Is science being unduly influenced?

[Chameleon]

Re: Is science being unduly influenced?

If you would like to discuss religion kindly start your own thread. As far as indoctrination you mean like this?

A fascinatingly honest admission by a physicist indicates the passionate commitment of establishment scientists to naturalism. Speaking of the trust students naturally place in their highly educated college professors, he says:

And I use that trust to effectively brainwash them. . . . our teaching methods are primarily those of propaganda. We appeal -- without demonstration -- to evidence that supports our position. We only introduce arguments and evidence that supports the currently accepted theories and omit or gloss over any evidence to the contrary.-Singham, Mark, "Teaching and Propaganda," Physics Today (vol. 53, June 2000), p. 54.

[SargeNZ]

Re: Is science being unduly influenced?

Teaching physics to students is very different to understanding physics at the research level. In order to simplify matters and allow the basic lessons to be taught, certain things are glossed over as they would needlessly complicate matters. - To call it 'propaganda' is sensationalist and sounds like the author going for readership numbers.

The 'solar system' model of the atom works perfectly for the basic understanding of chemistry and the periodic table. It is absolute total lies for anyone that needs to know more.

[fixthecopier]

Re: Is science being unduly influenced?

Has religion ever tried to suppress science? Thinking can be dangerous...

Giordano Bruno (Italian pronunciation: [dʒorˈdano ˈbruno]Iordanus Brunus Nolanus) born Filippo Bruno, was an Italian Dominican friar, philosopher, mathematician and astronomer. His cosmological theories went beyond the Copernican model in proposing that the Sun was essentially a star, and moreover, that the universe contained an infinite number of inhabited worlds populated by other intelligent beings.^[1] After the Roman Inquisition found him guilty of heresy, he was burned at the stake.^[2] After his death he gained considerable fame, particularly among 19th- and early 20th-century commentators who, focusing on his astronomical beliefs, regarded him as a martyr for free thought and modern scientific ideas.

[Chameleon]

Re: Is science being unduly influenced?

There are many examples in history of religion burning people at the stake those that disagree with them. Martin Luther was burned at the stake for posting objections to religious extremeists in the Catholic church. Thinking was dangerous even for people within the church.
I suppose we can't discuss things like the cambrean explosion, DNA, or the 2nd law of thermodynamics and leave religion out of it. I guess in a way we are discussing a religion.

"... evolution became in a sense a scientific religion; almost all scientists have accepted it and many are prepared to 'bend' their observations to fit with it ..." H.S. Lipson. A Physicist Looks at Evolution. Physics Bulletin, Vol. 31, p138 (1980)

"We only introduce arguments and evidence that supports the currently accepted theories and omit or gloss over any evidence to the contrary."-Singham, Mark, "Teaching and Propaganda," Physics Today (vol. 53, June 2000), p. 54.

[Darren King]

Re: Is science being unduly influenced?

Just because someone believes evolution is a load of crap (me) doesn't mean they think creation is the only other alternative. The truth may still be waiting for an open minded person to discover. There aren't very many of those on the two sides of the current discussion. Who knows, the real answer may be aliens. lol

[rthonpm]

Re: Is science being unduly influenced?

There are many examples in history of religion burning people at the stake those that disagree with them. Martin Luther was burned at the stake for posting objections to religious extremeists in the Catholic church. Thinking was dangerous even for people within the church.
I suppose we can't discuss things like the cambrean explosion, DNA, or the 2nd law of thermodynamics and leave religion out of it. I guess in a way we are discussing a religion.

"... evolution became in a sense a scientific religion; almost all scientists have accepted it and many are prepared to 'bend' their observations to fit with it ..." H.S. Lipson. A Physicist Looks at Evolution. Physics Bulletin, Vol. 31, p138 (1980)

"We only introduce arguments and evidence that supports the currently accepted theories and omit or gloss over any evidence to the contrary."-Singham, Mark, "Teaching and Propaganda," Physics Today (vol. 53, June 2000), p. 54.

Martin Luther died of a stroke, not from Catholic retribution.

[Chameleon]

Re: Is science being unduly influenced?

Martin Luther died of a stroke, not from Catholic retribution.

Yor're right. I made a mistake. I remembered he was put on trial to be burned at the stake.

[SargeNZ]

Re: Is science being unduly influenced?

Just because someone believes evolution is a load of crap (me) doesn't mean they think creation is the only other alternative. The truth may still be waiting for an open minded person to discover. There aren't very many of those on the two sides of the current discussion. Who knows, the real answer may be aliens. lol

Panspermia, the concept of life being 'seeded' from something like a meteor strike. Great, but what kickstarted life on that other planet?

[Darren King]

Re: Is science being unduly influenced?

Panspermia, the concept of life being 'seeded' from something like a meteor strike. Great, but what kickstarted life on that other planet?

I was joking about the aliens. Nobody knows how life started................ Except God, or the aliens. lol

[mrwho]

Re: Is science being unduly influenced?

The more I think about it, I believe Darwin's theory of natural selection will ultimately be proven to be right, at the very least because there will not be anyone left thinking it's wrong. It's already starting to happen!

Can anyone say Darwin Awards?

[Darren King]

Re: Is science being unduly influenced?

The more I think about it, I believe Darwin's theory of natural selection will ultimately be proven to be right, at the very least because there will not be anyone left thinking it's wrong. It's already starting to happen!

Can anyone say Darwin Awards?

Unfortunately stupid people come from all walks of life.

[DAG COPIERS & COMPUTERS]

Re: Is science being unduly influenced?

Has religion ever tried to suppress science? Thinking can be dangerous...

Giordano Bruno (Italian pronunciation: [dʒorˈdano ˈbruno]Iordanus Brunus Nolanus) born Filippo Bruno, was an Italian Dominican friar, philosopher, mathematician and astronomer. His cosmological theories went beyond the Copernican model in proposing that the Sun was essentially a star, and moreover, that the universe contained an infinite number of inhabited worlds populated by other intelligent beings.^[1] After the Roman Inquisition found him guilty of heresy, he was burned at the stake.^[2] After his death he gained considerable fame, particularly among 19th- and early 20th-century commentators who, focusing on his astronomical beliefs, regarded him as a martyr for free thought and modern scientific ideas.

- IT would also seem that the very Religion that 'ever tried to suppress science' was the very Religion which groomed these scientists. Most of the scientists in the medieval period were themselves not only deeply Religious people but held very high positions in the church. For example Sir ISAAC newton was an Anglican Priest! Galileo came from a very devout Catholic family. One of his sibling was a catholic NUN.
- The church gave them the platform to learn and acquire more knowledge, but it seems, like a 'Revolution', it began to consume its own children.

[DAG COPIERS & COMPUTERS]

Re: Is science being unduly influenced?

Yes that is the typical response from people that hang out around school, colleges, and universities because that is where people think about stuff like that hang out. They develop theories and then share, discuss and refine those theories into something that *most* of the world agrees on, sometime they are even proven wrong but there is an openness and willingness to gain knowledge and sometime even fame and profit. There is another group of people that have been indoctrinated to somehow square everything they think, see and believe with what they have been told is in the pages of a few books re-written hundreds of times over the past 3,000 years. So YES, science is being unduly influenced but it's not by the people you think it is.

"The good thing about science is that it's true, whether or not you believe in it" - Dr. Neil DeGrasse Tyson, Astrophysicist

So far so good. Now let us 'Refresh' our memory here about Science & Technology, through definitions, lest we veer off, its 'basic tenets'. I'll limit the definitions to a layman's language, as found in 'Oxford Advance Learner's dictionary 2007.

1)- SCIENCE: Knowledge about the structure & behavior of the NATURAL & PHYSICAL WORLD, based on facts that you can prove e.g. by experiments.
2)- PHYSICS: The scientific study of FORCES such as heat, light, sound etc and of relations between them and how they affect objects...(Physical laws).
*3)- STUDY: Is the activity of learning or gaining of knowledge, either from books, or EXAMINING THINGS IN THE WORLD. Examine carefully i.e. to watch, or look at somebody or something, carefully in order to FIND OUT something or Understand it e,g Scientists are studying photographs of the planet for signs of life.
4)- DISCOVER: To find out about something, to find some information about something.
5)- NATURE: a) All plants & animals and the things that exist in the universe that are not made by the people.
b) The way that things happen in the physical world when it is not controlled by people.
*** Based on the English definitions of the above words then, the scientists can be said to be, 'Students of nature'. They study the ways things happen in the physical world or universe.
- The scientists & Mathematicians do seek a deeper understanding and explanations of the LAWS governing the behaviors of the things in the universe. And when they DISCOVER these laws( that already exists...of course), they then try as much as possible to 'present a statement of explanation' of these phenomenon in a language humans can understand! The scientist who discovered this law is then honored by crediting the law in his name, e.g Newton's law of gravity, or Kepler's laws of planetary motions.
- The scientist didn't CREATE these laws, which already exist in the universe. They only discover. For, ''The law of conservation of matter & Energy is very clear: Can neither be created nor destroyed".
-These physical laws are so dependable that: The scientist at NASA are cock sure that, " The Eagle will lend on the Moon" at the precise moment and location, and that Armstrong's (RIP) voice will reverberate back to earth....That the space craft 'Orbiter?' will, not only lend on Mars, but will also send pictures & other data back 'home'. That a communication satellite send into Clarke's orbit will reach its destination and begin to do its work........All these AIDED by the INFALLIBLE, uncompromising & ETERNAL LAWS of the universe which these gallant scientists helped us to discover & understand.
-All of us humans, can go to our beds at night rest assured that we shall wake up the following morning and find these laws INTACT, not that some crazy group of politicians or senators have tempered with them.
These scientist & Mathematicians deserve praise, thanks and honor for their achievement.
The AUTHOR of these physical laws, whoever,, wherever, He may be, deserve praise, thanks, Honor and above all Glory for His work, of Thinking about, Designing, putting in place & Sanctioning the operations of these laws

[mrwho]

Re: Is science being unduly influenced?

Galileo came from a very devout Catholic family.

What's that supposed to mean? It's not like religion is hereditary - I come from a religious family and, if anything, it made me question everything I've been told.

[rthonpm]

Re: Is science being unduly influenced?

To take the argument back a few steps, and to really see what we're looking at let me quote Aristotle. He was one of the first thinkers to ever make the claim that for science to be a serious field, it had to be made clear through demonstration, otherwise it's nothing more than someone's idea. At the same time, he admits that there is a limit to which we can know and demonstrate things at which point we have to make a determination to take a demonstrable concept as a grounding point and to work with that otherwise we'll spin our wheels forever and either conclude that there's nothing we can ever truly know, or that we just repeat and repeat demonstrable phaenomena without ever really doing anything beyond that. To overcome this, he states that science needs to find that base, i.e. the demonstrable, and go back to the furthest point that can be shown to work in a demonstrable area and start there. Without that base you end up in the first camp he talks about:




Furthermore, and slightly more substantial to the debate at hand, Aristotle in his Physics also determines that there is an order to physiology and that nothing that has developed in nature happens without some sort of cause, or as he puts it 'for the sake of something'.



In the concept of evolution, there must be an inherent method to nature's madness. For every good reasons we don't have fruitflies with opposable thumbs or human beings with wings: nature (i.e. the physical world) has a certain order to how it can most successfully adapt.

Going away from Aristotle: look at the range of strange birth defects and maladies that humans can have. People can be born with all kinds of crippling or just odd characteristics, none of which are outside of the realm of reason and all of which have a rational cause. Even a slight change in our genetic structure can cause huge differences in our appearance or overall health.


Just a little bit coming from a tech with a philosophy degree.

If I get the chance, I'll dig out my copy of Origin of the Species to verify some half remembered quotes. As it stands now, the quotes are from the Prior Analytics and the Physics.