Phi for All

You'll never know the joy of seeing what can only be seen by those who refuse to believe the unobservable can't be observed. You'll never know how intellectually satisfying it is to be able to ignore reasonable arguments and just claim it's mysterious, or unknowable, or can only be known by a fellow believer. You miss the wisdom one gains from an imprecise worldview, and by having such a wide range of interpretation ethically.

Exactly, and when put that way, the argument seems to gain unwarranted support. It's fairly noble to stand against your detractors while holding an unpopular belief. Just like always siding with the underdog seems noble, until you put it in context. North Korea threatening the rest of the world with nuclear capabilities to protect its national suppression of basic human rights is a good example.

I'm uneasy about the concept of "common sense" in the same way I dislike the "I'm a skeptic" concept. Both make the assumption that this is the right thing to do / the right way to be whenever someone decides to use them in judgement. Common sense seems to beg the question that this is something everyone should know. Skepticism is a hallmark of science, but some folks think it makes sense to doubt everything, even when the evidence in support of a particular explanation is overwhelming.

! Moderator Note Obtuse-Venom, if your username reflects this discussion style you're using, we frankly don't want it here. Responding with purposely obtuse replies in a venomous manner breaks several of our rules. This style will only serve to disrupt every conversation you join, making it spiral into meaninglessness, and it won't be tolerated. You can change your style and discuss science, or you can continue as per the above and our processes will urge you towards the exit. Your choice. Don't discuss your decision here. If you have a beef with this decision, Report this post and another staff member will assist you.

It's possible to self-teach, if you already have good critical thinking skills. The fact that so many people who try to self-teach science suddenly develop the idea that the mainstream is wrong suggests that their critical thinking was flawed to begin with. Why criticize things you don't know about? Do these people think they could self-study some sculpting, or karate, or acting, or plumbing, or whatever else, and discover that everybody's been doing it wrong this whole time? Does that really sound rational?

This would seem to give you all the uncertainty an omnipotent and omniscient deity introduces to a worldview, with none of the comfort a religion offers. I'm with Prometheus, at least the neutral position is true to observation.

Get it right next time. In the original, I think he's seated in a limo. It's even funnier that way, imo. Your photo, quite frankly, is disrespectful. It takes a moment of levity produced by the great man, and uses it to ridicule him and his passion.

The government is just a tool, hopefully one crafted for the job of aiding the prosperity of its citizens. If you think government is for taking away everyone's aches and pains, its because that's what your party has tried to make it so they can ridicule it. Personally, I'd like to see our government do all it can to promote fair practices in all facets of life (if you're against this, let me know). Most of our consumer laws are trying to raise us above the barbarity of caveat emptor, since we are a specialized society and not everyone can study investments or finances or law. You make it sound like we're children for wanting protection from predatory business practices. Do you feel the same way about the police, that they're unnecessary, you don't need them to hold your hand, you'll take care of the bad guys with your guns?

When you posted that fake news picture and pointed at what a crackpot he was, that was your disdain, right? You had to use something fake to prove your point. It's obvious you had to force your disdain just to be contrary.

The upshot of this mentality is that anyone who isn't you can go fuck themselves. It's not conducive to the mechanics of a modern society, not to mention it's just horribly un-human to assume that only your little circle is worthy. Glad most of us matured.

! Moderator Note Not all attempts to start a discussion are successful. This one needs to be put down humanely. Paragaster, please think about the topic, the best way to approach it, and be clear and distinct about what you want to discuss. Then open another thread with a different opening post if you still want to have this science discussion.

First, in science, theory is the best we can hope for, ever. Theory isn't guessing, and science isn't looking for proof. We only call an explanation a theory only when it's been exhaustively tested against reality and has never been successfully refuted. Modern media can be blamed for muddying the meaning of many scientific terms. Second, without the math, all you can hope to do is support your idea with observation. Is there any other part of mainstream science that supports the concept, any mechanism within a planet that could change dark matter to EM waves? Saying something doesn't make it so. Support your ideas with the evidence that helped convince you that you might be right.

If you're implying that a creator started the mechanisms that eventually developed the universe we observe around us but left it all alone after that, then such a creator would have to be awesomely patient, wouldn't it? It seems more credible than a personal deity, but it still adds an unnecessary supernatural element.

! Moderator Note Since civil discussion has vanished, along with any attempt at reasonableness, this thread is closed.

Sharing means you'll answer questions about it, even the ones that are questioning its relevance. So far you're presenting, and that's not what discussions are all about. Engage with us, converse about your idea, support it with science. That's what everyone is basically asking you to do.

It's like you're just rambleblurting to yourself. You've ranted these rants so often you've stopped bothering to put them in reasoned order. All your responses are like this. Push a button, get a can of previously owned rant.

Iirc, in the sequel to 2001: A Space Odyssey, the monolith returns and warns us to leave Europa alone. There may have been an expiration date on how long, but I can't recall.

You don't have folks like this in the UK? This is a mishmash of sermons, misunderstood "common sense", and canned arguments from the folks at the Creationist Museum that removed the hipbones from their whale exhibit. To call it drivel is an insult to good drivel. This is more like the Cheez Whiz of fundamentalist filosophy.

! Moderator Note Lazarus, it's clear you're making leaps over elements of your idea you can't or won't explain, and ignoring their importance. You're ignoring questions that might help you. You mostly make assertions you don't support, causing them to be challenged. When you do ask questions, you ignore the answers, and later ask the same questions again. You've had a whole lot of posts to speculate, but you aren't really discussing your idea. Science discussion forum. Thread closed. Don't re-open this subject without checking with staff first, and don't check unless you have supportive evidence, and are willing to have a conversation instead of a sermon.

Especially when he's photoshopped in front of an incorrect equation, as you've chosen to show. Again, you wave your hands about a caricature of what you think science is. You're wrong, and I think you realize it.

Everything after this in your post seems to rail against a caricature of science and scientists, so I'll just comment on this opinion. Our working definition of crackpottery here is making guesses that have no rational support, and stating them as fact, or claiming it's "a theory". Since most crackpots think theory means guesswork and speculation, they have problems here. They're wrong because they aren't using science to discuss science on a science discussion forum. It has NOTHING to do with their ideas, no matter how wild. It has to do with how they don't support themselves with evidence the way you're supposed to. So really it's nothing like being homosexual or black was in the past. NOTHING is going to make a crackpot right until they can support their ideas with evidence. Does that make sense?

Ah. Iron Age alternative facts. Hmmm.

Disobeyed Him by eating an apple He told us would kill us if we touched it. Technically, He created evil first when he lied to Adam & Eve about the apple. Bearing false witness is one of the worst crimes, or at least in the top ten.

There are behaviors that are labeled common sense that may actually be universal. Don't spit into the wind. Watch where you're going. Don't stare at the sun. Most people use the term common sense as a seal of approval ("Well, that's just common sense!") for ideas or actions that parallel things they'd do themselves. These are mostly subjective assessments, and aren't necessarily common at all. Common sense is supposed to be accessible by all (but isn't), but things that make sense have to be reasoned out, and that takes critical thinking skills. Those aren't common at all.

Seriously, I was going to post earlier about you thinking exactly this way, in the cynical, small government, I-haven't-been-screwed-yet, caveat emptor way you have. Then I thought no Phi, you don't know that for sure, so I erased it.