What is Science?

Wow. Pretty hostile. I only wanted to put forth a non-religious opposing view. I clearly stated that sccience has done some good. I also said that man’s greed and avarice are partly responsible for science’s shortcomings. I feel REALLY sorry for the fool that tries to put forth a religious view.

And Legendaryblaze, that’s nice how you decide what kind of person I am ahead of time and refute statements I haven’t even made. That’s REALLY good science. The reality is, we’re all headed for trouble with the current state of ecology/power/disease/war. World conditions are not improving, regardless of the advances of technology and medicine and science in wealthier countries.

IMHO, good science should advance human civilization, not luxuries for select countries(eg, I can watch porn on my phone while thousands of infants worldwide die of diarrhea–see the discrepancy?).

Why is this thinking SO offensive?

[quote]TD54 wrote:

[quote]scj119 wrote:
Science is the formulation of hypotheses, and the subsequent testing/proving of those hypotheses.[/quote]

yea yeah we know that definition. We were all told that in the 4th grade
[/quote]

Were you taught Occam’s Razor in 8th grade? That the simplest definition is usually correct?

No need to write a paragraph explanation when a sentence answers the question. Just because it’s simple doesn’t mean it’s wrong, or that there’s a better way to say it by writing more words.

[quote]Rational Gaze wrote:

[quote]Humbert wrote:

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:

[quote]Humbert wrote:
just to introduce a non-religious opposing view:

If you look at science as we now practice it, scientific method, theory and hypothesis and evidence(which is greatly misused to “prove” certain theories, much like statistics can be manipulated to prove a study, get a grant, pass a law, etc, we aren’t having a lot of success.

Medicinal science: for all our bravado, we still get old, die, catch colds, etc. Science has provided us with vaccines that we are only beginning to understand actually cause many diseases to mutate and become more potent. After all this science, why, in 2010 do I have a cold right now?

Economic science: Would I send my kid to Harvard to get a high-end Wall Street job right now? In this global economy? WTF are they teaching up there? We, as a species, don’t understand CRAP.

Green science: I like where this is headed, but what about all the “progress” that got us in this jam in the first place? Ozone holes, ice caps melting, oil spills.

And Technology? Hey, I can watch porn on my cell phone. Yay. So can my 6-year old nephew. Oops.

Science–we aren’t doing it right.[/quote]

I don’t think you realize how amazing it is that you can easily survive almost any disease that would have decimated thousands a century or two ago.
You don’t have to worry about the measles, mumps, smallpox rubella, common cold, cholera, polio, among others.
If you were to catch some of those, of which the others are pretty much extinct, you would be pretty much guaranteed to be healed with minimal to no side effects.
If ever you were to lose an arm, given the right time frame, we would be able to save it, ensuring you’d have almost 100 percent restoration in a matter of months or years. As opposed to only having one arm, forever.
You can instantly communicate with someone across the world, while eating instant food, in a shelter that will protect you from almost anything mother nature will whip at you.
You have almost all the knowledge of humanity at your finger tips.

Need to get in contact with the best coaches in the world? No problem. Need to inform yourself on a specific subject? No problem.
Want to see what the pyramids look like? Done. Want to know how they were made? Done.
Want to travel to the other side of the world, in a matter of hours, in complete comfort and safety, and not having to worry about being attacked by bandits, taking months to years, losing your possessions or becoming violently ill? Done.
Want to have some of the best treatement we can give you? Done.
Want to be unconscious for your operation while robots with the utmost speed, accuracy and precision take care of you? Want it to be done while your body is fed a series of chemicals that will keep it strong with minimal side effects? Done.
Want instant food that doesn’t take months to grow, will not wither or die, requires no expenses or time, while giving you an abundance of protein, carbs and/or fat? Done.
Want to be able to travel at your leisure, in a mechanical beast, protected from the elements while you power through the air, listening to music stored on little disks and being air conditioned or heated, at speeds impossible to attain any living creature? Done.
Do you want to be able to purchase any clothing, to your desired specifications and while keeping out cold, wind, heat or whatever the fuck, without costing an arm and a leg? Done.
Want to be able to purchase items from across the globe and have them shipped to your door without any effort on your part? Done.
Want to know the latest in everything and anything? Done.
Want to be able to inject yourself with substances that allow you to be put on muscle mass and strength beyond what is naturally possible? Done.
Want to view things in 3d as if you were really there, from the comfort of your home? Done.
Want to play and reenact other realities with no consequences? Done.
Want to know the weather, anywhere in the world, instantly? Done. Want to know the weather in the fucking future? Done.
Have poor eye sight but want perfect vision in a matter of 10 minutes? Done.
Want the ability to see in perfect darkness? Done.
Want the ability to summon power, light and electricity? Done.
Want the ability to destroy matter in a matter (see what I did there) of milli seconds? Done.
Want to eradicate any potential threat to you and your loved ones, from miles away or up close? Done.
Want to fight almost any disease or illness? Done.
Want to jump out of a flying machine, 10 000 feet in the sky, and land safely on earth with no injuries, just for the fun? Done.
Want to be able to go under water for hours? Done.
Want to be able to survive in almost any climate on earth? Done.
Want the ability to mass produce anything, including organisms and food? Done.

Want some guy in Canada to tell you that you are a fucking idiot because you take amazing technology for granted, you spoiled idiot? Done.[/quote]

Almost all those things you “want” to do are pointless luxuries, inconsequential to your existence. Look at your list–and you call me spoiled? Buy, view, play, travel, destroy. Consumer science. A waste of science IMO. How is the ability to jump out a plane good science?

Everything in your list–EVERY THING–you will enjoy for a lifespan that will be between 45-70 years, maybe less, depending on where on this planet you live. You will fight illnesses instead of curing them, at least until another country with better “science” weaponizes one of them and ices you and your entire nation. Will you beat your chest in the name of science when you and your loved ones are eradicated by someone else’s science from far away or up close? You will breathe unclean air because of the inability of modern science to develop and utilize clean energy sources. I could go on.

Science has done some good, I agree. Most of it has been cosmetic and frivolous. I was kinda hoping for more at this point. As posted already, man and greed play a strong role in this. To me, that’s a fact but not an excuse.[/quote]

I want you to pick up your computer and throw it out the nearest window. Then call up the utility companies and cancel your contracts with them. Cancel your phone and internet services too. Have your car scrapped. Throw away any clothes made from synthetic fibers and any tinned or packaged goods in your house. In fact, leave your house and possessions behind and find a cave somewhere. Sit in that cave, in the dark, naked and alone. Then think about what a fucking idiot you are, but don’t bother telling anyone about it, because you have no way of communicating with anyone that might care.[/quote]

The only people who argue science isn’t doing it right are those who haven’t studied it. Same with anyone who argues that science doesn’t prove anything – no one who UNDERSTANDS it ever argues it’s inconclusive.

If a bunch of people who’ve watched football but never played it said that it’s not dangerous because of all those pads, would you listen to them over those who have actually played and been concussed/injured? Of course not. It’s just like any field – when the only people who are arguing one side of the argument are those who have NO EXPERIENCE in the field… and everyone who has experience argues the other side… it doesn’t take a rocket scientist (see what I did there?) to figure out who’s right.

Do you listen to a 6’0" 140lb guy on how to get big and muscular? Do you listen to a football player tell you how to train for soccer? Do you listen to someone who doesn’t have a degree in a science-related field tell you about the validity of science?

[quote]pch2 wrote:
I’m doing some research on the nature of science, like what do people in general think science is, and was wondering if you all had some thoughts on it. It’s one of those thing I’ve been thinking about that seems simple, yet after a while isn’t at all. I know there is quite the range of people on here, so thought I’d get some opinions.

So, what’s science? [/quote]

I think the OP opened the topic up to everyone. Am I wrong?

The problem with the scientific method is asking the right questions in the first place. Much of scientific research fails to do this, and then it gets twisted by the media into some ridiculous statement.

It seems to me that many people are starting to discount scientific discoveries because of conflicting evidence that gets rushed to print because it disproves a previously held theory (forget actually looking at the study to see if the reporting is accurate). Example- One day eggs are terrible for you, the next year they’re a miracle food, a few years later they’re demonized again, forget the fact that eggs of any sort are a prized food throughout the animal kingdom since they were first laid. So the “average Joe” doesn’t know how to process that, they shut down, sit on the couch and watch American Idol instead of looking through available evidence. Like a previous poster said- their needs are met, they are comfortable, and don’t want to upset that balance, so it’s much easier to do nothing, and let Fox News tell me what I should be thinking.

Too often the scientific findings get extrapolated FAR beyond their meaningful impact, and the media is always willing to make that jump, no matter how big the gap.

technology/science is good. The problem is overpopulation. If we could be let’s say 50 million instead of 8 billion or I dont know the count now we could all own 8 hummers and it wouldn’t make any difference. Granted the hummers would be probably all the same color but who cares

For that matter, I am not a scientist, and won’t claim to be. However, as a reasoning adult, I see science chasing the dollar. That’s my beef with the whole issue. Modern science isn’t doing it right, and nothing I’ve here so far has even begun to address that side of it.

this is why science was invented.

[quote]Humbert wrote:
Wow. Pretty hostile. I only wanted to put forth a non-religious opposing view. I clearly stated that sccience has done some good. I also said that man’s greed and avarice are partly responsible for science’s shortcomings. I feel REALLY sorry for the fool that tries to put forth a religious view.

And Legendaryblaze, that’s nice how you decide what kind of person I am ahead of time and refute statements I haven’t even made. That’s REALLY good science. The reality is, we’re all headed for trouble with the current state of ecology/power/disease/war. World conditions are not improving, regardless of the advances of technology and medicine and science in wealthier countries.

IMHO, good science should advance human civilization, not luxuries for select countries(eg, I can watch porn on my phone while thousands of infants worldwide die of diarrhea–see the discrepancy?).

Why is this thinking SO offensive?[/quote]

It’s not offensive, it’s just naive in light of what we’re working with.

The problem with science is misinterpretation of it. Science can also be a religion if you become entrenched in certain beliefs (faith). Whoever said science requires an open mind was spot-on. Being religious requires that your mind be closed to any ideas that call your beliefs into question.

Faith is the enemy of reason.

.

[quote]Humbert wrote:
For that matter, I am not a scientist, and won’t claim to be. However, as a reasoning adult, I see science chasing the dollar. That’s my beef with the whole issue. Modern science isn’t doing it right, and nothing I’ve here so far has even begun to address that side of it.[/quote]

Confirmation Bias: you choose only to look at science in instances where it proves your point. Medicinal Science has accomplished nothing because you have a cold? (in an earlier post). Give me a fucking break. I suppose eradicating polio means nothing to you because you’ve never had it (which is sorta the point). And that HIV/AIDS is miraculously no longer a death sentence with modern medicine. Shit, they now believe someone has been CURED of HIV via stem cells. Not “managed pain”, or “extended life”, fucking cured (here’s the link: Stem Cell Transplant Cures HIV In 'Berlin Patient' | HuffPost Latest News).

Or how bout the average life expectancy that’s grown from 45yrs to 67yrs since the beginning of the 20th century? (That’s not a randomly chosen point to prove a point: that 45yr life expectancy was arguably the highest it had ever been in history to that point).

But, you have a cold, so medicinal science has done nothing.

[quote]Oleena wrote:

[quote]Humbert wrote:
Wow. Pretty hostile. I only wanted to put forth a non-religious opposing view. I clearly stated that sccience has done some good. I also said that man’s greed and avarice are partly responsible for science’s shortcomings. I feel REALLY sorry for the fool that tries to put forth a religious view.

And Legendaryblaze, that’s nice how you decide what kind of person I am ahead of time and refute statements I haven’t even made. That’s REALLY good science. The reality is, we’re all headed for trouble with the current state of ecology/power/disease/war. World conditions are not improving, regardless of the advances of technology and medicine and science in wealthier countries.

IMHO, good science should advance human civilization, not luxuries for select countries(eg, I can watch porn on my phone while thousands of infants worldwide die of diarrhea–see the discrepancy?).

Why is this thinking SO offensive?[/quote]

It’s not offensive, it’s just naive in light of what we’re working with.[/quote]

Could you clarify that? I’m not quite sure what your point is?

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]Oleena wrote:

[quote]Humbert wrote:
Wow. Pretty hostile. I only wanted to put forth a non-religious opposing view. I clearly stated that sccience has done some good. I also said that man’s greed and avarice are partly responsible for science’s shortcomings. I feel REALLY sorry for the fool that tries to put forth a religious view.

And Legendaryblaze, that’s nice how you decide what kind of person I am ahead of time and refute statements I haven’t even made. That’s REALLY good science. The reality is, we’re all headed for trouble with the current state of ecology/power/disease/war. World conditions are not improving, regardless of the advances of technology and medicine and science in wealthier countries.

IMHO, good science should advance human civilization, not luxuries for select countries(eg, I can watch porn on my phone while thousands of infants worldwide die of diarrhea–see the discrepancy?).

Why is this thinking SO offensive?[/quote]

It’s not offensive, it’s just naive in light of what we’re working with.[/quote]

Could you clarify that? I’m not quite sure what your point is?
[/quote]

Scroll back and check out my previous response to you.

I am not sure how anyone has a problem or even a question about science.

It is when mixing with money and politics that science has problems because the truth becomes secondary.

[quote]scj119 wrote:
Shit, they now believe someone has been CURED of HIV via stem cells. Not “managed pain”, or “extended life”, fucking cured (here’s the link: Stem Cell Transplant Cures HIV In 'Berlin Patient' | HuffPost Latest News).
[/quote]

Whoa.

[quote]scj119 wrote:

[quote]Humbert wrote:
For that matter, I am not a scientist, and won’t claim to be. However, as a reasoning adult, I see science chasing the dollar. That’s my beef with the whole issue. Modern science isn’t doing it right, and nothing I’ve here so far has even begun to address that side of it.[/quote]

Confirmation Bias: you choose only to look at science in instances where it proves your point. Medicinal Science has accomplished nothing because you have a cold? (in an earlier post). Give me a fucking break. I suppose eradicating polio means nothing to you because you’ve never had it (which is sorta the point). And that HIV/AIDS is miraculously no longer a death sentence with modern medicine. Shit, they now believe someone has been CURED of HIV via stem cells. Not “managed pain”, or “extended life”, fucking cured (here’s the link: Stem Cell Transplant Cures HIV In 'Berlin Patient' | HuffPost Latest News).

Or how bout the average life expectancy that’s grown from 45yrs to 67yrs since the beginning of the 20th century? (That’s not a randomly chosen point to prove a point: that 45yr life expectancy was arguably the highest it had ever been in history to that point).

But, you have a cold, so medicinal science has done nothing.[/quote]

Clarification on the life expectancy- you can’t attribute that completely to medicine, a vast majority of that is due to public works/sanitation initiatives, and the fact that we actually realize that feces and drinking water don’t mix.

Cool stuff about the AIDS patient, I heard something similar to that with Magic Johnson, that his T-cell levels are near the levels of a 'healthy" individual

[quote]Theface wrote:

[quote]scj119 wrote:

[quote]Humbert wrote:
For that matter, I am not a scientist, and won’t claim to be. However, as a reasoning adult, I see science chasing the dollar. That’s my beef with the whole issue. Modern science isn’t doing it right, and nothing I’ve here so far has even begun to address that side of it.[/quote]

Confirmation Bias: you choose only to look at science in instances where it proves your point. Medicinal Science has accomplished nothing because you have a cold? (in an earlier post). Give me a fucking break. I suppose eradicating polio means nothing to you because you’ve never had it (which is sorta the point). And that HIV/AIDS is miraculously no longer a death sentence with modern medicine. Shit, they now believe someone has been CURED of HIV via stem cells. Not “managed pain”, or “extended life”, fucking cured (here’s the link: Stem Cell Transplant Cures HIV In 'Berlin Patient' | HuffPost Latest News).

Or how bout the average life expectancy that’s grown from 45yrs to 67yrs since the beginning of the 20th century? (That’s not a randomly chosen point to prove a point: that 45yr life expectancy was arguably the highest it had ever been in history to that point).

But, you have a cold, so medicinal science has done nothing.[/quote]

Clarification on the life expectancy- you can’t attribute that completely to medicine, a vast majority of that is due to public works/sanitation initiatives, and the fact that we actually realize that feces and drinking water don’t mix.

Cool stuff about the AIDS patient, I heard something similar to that with Magic Johnson, that his T-cell levels are near the levels of a 'healthy" individual[/quote]

Wouldn’t you call the creation of water filtration and the creation of infrastructure as a type of science???

Remember, science covers so many things. I am not going to write a wall of text but it is all revolving around evolution (and not the radical thinking of man from ape based on Darwin… who never said that) but that through stressors, things evolve at a faster pace. War, science advances happen. Plagues? medical advances happen, over population? quality of life goes up due to advances in infrastructure.

Internet butt hurt? well, apparently people don’t use this to LEARN more about what caused the butt hurt.

[quote]Theface wrote:

Clarification on the life expectancy- you can’t attribute that completely to medicine, a vast majority of that is due to public works/sanitation initiatives, and the fact that we actually realize that feces and drinking water don’t mix.
…[/quote]

Quite a bit of science in water treatment technology. It is almost totally responsible for our extended lifespans. Good point about medicine.

[quote]Oleena wrote:

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]Oleena wrote:

[quote]Humbert wrote:
Wow. Pretty hostile. I only wanted to put forth a non-religious opposing view. I clearly stated that sccience has done some good. I also said that man’s greed and avarice are partly responsible for science’s shortcomings. I feel REALLY sorry for the fool that tries to put forth a religious view.

And Legendaryblaze, that’s nice how you decide what kind of person I am ahead of time and refute statements I haven’t even made. That’s REALLY good science. The reality is, we’re all headed for trouble with the current state of ecology/power/disease/war. World conditions are not improving, regardless of the advances of technology and medicine and science in wealthier countries.

IMHO, good science should advance human civilization, not luxuries for select countries(eg, I can watch porn on my phone while thousands of infants worldwide die of diarrhea–see the discrepancy?).

Why is this thinking SO offensive?[/quote]

It’s not offensive, it’s just naive in light of what we’re working with.[/quote]

Could you clarify that? I’m not quite sure what your point is?
[/quote]

Scroll back and check out my previous response to you.[/quote]

It wasn’t to me, I’m a different poster. To clarify, are you saying he is naive to think we can aspire to greater social priorities than those of primates? Thats what I took you to mean, although perhaps you didn’t mean that exactly?