The Spirit Of Science Forums

[PrimalMinister]

Look admins, why do you think I come here?

In my thread titled the spirit of science someone suggested going through previous posts and pointing things out to make my case.

I have read through this one :

Everybodies approach is the same, to jump in and start critising things before actually understanding them. There are small comments aimed at me like implying I am just making things up. This is prejudice, you are making judgements without first considering my case, I am expecting you to ask questions about it and understand it before you start critising it, otherwise your critisms entirely miss the point. But I dont think you realise you are even doing it.

I will ask again, why do you think I come here, what do you think is motivating me?

I am asking because I think your subliminal prejudices are causing you to draw conclusions about me that I reckon are far from the truth.

Whatever you think about me you seem to entirely missing the point of why I am posting.

 

 

[studiot]

You have a PM

[StringJunky]

15 minutes ago, PrimalMinister said:

Look admins, why do you think I come here?

In my thread titled the spirit of science someone suggested going through previous posts and pointing things out to make my case.

I have read through this one :

Everybodies approach is the same, to jump in and start critising things before actually understanding them. There are small comments aimed at me like implying I am just making things up. This is prejudice, you are making judgements without first considering my case, I am expecting you to ask questions about it and understand it before you start critising it, otherwise your critisms entirely miss the point. But I dont think you realise you are even doing it.

I will ask again, why do you think I come here, what do you think is motivating me?

I am asking because I think your subliminal prejudices are causing you to draw conclusions about me that I reckon are far from the truth.

Whatever you think about me you seem to entirely missing the point of why I am posting.

 

 

Critiques are an essential part of scientific review and should be expected when presenting a novel idea. We are not here to help you build your idea.... quite the contrary.

[Phi for All]

20 minutes ago, PrimalMinister said:

Everybodies approach is the same, to jump in and start critising things before actually understanding them.

No. That's NOT what happened in that thread. Your approach was compared to other past ideas that were debunked, and then some of the misconceptions around your weird need to invent a unit of measurement were brought up. Not criticized, but pointed out as wrong. 

So many people come here with ideas based on misconceptions that it's normal to correct those first. If you wanted to build a house, we'd tell you your idea about using wood for the foundation is a poor one, and will likely make all the rest of your work on the house useless. It doesn't matter what the rest of your ideas for the house are if they're based on that bad foundation. Nobody wants your house to fall, so our experience is passed along in hopes that you'll understand why you need to start with the best foundation you can, in carpentry as well as science.

[swansont]

30 minutes ago, PrimalMinister said:

Look admins, why do you think I come here?

...

I will ask again, why do you think I come here, what do you think is motivating me?

I am asking because I think your subliminal prejudices are causing you to draw conclusions about me that I reckon are far from the truth.

Whatever you think about me you seem to entirely missing the point of why I am posting.

!

Moderator Note

I don’t care why you post. I do care that you are repeatedly violating the rules, and don’t seem to comprehend the feedback you’ve been given.

This is posted in philosophy. Was there some philosophy you wished to discuss?

 

[Curious layman]

26 minutes ago, PrimalMinister said:

I am asking because I think your subliminal prejudices are causing you to draw conclusions about me that I reckon are far from the truth.

Tell me about it...

I can't comment on your threads, 

but you've got to remember that when someone reads something you post on the internet, they don't read them the way you wrote them. They dont know why you wrote it, they have to assume that themselves, so sometimes there's a bit of friction. It's never personal. It's your idea they attack, not you personally. 

[Phi for All]

17 minutes ago, Curious layman said:

but you've got to remember that when someone reads something you post on the internet, they don't read them the way you wrote them. They dont know why you wrote it, they have to assume that themselves, so sometimes there's a bit of friction. 

I read them EXACTLY the way they're written. I don't CARE why they wrote it, because science isn't really the place for why, so I'm NOT assuming anything. The friction is all in your mind, because it's not personal, and it's actually quite easy to see when someone is guessing and when they're supporting their concepts.

 

20 minutes ago, Curious layman said:

It's your idea they attack, not you personally. 

Now you have it. I don't know the people behind the ideas. The ideas are assessible without them. Any prejudices we might have here are for rigorous support, and against breaking the rules, so they aren't subliminal at all.  

[PrimalMinister]

34 minutes ago, swansont said:

!

Moderator Note

I don’t care why you post. I do care that you are repeatedly violating the rules, and don’t seem to comprehend the feedback you’ve been given.

This is posted in philosophy. Was there some philosophy you wished to discuss?

 

Ok, as I understand it the letter of the law (the rules I am violating) come from the spirit of the law. If one follows the spirit of the law the letter becomes pointless, its only for people who are not following the spirit.

The title of the post is 'The Spirit of Science Forums', so please tell me what the spirit of these forums are?

 

 

[Curious layman]

26 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

I read them EXACTLY the way they're written

That's kinda my point. When people type and say it to themselves in their head, it's not going to sound the same to the person reading it.

19 minutes ago, PrimalMinister said:

so please tell me what the spirit of these forums are?

Arguing with each other.

[swansont]

36 minutes ago, PrimalMinister said:

Ok, as I understand it the letter of the law (the rules I am violating) come from the spirit of the law. If one follows the spirit of the law the letter becomes pointless, its only for people who are not following the spirit.

The title of the post is 'The Spirit of Science Forums', so please tell me what the spirit of these forums are?

Discussing science. Which doesn’t happen if you never present evidence, which has been your repeated failing. 

I don’t think this is a difficult concept, and I can’t discern the reason you fail to understand it.

[Phi for All]

1 hour ago, Curious layman said:

That's kinda my point. When people type and say it to themselves in their head, it's not going to sound the same to the person reading it.

And yet your own "subliminal prejudices" lead you to conclude we shouldn't read what they write, but rather intuit what they really mean? Or let the misinformation they're basing their idea on slide so we can hear the whole idea first before commenting? Or encourage people to use their imagination when they don't understand something, rather than ask a question of a science community?

Tell me about it....

[zapatos]

2 hours ago, PrimalMinister said:

I am expecting you to ask questions about it and understand it before you start critising it, otherwise your critisms entirely miss the point. But I dont think you realise you are even doing it.

The problem seems to me to be that you want everyone to change to your way of doing things. Wouldn't it be easier for you to accept the way this site works?

If someone has a criticism of you idea, instead of getting angry, just respond to the criticism until it is resolved. Then move on to the next part of your idea. Rinse. Repeat.

You are wasting time complaining about how this site works. Spend your time giving people what they ask for so you can move on with your idea.

If you cannot do that (like everyone else does) you will never succeed.

[PrimalMinister]

31 minutes ago, swansont said:

Discussing science. Which doesn’t happen if you never present evidence, which has been your repeated failing. 

I don’t think this is a difficult concept, and I can’t discern the reason you fail to understand it.

There is evidence as I have tried to dicuss before, the main evidence being the fact it self evidently explains itself, that it does not need supporting evidence, even though there is supporting evidence for it, the whole of reality is evidence of it. My complaint is that you are critising it before you even understand it making your critisms pretty pointless because they seem to miss the point I am making.

I am a self critical person and always question myself and in the post I refered to in the beginning I didnt particulary make things clear, but I thought you would somehow want to understand it so would ask questions. You didnt, maybe I just dont get internet forums and its nothing to do with the actual science.

I will be honest with you, I dont believe the big bang, but not because I am religious, but rather because I have examined it critically and found it wanting. This does not mean I dismiss it, I am simply not convinced by it and would need fundamental questions answered before I was. Furthermore, I have become disillisioned with scientists because I find they are a bit like what people experience with the priesthood when asked questions they cant answer, they will answer its just to complex to fathom for our feeble minds and just trust they know what they are talking about.

But I dont trust physicsts, there is this wall of ignorance they do not talk about, they will say the laws of the universe are mysterious but not really talk about why they are mysterious. In that thread someone said that asking questions like 'why is reality mathematical' is the domain of philosophy and religion however what I am suggesting, which is perfectly scientific, clearly and unambigiously would explain 'why' reality is mathematical. So the idea that questions like 'why reality is mathematical' are not questions science can answer is simply not true, science can indeed explain 'why' reality is mathematical. I have listened to people try to answer the question 'why is reality mathematical' and it ends up being philosophical because they are completely and utterly lost. They dont understand the question which is why they cannot answer it.

The question of 'why' reality is mathematical is not a philosophical one, its a technical one. People are just plain wrong on this.

When asking 'why' reality is mathematical, what you are really asking is 'how is reality imbued with laws', this is not philosophical, it is asking 'what is the physical mechanism by which reality is imbued with laws'. I am sorry, scientists are briliant people but they are fallable too.

I mean, if you cant answer this question, if you admit you dont know, that despite all your knowledge there is a wall of ignorance you cant see beyond, if you have nothing to offer of terms of insight, then show some humility.

 

 

[zapatos]

21 minutes ago, PrimalMinister said:

the main evidence being the fact it self evidently explains itself, that it does not need supporting evidence,

Yeah, this is never going to fly on a science site. Ever. You have to give in on this one or you'll never succeed here.

24 minutes ago, PrimalMinister said:

I will be honest with you, I dont believe the big bang, but not because I am religious, but rather because I have examined it critically and found it wanting. This does not mean I dismiss it, I am simply not convinced by it and would need fundamental questions answered before I was.

Yeah, this is going to be another issue for you. The BB is one of the best supported Theories in science. Ever. This in itself will not harm your ideas but people are going to take everything you say with a grain of salt.

28 minutes ago, PrimalMinister said:

I have become disillisioned with scientists

 

28 minutes ago, PrimalMinister said:

I dont trust physicsts

 

30 minutes ago, PrimalMinister said:

show some humility

Why are you here with these people you think so little of?

[Phi for All]

47 minutes ago, PrimalMinister said:

The question of 'why' reality is mathematical is not a philosophical one, its a technical one. People are just plain wrong on this.

I don't think "reality" is a viable term for what you're talking about. Science is interested in the natural world, but there's too much subjectivity wrt "reality". 

I don't think the natural world is mathematical, and nothing you've ever written about it is very persuasive to me, especially when I have more trustworthy science I can rely on. I think we've been able to describe the natural world mathematically to an astonishing degree, and I think your concept puts the cart before the horse. We made up the maths to describe what we saw. The physical universe does what it does, and we measure it using concepts that give us accurate enough explanations that we can make predictions that teach us even more.

And I agree with zapatos, trying to push that load about not needing evidence because it's self-evident is a slap in the face to our rules and scientific methodology. Take that argument somewhere else, pal. You're welcome here as long as you obey the rules the owners of the site want the staff to enforce. 

Why don't all you folks who love to make shit up and assume it's interesting start your own discussion forum? You could have no rules at all, and follow no methodology, and you can search for meaning all you want without being held to any standards. You could discover fascinating new horizons and be much happier, while we plod along with our dumb old rules and limit ourselves to best current scientific explanations. How about that?

The spirit of SFN is discussing how amazing mainstream scientific knowledge connects us all as a species and a civilization. It tears me apart when folks who obviously quit studying science far too early criticize it rather than overcome their ignorance about it. 

[iNow]

1 hour ago, zapatos said:

The problem seems to me to be that you want everyone to change to your way of doing things. Wouldn't it be easier for you to accept the way this site works?

Nah... It’s WAY easier to keep screaming at the cashier at Arby’s for not serving sushi and sake. I want sushi and sake and it’s the job of this minimum wage cashier at Arby’s to oblige me. Duh!

1 hour ago, PrimalMinister said:

My complaint is that you are critising it before you even understand it making your critisms pretty pointless because they seem to miss the point I am making.

Then start making your points more clearly and succinctly. If you can’t explain it on an index card, then you don’t understand it well enough yet to try. 
 

Science is our attempt to model the cosmos, make predictions about how it behaves, test those predictions, and discard as trash the ones that don’t work.

Science follows a method of finding every flaw in an idea to ensure only the strongest survive, of making sure we are not simply fooling ourselves or unconsciously ignoring those flaws, and any conclusion ever made is provisional, at best. The strongest idea accepted today would be discarded tomorrow if a better, more informative, and more accurate idea came along. 

When people say that they cannot or do not trust science, it tells me immediately that they are ignorant of how it really works and are basically arguing against straw men. 

[beecee]

10 hours ago, PrimalMinister said:

Look admins, why do you think I come here?

In my thread titled the spirit of science someone suggested going through previous posts and pointing things out to make my case.

I have read through this one :

Everybodies approach is the same, to jump in and start critising things before actually understanding them. There are small comments aimed at me like implying I am just making things up. This is prejudice, you are making judgements without first considering my case, I am expecting you to ask questions about it and understand it before you start critising it, otherwise your critisms entirely miss the point. But I dont think you realise you are even doing it.

I will ask again, why do you think I come here, what do you think is motivating me?

I am asking because I think your subliminal prejudices are causing you to draw conclusions about me that I reckon are far from the truth.

Whatever you think about me you seem to entirely missing the point of why I am posting.

 

I don't know why you come here, but I come here to ask questions when I need to, and  listen,and learn in as many branches of science I can....

I am also aware that any new scientific knowledge, or theory, is very very unlikely to start and/or develop in forums such as this or any other science forums. Anyone that thinks so, in my opinion, are suffering from delusions of grandeur...particularly the branches of science that the cranks like to argue against and/or outright dismiss, like SR/GR for example. 

Edited March 10, 2021 by beecee

[joigus]

Take comfort in this: If Euclid himself were to come back to life and tried to give some of his views on modern theories on these forums, without thinking with any care what science has been up to for the last \( 2.2 \times 10^3\) years, his ideas would be probably dismissed just as quickly as yours have. And rightly so.

[dimreepr]

1 hour ago, joigus said:

Take comfort in this: If Euclid himself were to come back to life and tried to give some of his views on modern theories on these forums, without thinking with any care what science has been up to for the last 2.2×103  years, his ideas would be probably dismissed just as quickly as yours have. And rightly so.

If he can't take comfort in that, he'll forever see the sky from under a bridge; and never get sky sport's 

[Curious layman]

14 hours ago, Phi for All said:

Tell me about it....

I stand by what I said. 

When your typing on the internet, you need to be aware that's it's sometimes difficult for the reader to translate it the way you want it to be. So sometimes there will be friction. So don't take it personally.

Whats your problem with this, it's true.

You're doing it now. 😂 

Edited March 10, 2021 by Curious layman

[dimreepr]

Just now, Curious layman said:

I stand by what I said. 

When your typing on the internet, you need to be aware that's it's sometimes difficult for the reader to translate it the way you want it to be. So sometimes there will be friction. So don't take it personally.

Whats your problem with this, it's true.

I get what you're saying but the onus of understanding is not their's, you're the teacher...

[Curious layman]

Just now, dimreepr said:

I get what you're saying but the onus of understanding is not their's, you're the teacher...

That's my point, I'm not saying it's their fault (the reader), it's just something to remember when someone responds in a way you didn't expect. 

It might make sense to you, but that doesn't mean it makes sense to someone else. There's a lot of information that relevant that you didn't type, it's just something to be aware of when you post stuff. 

11 hours ago, iNow said:

Then start making your points more clearly and succinctly. If you can’t explain it on an index card, then you don’t understand it well enough yet to try. 
 

What if that's why you're asking, to get a better explanation from someone who does?

[dimreepr]

4 minutes ago, Curious layman said:

That's my point, I'm not saying it's their fault (the reader)

But that's my point... It's your fault (the writer)... 🙄

[Curious layman]

Just now, dimreepr said:

But that's my point... It's your fault (the writer)... 🙄

I agree with this. At no point have I put the blame on the reader.

Just something for people who post to think about. Including me.

12 minutes ago, Curious layman said:

It might make sense to you, but that doesn't mean it makes sense to someone else. There's a lot of information that relevant that you didn't type, it's just something to be aware of when you post stuff.

[dimreepr]

21 minutes ago, Curious layman said:

I agree with this. At no point have I put the blame on the reader.

Just something for people who post to think about. Including me.

Blame being the operative word, just something to think about... 😉