Science Is Bullshit

And alcohol kills more[braincells]..and is freely sold by the megaliter.

THAT..is our society of thinkers. The one that looks down on 'tokers'
Grow up lad.

Occam

 

As you type your next post here - look at the door of the room you are in, then try to leave the room. However just as you stand up - remember it is only a theory that you can leave the room. Something may prevent you from doing so,
You have done this many times before. Now test the theory. Leave the room
but as you do so, list on a peice of paper all the processes you underwent to achieve that. That is all science amounts to - is the testing of a theory. The theory that, in this case, "I can leave the room". It is merely a theory of mine that this post will reach the hipforums server. When it accomplishes the goal or fails, I can test why the result occurred - thats science !!!!!
My investigation of a particular pattern of events allows me to describe the conditions under which a particular event happens or fails to happen. And that is what scientists do
everything that occurs to your mind is a theory - you are - we all are - in the position that everything we see is merely theoretical. What is not science is to postulate upon things you have not observed, or to falsify the results of your experiments.
Since everything that you, or anyonelse, can say about the outside world infers a theoretic proposal then you might say we are all scientists, except we reserve that name for those who make a special study of the methods of analysing theory, and those who test the results of experiments and shift their theoretical position to match the evidence of the results.

Your level of knowledge is quite obviously nil ! Tony is basically right to say what he did - I suspect you are so dimwitted that you just didnt understand and confused it with an opinion. I can see nothing but facts, basic as they are in what tony said - its you thats the idiot here

If youre that clever you would know that the height of a human is almost exactly halfway between the size of the smallest atom and the size of the largest star - so not that small and not that big either - we are just perfectly between big and small

 

"And alcohol kills more[braincells]..and is freely sold by the megaliter.

THAT..is our society of thinkers. The one that looks down on 'tokers'
Grow up lad.

Occam"

I was basically pointing out the error in today's "thinkers", I myself toke regularly (If I can find some!" Grow up? ooook.....

"If youre that clever you would know that the height of a human is almost exactly halfway between the size of the smallest atom and the size of the largest star - so not that small and not that big either - we are just perfectly between big and small"

Never claimed to be "clever", actually by my statement, alluded to how little we all know as humans...and I think most would have realized my "smallness" statement was used metaphorically...and if you would read my post...I was agreeing with Tony and complemented him...I'm glad you can come up with your assumption of me and my nil level of knowlege based upon a couple of posts on a hippie website...why don't you shove one of those flaming torches in your gif where the sun don't shine and lighten up a bit

 

How about if I put one up your gaping JPEG for you where I am sure it will substitute for a brain cell

Just what kind of scientist are you, you havent mentioned anything remotely about methodology or the variety of science you allegedly practice

But we know a great amount compared to any other variety of life that exists in the universe. Infact the human brain, which is the most complex organisation of cells in the universe (with a few noted exceptions) has achieved quite a lot and knows evn more, and will continue to investigate.

 

hmm...yeah because it's important for me to validate myself on a forum...?

By the way, my brain cells aren't up my arse, but we're all different! Have a nice day

 

Kids ! what do they learn these days?

 

By the way Columbo (very original might I add), why not spare the fine people of this forum exposure so such petty childishness, if you have a problem with me, use that private message thingy. If not, chill and let's all pretend this is all pretty insignificant in the grand scheme of things.

 

well go on then whats your science, and what flavour of methodology do you use - whose theory of good theory do you propose for science
I mean you slagged tony off but he was merely explaining a view of science

The sheer nerve of it !

I dont have a problem with you, just the way that you breezily slag someone off and then dismiss any real questions about your own opinions

 

"WHat they call 'science' in schools is garbage...

Teach the METHOD... grind it in.. and humanity on this planet
may have a chance.
But no... THINKING.is not taught in schools...thinking leads to questioning.
Questioning leads to dissent.

OCCAM"

I completely agree Occam(inspired by the Razor by chance?), today's school is more about indoctrination, than free thought.

 

Columbo, are you so deluded into thinking that I must reveal personal information about myself to appease misguided malcontents such as yourself on the internet? My goal here is to contribute my ideas and "opinions" in interesting topics, not to prove myself to lost souls.

Again I plead, if you feel compelled to continue, let's do it in private.

 

I see this place and other forums as a place to exchange ideas and points of views, not to provide a setting for personal attacks. Thus I will no longer respond to you in this string, if you want to continue with the childish mud slinging, again, send a pm.

 

Please point to where I "slagged off" someone...that was definately not my intention, I could have sworn I complemented him on his knowledge.

 

Do we need to post cv's on here now then? I don't think i've said anything that I couldn't have got off of wikipedia anyway, so I could infact be lying about having any knowledge of science. But more amusing was the fact you seem to be violently agreeing with each other but I may have misread the post. I also had to look uo Toker on wiki as well i assumed it was a typo until people started using it as a verb.

 

No Tony I think you're correct, and considering no response to my question of where I supposedly insulted you, I think we all just realized it...carry on.

"I'm a smoker, I"m a joker, I"m a midnight TOKER"

 

Just revisiting an old thread.

You are correct Sir!
But I will go a bit further: MONEY is bullshit, not science .... let me explain:

Just take the example of a friend of mine and his diabetic son.
His 4 year old son is a diabetic and needs in excess of 400$/month of medication and medical supplies, and this, for the REST OF HIS LIFE. When my buddy asked the nurses and doctors why the meds are so expensive, they replied that the same companies who make the meds also do research for a cure. This is a common belief that the high price of meds is due to the high cost of research incorporated in the price of meds .... but think about this for just one minute.

Let's say you have a million diabetics in North America alone (probably more actually) and let's say that the average diabetic spends 400$/month on meds and various medical supplies.
That is an effective cash flow of FOUR HUNDRED MILLION PER MONTH ..... that's a lot of dought dude!
Now let's assume that a large part of this money is going to those med companies that 'research' for a cure ..... what do you think would happen if they suddenly found a one-time-one-pill cure for diabetics?
That would effectively terminate their 400,000,000$/month cash cow .... those corporations depend or the misery of diabetics, they are not going to find a cure any time soon for this reason alone.

Is this because science is corrupted?
Not at all, it's just big money that is corrupted bullshit.

Corporations have a legal obligation to make money for their investors, it's their LEGAL DUTY, however, they don't have a legal duty or obligation to FIND a cure, they are only required by popular morals to 'look for a cure'.
They make money 'looking' for a cure, they would loose money if they were in fact to 'find' a cure.

But as you read this, you are likely to get very angry at me and at what I wrote because most people live in this ridiculous belief that corporations and governments are above us, taking care of us and worrying about us. Demolishing this comforting but ridiculous belief has shown in the past to make people very angry and disturbed.

 

Heh.. Whenever I see the following sentence in a forum post: "Do you even know what Science is?".... You just know its going to be someone who does NOT know 'what science is'.

Its not an 'is' really but you can dig what Im saying

 

He's incorrect on one point. Zero Point Energy isn't funded because it's bullshit, not because there's an evil capitalist conspiracy (as there may well be with regards to OPEC and alternative fuels). You can't extract energy from the lowest energy level there is, no matter how much energy may be dumped at that level. It's like trying to get power from a dam that has water on both sides at equal depth.

 

It's not impossible.

http://www.ldolphin.org/zpe.html

Also take a look at this, it's an Irish company that claim to have built a free energy device which harnesses an as yet unidentified form of energy (although it's debatable whether this is a hoax or not, they claim to currently be testing it with physists to determine whether it is indeed free):

http://www.steorn.com

 

No one is quite sure how much energy there is to be extracted from these vacuum fluctuations. When you get into loops and other higher order quantum field effects the whole thing becomes fiendishly hard to solve. Im not sure about using this energy to do work. Moving away from particle physics into quantum mechanics the zero point energy comes form the fact that the lowest energy state of a system is non-zero, but it is still the lowest state so im not sure that that system can do work. That said the Casimir effect would certainly suggest that work is being done. My instinct is that you cant extract energy as so far quantum mechanics seems to have conservation of energy as a conerstone along with the rest of physics, though if it were possible it would solve a lot of energy problems.

As for the Steorn thing ive heard about this, not convinced. They all seem to involve magnets, all these free energy things. In a post the other week I said id be incredibly suprised if the laws of clasical electromagnetism were found wrong. If this is right it will take down EM and thermodynamics I guess, the 19th century may as well have not existed. That said theres nothing better than a major thoery being found wrong look what happened when they found Newton was right.

 

Puthoff's work is still highly controversial, and really most of it looks into the properties of mass being linked to the vacuum fluctuations, rather than the ZPE thing being the ultimate in clean, unlimited energy. The Casimir effect doesn't even show that much work being done, and even if there was something going on, it takes energy to set that whole thing up in the first place. You can't cheat conservation of energy or momentum.

The Irish site is simply another totally unverified device that, in all honesty, is, without me checking the link, an induction motor where they think they're getting net energy gain from drawing power from ferrite magnets. A good test (which they'd never let anyone do) of their device is to hook it up to a system where energy is used, like getting the thing to power an electric motor. Watch how their device suddenly fails to be perpetually motile.