Nye Booed for pointing out Moon reflects the Sun

Discussion in 'General Chat' started by MR2T, Aug 12, 2007.

  1. Only if you're like one of these retards in Texas who takes everything literally. Unless you care to extrapolate.
     
  2. How is gravity unproven? How it works is unproven, but not that it exists.
     
  3. inertia is a property of matter
     
  4. Nothing can be proven by science. Nothing.
     
  5. Like I said, science only allows for things to be disproven, not proven. According to logic, the only way to prove something is to disprove all other explanations, which, when it comes to science, is an infinite number of things that we haven't even thought of yet. If you can disprove an infinite number of explanations that haven't even been thought of, then you can prove gravity exists. Any moron knows this would be impossible.
     
  6. Do you have a fist sized organ in your body that is made up of muscle tissue and pumps blood through your body?

    Was that not proven by science?
     
  7. Technically, no.
     
  8. Can you elaborate?
     
  9. Yes, although it's nothing I haven't said already.

    "Like I said, science only allows for things to be disproven, not proven. According to logic, the only way to prove something is to disprove all other explanations, which, when it comes to science, is an infinite number of things that we haven't even thought of yet. If you can disprove an infinite number of explanations that haven't even been thought of, then you can prove gravity exists. Any moron knows this would be impossible."
     
  10. Why can't you prove things with science? I feel stoopid now <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/PitLane?displayFAQ=y"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="pitlane/emoticons/tongue.gif"></A>
     
  11. technically a "heart" doesnt exist so much as a bunch of atoms put together to form cells that form tissue that forms what we call a heart.
    Then again what makes up atoms? quarks. What makes up quarks? where does that end? Or rather, where does it begin? Science definitely hasnt explained how to comprehend how anything can be made of infinitesimally smaller particles that really must be composed of something, but then would have to be composed of something else. How is that explained? At that point, believing that a God is behind the creation and source of such particles is every bit as legitimate as any theories about it as described by Science.
     
  12. I'm pretty sure I do, but I cannot technically prove this is so by science.

    I've never seen inside my own chest, for that matter. I can infer that it is so because it's pretty likely I work the same way as all other humans, as I appear outwardly to be roughly the same as them and it would be very strange indeed if there were another way in which I functioned separate from them. I can also infer that this is the case as I can feel the regular beating of the muscle tissue and that the electromagnetic disturbances thrown off by the functioning of the muscle tissue have been measured for medical reasons. However, there is an infantesimal but nonzero chance that this is not true. I could posess a rare genetic deformity in which it functions some other way. Say, a fully vascular pump that would still give a pumping feeling and register on an electrocardiogram, but would be fully different in structure. It's possible I'm an alien and don't know it, however unlikely that may be. There are, as LJFS pointed out, an infinite number of alternate explainations that I cannot possibly dismiss. However, the theory that I just have a heart like everyone else is of course by far and away the most likely. So much so that you can just act like it's 100% certain, like the existance of gravity. Though, technically, we can never be absolutely certain through science.
     
  13. If you want to split hairs to that degree I could argue that, you can't really prove that computer you're typing on really exists. For all we know you could be a synthetic bio-slave with no other purpose than to provide electricity to machines that took over the world. Follow the white rabbit.

    But there comes a point point of reasonable acceptance of what is actually proven and what's not. I guess where that point actually is depends on the individual. But for practical purposes, you can say with (reasonable) certainty that some things are proven.
     
  14. By the current theory, we believe Quarks are fundamental particles, indivisible.
    Then again, we're pretty sure the current theory is at the very least incomplete and we've thought various divisible particles were fundamental before, too. But that said, a particle need not necessarily be divisible.
     
  15. Decartes would give you HJ's from beyond the grave.
     
  16. so basically, youre saying that people have a FAITH in Science.
    It cannot be 100% proven but people still choose to believe it.
     
  17. Now you're on the trolley! That's exactly it.
     
  18. Reasonable acceptance is not science. You're arguing two different things. If you're talking pure science, then you can prove nothing. If you're talking about the amount of evidence necessary before somebody accepts something as true, then that's something else, and would differ from person to person.
     
  19. No, what I'm saying is that in life and in science countless things HAVE been proven. Of course there's an infinite number of (unreasonable) explanations you can come up with to "disprove" the proven. Just like my Matrix explanation for him being able to type on a computer that I say doesn't exist.
     
  20. Faith is not blind, faith is believing in what you have reasonable evidence to believe in. When people talk about faith in God, our reasonable belief for that fact (or a large part of it) comes back to the person of Jesus:

    "No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, (ie, Jesus) who is at the Father's side, has made him known."

    "Philip said, "Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us."

    Jesus answered: "Don't you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'? Don't you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you are not just my own. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work. Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me; or at least believe on the evidence of the miracles themselves."

    If faith is believing without evidence or proof, then Jesus' disciples didnt have faith...
     
  21. OK, so we're in total agreement there. And I've always thought that way. But for the purposes of debating facts I just don't go down that road because it muddies up the water and nothing gets solved.
     
  22. Which is why you can never be TOTALLY sure. Think about it.
     
  23. things that HAVE been proven have also had instances of new discovery. for a very long time it was "proven" that Pluto is a planet, and yet now its not.

     
  24. Pluto's classification has always been hotly debated among astronomers. And the fact that Pluto exists IS proven. How we, as humans, choose to define certain things tend to be more debatable and ever changing.
     
  25. SeansVette is not real.
     

Share This Page