wheelrite
12 years ago

I also posted the actual journal link, to the American Sociological Review journal. Sooo.... go ahead and read that instead.

victor809 wrote:



You have a degree in Sociology ?

I knew it,,,,
View All Posts by User
borndead1
12 years ago
The flip side of the "war on science" is the war on people who question science.
View All Posts by User
victor809
12 years ago

You have a degree in Sociology ?

I knew it,,,,

wheelrite wrote:



Bite your tongue.
That's a fluff education...
View All Posts by User
victor809
12 years ago

The flip side of the "war on science" is the war on people who question science.

borndead1 wrote:



????
Are we supposed to coddle the stupid?
View All Posts by User
wheelrite
12 years ago

Bite your tongue.
That's a fluff education...

victor809 wrote:



no it's a waste of money...
View All Posts by User
borndead1
12 years ago

????
Are we supposed to coddle the stupid?

victor809 wrote:




Congrats. You just proved my statement.

When did it become stupid to question science? Scientific theories have been proven to be false many, many times. Science should be questioned/scrutinized; theories challenged, experiments recreated. Science has become hierarchical and politicized to the point that anyone who questions a theory is insulted. It's gotten to the point that OTHER SCIENTISTS are afraid to disagree with or question certain theories/ideas.
View All Posts by User
victor809
12 years ago

Congrats. You just proved my statement.

When did it become stupid to question science? Scientific theories have been proven to be false many, many times. Science should be questioned/scrutinized; theories challenged, experiments recreated. Science has become hierarchical and politicized to the point that anyone who questions a theory is insulted. It's gotten to the point that OTHER SCIENTISTS are afraid to disagree with or question certain theories/ideas.

borndead1 wrote:



That makes no sense whatsoever.

"Science" as an entity is simply a method of establishing theories based on repeated experiments and observations. To question that is ... well... kind of dumb.

However, feel free to question individual theories, the scientific method has entire ways of going about doing it. You can go and gather data and become a scientist yourself, establish competing theories using valid scientific methods.

Or is that too much work? You'd rather just say science is dumb?
View All Posts by User
dpnewell
12 years ago
Here's my problem, Victor. A theory is just that, a theory. It may be based on observations and repeated experiments, but it is still a form of conjecture. If it could be proven, it would be a fact, not a theory. Yet when someone questions a scientific theory, they are immediately branded as ignorant or backwards by the scientific community, as illustrated by your replies in this thread. Some scientists feel that their theories should be accepted, unquestioned, by the masses as fact, when even they know that their theories can't be proven as such. Talk about egos.

Now it's your turn to call me stupid. Have fun.
View All Posts by User
jetblasted
12 years ago
Do you think for one minute that the government could afford for Buddy Holly to live? Hell no. The greatest conspiracy you never heard of? The powers that be kill three rock stars - two from Texas and one Mexican and two months later they draft Elvis? I'm calling BS ... They'll never take their boot off our necks !!
View All Posts by User
victor809
12 years ago

Here's my problem, Victor. A theory is just that, a theory. It may be based on observations and repeated experiments, but it is still a form of conjecture. If it could be proven, it would be a fact, not a theory. Yet when someone questions a scientific theory, they are immediately branded as ignorant or backwards by the scientific community, as illustrated by your replies in this thread. Some scientists feel that their theories should be accepted, unquestioned, by the masses as fact, when even they know that their theories can't be proven as such. Talk about egos.

Now it's your turn to call me stupid. Have fun.

dpnewell wrote:



But here's the problem. Generally, the individuals questioning a theory aren't doing so with equal evidence. You don't question a theory simply because it "doesn't sound right" to you. You present contradicting evidence of an equivalent nature.

Here's an example:
Lets say I had a theory that Wheel was cheating on nurse terri with Jade. To back up that theory I had photos of wheel and jade exiting bathhouses together, video of wheel's head disappearing in jade's lap in a parking lot... etc, etc. I use that evidence to support my theory.

You can't just say "I don't believe your theory, despite the evidence"... that would be kind of denial. Now, if you had equivalent evidence, such as video in the bath-house of wheel going in to rescue jade from a heroin spiral, and of jade trying to find his contact on the floorboards of wheel's car, that would be equivalent. See where I'm going here?

View All Posts by User
Bones33
12 years ago
You are obviously a hopeless socialist.
View All Posts by User
victor809
12 years ago

You are obviously a hopeless socialist.

Bones33 wrote:



Look at you... running around with your random claims.

noobs...

How exactly would this post make me a socialist? Is it because it's using data and graphs? Because if you think that's the mark of socialism, you kind of proved the entire post.
View All Posts by User
jpotts
12 years ago

False arguments potts.
These aren't the same people. They are the institutions in a different era.

victor809 wrote:



Really?

Oh wait...this is the "they were men of their time," argument. It is complete BS.

Really Victor, your rationalizations are very shallow.
View All Posts by User
jpotts
12 years ago

But here's the problem. Generally, the individuals questioning a theory aren't doing so with equal evidence.

victor809 wrote:




That is a complete cop-out. Mainly because the minute someone actually SHOWS evidence to the contrary, it is either quashed by the apparatus that already exists that protects the current view, or it is dismissed out of hand.

You do it all of the time Victor. It's a nice tactic...for the feebleminded.

Science and scientists have not changed one iota since the dreaded Dark Ages. They just bow down to a different god, worship at a different church, and graft themselves to a different doctrine. Yourself included. You and these "scientists" that you often tout are no better than the dreaded, uneducated hicks and rubes you think are beneath you, though you delude yourself thinking otherwise.

I'll never forget the 5 month heated argument I witnessed over the molality of a simple solution (it had to do with cell transfection, if I remember correctly) that resulted in the trading of insults, and accusations of fraud.

All because of the concentration of a simple, frickin' solution.

Face it, Victor, when you start to think your s**t doesn't stink as much as the rest of the population, you're headed for a very nasty fall...
View All Posts by User
teedubbya
12 years ago
I always thought the purpose of science was to disprove theories just as much as to prove them all within a structured model.

I now know the scientific model is bad and random anecdotal crap tossing is far superior.

And stuff.
View All Posts by User
teedubbya
12 years ago
And in the words of Macs and his extra teeth Galileo Figaro

View All Posts by User
jpotts
12 years ago

I always thought the purpose of science was to disprove theories just as much as to prove them all within a structured model.

I now know the scientific model is bad and random anecdotal crap tossing is far superior.

And stuff.

teedubbya wrote:



The biggest problems with most processes and models is that they usually involve people. And people tend to make processes and models work to fit their viewpoint...not the other way around.

Then again, this coming from the guy who voted for Idi Amin Jr. because he "wasn't Bush," and got Bush on steroids...

Your blind faith in the virtue of elites and "experts" is noble, but foolhardy. History says otherwise.

But please, continue dreaming. It's quaint.
View All Posts by User
jpotts
12 years ago

And in the words of Macs and his extra teeth Galileo Figaro

teedubbya wrote:



LOL.

Scaramoosh, Scaramoosh can you do the fandango?
View All Posts by User
teedubbya
12 years ago
Then you argue about the specific bastardization of the process. If the process isn't followed or is tainted in any given situation your problem isn't really with the scientific method but in reality it's lack of appropriate application.

And while bush is still worse than the big o, the big o is just getting up to full stride and may very well catch him

All that really has nothing to do with the subject at hand though. I just read a post about that tactic. Saul or Sally something or other.

View All Posts by User
jpotts
12 years ago

Then you argue about the specific bastardization of the process. If the process isn't followed or is tainted in any given situation your problem isn't really with the scientific method but in reality it's lack of appropriate application.

teedubbya wrote:



You can't argue about the bastardization of the process with people who are specifically invested in making sure the process remains tainted. They have a vested interest in keeping it tainted.

Dude, have you never read a history book? The people who corrupt a system make sure that the system STAYS corrupted by packing it with like-minded people. Just take a look at what's happening at the IRS.

I cannot believe that you are THIS naive.
View All Posts by User
Users browsing this topic
Mobile! Terms | Privacy | Contact Us | Help | © 1998-2026, CigarBid.com