Science
- Started
- Last post
- 1,010 Responses
- son0
Diamond Window
Beyond his work on the bomb, Quarterman worked with fluoride solutions to create new chemical compounds and new molecules. He was skilled at purifying hydrogen fluoride, a highly corrosive gas. In 1967 he developed a corrosive resistant “window” made of diamonds in order to better study hydrogen fluoride. His innovation was called the “diamond window.” He also created a xenon compound which surprised the world of chemistry because it was believed that xenon was an “inert” gas and supposedly could not be combined with other atoms. At the time of his death, in 1982, Quarterman had initiated work on a project to develop “synthetic blood” but encountered ethical and political opposition to his research.
- Sweet. Mexican scientist!cannonball1978
- yeah...a mexican named Lloydson
- sarahfailin0
Sir Karl Raimund Popper CH FBA FRS[4] (28 July 1902 – 17 September 1994) was an Austrian-British[5] philosopher and professor at the London School of Economics.[6] He is generally regarded as one of the greatest philosophers of science of the 20th century.[7][8] Popper is known for his rejection of the classical inductivist views on the scientific method, in favour of empirical falsification: A theory in the empirical sciences can never be proven, but it can be falsified, meaning that it can and should be scrutinized by decisive experiments. If the outcome of an experiment contradicts the theory, one should refrain from ad hoc manoeuvres that evade the contradiction merely by making it less falsifiable. Popper is also known for his opposition to the classical justificationist account of knowledge which he replaced with critical rationalism, "the first non justificational philosophy of criticism in the history of philosophy".[9] In political discourse, he is known for his vigorous defence of liberal democracy and the principles of social criticism that he came to believe made a flourishing "open society" possible. His political philosophy embraces ideas from all major democratic political ideologies and attempts to reconcile them: social democracy, classical liberalism and conservatism, more explicitly so in his later years.[10]
- cannonball19780
^^ "Science by definition can be proved wrong because results are testable and the passage of time allows for review, progression and discovery."
I think you mean scientific results, not science itself.
- Morning_star0
^ Your constant assertion that science and religion are different sides of the same coin is fundamentally wrong. They are NOT interchangeable or comparable. For Instance, to claim that, 'Religion is the reason for violence and oppression' can be replaced by 'Science is the solution for violence and oppression' is illogical and lacking critical thinking. Science by definition can be proved wrong because results are testable and the passage of time allows for review, progression and discovery. The answer to religions failings is not science.
- JESUS
FUCKING
CHRIST
RELAXutopian - I am and this was in reply to Monos post.Morning_star
- Roots of science come from religion. Astrology = cosmology, alchemy=chemistry, vedic texts= quantum physicsyurimon
- The roots of all of religions failings will be in science, because religions are archaic and science IS progressmonospaced
- ANYWAY, the reason they're not comparable is because religion is a BELIEF system and science is not. Thank you.monospaced
- you actually proved my point for me and the entire threadmonospaced
- If it makes you feel better believing I've proved your point then so be it. However, in reality I have done no such thing.Morning_star
- The reason they are not comparable is nothing to do with belief. Belief is an inherent part of both religion and science but as you won't engage in discussion about this then you'll never know why you're so wrong.Morning_star
- as you won't engage in discussion about this then you'll never know why you're so wrong.Morning_star
- JESUS
- utopian0
Earth survived near-miss from 2012 solar storm: NASA
Washington (AFP) - Back in 2012, the Sun erupted with a powerful solar storm that just missed the Earth but was big enough to "knock modern civilization back to the 18th century," NASA said.
The extreme space weather that tore through Earth's orbit on July 23, 2012, was the most powerful in 150 years, according to a statement posted on the US space agency website Wednesday.
However, few Earthlings had any idea what was going on.
"If the eruption had occurred only one week earlier, Earth would have been in the line of fire," said Daniel Baker, professor of atmospheric and space physics at the University of Colorado.
Instead the storm cloud hit the STEREO-A spacecraft, a solar observatory that is "almost ideally equipped to measure the parameters of such an event," NASA said.
Scientists have analyzed the treasure trove of data it collected and concluded that it would have been comparable to the largest known space storm in 1859, known as the Carrington event.
It also would have been twice as bad as the 1989 solar storm that knocked out power across Quebec, scientists said.
"I have come away from our recent studies more convinced than ever that Earth and its inhabitants were incredibly fortunate that the 2012 eruption happened when it did," said Baker.
The National Academy of Sciences has said the economic impact of a storm like the one in 1859 could cost the modern economy more than two trillion dollars and cause damage that might take years to repair.
- monospaced0
^ and yet, despite all the top scientific minds having some doubts once in awhile, after major breakthroughs, religion came in and made all this progress happen. Yeah fuckin' right. Fuck all if you think you can discredit scientific progress just because they doubted themselves once in awhile.
- I'm not trying to discredit science, it does it very well without my help. Science has corporate paymasters now with agendas and targets. The reality of truly independent research is becoming a thing of the past.Morning_star
- and targets. The reality of truly independent research is becoming a thing of the past.Morning_star
- holy shit you almost sound like a paranoid conspiracy theoristmonospaced
- And you sound nothing like one of the obedient flock unquestioningly worshiping at the altar of Scientism.Morning_star
- Morning_star0
The trouble with science is obviously the scientists ;)
I see no good reasons why the views given in this volume should shock the religious feelings of anyone. – Darwin (writing in Origin of Species), 1859
"There is not the slightest indication that nuclear energy will ever be obtainable. It would mean that the atom would have to be shattered at will." – Albert Einstein, 1932
The so-called theories of Einstein are merely the ravings of a mind polluted with liberal, democratic nonsense which is utterly unacceptable to German men of science. – Dr. Walter Gross, 1940
“The earth’s crust does not move”- 19th through early 20th century accepted geological science
“Rail travel at high speed is not possible because passengers, unable to breathe, would die of asphyxia.” – Dr. Dionysius Lardner, 1830
“I think there is a world market for maybe five computers.” – Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943
“That virus is a pussycat.” — Dr. Peter Duesberg, molecular-biology professor at U.C. Berkeley, on HIV
“Stomach ulcers are caused by stress” — accepted medical diagnosis, until Dr. Marshall proved that H. pylori caused gastric inflammation by deliberately infecting himself with the bacterium.
“X-rays will prove to be a hoax.” – Lord Kelvin, President of the Royal Society, 1883
“Everyone acquainted with the subject will recognize it as a conspicuous failure.” – -Henry Morton, president of the Stevens Institute of Technology, on Edison’s light bulb, 1880
“There is no reason for any individual to have a computer in his home.” – -Ken Olson, president, chairman and founder of Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC), in a talk given to a 1977 World Future Society meeting in Boston
“Louis Pasteur’s theory of germs is ridiculous fiction.” — Pierre Pachet, Professor of Physiology at Toulouse, 1872.
‘The abdomen, the chest and the brain will forever be shut from the intrusion of the wise and humane surgeon.’ – Sir John Eric Ericson, Surgeon to Queen Victoria, 1873
“If excessive smoking actually plays a role in the production of lung cancer, it seems to be a minor one.” – -W.C. Heuper, National Cancer Institute, 1954
“Space travel is bunk.” - Sir Harold Spencer Jones, Astronomer Royal of the UK, 1957 (two weeks later Sputnik orbited the Earth).
“There will never be a bigger plane built.” – - A Boeing engineer, after the first flight of the 247, a twin engine plane that holds ten people
“When the Paris Exhibition [of 1878] closes, electric light will close with it and no more will be heard of it.” – Oxford professor Erasmus Wilson
A rocket will never be able to leave the Earth’s atmosphere.” - New York Times, 1936
To place a man in a multi-stage rocket and project him into the controlling gravitational field of the moon where the passengers can make scientific observations, perhaps land alive, and then return to earth—all that constitutes a wild dream worthy of Jules Verne. I am bold enough to say that such a man-made voyage will never occur regardless of all future advances. - Lee De Forest, American radio pioneer and inventor of the vacuum tube, in 1957
We can close the books on infectious diseases. - Surgeon General of the United States William H. Stewart, 1969
There is nothing new to be discovered in physics now; All that remains is more and more precise measurement - Lord Kelvin, allegedly speaking to the w:British Association for the Advancement of Science in 1900
- max plank, said something, like new ideas in science only take effect when old scientists die.yurimon
- new ideas in religion never happen because they don't ever changemonospaced
- It's not a competition Mono. We ALL know the shortcomings of religion. But the transfer of ones belief to science and the idea that it will provide all the answers is horse shit. It's dogma is abundantly apparent. And that's just in this thread.Morning_star
- that it will provide all the answers is horse shit. It's dogma is abundantly apparent. And that's just in this thread.Morning_star
- haha, yet all the examples here are of science finding answers to things people thought impossiblemonospaced
- so, it gives me a huge reason to 'believe' it will continue to do so... and why not? it's never failed to find solutionsmonospaced
- Absolutely correct.Morning_star
- science has never purported to provide all the answers. religion does. all these quotes are subjective opinion with no backing facts.doesnotexist
- facts backing them. science is one thing and humans use it, they are not incoherently combined and inseparable.doesnotexist
- sarahfailin0
http://rt.com/usa/173324-nasa-te…
NASA: We will find aliens within 20 years
"What we didn't know five years ago is that perhaps 10 to 20 percent of stars around us have Earth-size planets in the habitable zone. It's within our grasp to pull off a discovery that will change the world forever,” said Matt Mountain, director and Webb telescope scientist at the Space Telescope Science Institute in Baltimore.
- utopian0
- yupmoldero
- fucking idiots focusing on Earth when it's a spec of dust in the big scheme of thingsmonospaced
- yurimon0
- Those were on the ark.monospaced
- 2 of themmoldero
- No. Just one.Morning_star
- zingmoldero
- ukit20
Oregon geologist says Curiosity's images show Earth-like soils on Mars
- Morning_star0
4:41 to 6:18 Lawrence Krauss says nothing different to what I'm saying.
- ukit20
- watched this this morning- quite good! dark matter, LHC, WOMEN physicist laureates! wow.sarahfailin
- yurimon0
http://phys.org/news/2014-07-cro…
New study shows how existing cropland could feed billions more
- utopian0
- Really. We can't see it....We don't know what it is...It's invisible... It's wishy washy speculation dressed up as science fact. There's more evidence for bigfoot FFSMorning_star
- evidence for Bigfoot FFSMorning_star
- But it's there, regardless of if we can define it completely.monospaced
- There is no 'IT'. 'IT' isn't there, its gravitational effect can be measured but there is no 'IT'. Whatever DM is, it doesn't fall in to the Standard Model and is arguably non-material.Morning_star
- to the Standard Model and is arguably non-material. At that point your materialist scientists invent extra dimensions.Morning_star
- Can't see it, or prove it but believe it. Where have I heard that before? :)ETM
- ha, you guisemonospaced
- Morningstar, how would you like it if people dismissed design or whatever you do for a living without understanding a thing about it?ukit2
- about it? I think a little humility is called for when you're talking about things so far outside of your understanding.ukit2
- I do get dismissed on a daily basis : ). What I do is essentially subjective and so opinion counts, the same with speculation about the nature of dark matter. It can't be measured by any of sciences universal laws and is therefore beyond conventional understanding. New thinking and consideration of the nature of the universe has to be explored and if the current model doesn't fit then my opinion is no more or less valid than anyone else's. That video claims to explain dark matter and does nothing of the sort. If you're content to believe what you're...Morning_star
- the nature of dark matter. It can't be measured by any of sciences universal laws and is therefore beyond conventional understanding. New thinking and consideration of the nature of the universe has to be explored and if the current model doesn't fit then my opinion is no more or less valid than anyone else's. That video claims to explain dark matter and does nothing of the sort. If you're content to believe what you're peddled without questioning it then that's cool but I'm not. Science is evidence based and with no evidence then all you have is opinion, speculation...Morning_star
- understanding. New thinking and consideration of the nature of the universe has to be explored and if the current model doesn't fit then my opinion is no more or less valid than anyone else's. That video claims to explain dark matter and does nothing of the sort. If you're content to believe what you're peddled without questioning it then that's cool but I'm not. Science is evidence based and with no evidence then all you have is opinion, speculation and debate until hypotheses are formed and experiments can be performed.Morning_star
- then my opinion is no more or less valid than anyone else's. That video claims to explain dark matter and does nothing of the sort. If you're content to believe what you're peddled without questioning it then that's cool but I'm not. Science is evidence based and with no evidence then all you have is opinion, speculation and debate until hypotheses are formed and experiments can be performed.Morning_star
- of the sort. If you're content to believe what you're peddled without questioning it then that's cool but I'm not. Science is evidence based and with no evidence then all you have is opinion, speculation and debate until hypotheses are formed and experiments can be performed.Morning_star
- evidence based and with no evidence then all you have is opinion, speculation and debate until hypotheses are formed and experiments can be performed.Morning_star
- experiments can be performed. .Morning_star
- "my opinion is no more or less valid than anyone else's"
You know some people actually study this stuff their entire lives :)ukit2 - entire lives :) And here you are jumping in and saying it's nonsense, and oh by the way this paranormal research stuff, that's totally believable.ukit2
- that's totally believable.ukit2
- Look at that video and tell me what DM facts you can take from it?Morning_star
- You were critiquing the entire idea not just the videoukit2
- As I say in my post (down there v), I claim nothing more than Lawrence Kruass in the you tube video I've linked.Morning_star
- The fact that you are acknowledging it exists is hypocritical. Yes, it exists, it's matter, and science figured that out.monospaced
- You know it's matter do you? Any proof? Anything testable? a repeatable experiment perhaps?Morning_star
- How is acknowledging IT hypocritical. I've never question the existence of DM.Morning_star
- you can't say it's matter... hahahaset
- set0
This is well worth a watch...
- inteliboy0
Sorry yea you're right. Had it dog eared. I'll try to remember to avoid this thread, though will no doubt forget, and complain again.
- monospaced0
If you want "interesting science news," go to the Science of the Day thread. My understanding, based on the history and original post content, is that this thread is for discussing whether science is a belief system or not (it's not).
- It is ; )Morning_star
- nope, it's just a method of figuring things out, the only onemonospaced
- I know where you are coming from. I do understand that the definition of 'science' is essentially a process of investigation to establish the truth or otherwise of a hypothesis. However, the common understanding of what 'science' is, is evolving. Due to the agenda of fundamental atheists like Dawkins/Krauss 'science' has been promoted as the opposite position to that of religion/faith. And that is what i have a problem with. It's essentially a false dichotomy.Morning_star
- investigation to establish the truth or otherwise of a hypothesis. However, the common understanding of what 'science' is, is evolving. Due to the agenda of fundamental atheists like Dawkins/Krauss 'science' has been promoted as the opposite position to that of religion/faith. And that is what i have a problem with. It's essentially a false dichotomy.Morning_star
- 'science' is, is evolving. Due to the agenda of fundamental atheists like Dawkins/Krauss 'science' has been promoted as the opposite position to that of religion/faith. And that is what i have a problem with. It's essentially a false dichotomy.Morning_star
- the opposite position to that of religion/faith. And that is what i have a problem with. It's essentially a false dichotomy.Morning_star
- that's mostly in reaction to fundamentalists trying to attack science educationmonospaced
- but it is the fundamentalists themselves that are fucking up science, not the scientists themselvesmonospaced
- Science/scientists should never have stooped so low as to engage those who think Creationism and Intelligent Design should be taught in the same breath as The Theory of Evolution. Their engagement has polarised the 'sides' even more and created a scenario where (as we can see from this thread) you are either a materialist or a religious nutter. It's just not that black and white.Morning_star
- Design should be taught in the same breath as The Theory of Evolution. Their engagement has polarised the 'sides' even more and created a scenario where (as we can see from this thread) you are either a materialist or a religious nutter. It's just not that black and white.Morning_star
- and created a scenario where (as we can see from this thread) you are either a materialist or a religious nutter. It's just not that black and white.Morning_star
- black and white.Morning_star
- i'll probably continue to post science news here. i think our everyday advancements are integral to our views on science and should be considered when making broad generalizations about it, as this thread so often doesscarabin
- and should be considered when making broad generalizations about it, as this thread so often doesscarabin
- rabbit0
thats fucked up
