World Republic
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.
World Republic

Uniting All People!
 
HomeHome  SearchSearch  Latest imagesLatest images  RegisterRegister  Log in  

 

 The Universe

Go down 
+5
mattabesta
Liche
CoolKidX
Tyrlop
Black_Cross
9 posters
Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
AuthorMessage
Zealot_Kommunizma
Hero of the World Republic



Posts : 5413
Join date : 2007-12-06
Age : 35
Location : Mexico/Russia/Worl

The Universe - Page 4 Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Universe   The Universe - Page 4 Icon_minitimeFri Feb 26, 2010 10:25 am

Dear Shurik,

"Theory - 1: The analysis of a set of facts in relation to one another. 2: Abstract thought: Speculation 3: The general or abstract principles of a body of fact, science, or an art. 4: A belief, policy, or procedure proposed or followed as the basis of action. 5: A plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena. 6a: A hypothesis assumed for the sake of argument b: an unproved assumption: Conjecture c: a body of theorems presenting a conciese, systematic view view of a subject <~ of equations>. syn hypothesis"
-Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary 11th edition.

The scientific community mostly uses this word in its main senses, that is the first 5. Number 1 being used mainly when saying "Theory of Evolution", "Theory of Gravity", "General Relativity Theory", etc.

You, and a bunch of creationists disregard entirely this fact and decide to use the least important meaning of this word, that is, as a synonim for "hypothesis". It's just pretty convenient isn't it? Well, next time just keep in mind that Scientists don't actually mean it in that way, but in its actual more accurate form. Ok?
Back to top Go down
http://unitedrevleftfront.forumotion.com/
alexCCCP-RUS-54321
World Republic Party Member



Posts : 728
Join date : 2007-12-22
Age : 115
Location : Canada/Russia/World

The Universe - Page 4 Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Universe   The Universe - Page 4 Icon_minitimeSat Feb 27, 2010 4:41 am

ALL HEIL LE MOUSEEEEE


how obvious so i have to make it.

Fact: I see a pair of sungalsses.
Fact: They say made in china on them.
Theory: They are made in china.

I learn that indeed, made in china was just printed over made in korea. Theory changes.

If you don't know what causes something, doesn't mean god caused it, doesn't mean the present theory is true. Seriously, wtf hapenned to teh steady state theory, and all the others? If you don't know what caused it, seek new evidence rather than evidence that advocates one theory.

Theories I am investigating as I speak: Tehory of relativity, Qauntam field theory, etc.

WE learn more, tehy are disproved, and scientists use current information to make new ones. Does it have to be "God" vs "Whatever"? Are there other possibilities?

" It is quite possible that the dinosaurs were almost wiped out circa 75 million years ago, but that some survived somewhere in the world. If they existed in very small numbers, it is possible that few fossils would have been preserved, and that none were ever found. Thus, although scientists assume that dinosaurs went extinct 75 million years ago, they they must keep open the possibility that a very few survived -- even to the present day."
Back to top Go down
Zealot_Kommunizma
Hero of the World Republic



Posts : 5413
Join date : 2007-12-06
Age : 35
Location : Mexico/Russia/Worl

The Universe - Page 4 Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Universe   The Universe - Page 4 Icon_minitimeSat Feb 27, 2010 5:55 am

alexCCCP-RUS-54321 wrote:


how obvious so i have to make it.

Fact: I see a pair of sungalsses.
Fact: They say made in china on them.
Theory: They are made in china.

I learn that indeed, made in china was just printed over made in korea. Theory changes.

And, until you find out that "Made in China" was printed over "Made in Korea", the theory that they were made in China is perfectly valid, its entirely plausible since all evidence pointed to that explanation.

As soon as you gathered new evidence the theory changed and if you were to gather more evidence it would ultimately change again and so on.

The thing is that you do not discard a theory just because you want to discard it when all evidence points to it as the most vaible explanation. You modify or entirely dismiss a theory once you find evidence that can either modify it or prove it entirely wrong.

If you do it before it's the same as dismissing facts. You're dismissing that body of facts instead of introducing a new fact that changes the theory.

You got the difference?

alexCCCP-RUS-54321 wrote:

If you don't know what causes something, doesn't mean god caused it, doesn't mean the present theory is true.

If you don't know what causes something doesn't mean that you can't analise that something and come up with a conclusion based on what you have observed which is what a theory is.

alexCCCP-RUS-54321 wrote:

Seriously, wtf hapenned to teh steady state theory, and all the others? If you don't know what caused it, seek new evidence rather than evidence that advocates one theory.

Are you somehow saying that the scientific community is currently "biased" towards the Big Bang or say Evolution Theories and that's why they just look in directions that point to the validity of said theories instead of looking somewhere else for evidence that could challenge them?

If that's what you're saying then you must have at least an idea of where they should be looking for evidences for these alternative theories. If so, where should scientists be looking for evidence?

As far as I know, the entire community currently observes as much as they can, that is, anything we as humanity can detect so far is being detected and analised and being used as evidence to form the theories we have now.

It's not like they decided overlooking say compelling evidence to reasonably doubt on Evolution's validity or that they just decided to dismiss a big cosmic sign saying "Made by God". Something like just hasn't been found, thus hasn't been included in the theories and is at best part of hypothesis.


Shurik wrote:

" It is quite possible that the dinosaurs were almost wiped out circa 75 million years ago, but that some survived somewhere in the world. If they existed in very small numbers, it is possible that few fossils would have been preserved, and that none were ever found. Thus, although scientists assume that dinosaurs went extinct 75 million years ago, they they must keep open the possibility that a very few survived -- even to the present day."

Has this come from a Creation "Scientist"?

Let's see... lets suppose some dinosaurs survived that massive extinction and that somehow dinosaurs made it to our days.... and not only that, let's suppose that in 75 million years they didn't evolve into something else... do you think that in 75 million years their numbers would be so small as to not be able to perceive them? I mean don't you think that for a species to survive that amount of time it must have a good reproductive rate? Good enough numbers?

Hell, we have discovered and classified tens of thousands of different species of ants and you'll tell me that somehow Dinosaurs (sticking, that is, to the definition of Dinosaur) are hiding somewhere there? That they have been effectively hiding somewhere? That something as massive and astounding as a dinosaur that has been able to preserve itself intact for millions of years without having a big enough population? Without producing evidence that at least the cavemen interacted with them? Dont' you think some would have been relatively well preserved during the Ice age?

I mean, such hypothesis do defy a lot of logical principles and evidence.
Back to top Go down
http://unitedrevleftfront.forumotion.com/
Tyrong Kojy
Member of the Supreme Council
Tyrong Kojy


Posts : 2142
Join date : 2008-04-11
Age : 37
Location : Canada

The Universe - Page 4 Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Universe   The Universe - Page 4 Icon_minitimeSat Feb 27, 2010 7:07 am

Quote :
Seriously, wtf hapenned to teh steady state theory, and all the others? If you don't know what caused it, seek new evidence rather than evidence that advocates one theory.
Most of what they do is search for evidence AGAINST the theory. The whole point is to try and DISPROOVE, not proove it. Take Tiktalic. "If we are to find this creature, it should be in this rock srrata in about this are here. If we dont find it, then most likely our conclusions were wrong and we must reevaluate them." They found Tiktalic.

Quote :
75 million years ago
65

Quote :
they they must keep open the possibility that a very few survived -- even to the present day."
Sharks, aligatos, crocodiles, birds, Komodo Dragon, many lizard species and nearly all insects. If you count these, then yes, and science knows this. The layman, when they say they died out, is the only one to actually mean that literally.
Back to top Go down
Zealot_Kommunizma
Hero of the World Republic



Posts : 5413
Join date : 2007-12-06
Age : 35
Location : Mexico/Russia/Worl

The Universe - Page 4 Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Universe   The Universe - Page 4 Icon_minitimeSat Feb 27, 2010 7:18 am

For the record, I know it's 65 million years, I just wanted to follow literally with what Alex quoted.
Back to top Go down
http://unitedrevleftfront.forumotion.com/
alexCCCP-RUS-54321
World Republic Party Member



Posts : 728
Join date : 2007-12-22
Age : 115
Location : Canada/Russia/World

The Universe - Page 4 Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Universe   The Universe - Page 4 Icon_minitimeSat Feb 27, 2010 8:25 am

Well, the Coecelanth was believed to be extinct, yet one was recently caught?!?!?! The living fossil!!!!
And I was figuratively speaking.

Tyrong, I've seen lots of scientists just using evidence to prove their own theories. Finding evidence, and then if the evidence backs up teh theory to use it, or if the evidence disproves they theory, change it so its still valid with the knowledge known.

Zealot, the theory may be valid but does it mean its true? Does it mean we can assume its true? We can say its a good possibility, but then we learn more and science changes. Using the dinosaur thing, I'm trying to say we will never know whats true, but only whats false.

There's lots of things that scientists say that I don't like, but does that mean God is the answer? If science doesn't have an answer, it must be god????
Back to top Go down
Tyrong Kojy
Member of the Supreme Council
Tyrong Kojy


Posts : 2142
Join date : 2008-04-11
Age : 37
Location : Canada

The Universe - Page 4 Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Universe   The Universe - Page 4 Icon_minitimeSat Feb 27, 2010 9:23 am

Quote :
or if the evidence disproves they theory, change it so its still valid with the knowledge known.
Wouldn't happen to have an example, would you? And it doesn;t count if it's one guy who was later called out on his bullshit. Ie. Piltdown. (Three guys, but still.)

Quote :
Zealot, the theory may be valid but does it mean its true?
Yes.

Quote :
I'm trying to say we will never know whats true, but only whats false.
Well then we know God, Gods, and God like beings, with the exception of God like aliens, are false. Kehl, Apophis.

Quote :
There's lots of things that scientists say that I don't like,
Well that's just too bad for you, isn't it?

Quote :
If science doesn't have an answer, it must be god????
No, but until recently it's what you've been saying. And it's what many others say, too.
Back to top Go down
Zealot_Kommunizma
Hero of the World Republic



Posts : 5413
Join date : 2007-12-06
Age : 35
Location : Mexico/Russia/Worl

The Universe - Page 4 Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Universe   The Universe - Page 4 Icon_minitimeSat Feb 27, 2010 9:41 am

alexCCCP-RUS-54321 wrote:
Well, the Coecelanth was believed to be extinct, yet one was recently caught?!?!?! The living fossil!!!!
And I was figuratively speaking.

I think you can hardly compare little fish to large reptilians. While the conditions for the Coelacanth to live have not changed so drastically, in the case of large reptilians like dinosaurs, yes, it has changed a lot.

For starters, water dinosaurs would have to compete with thousands of better suited predators, that is, sharks and cetaceans. Else, these large reptilians would most certainly be unable to reach the depths reached by, say, sharks or killer whales, meaning that they would be more detectable. Let alone the fact that currently oceans are quite colder these days, and reptilians do not operate that well in cold, specially big ones.

Why do I focus on sea dinosaurs? Simply because they'd be the hardest of all to detect.

Even if you were speaking firguratively.


alexCCCP-RUS-54321 wrote:

Zealot, the theory may be valid but does it mean its true? Does it mean we can assume its true?

For the span where nothing points otherwise and for pragmatical reasons, yes, you get to consider it as true.

alexCCCP-RUS-54321 wrote:

We can say its a good possibility, but then we learn more and science changes.

The thing is not "then", but "when". I'd say it's rather naive to expect to know all (even if it's not impossible) so we could actually know every single thing that is a law and that is not a law. That's why we use the concept of theory to manage facts. A theory is regarded as true so long as nothing consistently changes or contradicts it.

So far there are no solid arguements or evidence against the Bing Bang Theory and much less against the theory of evolution. In the case of the theory of evolution not only is there no evidence against it so far, it's based on series of phenomena that repeat over and over again and that we have even managed to reproduce.

By definition a theory is the analysis of a body of facts, that's why you regard it as true. As simple as that. If it's not based on a body of facts, then it's not a theory, it's a hypothesis.

alexCCCP-RUS-54321 wrote:

Using the dinosaur thing, I'm trying to say we will never know whats true, but only whats false.

Bad choice for an example.

alexCCCP-RUS-54321 wrote:

There's lots of things that scientists say that I don't like,

Elaborate please.

alexCCCP-RUS-54321 wrote:

but does that mean God is the answer?

For many it is, probably because of their shortsightedness or unwillingness to carry out investigations.

alexCCCP-RUS-54321 wrote:
If science doesn't have an answer, it must be god????

Nope. It means there's no answer unless of course we actually find evidence of God's existance in which case attributing him anything would be a valid theory.
Back to top Go down
http://unitedrevleftfront.forumotion.com/
Tyrong Kojy
Member of the Supreme Council
Tyrong Kojy


Posts : 2142
Join date : 2008-04-11
Age : 37
Location : Canada

The Universe - Page 4 Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Universe   The Universe - Page 4 Icon_minitimeSat Feb 27, 2010 10:00 am

Quote :
Nope. It means there's no answer
Or it could mean we have not stumbles upon the answer yet.
Back to top Go down
Zealot_Kommunizma
Hero of the World Republic



Posts : 5413
Join date : 2007-12-06
Age : 35
Location : Mexico/Russia/Worl

The Universe - Page 4 Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Universe   The Universe - Page 4 Icon_minitimeSat Feb 27, 2010 10:24 am

Tyrong Kojy wrote:
Quote :
Nope. It means there's no answer
Or it could mean we have not stumbles upon the answer yet.

Yeah, I forgot to write "yet".
Back to top Go down
http://unitedrevleftfront.forumotion.com/
Sponsored content





The Universe - Page 4 Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Universe   The Universe - Page 4 Icon_minitime

Back to top Go down
 
The Universe
Back to top 
Page 4 of 4Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
 Similar topics
-
» The universe... is big....
» Welcome to the Universe - The Size of Things

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
World Republic :: Capitol of the World Republic :: Secret Research facility-
Jump to: