the word "concern"? Guess what? I don't care. Write a book about it if it's so important to you.
Science and scientific method is the tie-in each instance
quote:you pick. I can't prioritize your "concerns" (lol) for you.
tossed out multiple topics,
quote:OK. Were you gonna justify any of that with evidence ? Just pick one thing please.
FWIW, each is an example of "professional" "expert" scientists (as opposed to the armchair guys) acting stupidly. Each example is loaded with "professional" "experts" who are quite "concerned" about challenges to basically unsupportable hypotheses.
And as far as COVID-19, you're right, that's way too far outside of my field of study. Unlike you armchairs, I actually have a decent sense of what I do not understand.
This post was edited on 9/26/23 at 8:44 pm
0
Posted on 9/27/23 at 7:26 am to Bass Tiger
quote:
Doesn’t the Cambrian Explosion show all life came into existence basically as the kind they are today? Reptiles, Amphibians, fish, mammals, birds?
lmfao, no
Posted on 9/29/23 at 5:20 pm to GumboPot
quote:
The climate science and vaccine industry does not approach science like this. Climate science and the vaccine industry approach science by developing a model and mold data to fit model and declare, IT'S SCIENCE!
That's not actually true. The predictive ability of climate models is well documented. You just haven't bothered to read any scientific literature on the subject.
Posted on 9/29/23 at 5:25 pm to omegaman66
quote:
Scientists do not have the capability to see back all the way to the big bang and their models can't go back all the way to the start either.
I mean, not all the way. 1 second after the Big Bang ain't bad though. I'd like see see some creationist determine the abundances of every light element in the Universe except Lithium based on a one parameter model.
This post was edited on 9/29/23 at 5:26 pm
Posted on 9/29/23 at 5:29 pm to VolcanicTiger
quote:
There are very few chefs in science, only cooks following recipes. They don't come to these conclusions, they just repeat them, so why should their numbers be counted to add weight to certain views?
Kinda sounds like you're saying experiments aren't worth repeating, and perhaps a little oblivious to the fact it's every cosmologists dream to explain the things the current theory does not.
Posted on 9/29/23 at 5:46 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
The Big Bang hypothesis was developed when science actually worked
I hate to break it to you but the current model of the big bang did not become the most accepted model until the late 90's.
Posted on 9/29/23 at 5:49 pm to Peebles
quote:... and ????
I hate to break it to you but the current model of the big bang did not become the most accepted model until the late 90's.
Posted on 9/29/23 at 5:50 pm to DarthRebel
quote:
Maybe some scientist still refer to it as a theory, but general pop are force fed that is what happened, do not question the science.
I'm not seeing what your beef is. Lambda CDM doesn't explain every observation but the general pop isn't too worried about Lithium abundances.
Posted on 9/29/23 at 5:52 pm to NC_Tigah
The was a quarter century ago.
And eons ago in terms of scientific funding and 2° attitudes.
And eons ago in terms of scientific funding and 2° attitudes.
Posted on 9/29/23 at 5:52 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
When the scientist has an explanation for infinite existence of inanimate matter, he'll have a point.
We really don't know if the universe is infinite in extent. Theory says, probably so, but then we're kinda getting into metaphysics because how would we ever know for sure ? Anything outside our light cone can't be observed.
Posted on 9/29/23 at 5:54 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
The was a quarter century ago.
Ok. Well there was pretty much a consensus on AGW then, so you kinda contradicted yourself. But whatever
Posted on 9/29/23 at 5:56 pm to Peebles
quote:Yet we acknowledge its existence. Hence it's ""magic"" one way, or it's ""magic"" another.
Anything outside our light cone can't be observed.
Posted on 9/29/23 at 6:02 pm to Peebles
quote:The period you cited was a contradiction. It was a transition from good to bad science. There is no way in hell the BatSoup CV19 crap would have passed in 1999.
so you kinda contradicted
Posted on 9/29/23 at 6:07 pm to NC_Tigah
You will like this if you want to know more about general relativity. Its very well put together. It's perfectly suited to people who know math on the level of an engineer/doctor/most of the rest of science but have never had the need for tensor calculus in four dimensions. Don't let the title fool you its way past dummy level.
LINK
LINK
This post was edited on 9/29/23 at 6:08 pm
Posted on 9/29/23 at 7:09 pm to Peebles
Peebles, you are confusing dark matter with dark energy. They are not the same thing and there is no Einsteinean equivalence between them.
Dark matter describes why galaxies do not behave as they should based on the matter we can see. Therefore, there must be dark matter influencing the rotation. Some have speculated that GR may break down, but most physicists don't buy it. They are convinced GR is correct and there really is invisible matter.
Dark energy is postulated to explain why the universe as a whole is expanding. It has nothing to do with dark matter. The accelerating universe was discovered by two separate teams in 1998 and both teams shared the Nobel.
Dark matter describes why galaxies do not behave as they should based on the matter we can see. Therefore, there must be dark matter influencing the rotation. Some have speculated that GR may break down, but most physicists don't buy it. They are convinced GR is correct and there really is invisible matter.
Dark energy is postulated to explain why the universe as a whole is expanding. It has nothing to do with dark matter. The accelerating universe was discovered by two separate teams in 1998 and both teams shared the Nobel.
Posted on 9/29/23 at 7:45 pm to blackrose890
quote:
Have the biblical flat earthers come in yet?
Yes, you have to read the previous 33 pages of bickering to get to the “evolution is just a theory” nonsense.
Posted on 9/29/23 at 8:18 pm to AUstar
quote:
AUstar
Peebles, you are confusing dark matter with dark energy. They are not the same thing and there is no Einsteinean equivalence between them.
Where? I certainly didn't mean to mix up the two
quote:Dark matter is the second biggest contributor to all the matter energy in the universe behind dark energy and the evolution of the structures formed by dark matter are most certainly influenced by the presence of dark energy so I don't see how you can say the two have nothing to do with each other. It's kinda like saying protons have nothing to do with electrons.
Dark energy is postulated to explain why the universe as a whole is expanding. It has nothing to do with dark matter. The accelerating universe was discovered by two separate teams in 1998 and both teams shared the Nobel.
This post was edited on 9/30/23 at 8:57 am
Posted on 9/29/23 at 10:59 pm to TrueTiger
quote:
evolution…eventually get their debunking
Tell me you’re a moron without telling me you’re a moron.
Posted on 9/30/23 at 4:49 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
Until the next mass extinction? Perhaps of our own doing.
Perhaps? Seems pretty certain at this point with folks like you sticking your heads in the sand. The Great Filter is YOU!
Posted on 9/30/23 at 8:50 am to Peebles
quote:Yes, perhaps.
Perhaps of our own doing.
Perhaps?
quote:Some words seem to stump you, so I'll just ask: Are you familiar with the term "projection"?
folks like you sticking your heads in the sand
Page 34 of 35
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News