My ramblings on truth and grey area's.

[Scotty99]

I think there is a bit of a disconnect here, did none of you read this from my original post:

 

I understand many of you have minds that work purely on the grounds of the scientific method and nothing i am saying here right now will have any impact on you because its all hypothetical and it cant be tested and that is fine. I just wanted to put some thoughts down on paper and maybe get a discussion going

 

 

I just don't understand some of the replies in here given what i stated above.

[Phi for All]

I think there is a bit of a disconnect here, did none of you read this from my original post:

 

 

I just don't understand some of the replies in here given what i stated above.

 

I, for one, was trying to dissuade you from believing this type of discussion had any meaning, since it doesn't have to embrace reality much more than occasionally. I have failed. Happy Holidays!

[Scotty99]

 

You've taken some data (relativity has no preferential frame of reference), that was turned into information (in general relativity, you can use the math to make a frame of reference stationary), and turned it into misinformation (the Earth could be the center of the universe). As I mentioned before (and you ignored), if you put Earth in a fixed position, the orbits of the planets and sun look crazy impossible. Even early astronomers noted this. When the sun is at the center of our system, the orbits make sense, and physics isn't violated.

 

You think you're doing something special, that your way of looking at a problem is untainted by the evils of modern education, and that your intuition is capable of solving problems that takes others years of study. You believe you are capable of thinking outside the box without knowing much about what's inside.

 

It's a bit delusional. You didn't study science in school for some reason, but now feel an affinity towards it, and think you see glimpses of understanding when you read popular science articles, and that empowers you to feel like maybe you didn't need all that studying anyway. You can hold your own with people who did study, because your brain works differently. It doesn't need all the knowledge, because you can leap from conclusion to conclusion without the tedious study, experimentation, research, trial, error, methodology, and critical thinking. You can intuitively leap ahead and wait for the scientists to catch up to your conclusions.

 

I encourage you to learn, and keep thinking, but you might want to stop rambling, stay away from "truth", and study the gray areas a bit harder. Critical thinking and the scientific method are better than rambling, the best supported explanations are far more trustworthy than anybody's "truth", and coloring in the gray areas is the most obvious reason for existence there is.

 

Here is the thing, i do believe i am using critical thinking, just not in the way you are accustomed to. I have debated going back to school believe me, but i honestly feel its in my best interest that i continue down the path i am. I am not pushing any of my ideas on anyone here and but some replies in here make me believe some people think that, the title of the thread is ramblings and that is really all i am doing, just tossing ideas about and seeing what kind of feedback i would get. I fully respect the method i dont want you guys to get the idea that i dont, but i just feel there has to be people out there in the world trying to come to conclusions in a different way.

 

I, for one, was trying to dissuade you from believing this type of discussion had any meaning, since it doesn't have to embrace reality much more than occasionally. I have failed. Happy Holidays!

My question would be why are you trying to dissuade me? Besides myself (that is why i assume you are trying to get me out of this way of thinking) who am i hurting here by just tossing about ideas i have had? I mean its just so odd to me, i posted on a philosophical section and the amount of pushback for not thinking in a scientific manner is something i did not expect to this level, even knowing the title of this forum is "science".

 

Like the post i just quoted from my OP says this does not exactly come from a methodological viewpoint you are used to, i just wanted to get some sort of a discussion going. The crazy thing is you guys are simply unable to even speculate as to whether its true or not because it was not derived using the scientific method. All i was doing in this thread was asking for you to suspend disbelief for 10 minutes out of your day and if you HAD to take a guess what is your best shot at where we are at currently.

Edited November 29, 2016 by Scotty99

[Memammal]

All i was doing in this thread was asking for you to suspend disbelief for 10 minutes out of your day and if you HAD to take a guess what is your best shot at where we are at currently.

Well, I think the rest of us are pretty sure that we are not at the center of the universe and quite content with that knowledge. If we follow the above line of reasoning we could of course also start discussions about aliens visiting us in UFO's, whether they were being confused with angels in chariots and if we are all just part of their advanced simulation...and/or similar topics...

[Strange]

I just don't understand some of the replies in here given what i stated above.

 

 

What don't you understand? You asked us to discuss your thoughts. We have pointed out that your beliefs are random and baseless. All you have done to defend them is to simply repeat the same thing. Not much of a discussion...

[Ophiolite]

 

Here is the thing, i do believe i am using critical thinking, just not in the way you are accustomed to.

That suggests that it is not actually critical thinking. Can you give an example of where and how you have used critical thinking?

 

 

I am not pushing any of my ideas on anyone here and but some replies in here make me believe some people think that, the title of the thread is ramblings and that is really all i am doing, just tossing ideas about and seeing what kind of feedback i would get. I fully respect the method i dont want you guys to get the idea that i dont, but i just feel there has to be people out there in the world trying to come to conclusions in a different way.

The scientific method, arising out of philosophical roots, has been modeled and sculpted and honed and improved over the course of centuries by the greatest minds that have ever lived, then applied with immense success by tens of thousands of scientists. What are the odds you have come up with something almost as good? (Remember, apply your critical thinking.)

 

 

My question would be why are you trying to dissuade me? Besides myself (that is why i assume you are trying to get me out of this way of thinking) who am i hurting here by just tossing about ideas i have had?

Should I stand by and see you hurt yourself? Should I stand by and allow you to waste your imagination and drive and curiosity on a fruitless task? If you don't want to have your ideas questioned then don't post them. I am curious as to what reaction you were expecting. Did you expect agreement? Praise? Applying critical thinking one might have expected exactly the reaction you got.

 

 

I posted on a philosophical section and the amount of pushback for not thinking in a scientific manner is something i did not expect to this level, even knowing the title of this forum is "science".

The demands of philosophy are every bit as rigorous as those of science. Philosophy does not give one license to waffle and perform brain burps.

 

 

Like the post i just quoted from my OP says this does not exactly come from a methodological viewpoint you are used to, i just wanted to get some sort of a discussion going. The crazy thing is you guys are simply unable to even speculate as to whether its true or not because it was not derived using the scientific method. All i was doing in this thread was asking for you to suspend disbelief for 10 minutes out of your day and if you HAD to take a guess what is your best shot at where we are at currently.

I think I gave it more than ten minutes and my conclusions, expressed in post #2 and apparently ignored by you, is that your premises are wrong and therefore your conclusions are worthless.

[AbstractDreamer]

@Scotty99

 

So what exactly can you tell me about this God of yours?

[Ten oz]

@ scotty99, the world existed before you and will exist after you. Your thoughts, feelings, beliefs, and etc do not change reality. Your grey areas do not change reality. You seem to be trying to understand the world in a egocentric manner where who you are is part of the equation. How you feel matters. It doesn't. God is either real or not. No grey area. The things you believe are either true or not. Passion does not handicap reality.

 

 

*My opinion on your thread

Edited December 3, 2016 by Ten oz

[Strange]

How are pyramids still standing today when they could have been built upwards of ~8k years ago, what exact processes were used in some of the mind blowing structures that are scattered around this planet that we really only have poor theories on how they were accomplished? Again this is only part of what i believe to be lost knowledge ...

 

 

Apparently some guy in Michigan has rediscovered this "lost knowledge" (sarcasm, in case you missed it)

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/101571-man-moves-huge-blocks-easily-with-no-heavy-equipment/

[Phi for All]

Apparently some guy in Michigan has rediscovered this "lost knowledge" (sarcasm, in case you missed it)

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/101571-man-moves-huge-blocks-easily-with-no-heavy-equipment/

 

Incredulity is a weak mortar.

[Scotty99]

Well that is not exactly a large stone, THIS is a large stone lol

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stone_of_the_Pregnant_Woman

 

That is located in lebanon on a site believed to be inhabited for 9000 years or more.

 

These ancient structures are again only part of how i put together this little theory i have, but as to that subject i do believe we had far more advanced knowledge of basic physics than we do now. The best example i have heard of which i mentioned in this thread is sound. Sound has some pretty incredible properties and i believe we had been shown a way to harness sound in a way that we cannot even fathom currently.

[Phi for All]

These ancient structures are again only part of how i put together this little theory i have, but as to that subject i do believe we had far more advanced knowledge of basic physics than we do now.

 

You're fooling yourself. Atlantis was a myth.

[Scotty99]

 

You're fooling yourself. Atlantis was a myth.

 

 

To be honest i have never looked into anything about atlantis, the stuff that exists on this planet is enough for me. The thing that bothers me is ancient alien nutters, because that show/crowd exists it gives people like me some kind of stigma for having some of the same thoughts as they do. Instead of "because aliens", i think i am taking a far more logical approach in saying we simply had a broader knowledge about existence and the structures from antiquity really do speak to that for me.

 

Have you never questioned the how and why in regards to some of the structures left behind on this planet? Are our best guesses good enough for you? I really do not like to underestimate human ingenuity, but what really trips me up with some of these structures is the timeline. There are so many examples but to give another one, studies of the sphinx suggests that is is much much older than believed because of its state of decay, that wind could not have caused the damage and to date it correctly when there was enough precipitation in that area we would have to go back to the 5th or 6th millennia BC.

 

To me tho the why's are much more important than the how's. If we can figure out the why's the how's should fall right into place.

[Ophiolite]

 

There are so many examples but to give another one, studies of the sphinx suggests that is is much much older than believed because of its state of decay, that wind could not have caused the damage and to date it correctly when there was enough precipitation in that area we would have to go back to the 5th or 6th millennia BC.

Yes, let's take the Sphinx. One "investigative writer" supported by the views of a single geologist make the claim you have repeated.

 

I have stood by the Sphinx and examined it. Have you?

 

I have a degree in geology. Do you?

 

I have been caught in the Western Desert by a sudden downpour more than once. Have you?

 

Based upon my personal examination of the Sphinx, my knowledge of the mechanisms of erosion and the propensity for occasional severe rainfall to occur in desert regions, I have little doubt that the current condition of the Sphinx is consistent with the generally attested age.

 

Now you would be quite right not to take my word for it. You should rightly question my assertions. But if you do that, you need also to question the assertions of a single "investigative writer" and a single geologist. Some how it seems unlikely that you will do so. You seem to much prefer the fantastic world you have created by cherry picking popular works.

[AbstractDreamer]

Why did the creator let the aliens leave that big stone in the ground?

 

So that 2000 years later we would say "oh wow we used to be waaay smarter than we are now"?

 

350 Million years ago, we were so clever we genetically modified things called dinosaurs to play with. There's proof in bones.

 

If the Earth is 4 billion years old, that means we must have been super advanced to build a PLANET all that time ago! You're standing on the proof!

Edited December 8, 2016 by AbstractDreamer

[Scotty99]

Yes, let's take the Sphinx. One "investigative writer" supported by the views of a single geologist make the claim you have repeated.

 

I have stood by the Sphinx and examined it. Have you?

 

I have a degree in geology. Do you?

 

I have been caught in the Western Desert by a sudden downpour more than once. Have you?

 

Based upon my personal examination of the Sphinx, my knowledge of the mechanisms of erosion and the propensity for occasional severe rainfall to occur in desert regions, I have little doubt that the current condition of the Sphinx is consistent with the generally attested age.

 

Now you would be quite right not to take my word for it. You should rightly question my assertions. But if you do that, you need also to question the assertions of a single "investigative writer" and a single geologist. Some how it seems unlikely that you will do so. You seem to much prefer the fantastic world you have created by cherry picking popular works.

Congrats on your job, i can only hope i end up in a related field as i truly believe the real discoveries are going to come from exploration rather than science. Sphinx's age for me is just a small example of a larger picture here, i was not claiming anything nor is my mind made up on the subject i just found it an interesting read. I will say yes i am cherry picking here, cherry picking a lot of things that fit into my theory of how things are....thought i made that clear in the first post. Is there something inherently wrong with that? I am not picking these things out of thin air to fit some sort of agenda i have, ive just taken bits of information that made a whole lot of sense in my head and put them together to form a larger view of our existence.

 

Bottom line here is no one knows the truth, this thread is just my best guess as to where we are at today. To be honest i am not even sure what the goal of the thread was, i just felt like thinking aloud and if anyone else had a "best guess" they could participate too.

 

 

Why did the creator let the aliens leave that big stone in the ground?

 

So that 2000 years later we would say "oh wow we used to be waaay smarter than we are now"?

 

350 Million years ago, we were so clever we genetically modified things called dinosaurs to play with. There's proof in bones.

 

If the Earth is 4 billion years old, that means we must have been super advanced to build a PLANET all that time ago! You're standing on the proof!

Not sure what you are trying to get at really, if you kept up with my ramblings i think this universe exists for us and aliens are not a thing. I claim we simply had a better understanding of our existence in the past, with only small remnants of that knowledge possibly existing today in religious texts. I think the truth is in the middle somewhere and that science is not the tool to get us there. I think the truth is so incomprehensible to us that is why our universe exists as it does, we can see it and view it and measure it and it kind of makes sense, i think only now are we starting to realize this is only because this is what our creator wants us to see and the truth is beyond our realm of understanding. I think the universe is put together like it is for various purposes, one being that it lends us to being inquisitive and curious other being it simply needs to be there for life to exist here on this planet. Of course the instant you find life on another floating rock this all falls apart for me, but i really dont think that will ever happen.

 

Back to the incredible ruins on this planet, if i had to fare a wager i would say in the next century we will find something so incredible (probably underwater) it will force the world to view history more in the way i am suggesting here. Of course i am already there with the ones on land, i am just curious what it would take for you guys to do a double take and say wow, that should not have existed back then.

[AbstractDreamer]

Scotty99, on 09 Dec 2016 - 04:18 AM, said:

i think this universe exists for us

What makes you think that?

I claim we simply had a better understanding of our existence in the past, with only small remnants of that knowledge possibly existing today in religious texts.

What makes you claim that? Humans are good at telling stories and believing them. The ancient Greeks found dinosaur bones and believed there used to be Titans and Gods. Eventually people stopped believing those religions that didn't make sense. I claim, the ones that are left are the best stories.

I think the truth is in the middle somewhere and that science is not the tool to get us there

Why do you think that? Why do you think we can ever get to the truth?

I think the truth is so incomprehensible to us

I agree

...that is why our universe exists as it does

Its incomprehensible so that is the reason why it exists? Doesn't make any sense

think only now are we starting to realize this is only because this is what our creator wants us to see

You jumped from nonsense to your Creator. You lost me.

and the truth is beyond our realm of understanding

I agree

I think the universe is put together like it is for various purposes, one being that it lends us to being inquisitive and curious other being it simply needs to be there for life to exist here on this planet.

Why? Do you need a purpose?

Of course the instant you find life on another floating rock this all falls apart for me, but i really don't think that will ever happen.

Nope, you will just believe the Creator put life out there to give you more purpose to figure out why.

Back to the incredible ruins on this planet, if i had to fare a wager i would say in the next century we will find something so incredible (probably underwater) it will force the world to view history more in the way i am suggesting here. Of course i am already there with the ones on land, i am just curious what it would take for you guys to do a double take and say wow, that should not have existed back then.

So is this about taking the safer bet? The creator can never be disproven so you can never be wrong. But if we find some ruins, then you can say "I told you so?", but no-one can tell you the same?

our creator wants...

But from this, I can see your Creator has desires. "He/she/it" "wants". Why does he "want" anything? What is his purpose?

our creator wants us to see and the truth is beyond our realm of understanding

So he makes us incapable of understanding, and he then wants us to see what we cant understand. Why would your Creator do that?

Edited December 9, 2016 by AbstractDreamer

[Strange]

I will say yes i am cherry picking here, cherry picking a lot of things that fit into my theory of how things are....thought i made that clear in the first post. Is there something inherently wrong with that?

 

 

The trouble is you are then basing your views only on evidence that agrees with what you already think (confirmation bias). You will either discard or adapt any evidence that disagrees with you beliefs. This is certainly not scientific and barely rational.

 

But apart from that, there is nothing wrong with it. You can believe whatever you want and do whatever you want to support that belief. Just don't expect anyone else to take your beliefs seriously.

 

 

 

I am not picking these things out of thin air to fit some sort of agenda i have, ive just taken bits of information that made a whole lot of sense in my head and put them together to form a larger view of our existence.

 

You keep saying you don't have an "agenda" and yet you have admitted that your agenda is to cherry pick the evidence that supports your beliefs.

 

 

 

I think the truth is in the middle somewhere and that science is not the tool to get us there.

 

Science is not a tool to get at truth. (I don't think there are any such tools. But believing in a creator god is just as valid as any other, I suppose.)

 

 

 

i am just curious what it would take for you guys to do a double take and say wow, that should not have existed back then.

 

Evidence.

[Ophiolite]

Congrats on your job, i can only hope i end up in a related field as i truly believe the real discoveries are going to come from exploration rather than science. Sphinx's age for me is just a small example of a larger picture here, i was not claiming anything nor is my mind made up on the subject i just found it an interesting read. I will say yes i am cherry picking here, cherry picking a lot of things that fit into my theory of how things are....thought i made that clear in the first post. Is there something inherently wrong with that? I am not picking these things out of thin air to fit some sort of agenda i have, ive just taken bits of information that made a whole lot of sense in my head and put them together to form a larger view of our existence.

Almost every piece of information you have that you believe support your world view can be deconstructed in a similar way. Many, many pieces of information you choose to ignore refute your worldview.

 

In other words your worldview is the product of your imagination. It is neither original, nor convincing. I recommend reality for superior mental challenges.

[Scotty99]

Almost every piece of information you have that you believe support your world view can be deconstructed in a similar way. Many, many pieces of information you choose to ignore refute your worldview.

 

In other words your worldview is the product of your imagination. It is neither original, nor convincing. I recommend reality for superior mental challenges.

It really can't tho...

 

I mean you have your theories i have mine, you can't prove anything i am saying in here is wrong because we don't know either way. This thread is simply my best guess as to how things really are. I get that many people do not think the way i do, but it is in my opinion we aren't going to solve the riddles of the universe with methods invented by our human minds. I think our best shot currently is a better investigation of our oceans (which would take a long ass time, i know this)i do truly believe that we have had a greater understanding of the world not that long ago, and i have to think there is some evidence left behind of this.

[DrP]

Quote: "It really can't tho..."

 

Yes it clearly can.

 

QUOTE:"You can't prove anything..."

 

Nonsense! Your Geocentrism argument, for example, there is a hell of a lot of proof to say it is complete and utter rubbish and it has been shown here above by looking at the rotation of the earth and other planets around the sun etc.. Seriously - these 'grey areas' you are referring to - aren't so grey.

 

Also - until there is some (any at all) evidence of a past super intelligent civilization on earth here before us, it HAS to be regarded as utter crap and the blitherings of someone who doesn't know what they are talking about.

[Phi for All]

It really can't tho...

 

I mean you have your theories i have mine,

I always hope that if anyone learns anything when they come to discuss science here, it's that there is a vast, intricate world of difference between your "theories" and mainstream scientific theory. But it's clear you still think "theory" is synonymous with "this rambling I've been having about truth and gray areas".

 

It seems we've failed you, and for that I'm sorry. It would have helped if you'd listened, but what the hey.

[Scotty99]

Quote: "It really can't tho..."

 

Yes it clearly can.

 

QUOTE:"You can't prove anything..."

 

Nonsense! Your Geocentrism argument, for example, there is a hell of a lot of proof to say it is complete and utter rubbish and it has been shown here above by looking at the rotation of the earth and other planets around the sun etc.. Seriously - these 'grey areas' you are referring to - aren't so grey.

 

Also - until there is some (any at all) evidence of a past super intelligent civilization on earth here before us, it HAS to be regarded as utter crap and the blitherings of someone who doesn't know what they are talking about.

A geocentric universe is absolutely a possibility, its just that some people believe the orbits of planets make more sense with a heliocentric view. Nothing about the geocentric model has been "disproven" its really all about your point of view, as relativity states.

 

And i think saying "super intelligent" civilization is the wrong wording. I never suggested they had flying saucers and death rays, i just think we had a deeper understanding of the universe and that possibly with that came advanced knowledge on harnessing energies on this planet.

I always hope that if anyone learns anything when they come to discuss science here, it's that there is a vast, intricate world of difference between your "theories" and mainstream scientific theory. But it's clear you still think "theory" is synonymous with "this rambling I've been having about truth and gray areas".

 

It seems we've failed you, and for that I'm sorry. It would have helped if you'd listened, but what the hey.

That is the second time you have left this post ("im sorry we tried but failed"). If you dont like what i have to say thats fine, but why keep coming back? Its almost like people think i am asking for advice here, really really strange. Its not like im proposing a scientific theory here, if it pleases you what would be a better word to use to summarize my world view than theory?

[DrP]

QUOTE "Nothing about this model has been disproven"...

 

It is clearly wrong - we have been into space and watched our earth go round the sun... come on man, I don't mean to be rude, but this is ridiculous! With what we know today this is like a child's postulation.

 

 

Quote"....we had a deeper understanding of the universe and that possibly with that came advanced knowledge on harnessing energies on this planet."

 

Again - utter nonsense. Not meaning to be rude, but what do you expect? Why did we loose this technology? Where did it go? Why are there no records of it at all anywhere?

 

 

Quote: "what would be a better word to use to summarize my world view other than theory?"

 

Drivel? Nonsense? Utter tripe? Come on! If we had some great understanding that we no longer have then why did we not pass this info down through the generation with other info that we learned from our ancestors like tool making, speech etc.. When was it lost? We haven't been on this planet long enough to have learnt something so amazing and then to have just forgotten it again.

[Scotty99]

QUOTE "Nothing about this model has been disproven"...

 

It is clearly wrong - we have been into space and watched our earth go round the sun... come on man, I don't mean to be rude, but this is ridiculous! With what we know today this is like a child's postulation.

 

 

Quote"....we had a deeper understanding of the universe and that possibly with that came advanced knowledge on harnessing energies on this planet."

 

Again - utter nonsense. Not meaning to be rude, but what do you expect? Why did we loose this technology? Where did it go? Why are there no records of it at all anywhere?

 

 

Quote: "what would be a better word to use to summarize my world view other than theory?"

 

Drivel? Nonsense? Utter tripe? Come on! If we had some great understanding that we no longer have then why did we not pass this info down through the generation with other info that we learned from our ancestors like tool making, speech etc.. When was it lost? We haven't been on this planet long enough to have learnt something so amazing and then to have just forgotten it again.

Or did we watch the sun go round the earth my friend? I think you may need to look over the special theory of relativity again.