[Taristin]

Finally, someone gets the right answer.

[pyro-manic]

Originally posted by .::Tin Can::.


Couldn't keep your hands out of your pants, huh?

Um, I'm not sure I follow.... How on Earth is that remotely relevant?

PeachE: Fair point. Though you could contribute fanaticism to major factors other than stupidity - look at Germany in the 30s, or even America in the past 3 years. The people were whipped up into a frenzy through careful manipulation of the media and information. These people are/were not stupid as a rule (obviously you get the odd dullard - ha, what a word! - but as a rule, people are fairly bright), and yet the effect was massive. The same thing can be accomplished for pretty much anything, given sufficient resources.

[.::Tin Can::.]

Originally posted by Raa
No, the test will consist of 1 yes or no question:

Does what I believe in matter in any way shape or form to anyone else other than me?

Yes it does, and it offends me. I will sue for 200 million gazillion dollars.

[Taristin]

Oh yeah? And you smell like cheese.

[.::Tin Can::.]

The color of your shoes offends me. That's another 300 million gazillion dollars.

[Sandwich]

*ahem*

Scientific Theory is not fact, I'm sorry. It is (hopefully and usually) an eminintely logical conclusion that fits (many? most?) observed facts and does not blatantly contradict any of them.

However, scientific theories can be, and indeed have been, proven wrong. Scientific thinking, when faced with more than one explanation that fits the facts, usually tends towards the simpler one. However, when at an unspecified point in the future new empirical evidence, new facts, are established, that contradict that simpler explanation without contradicting one of the others, then that theory must change to fit the facts.

The Earth revolving around the Sun is a fact, not a theory. It has been observed, measured, and verified 14 million ways from Sunday.

However, if I may toss a match into the kindling, AFAIK the theory that the universe is expanding (not referring to the Big Bang Theory, mind you) is still just a theory. Yes, it fits the facts of red-shifting in the observed galaxies in our proximity, but there is another theory to fit that fact just as well: the universe could have stopped expanding eons ago, due to gravitational forces slowing everything down, and has now begun to contract.

Logically, this works, since those galactic bodies closer to the "center" of the universe's distribution of mass would have a stronger gravitational effect pulling them "inwards" at a faster clip then the Milky Way is being pulled. Same with the galaxies "rimward" from our position - we're being pulled in faster than they are, hence the red-shifting.

Now, granted, all this is still firmly theory - expansion or contraction - and could be overruled by some new shred of evidence at some point in the future. It is not fact, it is a logical conclusion that fits observed facts. Nothing more, nothing less.

[Ghostavo]

Sandwich, Earth revolving around the Sun IS a theory... heliocentric theory to be more exact... it is not a fact but is regarded as such due to centuries of observation...

Now, quoting someone smarter than me...
A theory is a good theory (in the scientific sense) when it does two things, explain what happens with few elements, and predict things to happen in the future acuratly (or something like this).

Also, the big bang has more evidence than you realize and it also has flaws like any modern theory, so it still has ironing to do although most problems have been already ironed.
Here's a peak - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_bang#Supporting_evidence

[aldo_14]

Of course, you could say that observations and measurements are designed / determined based on a theory, and the assumption that we perceive images (i.e. what we see is what is really there) correctly is also based upon a theory which is neither proveable nor unproveable...... really you can find grounds to dismiss anything if you choose to do so.

[PeachE]

Originally posted by Sandwich
The Earth revolving around the Sun is a fact, not a theory. It has been observed, measured, and verified 14 million ways from Sunday.

goddammit, why does not one ever understand the word theory?

paraphrase of PeachE

scientifically speaking, the order by which we classify knowledge is roughly:

opinion < conjecture < hypothesis < notion < theory

there is NOTHING higher than theory. it's the top of the chain. it is the very best that modern science can do. it's by no means perfect, but the nothing is. there are NO facts. they simply don't exist. the only real "proof" method we have is observation, which really isn't a proof method at all. so there is no such thing as a fact.

[Eishtmo]

Might as well stop fighting PeachE, an0n.  You'll never beat their well entrenched ideas and opinions with facts.  After all, they know the "truth" about the universe, despite never having studied it beyond what they learned in Physics 101 (or in some cases, High School, if that even).  Reminding them that the world as they know it is built on the very theories they're attacking as "just a theory" will only make them all confused.  Better to let them wallow in their ill-concieved, unfounded, and ignorant positions than try to expand their minds with logic, reason, and fact.  At least this way we don't have to teach it to them or hear about how right they are and how wrong we are, despite all evidence to the contrary.

Besides, it's fun to laugh at them when they try to act all smart.

[Flipside]

Theory basically is the most sensible answer given the available information.

We have watched the Earth go round the Sun, so we might call that fact, but true scientists will still call that a theory, because it is actually closer to the truth to say 'The Earth goes round the sun at the moment'. This quite possibly will not always be the case.

So the trail of intelligence goes....

Ignorance... Lack of understanding.
Spiritualism... Personification and attributes of power (eg. Fire)
Theory.. An attempt to explain the 'God like' powers of Fire.

Fact does not exist as unchangeable, it is merely the sum of knowledge until those facts change.

[Grey Wolf]

You can also consider the ramifications of things such as Quantum Mechanics on reality, with things such as the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle...

[WeatherOp]

One thing that I know is a fact is that this will turn into a Flame war. So I'm just gonna watch.

[karajorma]

Originally posted by Flipside
We have watched the Earth go round the Sun, so we might call that fact, but true scientists will still call that a theory, because it is actually closer to the truth to say 'The Earth goes round the sun at the moment'. This quite possibly will not always be the case.

Or quite possible we are nothing more than computer simulations in an alien mainframe somewhere, there is no Earth, there is no Sun.  (Actually a lack of processing power might explain why I keep bumping into people I know in the weirdest places )

As you say to a scientist there is no such thing as a fact because there  is absolutely nothing that doesn't have another explaination.

[Fergus]

Can one of the religous people answer me in this, why is it that they are right and the other side is wrong.
Can one of the scientisty (vocab failing) people answer me in this, why is it that they are right and the other side is wrong.
Can the conservatives answer me in this, why is it that they are right and not evil, and the other side is wrong.
Can the liberals answer me in this, why is it that they are right and not evil, and the other side is wrong.

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by karajorma


Or quite possible we are nothing more than computer simulations in an alien mainframe somewhere, there is no Earth, there is no Sun.  (Actually a lack of processing power might explain why I keep bumping into people I know in the weirdest places )

As you say to a scientist there is no such thing as a fact because there  is absolutely nothing that doesn't have another explaination.

Code: [Select]



if(user.getPosition("karajoma") == city.getPosition("London") {
      city.setWeather(Weather.DRIZZLE);
       user.get("bloke1102").setPosition(user.getPosition("karajoma") + 2);
       cabs.overchargeAmount(CabbieCharge.TOO_BLOODY_MUCH);
       tube.setOnStrike(true);
       city.destroy("Bristol");
}


[PeachE]

Originally posted by Fergus
Can one of the scientisty (vocab failing) people answer me in this, why is it that they are right and the other side is wrong.

i know you're trying to come off as intelligent and possibly even deep, but this is an incredible oversimplification.

an0n's particular brand aside, the scientists (possibly the word you were looking for, yes?) aren't really into the whole "right vs wrong" approach to arguments. there are well supported theories and poorly supported theories (or notions). and we believe that all things being equal, a well supported theory is probably superior to a poorly supported theory.

the problem we tend to have with most religious fundamentalists is that they are willing to outright dismiss entire branches of science under the pretense that "it's just a theory", when in point of fact the entirety of all current knowledge is really just a theory and the real reason is that those particular branches of science conflict with their various religious beliefs.

this is particularly distressing to scientists (especially those in the education system, who routinely come under fire), since the whole point of science is to broaden ones horizons and to explore and develop new theories. to have entire fields cut off from exploration simply because they conflict with ( scientifically unsupported ) beliefs is ludicrous.

[aldo_14]

People can't really answer whether they're right or wrong, anyways, ecause each definition of 'right' - in the grand theological / philosoiphical / whatever the hell you'd call it - tends to be a subjective personal thing....

 for some right means factually correct, others it means morally correct, and soforth.

[WeatherOp]

Originally posted by PeachE


i know you're trying to come off as intelligent and possibly even deep, but this is an incredible oversimplification.

an0n's particular brand aside, the scientists (possibly the word you were looking for, yes?) aren't really into the whole "right vs wrong" approach to arguments. there are well supported theories and poorly supported theories (or notions). and we believe that all things being equal, a well supported theory is probably superior to a poorly supported theory.

the problem we tend to have with most religious fundamentalists is that they are willing to outright dismiss entire branches of science under the pretense that "it's just a theory", when in point of fact the entirety of all current knowledge is really just a theory and the real reason is that those particular branches of science conflict with their various religious beliefs.

this is particularly distressing to scientists (especially those in the education system, who routinely come under fire), since the whole point of science is to broaden ones horizons and to explore and develop new theories. to have entire fields cut off from exploration simply because they conflict with ( scientifically unsupported ) beliefs is ludicrous.

Why do you care what We think,:confused:

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by WeatherOp



Why do you care what We think,:confused:

It's not what people think, it's what they do because of that which causes problems.