Science wrong.... again.

reply to post by Total Package


I would like to start this reply by stating that you and I probably agree on several key issues.
I wanted to say that because small insignificant issues should never be used as a reason to divide individuals who find common ground on significant issues.

The main aspect of this reply that I wanted to stress is...
Well...
Let's just look at one of your comments.

but that's ok... because that's what science is all about right? New discoveries... being proven wrong etc etc or so they keep justifying their f#@k ups that way anyway

Science, as in the Scientific Method, is without prejudice.
Science is not in the business of having beliefs, but in the business of providing methodical, empirical, and repeatable evidence regarding an assumption based on observations.
The scientific method was developed by Ibn al-Haytham sometime around the turn of the last millennium 1000 C.E.
(That's right folks. A Muslim. That was for all the Arab haters in the audience)
link to wiki on the scientific method

The scientific community, on the other hand, is a group of people, and most of them assuredly have an agenda.
Now, there you have a collective group of individuals who spend lots and lots money attempting to validate a belief or set of beliefs and for these individuals to contradict these beliefs would require them to contradict what has, up until that point, been their life's work.
I am not excusing their behavior, because in my opinion, these people should not be allowed to call themselves scientists if they are unwilling to reformulate when faced with overwhelming contradictory data.

I would maybe reformulate your post to accuse the scientific community and not generalize this to the concept of science.

And please don't take my words as argumentative.
I have a deep and profound respect for the Scientific Method. It is the only thing that we have left in the world that can save us from the barrage of disinformation that we encounter daily.



[edit on 20-12-2009 by Josephus23]

Originally posted by Total Package

Originally posted by Doglord

Hmm perhaps because it was other scientists who challenged the "assumptions" you are making such a big deal about?
Or do you think this planet was discovered by butchers, bakers and candlestick makers?

What you mean the scientist who did the equivalent of tripping over the planet in front of him.... all of a sudden proves that science is doing it's job?

The fact is they had a theory... yet another flawed theory.... and as a result did not actively look for planets which were literally under their nose. That is Science for you right there. Because 1 scientist lucked out one day when looking through his son's $500 telescope while showing him the moon doesn't mean the science community is right all along.

So again tell me why Science should be used as any sort of measurement for anything.... given how continually wrong they are?

What?

"The scientist who did the equivalent of tripping over the planet in front of him"?

And where did you get the idea that the "scientist lucked out one day when looking through his son's $500 telescope while showing him the moon"?

Do you know that he has been working on that for the last 10 years, perfecting ways of detecting exoplanets, and that this planet was found by the MEarth Project, a project funded by David and Lucile Packard Fellowship for Science and Engineering and the National Science Foundation?

Just because the project uses amateur level telescopes on remote stations it doesn't mean that this was something that happened by accident, as you imply in your post.

Originally posted by ProudFossil
No, methinks he believes the butchers invented the pc he is sitting at spouting his nonsense, the bakers invented the communications system we call the internet to spread his nonsense, and the candlestick makers invented the power generating plants to provide the energy for all this. And I have not even mentioned the "scientists" who developed the aluminum for his tinfoil hat or brought about his favorite flavor of kool-aid.

reminds me of Monty Python and the Holy Grail about the romans
"R: All right, Stan. Don't labour the point. And what have they ever given us IN RETURN? (he pauses smugly)
X: The aqueduct?
R: What?
X: The aqueduct.
R: Oh yeah, yeah they gave us that. Yeah. That's true.
MC: And the sanitation!
S: Oh yes ... sanitation, Reg, you remember what the city used to be like.
R: All right, I'll grant you that the aqueduct and the sanitation are two things that the Romans HAVE done ...
M: And the roads ...
R: (sharply) Well YES OBVIOUSLY the roads ... the roads go without saying. But apart from the aqueduct, the sanitation and the roads ...
MC : Irrigation ...
O: Medicine ... Education ... Health
R: Yes ... all right, fair enough ...
MC : And the wine ...
ALL : Oh yes! True!
F: Yeah. That's something we'd really miss if the Romans left, Reg.
MC: Public baths!
S : AND it's safe to walk in the streets at night now.
F: Yes, they certainly know how to keep order ... (general nodding) ... let's face it, they're the only ones who could in a place like this.
(more general murmurs of agreement)
R: All right ... all right ... but apart from better sanitation and medicine and education and irrigation and public health and roads and a freshwater system and baths and public order ... what HAVE the Romans ever done for US?
X: Brought peace!"

Its okay when science is wrong because science learns from its mistakes. Disproving science will make it stronger, because science is ever evolving.

Science makes mistakes. Scientists make mistakes, as they are only human.

One example is Mr. Einstein and his theory on relativity. Many scientists disproved his theory, but he still fought for it and guess what it lead to. We would not have any of the technologies today if we did not have Mr. Einstein.

And lets not even MENTION that this is a news article. They possibly put words into the researchers' mouth. And not only that, but they do not even site where or who was doing the research. Congratulations, they could be spewing bull# from their mouth and you are believing it. Not to even mention they can edit and remove content from wherever they please, this is the news today trying to "spice" up the news by contradicting their statements etc etc etc.

If you want what the astronomers are really saying, I suggest you read SCIENCE JOURNALS. They come from the scientists' own minds. Not as interpreted by a news source.

[edit on 20-12-2009 by fordrew]

Its a common misconception among many on ATS to confuse science with sceintists. Scientists are human and subject to pre-conceived thinking and mistakes - science itself is a process in which we search for truth. In fact its the only way in which we as people can truly understand our world and how it works. Science is on-going process and is only as good as the evidence we have at the time. It changes as we learn more. That's what science does as it searches for truth.

To say science itself is a system that occasionally f's up is only partially true. What it does instead is change according to the facts at hand.

As a UFO believer, I don't think science has exactly weighed in completely on the issue. There is evidence - both witnesses, photos, and videos that all add up to something going on. What we don't know conclusively yet is if this phenomenon is about extraterrestrial life. As of now we don't have enough evidence to say this conclusively. But as we've seen with a number of issues (re: water on the moon) conclusions can change.

[edit on 20-12-2009 by mrsoul2009]

reply to post by Total Package


I cannot stand people like you...

The very reason I scarcely come to this site much anymore, in fact. If you hate science so much please turn your computer off, disconnect your cable and internet and communicate your foolish opinions via smoke signals or something. No REAL scientist, or any sane and intelligent person for that matter claims to have a monopoly on the truth.

And by the way, the fundamental structure of science allows scientists to admit and correct errors that occur (and errors will ALWAYS occur in science). It is exactly what makes science such an effective mechanism for discovery. From the sound of it if you and your kind were running the show once you took us down a wrong path (and you WOULD take us down a wrong path) there would be no effort at self-correction and, therefore, no discovery.

You do realize science is a widely accepted opinion?

Seems like you have some anti-science agenda out there.

No doubt science is wrong many times...but the process of it is what makes it so liked. The testing, retesting, disagreeing, etc, all of that is what makes science good.

I do not understand why the title is called "Science wrong...again". Please show me a better way of understanding things.

Originally posted by Total Package
I make note of that particular point.... because this is exactly the issue I have with Science and anyone who uses it as any sort of measuring tool. I mean.... this is another perfect example of the arrogance of the Scientific community... who were so utterly convinced they were right about the behaviour of the planets ... that they did not even bother to spend any time looking for these planets which could contain life.... until they were once again proven wrong. No doubt they were teaching this crap to up and coming scientists in journals as "gospel" as well.

So why should we trust science at all with anything to do with UFOs or crop circles or much less anything else?

Because the scientists in question used science to make their decisions, to determine which planets would be more likely to have water/conditions for life. Sorry, but there are countless stars and planets to work with. Sorry. So sorry they offended your delicate sensibilities by not getting an answer for you.

Of course you seem, strongly, to presume that if Scientists can't get it right on the head the first 1000 times, then Science is false, Science is wrong, never mind the countless stars and planets from which Scientists have to work with and thus narrow down the choices for research on.

Further this is really a rant. You say nothing, you contribute nothing, you only whine in the most ignorant fashion. If you're not deliberately trying to troll ATS/this forum with your OP, then you are clearly blind/short-sighted. Personally I don't want to believe you're stupid. I want to believe you're highly intelligent, witty, clever individual. That being the case: you're a troll.

Science is fine for learning about the universe. It's strength is it's ability to change and improve over time.

That it was wrong before and corrected the mistake is something that should be encouraged, not something used to dismiss it.

Not everyone thinks of Science as "the truth" or anything like that. It's just the best current explanation - which was somewhat provable. And is close enough in accuracy as to give benefits.

I don't think science tries to debunk UFOs...

if anything, science provides factual information that proves UFOs and life beyond our planet.

What I really don't understand about people that bash science is do you expect these people to be right 100% of the time. They make and educated guess with the knowledge they have at that point. They learn new things and experiment, change what they know and believe.

And to think at this point in science that we know anything but the basics is ignorant. We have just scratched the surface and are learning new things that will turn science on it's head.

So please before you bash science take the time to learn about it. Don't bash people who have made your life better and are trying to explain it better while you do nothing but criticize them for doing so.

I think a lot of scientists are close minded to a point, but they want evidence to think about certain things. There are a lot of scientists on boards for UFO's and E.T.'s but again you criticize science you criticize it all. When Aliens become common knowledge there is only going to be scientists to prove it for you...only if you believe though...

[edit on 20-12-2009 by predator0187]

If something else kept disproving science over and over again, then I would agree with the expression "science is wrong again". But if science is correcting itself, then science is not wrong again. Actually, Science is right again. Till it corrects itself once more. And then, guess what? It will be right again.