Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:And this is somehow supposed to be a surprise? (Score 1) 1010

That's repetition, not contradiction. I say there is no proof in science, then I say there is no proof in science. Though, in your defense, I made a typo: I should have capitalized "logic" as "Logic", so perhaps that threw you off

That's not what you said, and changing 'logic' to 'Logic' makes no difference. You are first claiming that math is not science, which is wrong.

It is, and I did, because it's not (though to be fair, I didn't specify a "natural science". One could argue that any body of knowledge is a science, but let's stick to natural sciences, else we could include just about anything, like the "science" of sewing or numerology).

Next you are claiming that "logic" is a field of science or subject of science, which is absolutely wrong (take an entry level Philosophy class if you are that lost).

I didn't. Find me quoted as saying "logic is science" and I'll mail you a Kennedy half dollar. Everything I said is all right up there ^^^.

Lastly, you claim that no other field of science has proven anything which is also wrong.

That's true, despite your assertions otherwise. And again, this is natural science we're talking about. The natural sciences don't prove things because there is no one final end-all, be-all fact to find about any given aspect of the natural world. Any new evidence can modify or nullify what we have already observed.

Your next paragraph seems rather incoherent, so let me get this straight. You don't agree that we can ever prove evolution, so I guess the work that we have done on genetics proving large portions of the complete theory are not proven.

We can't, because theories are provable in the same way the number 9 is salty to the touch. It doesn't make sense. What is the "complete theory" of Evolution? Which fact, once discovered, will close the books on ToE so we never have to study it anymore? That we have such a large body of knowledge about evolution is what makes it such a strong theory, one of the strongest theories of the natural world we have. There's still no proof of anything in there, though.

Hrm, something is wrong with that line of thinking.

In your gravity example, by your own thoughts you must accept Newton's Law as factual.

No, I accept it as a law, and I accept that it, like all scientific laws, only apply in limited conditions and limited circumstances. Newton's Law it only applies in weak gravitational fields. At subatomic levels or in immense gravity fields, for example, Newton's Law is invalid. But it still is immensely useful in day to day life, like predicting eclipses or firing missiles at Iraqi weddings.

The people that started looking at merging Einstein's work and Newton's work were heathens and of course those guys that showed where Einstein's work fails are simply blasphemous!

Einstein is the people who merged Einstein's work with Newton's work, and he called it the Theory of General Relativity. (As an agnostic, I guess he technically was also a heathen.) There is no blasphemy in science, only in religion. I'm beginning to suspect you are secretly an intelligent design proponent.

And of course any theory we have of gravity, even when it does not work, must be proven by your way of thinking.

That's something you just made up about me, especially in light of the fact that I must have said about 30 times already that theories are unprovable by their very nature, and can be completely undermined by even a single piece of evidence that contradicts all previous observations. Also, what I said about Newton's Law about two paragraphs up.

Your failure to contemplate theories of gravity in relation to evolution are not shocking, but demonstrate you really don't care to think.

There is no relation of the two, outside they both explain parts of the same universe.

Further, you can't take something as extraordinarily complex as "gravity" or "evolution" and compare them to "2+2" or "hot", or even the same.

Then I'm glad I didn't. I really dodged a bullet on that one! Wait, what is the exact scientific definition of "hot", and where do we observe "2+2" in nature?

Sure, we can look at various creatures and know they are not the same, but we don't magically have knowledge of how they came about. We gave it a term called "evolution" which encompasses a whole mountain of stuff.

Technically, we built a mountain of knowledge and then called it "evolution".

Many components of that are probably true...

Not probably. If they weren't repeatedly and observably true (and true is only ever "true for now" in science), they wouldn't be part of the theory.

...but other components are still just theory and speculation. Claiming otherwise is no benefit to anyone.

That you use the phrase "just theory" means you still don't have any idea what a theory is, yet you continue to argue about it. And I have seen your posts arguing with others in this same article when they, too, present to you the universally accepted definition of theory. I'm about 90% sure at this point of your secret devotion to intelligent design.

Your last paragraph shows that you lack any real level of intellect on the subjects, or philosophy. I have explained my position without resorting to childish fallacy to get my point across.

Your position is rubbish, because your position is in contradiction to accepted scientific principles, because you feel they are wrong.

You continually lie, distort...

Quotes, or it didn't happen.

...present ad hominem...

I can be a snarky asshole.

...and ignore the point.

I feel I've belaboured the point too long, and yet it still falls on deaf ears.

Calling me a troll in light of those truths is laughable...

Troll was one option I presented. The other is that you are incapable of learning. Maybe you're both.

Comment Re:And this is somehow supposed to be a surprise? (Score 1) 1010

You contradict yourself.

Are you seriously trying to claim that we have no proven science?

Yes. So are all scientists.

Then in your last paragraph you state.

Absolutely. Math and logic are able to show proofs all of the time. But science never does.

That's repetition, not contradiction. I say there is no proof in science, then I say there is no proof in science. Though, in your defense, I made a typo: I should have capitalized "logic" as "Logic", so perhaps that threw you off.

I think Biology, Physics, and Chemistry have as much proven work as math does. As to Logic, well, I'm not sure you know what 'Logic' is if you are claiming it's a field of science.

They don't, but luckily science isn't based on what you think, only repeatable observation. And no, Logic is not a science, it's an artificially constructed and self-referencing system, therefore it can have proofs. And it does! Scientific theories are never proven because they are observations of nature, which is infinite and always changing (as far as we have so far observed, anyway).

Dog breeding is not the missing evidence for evolution, and neither is a flu virus. I'm pretty sure that they point in the right direction, but that does not get us the missing proof.

There is no missing evidence for the facts or theory of evolution. Dog breeding is one example of the fact of evolution. Flu virus mutation is another. Those facts, plus thousands more, contribute to the body of knowledge we call the Theory of Evolution (ToE). A theory can never be missing evidence, though will always allow for new evidence. There is no one ultimate fact that will finally prove a theory to be true at all times and in all conditions.

I never said evolution was wrong, in fact quite the opposite I stated that I believe the theory will be proven in time. I stated it's not proven, and for some reason you refuse to accept that.

I don't refuse to accept that you said the ToE isn't proven, because you did. I do refuse to accept, however, that it can be proven, since it can't be. No theory can be. The ToE (like all theories) can only be strengthened by new supporting evidence, modified or nullified by new conflicting evidence, or incorporated into new theories as our knowledge of nature expands. Like when Newton's Theory of Gravity was incorporated into Einstein's Theory of General Relativity. The fact of gravity never went away while we sorted it out. No one floated into the sky while we looked for the missing evidence. We just learned that Newton's observations no longer apply in all conditions at all times, e.g., at speeds approaching c , but are perfectly valid in "everyday" conditions.

Do I get to burn in hell for not believing like you do?

You are already burning in the hell of ignorance. At this point I'll have to assume you are either remaining willfully ignorant to the formal definition of scientific theory, and are therefore a troll, or you are just incapable of learning anything new. Either way, it's pointless for me to continue to explain it to you. There are plenty of resources online that do a wonderful job illustrating what a scientific theory is, if you ever care to educate yourself about it.

Comment Re:And this is somehow supposed to be a surprise? (Score 1) 1010

Are you seriously trying to claim that we have no proven science?

Yes. So are all scientists.

No, claims about validity are critical. If something appears to be nonsense, you would not go down the path and explore. If it looks like a dead end, usually it's noted as a dead end and put on a back burner. Often this leads to new "Science" as we have to build tools for experiments which leads to new discoveries and new areas of science to investigate. If it seems to be an absurd exploration, it's forgotten.

Claims about validity aren't worth the air used to make them. What criteria are used to judge absurdity? Curved space? That's just absurd! How can nothing be curved? Creatures too small to be seen can kill us? That's the Devil gotten in you, boy, making you talk that kind of nonsense! The Earth goes around the sun? Psh! I clearly see the sun rise and set everyday! Nonsense to suggest otherwise!

If I am wrong show me a group of scientists working on proving the earth is flat, looking for the deity responsible for lighting, trying to figure out where the moon goes at night, working on witchcraft detection, etc...

Werewolves must exist, because no scientist is trying to prove they don't, right? Or is lack of evidence not evidence? The world may very well be flat, but no one (probably) is studying it for flatness, not because it's an absurd notion, but because we have so much observed data about its shape that until some evidence challenges that data, we can assume that we are living on a sphere.

See my first comment regarding your false statement that we can't prove anything. We surely can, and do so all the time. That statement is reducto ad absurdum at best, delusional at worst.

Absolutely. Math and logic are able to show proofs all of the time. But science never does. Your homework assignment is to find a single scientific proof and post it here. (Hint: Facts are not proof, merely observations. For example, evolution the fact, as a subset of the Theory. We can and have observed change in species over time (evolution) in both the laboratory and in nature. Dog breeders are constantly forcing dogs to evolve, and evolution is why you need a new flu shot every year.)

Comment Re:And this is somehow supposed to be a surprise? (Score 1) 1010

No-one claims that any nuclear technologies built on the theory could be explained by exquisitely timed thunderbolts from Zeus, or that computers are actually just ways the gods give us answers, or that the Einsteinian corrections to GPS timing required for accuracy could be explained by Saint Christopher (patron saint of travellers.) Worse than that, this mere Theory has the audacity to contradict Newton's Laws of Motion at speeds approaching the speed of light. The "Just a Theory" people need to explain why one fundamental piece of modern science is "just a theory", when the other, which is on a profoundly equal basis in fact, isn't subjected to such mischief.

+1 for "exquisitely timed thunderbolts of Zeus."

Comment Re:And this is somehow supposed to be a surprise? (Score 1) 1010

Even people that claim to be "educated" fail at science.

Last I checked, "Science" and "The Scientific Method" had numerous requirements. If you wish to claim that humans evolved from other primates, or dogs evolved from another species, or cats from another, we lack proof. This is why "Evolution" is called a "Theory".

There is no such thing as proof in science, only observation and evidence, and a theory is the closest thing science has to proof. "Evolution" is called a "Theory", not because we lack evidence, but because we have collected a significant body of evidence (aka facts) through repeatable and verifiable experimentation and observation about changes in species over time.

I'm not claiming it's a bad theory, or wrong, I'm claiming we lack some critical data.

Claims about the validity of a theory are meaningless. You either provide independently verifiable evidence that expands, modifies or contradicts the theory, or as Newton once said, you are just making shit up. You also can't use lack of evidence as evidence.

It's amazing how people claim that the theory is proven without doing any of the work to find out it's not. They believe what they are told, just like the people on the other side of the building claiming a deity did it.

Just like when someone told you a scientific theory means "a hypothesis unproven due to lack of data" and you believed them without verifying it yourself?

Comment Re:And this is somehow supposed to be a surprise? (Score 1) 1010

33% of the population are age 50 and over, where a significant portion had to suffer through "new math" and "bauma reading" during their school years, rather than actual math and phonics.

I, on the other hand, thoroughly enjoyed New Math:

Comment Re:Stand up, people! (Score 1) 439

You contact the subsidiaries in your country of SOPA-supporting American companies and tell them why you will no longer/never be using their services or purchasing their goods. Also contact their American parent company. Publicly post this information and point them to it. Encourage others to do the same. The only thing that will keep SOPA and PIPA from passing is by making a real dent in the profits of the companies who have rented American senators and congressmen to pass this law for them.

Comment Re:Stand up, people! (Score 2) 439

Also, write to any of the corporate sponsors of the bill and tell them you are taking your business to a non-SOPA supporting competitor. This will be more effective if you actually have an account history with a company that they can see, and you actually do take your business elsewhere. And publicly post about it, and send them links to said postings. Enough of these complaints and it's quite likely said company will drop support for the bill. It worked with GoDaddy, it can work with others. This is also the only real way non-Americans who want SOPA stopped can have a voice in opposing it. American senators don't give a shit about the opinions of the other 95% of the world, but many US corporations have foreign subsidiaries and hitting their bottom line will also hit the US parent's bottom line.

Slashdot Top Deals

Luck, that's when preparation and opportunity meet. -- P.E. Trudeau