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.

 

Is science arrogant?

page: 2
4
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by TurkeyBurgers
The problem with the way you are looking at the SETI search OP is you are bringing BIAS that would contaminate the experiment.

You are already going into the experiment knowing that life elsewhere exists.

You just screwed the experiment.

You brought your BIAS on board.

Check that at the door before you come into the SETI experiment.

Go into the SETI search as looking for life without the BIAS of life existing. Searching for alien life. Not because you personally think it exists and are out to prove it. Your data will be corrupt and you will not have a substantiated claim if you do find results.


I agree and disagree...

I disagree that a scientist having a pre-existing belief would necessarily contaminate an experiment with BIAS. Every scientist is allowed to have personal beliefs. For example, I'm sure many of the SETI scientists have at least some personal beliefs that life may exist elsewhere. In fact, Seth Shostak -- the lead Astronomer for SETI -- believes in the possibility of extraterrestrial life.

I do agree with you, however, that scientists need to do all that is possible to not allow their personal beliefs to ruin the experiment...and by strictly following the scientific method, that personal bias could be eliminated (or minimized as much as possible).

In fact, personal beliefs outside the norm of science is REQUIRED to create new hypotheses for being tested by science.

[edit on 7/14/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]




posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People

Originally posted by 2shores

Everything can be prooved even cheese has intelligence can be proved, we just need to find the "facts" that say so, for the masses to catch on.

OK -- Do it.

OK
Fact: a person (not referring to anyone posting in this thread, just a hypothetical person) has a large brain and is considered intelligent.
That person looks at a videotape of a fuzzy dot in the sky on a video recording and knows of no earthly explanation for the dot so it assumes it must be a spacecraft controlled by aliens.
The cheese makes no such assumption.
Since the cheese's set of assumptions is more intelligent than the intelligent human's set of assumptions, that proves the cheese is intelligent.

[edit on 14-7-2009 by Arbitrageur]



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 02:02 PM
link   
Modern scientists are extremely arrogant I would say. They won't look at anything that falls outside their restricted understanding of things. Anything that can't be perceived with their five human senses just cannot exist according to modern scientists. The most arorgant of the bunch are astrophysicists and amateur astronomers.

It's funny too because there were many ancient civilizations that weren't as technologically advanced as we are now and were actually better astronomers and scientists than we are, like the Mayans and Summerians who knew about planets thousands of years before we even discovered them. All these civilizations also had prophetic calendars (spiritual). Modern scientists ridicule anything that has to do with spirituality or extraterrestrials.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 02:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 





Imagination, is much more important than knowledge. Without imagination, we wouldn't look for knowledge to support it...

I'm not interested in proving anything to anyone, but if i would on cheese. Lets see here.

www.arn.org...

try that link for proof. However, I have a feeling that no-matter what link I put up, inevitably someone would like to dissect it. I'm also not about to spend my life experience foolishly trying to prove the intelligence of cheese when it is too tasty to contemplate for longer than a chewing motion...



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 02:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by hermantinkly
Modern scientists are extremely arrogant I would say. They won't look at anything that falls outside their restricted understanding of things. Anything that can't be perceived with their five human senses just cannot exist according to modern scientists...

Most physicists in the world are working on quantum physics, which is far beyond most peoples "restricted understanding of things". Most astrophysicists are coming up with the most fantastic explanations for what is out there in the universe -- supermassive black holes, gamma ray bursts, pulsars, quasars, etc. I would say they are thinking way outside the box, also.

The only reason why you may think that supermassive black holes and quantum physics are "commonplace" ideas is that scientist have thought outside the box and developed the theories that attempt to explain to all humankind these fantastic things in nature.

[edit on 7/14/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 02:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by 2shores...Imagination, is much more important than knowledge. Without imagination, we wouldn't look for knowledge to support it...

Yes -- and the people with the best imaginations make the best scientists.

Science doesn't create knowledge(or at least it doesn't create the natural laws) -- it simply finds ways to interpret the knowledge of those laws in a way that humans can understand.



[edit on 7/14/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 02:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


I liked your defense of the position on cheese. Yours was much better worded than my own, thanks!


Then again, beware of your cheezy masters for they lurk behind every corner tempting you to eat them...



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 


Then if knowledge existed before science, what do we call that? Word-of mouth advertisment?

What happens when science has the only strangle-hold/authority on knowledge...? That is a form of Tyranny in my opinion.

What is tyranny?



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 02:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by 2shores
Then if knowledge existed before science, what do we call that? Word-of mouth advertisment?

I edited my reply to specify that I mean science does not create the natural laws that humans call "knowledge"


What happens when science has the only strangle-hold/authority on knowledge...? That is a form of Tyranny in my opinion.

What is tyranny?

I don't think you and I are using the same definition of "science". Science is not an institution, but a thought process that can be used by anyone and everyone.

There is not one institutional body that is disseminating all of the information and knowledge of nature that science is interpreting.

If some unknown guy in his garage produces -- for example -- anti-gravity in such a way that is verifiable and repeatable (usually by using the scientific method) then that guy has done science.

However, back to your question What happens when science has the only strangle-hold/authority on knowledge...? -- I would say that most of the knowledge we have has been given to the world through science. I wouldn't call it a "stranglehold", though.


[edit on 7/14/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:05 PM
link   
I think scientists are arrogant to a degree yes.

IMO many scientists are quick to dismiss any unexplained phenomena, disregarding any information whatsoever about them. I think many scientists are afraid of these phenomena being real, as it would change the scientific landscape in such a big way. I do understand though that scientists do have to be 100% sure about something before it's classed as something real.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by 2shores
What happens when science has the only strangle-hold/authority on knowledge...? That is a form of Tyranny in my opinion.

Oh I don't think you have to worry about science having a stranglehold on knowledge. Just look at all the people posting on ATS regarding how they know more than the scientists and the scientists are wrong. Thank goodness for the internet and free speech so this knowledge won't be repressed by those darn guys looking for their annoying proof all the time.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:36 PM
link   
Science, Religion, and Polyticks, all seem to function in the same way in my opinion. In this day and age, what gets accomplished through these 3 only benefit a select few directly.

The rest of us just have to take their word for it, and accept scraps while others get the credit.

I just want to be given a placebo, and lied to. Then my mind can gladly fool my body and benefit anyways...


THE authority on anything, is just the next trend in accepted wisdom.

What do we know about trends?



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:39 PM
link   
Those who practice science for a living are all individuals seeking, whether it's money or glory, or something personal.

I'm not saying science isn't good for human-kind.

What kills me to think is that IT is the most cherry-picked of the modern religions.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:41 PM
link   
Applause to all the thread contributers, good debates here! I love this site!




posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 04:19 PM
link   
Just because something has not yet been proven doesn't mean it isn't possible.

Ufology research has been stunted because of the ridicule factor.

Just wait until science catches up to the archeology mysteries that are being discovered that support theories of previous visitors to our planet.

"the world is flat"
"the sun revolves around the earth"



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 04:37 PM
link   
I'd say not just some, but MOST scientists are very arrogant when it comes to certain subjects. Subjects that when you bring them up, instead of being open and saying, "What do we know about this?," they would sooner balk and/or marginalize any effort to even study it.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 04:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by SmallManGeorge
I think scientists are arrogant to a degree yes.

IMO many scientists are quick to dismiss any unexplained phenomena, disregarding any information whatsoever about them. I think many scientists are afraid of these phenomena being real, as it would change the scientific landscape in such a big way. I do understand though that scientists do have to be 100% sure about something before it's classed as something real.


You have to realize that any Scientist who can prove any of the "phenomena" you are referring to would be one of the most famous people in history to include all of the awards, financial grants, Book deals, Schools being named after you, interviews, celebrity status, wealth that would come along of a find of the caliber you are describing. And you want to say they would be "Afraid"?



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 05:00 PM
link   
reply to post by TurkeyBurgers
 


All of the things you are talking about, celebrity status, fame, academic government grants, etc., who do you think decides who receives these things?

It's big media, big corporations, and big money. It's elites that choose who they want to make or break depending upon the public perception they wish to create. You can believe otherwise if you wish but I would think you are just being naive.

Paris Hilton is a celebrity, and she never did a damned thing worthy of attention. Enough said.

Copernicus made a very revolutionary discovery but he wasn't automatically declared a genius, awarded all kinds of honors, and made instantly famous. He died thought of as a fool, and was persecuted by religious powers all his life. Power does what power wants, just like George Carlin said. And we are not really free.

[edit on 14-7-2009 by bsbray11]



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 05:18 PM
link   
reply to post by bsbray11
 


I was referring to the present. A Scientist TODAY who makes one of these discoveries.

They can publish their work without fear of the Religious institution attempting to discredit them. Well the religious institution will still TRY but they are outnumbered. If they want their cars and electricity and televisions and computers they will shut up and sit down like the good little fundies they are


Scientists can publish their work. We have award systems to cherish Scientific Discoveries. We have GOVERNMENT grants that are organized by Scientists to award discoveries.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 05:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by TurkeyBurgers
I was referring to the present.


So am I. I used an ancient example but it's much worse today.

I have seen the realities of people who publish extraordinary work. I am a big fan of Dr. William Tiller of MIT, for example, but he doesn't get any special attention despite his ground-breaking contributions, while, again, Paris Hilton does, for doing nothing. That is not an accident or some freak media coincidence. It is big business. I am frankly surprised that Dr. Tiller still has tenure at MIT, because challenging the status quo is actually usually met with hostility (the whole point of this thread -- scientific arrogance). I am telling you, it's all about money and maintaining power and control, not about making us collectively smarter as a nation. You should know that by now. An enlightened public is the LAST thing TPTB want. Knowledge is also power, and they don't want to share.

[edit on 14-7-2009 by bsbray11]



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join