It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A MUST READ: SETI is Religion, Not Science!

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 4 2006 @ 01:21 PM
link   
And other conclusions by famed author Michael Crichton.

I've included a transcript of a 2003 speech by Crichton. His essential thesis is the growing danger of science being tied into political policy and rule-by-consensus.

I largely agree with him. He makes some startling, poigniant arguments over some very hot-button topics, including Global Warming. He's critical of the "science" behind model making at predicting the future based on natural, chaotic systems. One target of his is the Drake Equation, which estimates how much life is out in the galaxy. How can you quantify something conclusively if you don't know any of the inputs concretely?

But he's even more critical of the science community as a whole lambasting any scientist who dares to question the methodology or findings of conclusions based on hypothetical inputs.

In all my Internet searches, this is one of the few documents that should be required reading.

Enjoy




posted on Oct, 4 2006 @ 01:44 PM
link   
I must disagree with some of that.

SETI is still a scientific organization, plain and simple. All scientific organizations test things that might be theoretically possible. The key phrase is might be.

The fact that they had to use an inconclusive statistical calculation, is merely proof of the publics lack of patience, and unwillingness to allow anything to be done that hasn't already been tried and proven. It's that very same sort of thinking that keeps holding science back.

Some people are simply too stupid to understand how to deduce a statistic out of the given data you have. It's called formulating a conclusion... Micheal here seems to be left a little behind on his theoretical maths.
If we knew everything about the Universe such that we COULD give a Solid justification for SETI... We wouldnt need SETI anymore would we?

SETI is simply doing what all branches of science are doing. Testing the unproven. Trying the undone.

They are in no way a religion. They don't tell you to believe, they are simply telling you, we'll find them.

As I mentioned, the only reason they had to use incomplete statistical data to justify their actions, is because the public is too impatient for someone to justify their actions. The old, "lets go after the witch with a pitchfork" routine. All because they are too ignorant to allow science to do what it likes, and, as usual, horribly afraid that science may prove yet another part of the bible wrong. We can't allow that, can we? It seems we would rather live a 2000 year old lie, than change it in the slightest.

With or without the statistical justification SETI has given, I whole heartedly want them to keep doing what they are doing. I dont care if there is such a small chance of life being out there that the chances are we would never find them, I still want them to continue doing what they are doing. Why? Becuase as with the rest of science, we cannot put our foot down, simply because we don't like something about it. I don't really understand this guy's motives for attacking SETI anyhow, what has SETI ever done that could be harmful to us? The only people that have a reason to be afraid of SETI are the bible thumpers.

Go SETI!

[edit on 4-10-2006 by johnsky]



posted on Oct, 5 2006 @ 12:22 AM
link   
You have a thread dealing with this same topic under a similiar name in
the Aliens & UFOs section.
SETI and the Drake equation are religion!

Please do not post duplicate threads in multiple sections.



This thread should be closed, as I've stated the original poster
has already started another thread dealing with the same thing.

[edit on 10/5/2006 by iori_komei]



posted on Oct, 8 2006 @ 05:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by johnsky
I must disagree with some of that.

SETI is still a scientific organization, plain and simple. All scientific organizations test things that might be theoretically possible. The key phrase is might be.


Of all the things that might be theoretically possible ( in terms of aliens trying to communicate with us) what SETI is doing is pretty damn stupid and generally backwards.


The fact that they had to use an inconclusive statistical calculation, is merely proof of the publics lack of patience, and unwillingness to allow anything to be done that hasn't already been tried and proven.


Why does the public always get blamed for things science deliberately tries to keep beyond their reach?


It's that very same sort of thinking that keeps holding science back.


The only serious problem scientific advancement faces is the government funded science institutions of the western world.


Some people are simply too stupid to understand how to deduce a statistic out of the given data you have. It's called formulating a conclusion... Micheal here seems to be left a little behind on his theoretical maths.


"Lies, damned lies and statistics" sums up how i feel about that 'field' ( i'm being generous). With statistics you can say anything you want based entirely on what data you decided to include. Formulating 'conclusions' is as dumb as it sounds as in those instances it's pretty clear that the conclusion was reached long before the data that could lead to it was assembled. Michael seems to have a very good idea of what's going on in big science.


If we knew everything about the Universe such that we COULD give a Solid justification for SETI... We wouldnt need SETI anymore would we?


So since we are not sure what is going on we pick stupid ways to investigate the unknown? Explain the logic involved...


SETI is simply doing what all branches of science are doing. Testing the unproven. Trying the undone.


In a way you are correct as so much of our sciences are way off course and investigating fantastic delusions of their own construction.


They are in no way a religion. They don't tell you to believe, they are simply telling you, we'll find them.


When you control what people know about the sciences ( schooling,university, research grants,degrees) you can to a great extent dictate what will be investigated and in what ways and once that system is in place the investigation of reality no longer has to be your aim. If you can explain how the science establishment is generally against a new idea for the first few decades before it 'admits' ( actually they just sorta pretend that they always knew it) to the mistake i can listen but until then i know who's preventing the future from happening right now.


As I mentioned, the only reason they had to use incomplete statistical data to justify their actions, is because the public is too impatient for someone to justify their actions.


The only reason anyone uses incomplete data when they have so much at stake is because they know they can get away with it and will be supported. Honest to god real science ( like cold fusion, vacuum energy, continental drift, hygine in medicine) has to fight for every single point it introduces, and dozens it never suggested, to try shift the prevailing ideologues to the truth while pure nonsense like global warming and dangerous second hand smoke can gain scientific acceptance based on no facts at all. Stop blaming average people who suffer most, because they actually have to work for a living and don't have the time or interest to invest in the sciences, to get by why these people make up whatever fantastic nonsense they get paid to for.


The old, "lets go after the witch with a pitchfork" routine. All because they are too ignorant to allow science to do what it likes, and, as usual, horribly afraid that science may prove yet another part of the bible wrong.


Heresy is alive and well in the world but these days the church does not have to get involved as scientist will burn their own when they step out of line and say things they are not allowed to. If we allow science to do what it wants the pace of scientific discovery will accelerate no end as the only thing that is currently holding us back is those who choose what sort of investigation will happen.


We can't allow that, can we? It seems we would rather live a 2000 year old lie, than change it in the slightest.


Nonsense. People are as open minded as their environment allows them to be and it's IMO almost entirely the fault of the prevailing scientific dogma's that we are stuck in the situation we are. For the absolute majority of people religion is a tool to be used when it suits their interest but it's obvious that there are alternative religions practiced by others that does not help you feel very secure. The sciences have a MASSIVE advantage as you normally hear not a word about the alternatives the current 'reality' were chosen over those creating a framework where there is no known alternatives for most people. Scientific dogma dictating one belief over another is a far more comprehensive danger to a human mind than religion is as religious principles are generally so poorly defined and open to interpretation so as to become generally not restrictive.


With or without the statistical justification SETI has given, I whole heartedly want them to keep doing what they are doing. I dont care if there is such a small chance of life being out there that the chances are we would never find them, I still want them to continue doing what they are doing.


We convincingly know that life is 'out there' and also that there is no reason to go very far to look for it ( and looking that far with such equipment = waste of time which i believe to be their real aim) far away when we managed to find it on Mars already. I don't care if the chance for intelligent life out there is in fact very small but to go about looking for it with radio telescopes makes a mockery of common sense.


Why? Becuase as with the rest of science, we cannot put our foot down, simply because we don't like something about it.


Then why do we allow our science 'leaders' to lie and cheat to hide most of reality from us? Generally the average bloke in the street does not care much, know much or are interested in finding out much more as his life has been structured by his environment ( friends/TV/schooling/politics) to focus on very different things.


I don't really understand this guy's motives for attacking SETI anyhow, what has SETI ever done that could be harmful to us?


By keeping out attention focused on something that is on the whole a dumb idea that could never in a million years provide positive proof, that the average person or even scientist could or would believe, even if they were not conditioned to believe the opposite. We have photo's of standing water on Mars yet the science community simple refuses to believe that it's possible! If anyone believes radio signals can change prevailing dogma's they do not really understand how the science establishment works.


The only people that have a reason to be afraid of SETI are the bible thumpers.

Go SETI!


I think you should stick to chear leading as it seems evident to me that you would not be on the side of true scientific investigation.

Stellar

[edit on 8-10-2006 by StellarX]



posted on Oct, 8 2006 @ 11:28 AM
link   
Please do not post the same topic in several forums.

This thread is now closed. Please use this other thread for further comments.

SETI and the Drake Equation are Religion!

Thank you.



new topics

top topics
 
0

log in

join