• Started
  • Last post
  • 839 Responses
  • detritus7

    We cannot guarantee trust in ET messages.…

    "Our main argument is that a message from ETI can-
    not be decontaminated with certainty. For anything
    more complex than easily printable images or plain text,
    the technical risks are impossible to assess beforehand.
    We may only choose to destroy such a message, or take
    the risk. The risk for humanity may be small, but not
    zero. The probability of encountering malicious ETI
    first might be very low. Perhaps it is much more likely
    to receive a message from positive ETI. Also, the poten-
    tial benefits from joining a galactic network might be

    It is always wise to understand the risks and chances
    beforehand, and make a conscious choice for, or against
    it, rather than blindly following a random path. Overall,
    we believe that the risk is very small (but not zero),
    and the potential benefit very large, so that we strongly
    encourage to read an incoming message."

    • Imagine throwing it away without reading it, out of fear. lol to that.set
    • That's not their actual conclusion, but you're pretty naive to simply assume ET = Good.
      If they even exist in any meaningful sense..
    • I would never assume that..set
    • Not sure what would make you say that, either.set
    • You tend to deploy 'lol' sardonically so I assumed you were on your usual "Aliens Exist and are really great and if you don't accept this, you're a cretin"detritus
    • My bad if this wasn't the case this time.

    • Christ, you lot are odd.set
    • Strange assumptions, defensiveness, weird logic and completely made up accusations everywhere by the odd UK anti-set brigade.set
    • Yeah, must be everyone else who has problems communicating with you on this thing, set. God forbid it might just be you!detritus
    • I've never said they definitely exist, just that the vast evidence to suggest they do is pretty compelling, and I've also never said they'd definitely be good.set
    • Weirdo.set
    • there is literally no 'vast evidence' that supports anything, set - we only have one planet as a data point to reference in this debate in the entire universe.detritus
    • Perhaps if you didn't spend your time sneering at other's implied ignorance, people might interpret you differently? Of course, it's our fault though, right?detritus
    • LOLdetritus
    • lol, fuck me... get over yourself. You actually managed to take my comment as some sort of offence towards you, hahaha. So fucking defensive.set
    • If you're not aware of the wealth of evidence then you truly are ignorant.set
    • So both the defensiveness, the ignorance, the very odd assumptions and putting pretend things in my mouth that I never uttered, are of course your fault. Yes.set
    • Who's else would they be?set
    • offence towards me? not at all—willful misinterpretation of something that you decide perhaps not to believe in becuase it doesn't fit your narrative? perhaps.detritus
    • Clearly I am truly ignorant - perhaps enlighten me with your bounty of wisdom and link to something at least partially credible? go on.detritus
    • "You tend to deploy 'lol' sardonically so I assumed you were on your usual "Aliens Exist and are really great and if you don't accept this, you're a cretin""set
    • Yes, you mistook my comment as being arrogant, offensive etc. Now you're backtracking...set
    • I'll make some tea and wait raptly for this flood of knowledge that's about to whelm my consciousness and moisten my loins!detritus
    • Oh intellectual glee! Oh joy at the unburdening of these chains of compliant stupidity - I am soon to be free! to be free! Thank you set. Thank YOU!detritus
    • You're a grown man who obviously spends a large amount of his time on the internet. If you're world view is still impenetrable by all that's available...set
    • ...out there, then there's not much I can help you with.set
    • I did take your note as offensive arrogance - you've many times admitted that's how you are here. no question. I did not however take PERSONAL offence.detritus
    • Why on God's alien-probed Earth would i?detritus
    • You responded defensively. Use whatever words you wish to try and disagree with me. You called me naive based on something you imagined, lol.set
    • Go on - please link to some of this vast bounty of evidence that is at least tangentially credible. I'm brewing tea here, shaking with excited anticipation.detritus
    • Clearly you missed my post explaining that you're a grown man with access to the internet.set
    • As I said, I might've misinterpreted your note here - but as i added, that's due to too many years history of dealing with you otherwise, so...detritus
    • If you're still so rigid in your belief that there is no evidence whatsoever, then there is really no helping you.set
    • Sure, but you said you didn't take it that way, now you're saying that obviously you took it that way. Make your mind up.set
    • Show the fucking evidence! i've waited my entire life for anything that has any semblance of being proof - go on, please!
    • I've even told you I saw a UFO when I was a kid - if I'm rigid in my disbelief, it's because I've never seen anything believable, so please - PLEASE, show me.detritus
    • Use your brain and investigate yourself. I've already wasted far too much energy on you responding to this utter fucking nonsense...set
    • Of course, if someone's not unquesitioningly gaping wide their mind's cunt to every STD-ridden halfwit prick of bullshit, they must be stupid, right?detritus
    • Ok, show me ONE mote of evidence.

      ONE. Can't be too hard to back up your arrogant certainty here, can it?
    • I mean, if there's a vast sea of the shit, it can only take you a second's worth of effort to make me look like a fool, right? Got to be worth a punt!detritus
    • Clearly my posting something about alien contact means i'm closed to the very idea of aliens and alien contact. *slaps forehead* what a fuckwit am I!detritus
    • Fuck off and do your own research you silly cunt. You'll come back empty handed because clearly you have already formed your old man's opinion in stoneset
    • You only need to open the relevant qbn thread to see that something is going on. Now fuck off. You're a boring cunt.set
    • So you have no evidence?
      Just to be clear, you literally can't find one scrap of evidence? ONE? Not even one. I'm dismayed. I made tea and everything.
    • "there is literally no evidence that supports anything, set" has to be one of the most moronic things ever typed on this forum.set
    • And yet you can't confute it and in being unable to do so exhibit yet more arrogance.detritus
    • I just told you that we have a thread on this very forum with plenty of things to get started on, but instead of actually doing your research, you'd rather...set
    • ...sit there, mocking me, convincing yourself that you've proved me wrong. It's fucking hilarious.set
    • And still, no evidence.detritus
    • I'll show you a hundred things and you'll come back with utter nonsense in response. I've seen it time and time again.set
    • You have the wealth of knowledge available to man at your fingertips, and you're still literally insane enough to there there is 'literally NO evidence'.set
    • There is literally no helping someone like you. None. Why would I bother to try? As I said, please fuck off now.set
    • All I've said is there is enough evidence out there to make you question what's going on. If you can't see that, you're either a complete idiot or mentally ill.set
    • Show. Me. One.
      One that you think is utterly convincing.
      Wholly unquestionable as evidence.
      Go on.
    • I've started to type multiple items worth checking out, but I really cannot bare to listen to your response. Go on, fuck off now. There's no helping you.set
    • A strange way to prove your assertion - I'm afraid I can now only logically surmise that you realise you're talking shit in unhelpfully absolutist terms.detritus
    • by the way - in your world, is 'doing research' browsing crap on adolescent's Youtube channels? is that even intellectually rigorous?detritus
    • I mean are you honestly and actually suggesting that every. single. video, every single eye witness testimony, every. single. one. was bullshit?set
    • at least I, as someone interested in the idea of aliens, etc, posted something from academia... .detritus
    • Oops, sorry - of course, I'm rigidly and wilfully ignorant, closed to the idea of concepts beyond my own perception, aren't I? What a fool am I!detritus
    • More idiotic assumptions. You're not doing yourself any favours, wild desperately trying to appear more rational and intelligent. Fucking lol.set
    • You thick piece of shit.
      Your problem is you don't even realise how fucking stupid you are. I try, at least, and am not above apology.
    • ha, ironic timing.detritus
    • Your and fadein's only defence is to loudly proclaim in a sarcastic tone the things that I'm asserting. It's hilarious.set
    • To have the whole internet at your fingertips and still not see there's a single piece of evidence worth exploring more, is to be an utter, utter, utter, moronset
    • I've wasted far too much time already on this nonsense. You are ill read on the subject and are making excuses for such. It's embarrassing.set
    • https://www.echinese…detritus
    • lol at calling me stupid when you are literally incapable of educating yourself and instead need me to help you. You've seen plenty and rubbished it all off.set
    • I'm literally not wasting another second of my time on you. You're a moron. Ta ta for now.set
    • Don't bring me into more of your fucking bullshit.fadein11
    • That was for set by theway. @det a masterful handling of the troublemaking twit.fadein11
    • lol the idiots are combiningset
    • Fadein even completely agrees with me on the point in this discussion, but can't help but hold hands with his fellow kin. LOLset
    • I witnessed with my own eyes, Detritus feebly trying to rubbish off this NASA footage, for example...set
    • Why the fuck would I bother?set
    • and LOL and 'don't bring me in to your bullshit'. You respond and involve yourself in my discussions constantly. LOLset
    • Where did I rubbish that? I rubbished other footage that was posted around the same time as that, biut not that (if memory serves)detritus
    • if I remember right, i was railing against footage that showed what was clearly motes of dust around the ISS, affected by static build up.detritus
    • That video you've posted there I'm unsure about, purely because I have fuck all context for how/where it was taken. It IS odd though, I can't deny that.detritus
    • Hurrah! I should have posted that half an hour ago, haha. I distinctly remember you dismissing that too when I've posted it in this past...set
    • ...but if I'm wrong then I apologise.set
    • fact is - space is inherently alien - things even in LEO act weirldy different to how we'd innately expect. If I see dust motes, I see motes, not UFOs.detritus
    • Did you spend any time watching Musk's Starman? I did. I spent a lot of time looking at dust motes and weird lights in the background. I didn't assume UFOsdetritus
    • Yea but I see a big flash of light, a laser or projectile and a fucking orb intelligently moving out of the way of the incoming 'thing'.set
    • It's Space Shuttle STS-48 footage, you're welcome to look in to it for 'context'.set
    • I try and be very open about this shit - how the fuck can I or anyone KNOW. What I do KNOW is that humans make patterns and see things they want to.detritus
    • Tha';s the first and most critical thing to understand and to rail against. Beyond that, well fuck - open country.detritus
    • 99.99% of what people say is ALIENS or UFOs is not. Sorry, It's not. If any significant % of it were, well then by now we'd have more useful evidence. we don'tdetritus
    • The remaining 0.01% is likely not aliens either - prossibly something more interesting in terms of curiosity or nature.detritus
    • Just 1 of a million pieces of video, testimony, ancient writings and common sense that start to piece together a picture of rationale that SOMETHING is going onset
    • I meant more context in terms of aperture type and 'what am I looking at'. That mote reacting to the flash of light? Well, could be explained by...detritus
    • https://www.nature.c…
    • = photons can move small physical objects.detritus
    • if that mote was 1cm from the lens, then it's fucking small and moving relatively slowly and could, perhaps, be affected in a zeroG vacuum simply by lightdetritus
    • It's a coincidence that the projectile that came from the flash of light was on an exact collision course with the object that moved out of it's way?set
    • I could be talking out of my ass there, but I'm talking way less out of my ass there than someone simply invoking 'ALIENS'.detritus
    • If it was just that video, I might agree with you, but there are literally million date points that all add together to suggest something is going on.set
    • yes, set - it could well just be coincidence here. How many hundreds of hours of footage are there that show fuck all happening?detritus
    • Have you read the mahabharata?set
    • or show similar events that aren't QUITE so coincidental, but almost? How many hundreds of hours of footage have you analysed in detail?detritus
    • people see what they want to see…
    • NASA continuously shut off the live feed when a ufo appears on it.set
    • Yo do realise even their own astronauts have commented on ufos and aliens?set
    • You do know that NASA themselves told the papers they'd discovered a crashed saucer in 1947, before swiftly changing their story the next day?set
    • How about the disclosure project with endless corroborating testimony from military personel, government, pilots with nothing to gainset
    • How about every ancient culture talking about their gods coming from the sky in ships and teaching themset
    • Not to mention the millions upon millions of UFO videos, abduction testimonies. Is every single one bullshit? Every one?set
    • To say there is no evidence whatsoever is just simply not true.set
    • Wait - we can go beyond 100 notes now?detritus
    • I'm not 100% convinced myself. In terms of physical beings from other planets, but there is certainly something worth exploring.set
    • The mMayans and Egyptians for example were definitely taking psychedelics and describing the same kinds of beingsset
    • Well, there are different flavours of 'evidence' I suppose I meant something more concre in terms of 'direct' evidence rather than anecdotal or circumstantialdetritus
    • but suyre, when an astonaut says he saw weird shit out of a porthole, I take that with less salt... although local-orbiting motes around ships ...detritus
    • Interdimensional intelligence is starting to make more sense to me than physically travelling in ships, I'd guess both were real if I was pushed to...set
    • Who fucking knows. But to say there is literally no evidence of anything at all going on, is completely and utterly incorrect.set
    • fuck's sake, can't type with the excitement of going above 100 notes - giddying!detritus
    • No, it's not - there's nothing that can be pointed to that all can absorb and agree "yes, that is indeed evidence". If there were, our reality would be v. diffdetritus
    • there is weird unexplainable shit, and then anecdote. these are not evidence of aliens, sorry - they're not.detritus
    • meh, when I used to take DXM I 'literally' travelled to a galactic arm and saw, in HiDef, a full alien space station.detritus
    • So literally the only 'evidence' (please go back and read the definition of the word) for you is Aliens landing and saying hello.set
    • Everything else, even if all pointing generally to the same conclusion, is all utter nonsense and bullshit. That's weird...set
    • I also *definitely* travelled through time (by about 4 minutes) and met and had proof of th existence of the JudeoXtian God. I doubt these are relevant evidencedetritus
    • It's evidence. No one is saying conclusive proof. it's evidence...set
    • ..when I used to take too much NOXdetritus
    • You're confusing evidence with proof.set
    • Have you read the mahabharata?set
    • There's no weight of anecdotal evidence to point to anything actual either, set. That's the thing, there just isn't, as much as you would like to believe.detritus
    • they only point to the 'same conclusion' because we've had some sort of mass consensus shared reality space for x decades, perpetuating memes.detritus
    • as I say, 99.999x% is fully explainable, and there is some odd shit otherwise that is hard or nebulous to explain. none of this constitutes evidence though.detritus
    • Simply not true. But we'll never agree. I'll agree that there is no solid proof, which is obviously the word you should have used from the start.set
    • How much ancient history have you studied? They all tell the same story. Have you read the mahabharata? (3x now)set
    • They describe their god's flying spaceships, nuclear war and it's effects in detail, guided missiles etc etc etc. It's 5 thousand years old.set
    • Having studied all the ancient culture we know about. Having seen UFO's with my own eyes. Having seen many videos I cannot explain. Having heard many...set
    • ... very credible testimonies. Having read books like the Gods of Eden and having done thousands of hours of reading on relevant subjects...set
    • start to build a picture. There is no proof but there is plenty of evidence to suggest the truth.set
    • Working. Didn't realise what time it was. Have you actually read the mahabharata, out of interest? I mean, cover to cover, in person - not some paraphrasing?detritus
    • Because whilst not having read it itself, i have read 'what it says about contemporary tech' but also as much saying that it's all minsterpreted bullshit... .detritus
    • eg.…detritus
    • I've read it cover to cover. You seem to suggest just reading paragraph on the internet is an untrustworthy way of doing things but then...set
    • ... seem to put weight behind a few paragraphs on the internet debunking it...set
    • If it was just one text, then fine, but there are countless texts all describing beings coming from the stars with technologyset
    • i have no interest in reading it, but was a long time ago vaguely curious about some claims attributed to it. I read up on it a bit, came to nothing, forgot it.detritus
    • I'm just linking that now because a 5 minute scan of the answers in it implied as much of te criticism as I'd recalled.detritus
    • Remember - like Russia, there's a huge shoulder chip in India, but from Hindu nationalists wanting to proclaim their greatness and ancestry.detritus
    • Everyone and everything has an angle. Mine's born from a lifetime of disappointment seeing how much bullshit there is out there. *shrugdetritus
    • Simplest critique of the nuclear weapons angle - no discernible isotopes that could point to their having been used in any tangible history.detritus
    • Not very sexy, but there you go.detritus
    • This makes no sense, sorry... "no discernible isotopes that could point to their having been used in any tangible history"set
    • Yes, it does, set. Only curveball there is the inclusion of 'tangible' which I added in for greater allowance for the range of history you might be referring todetritus
    • nuclear weapons (etc) form rare istotopes which indelibly fingerprint their use for many (many) millennia thereafter.detritus
    • I'm no nuclear physicist, but this is GCSE level science—if you don't know that, then I can't understand how you can have so much conviction about all else toodetritus
    • Well, beyond what Dunning & Kruger might have to suggest on things, but .. well, it's late and I can't be bothered.detritus
    • Do your research. There's a great documentary on Netflix, and here are some websites where people speculate on things. Get woke.monospaced
    • *Googles"mahabharata...monospaced
    • Damn, Wikipedia says it's "ten times the length of the Iliad and the Odyssey combined." Yikes. You read it 3X?monospaced
    • Oh, sorry. I've just read this shit back and realised you might not have realised I was talking about nukes in ancient India. Sorry.detritus
    • Yep. I was given a copy by the lovely parents of a v.close friend who passed away many years ago. There are many abridged versions though so perhapsfadein11
    • Anyway, two points here:
      • I think you're wrong.
      • we can go above 100 notes now - how far do you think we can push this shit?
    • he read one of those three times. Who knows though, it's Set! One of the QBN superbrains.fadein11
    • He might have. I found a few websites that talk about ancient aliens and that epic. Even a few episodes of Ancient Aliens that feature top experts on the topic.monospaced
    • Haha, great — 2 more bodies into this mess — can we hit 999 notes?!detritus
    • No mess here. I really cannot be bothered with his approach to anything he disagrees with anymore. You handled yourself impeccably sir!fadein11
    • I hope he does know about isotopes though ;)fadein11
    • yeah, not interested in your spat either ... carry on ladies :)monospaced
    • No one wins here.detritus
    • nope. but some win more than others.fadein11
  • sofas-1…

    looking forward to December to see if they perform a head transplant

  • Morning_star2

    The 240 yr old Voynich Manuscript may have been translated.

    Learnt about this book as a kid and it's always held a fascination as to what information it could contain. Well, it seems we may know soon.…

    • oooh interesting.fadein11
    • It's an odd one. Very unique language and documents all kinds of plant life that has never been seen on earthset
  • utopian0

    • "look how fast this is"

      *plays in slow motion*
    • i didn't know that crabs sound like glass when they breakGnash
    • i had one of these in a tank, they’ll break your fuckin tankGuyFawkes
    • i’m assuming this is a mantis shrimp, i didn’t play the vid.GuyFawkes
  • detritus2

    Can we keep this thread to none bullshit science, please?

    • Exactly. It’s not a belief system.monospaced
    • isset
    • notmonospaced
    • Science said the earth was the centre of the universe at one point. Do you think all science of today is 100% correct? Of course it's a belief system...set
    • You believe scientists without doing the research or studies yourself. That's a belief...set
    • Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt, but to say Science is not a belief system is incorrect.set
    • Or not. Not sure I totally believe anything I say though. Maybeset
  • detritus2

    Fuck me, I had no idea...

    Apparently this is what Venus actually looks like — the photos you're probably accustomed to all include UV so as to highjlight the upper cloud layers.

    There's some interesting tidbits on here from 'planetarycolin', if you're into this sort of thing...…

  • detritus2

    Worried about the global collapse of bee populations?

    Here's an interesting take, from the horse's mouth so to speak..…

    (skip to 'Why this beekeeping web site?')

    • 200,000 honey bees killed in Prunedale…
    • Aw Jeez, that's so sad. WTH's wrong with people?detritus
    • Sad, very sad, that we are collectively destroying the place that we call home.utopian
    • Three men were in the pub discussing their bee's. First one says in his west country accent 'I've got 10,000 bees and 4 hives'. Second one says 'I've got 25,000set
    • bees and 8 hives'. The third one says 'I've got over one million bees and one hive'. 'A miliion bees and ONE HIVE!!!!???' is the response...set
    • 'Yea.... fuck em'.'set
    • Only the best joke ever told. Though loses something in text note form admittedly.set
  • pablo280

    Researchers Develop Novel Method to Repair Teeth using Alzheimer’s Drug Tideglusib…

  • sofas-3

    This thread is a pro-science circle jerk.

    I wish science would be bashed like religion is in its parallel thread, because I think the differences aren't that big, both-
    1) Institutionally (see copyrighted articles, fake results, tenure, publish or perish, student slavery, power hierarchy, industry ties, how knowledge revolutions were treated etc.) and
    2) Fundamentally (see induction / deduction etc.).

    Of course like a religion and a faith, the institution and fundamentals are intertwined.

    Atheism and science have great PR, look at the world becoming secular. Schools teach different religions and heritages highlighting the fact that it's about faith and belief (and often making kids hate them because many learn to hate what they were coerced to learn in school), but philosophy of science? Nah, just trust the priest in the white coat, dumbing down the scriptures so you can feel involved and safe.

    • the intiial reasoning for this thread has long-since departed. It's now literally just a thread where people post 'sciencey' things.detritus
    • Besides, we have other scientists to bash each New Science critically — I'm not sure how well-placed many of us are here to do that in any worthwhile sense.detritus
    • What do you suggest schools do - give valuable time up to unfoundable fantasies about Atlantis or færies?detritus
    • I mean I too post cool sciency things and enjoy everyone else's posts, just saying it would be refreshing to see critical things too :)sofas
    • This is what I dislike most about religionists - their simplistic unquestioning view that science isn't internally critical. That's the whole point of science.detritus
    • Religion tends towards black and white, whereas science (when done propa) is a myriad of shades of grey, and that encourages more questioning..detritus
    • it's not science you have a problem but the way in which it's (ab)used. as det says, it's not an absolute but is often referenced as such in order to deceiveFax_Benson
    • but there's definitely a kind blind faith tech worship that isn't remotely healthy.Fax_Benson
    • @detritus I agree. In an absolute sense I say don't coerce education, in a relative sense I say teach being critical of science's fundamentals and institutionssofas
    • @Fax to a degree I agree with you, but empiricism should be criticised as wellsofas
    • I think there is a general confusion between the criticism of the Scientific Method and criticism of Scientism (the blind belief in the infalability...Morning_star
    • ...of Science). FYI this thread was created because of my assertion in the Religion thread that Scientism has all the negative characteristics found in...Morning_star
    • ...Religions. IMorning_star
    • @Morning totally. Checked out the first post on this thread "Is not a belief system."
    • considering the definition of science is to constantly question and revise, I'd say the differences are so vast, that there's no fair comparisonmonospaced
    • common misconception is that science is some kind of book of rules, but it's just a process of figuring things out, it's a way of processing realitymonospaced
    • Morning_star clarifies it well with his Scientific Method vs. Scientism comparison.monospaced
    • You really should start an anti-science thread where you can bash on it. Should go over really well :)monospaced
    • true @mono, the comparison to religion was a bit of a provocation, but there are similaritiessofas
    • Just scrolled through the first couple pages of this thread, the beginning of it was more open endedsofas
    • I'll consider it mono! :)sofas
    • the comparison to religion is hilariously ironic, when religious people are using similarity to religion as an insult to sciencemonospaced
    • ^nice guys defusing my anger by agreeing with me, wtf :)sofas
    • yea mono, don't think I ever encountered that, I think it's more like they say "things aren't as straightforward" like "god put fossils here to test our faith"sofas
    • specific to that example, it really is scary the excuses they'll offer to discredit any affront to their faith in creationism, putting word's in god's mouth!monospaced
    • rest assured sofas, there are in fact hordes of new scientists that dedicate their lives to questioning and/or improving upon the fundamentalsmonospaced
    • and they will continue to do so, forever (hopefully)monospaced
    • think of it like this ... IF there's ever going to be a breakthrough in human knowledge, it's most likely coming from the sciences, not a religionmonospaced
    • mono I think you're right, you might back that up by saying "look how easily and quickly the quantum theory was adopted compared to the Copernican revolution"..sofas
    • ..but there is still room for so much more, I think the power structures are constricting in a similar way to the times of the Copernican revolutionsofas
    • Quantum theory was easily and quickly adopted? Einstein might disagree with you there..detritus
    • @detritus i'm no historian, but compared to the Copernican revolution or other major shifts I think it went quite easysofas
    • https://www.reddit.c…sofas
    • lol, what's the danger in testing a theory and coming up with conclusions based on those tests?monospaced
    • scientific progress is happening whether people choose to believe it or not, "thank god."monospaced
    • (not to derail, but copernicus was a pussy)Gnash
    • That'd be to do with the pace of change afforded by modern science and society though, rather than any kind of unblinking acceptance of theory.detritus
    • And quantum theory had to be accepted in some form when practical facets of its effect were used to deploy transistors then wifi, etc. in the real world.detritus
    • Perhaps the nuances or even indeed fundamental conceit of quantum theory is flawed, or entirely wrong, but the reality is that on some level - it works.detritus
    • There is science. Someone/team trying to prove something.
      Then there is cooperate science - someone being paid to prove what is wanted to be heard.
    • The way uni's are structured is more limited then the churches and encourages 'same' thought, IMHOmugwart
    • you question - your ridiculed - your unemployed.
      That isn't science.
    • Take climate, take evolution, shit medicine is the worst. Take health/dietitiansmugwart
    • I hear all the time I dont believe in religion - I believe in SCIENCE.mugwart
    • what does that even mean! Apart from your belief system operates exactly the same way as an otherdox religioniousmugwart
    • science doesn't operate like a religion at all ... it writes new books constantly, not reference 1. people believe in the process, OBVIOUSLY!monospaced
    • science isn't a belief system, so as hard as people try to cram it into that category, they will always fail, because it doesn't require belief beyond evidencemonospaced
    • it actually thrives on disbelief, which drives scientists to seek the answers, propose theories, etc ... and evolution is 100% true, it's not a belief systemmonospaced
    • if you add disbelief to religion, you get ridicule, you get banished, or you're forced to beg forgiveness, or forced to believe you've done wrongmonospaced
    • science only asks that if you disbelieve, you propose why and then present evidence based on scientific experiments, all in hopes of refinementmonospaced
    • Mono, you're right in principle but the reality is entirely different. Organisations that 'do' science are often less open minded and clogged with ...Morning_star
    • ...dogma and generational misconceptions. The political hierarchy is full of people more worried about their career than perpetuating good science...Morning_star
    • ..., much like religions.Morning_star
    • yeah, but that's a narrow view ... because there are ALWAYS scientists that are making real progress, and the scientific method can't be changedmonospaced
    • focusing on the minuscule minority that is fulfilling an agenda is not big picture, and even they aren't dogmatic about anything that I've ever heard ofmonospaced
    • and even THEN it's NOTHING like religion, as religion references only one book, makes NO progress, doesn't WANT to make progress, and is 100% misconceptionmonospaced
    • For a self confessed atheist Mono, your understanding of the variety and scope of different religions is severely limited. Know your enemy.Morning_star
    • My understanding is fine, and I apologize for focusing on the religions that use "the book" as those are the ones that are closest to my realm of life.monospaced
    • OF COURSE there are other religions that aren't as dogmatic like the western ones, and that aren't as orthodox as the orthodox ones, but that's missing my pointmonospaced
    • It's a given, in this thread specifically, that the comparison to a "belief system" is specifically the belief system of a western monotheism one.monospaced
    • Of which comparing to science is absolute rubbish, since science is not a belief system, but instead a process of figuring things out.monospaced
    • It's not a given. At all. If it makes you feel better to limit the universe for your Atheism because your argument is limited, that's up to you. However, ...Morning_star
    • i'm going to post some links to some discussions regarding science and religion which should show that your insistance that belief is absent from science...Morning_star
    • ...wrong.Morning_star
    • I think the whole recent reproducibility crisis in science is evidence enough that belief often runs a little too strongly.detritus
    • It’s fair to say religion is a non-progressive movement. Science is purely based on progress. The only thing holding us back is modern neoliberalismIanbolton
    • There is no pro science or anti science. There is just scientific and nonscientific. Science does not care that you don't participatecannonball1978
    • Damnit Morningstar, I was here when this thread started. It was about a comparison to Christianity as a belief system. A spin-off from another thread.monospaced
  • yuekit1

    Collective Intelligence Will End Identity-based Politics…

    • I've been saying this for years. I think we'll piggy back on technology to eventually form a collective mind. I don't think we'll have a choice...set
    • Privacy will be invaded on any and all levels, eventually, due to technology, so we'll have to accept no secrets from eachother..set
    • When that happens, everything changes.set
    • perfect for sharing pron linksmicrokorg
  • sofas1

    "2011 Isaac Asimov Memorial Debate: The Theory of Everything"

    "So you're steeped in abject ingnorance, that's what you're telling me." / Neil deGrasse Tyson
    "Nature doesn't care what I believe" / Dr. Janna Levin

    Unfortunately these debates are unlisted on YouTube and they don't have their own playlist on the "American Museum of Natural History" channel. It would also be nice if they would step up their production (audio, visual, presentation etc.), but it's still really good.
    If you'r looking for more go to-…

  • sarahfailin1

    • I'm a human being and still dont understand what it meansIanbolton
    • I think aliens will be surprised that we do in fact have pubic hairbezoar
    • They should also be surprised that we're not all caucasianbigbaby53
  • utopian0

    Asgardia, the world's first 'space nation', takes flight

    The world's first "space nation" has taken flight.
    On November 12, Asgardia cemented its presence in outer space by launching the Asgardia-1 satellite.

    The "nanosat" -- it is roughly the size of a loaf of bread -- undertook a two-day journey from NASA's Wallops Flight Facility in Virginia, the United States, to the International Space Station (ISS).

    It contains 0.5 TB of data belonging to 18,000 of Asgardia's citizens, such as family photographs, as well as digital representations of the space nation's flag, coat of arms and constitution.…

    • Picture: Holy shit a massively cool space station!
      Reality: A satellite the size of a loaf of bread.

      Clearly a space station for ants.
    • ^ lolGuyFawkes
    • why the f are they using a stencil font for a CNN article headlinescarabin_net
    • 'style'.detritus
  • PonyBoy2


    "The rare frilled shark is considered a “living fossil,” because evidence of its existence dates back to at least 80 million years ago. This summer, researchers found one alive and thriving off the coast of Portugal, adding yet more clues about the resilience of this ancient sea creature."

    • so no mutations for 80 million years? talk about resiliency._niko
    • dopeGuyFawkes
  • Gnash4

    • yeah not sure i'm with her :) but I do think that determinism and reductionism have killed romance and in some ways it was nicer before...sofas
    • lol, as if anyone is stopping scientists from scientifically exploring the science behind black magic! it isn't happening because that's stupid AFmonospaced
  • Morning_star0

    Because after all Mono, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

    • That is true. There are mounds of scientific evidence about the nature of our universe.monospaced
    • and evidence is ONLY coming from science, as religion has offered not a single piece in ... evermonospaced
  • utopian0

    What scientists know so far about Planet Nine…

    • its pluto?hotroddy
    • first rendering of Planet Nine brought to by... an 8th graderPonyBoy
    • 10 times bigger than earth!_niko
  • detritus0

    Ingestion of c60, 'buckminsterfullerene' doubles lives of rats?!…

    tl;dr — a study aimed at figuring out toxicity of buckyballs in mammals not only implies they're not toxic, but actually increase lifespan.

  • reanimate0

    • I think Sam gets a little bit sensationalist about the whole debate. However, all his points are valid, just not the whole picture.Morning_star
  • drgs1

    We dont live in a simulation…