Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/1 ... d=webmail1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The newly discovered LQC is so enormous, in fact, that theory predicts it shouldn't exist, researchers said. The quasar group appears to violate a widely accepted assumption known as the cosmological principle, which holds that the universe is essentially homogeneous when viewed at a sufficiently large scale.

Calculations suggest that structures larger than about 1.2 billion light-years should not exist, researchers said.

Just thought I'd mention this because it wasn't long ago that I made a post about astronomers and astrophysicists...about how they do all these calculations and think that the calculations are reality. Then they find out they are wrong.

Also on a larger level there's this thing where people have theories that can't be substantiated through experimentation. And they find out they are wrong a lot. And people actually act like people finding out they're wrong a lot means that everything they say should be taken as truth as though it's handed down by God.

Why, by golly, if the "scientific consensus" says something it MUST be true! That sort of thing.

So now that we find out that they're wrong about something...again...many will say, "See? Science corrects itself."

It's ironic for me to be saying this because I do love science. It's a wonderful process. Unfortunately I think a lot of people forget what it is. Or they don't understand what it is. And they think "scientists" are gods. Essentially.

There are always statistical outliers and astrophysics is in its infancy. Not a big deal.

Good thing we have JSO here to keep these scientists in their place. They think they are so smart and all trying to figure out the universe. If they were really smart they would be starting threads on a message board second guessing the work of others.

BlueHen86 wrote:Good thing we have JSO here to keep these scientists in their place. They think they are so smart and all trying to figure out the universe. If they were really smart they would be starting threads on a message board second guessing the work of others.

They are, of course, VERY smart. A lot smarter than me for sure. But they are dealing with a subject matter that does not lend itself to full application of the scientific method. And I think that if you kind of pay attention to news about that particular field over the years you will notice that instances in which beliefs generally accepted by those in the field are found to be wrong.

I suspect a lot of them know that and are humble about it. What I'm talking about is the general public; the way in which people refer to "the consensus among scientists" as though that necessarily means it has to be true. Again, it's as though scientists are gods. But in a field like astronomy many theories cannot be experimentally confirmed. Also even just complete description of everything that's out there is not possible. The universe is too vast. In this case somebody noticed something that's four billion light years across for the first time. Think about that. They estimate that our galaxy is 100,000 light years across. That makes the length of this thing, if they are correct, about 40,000 times the width of our galaxy. And they've completely missed it for all these years.

The observation appears to have revealed that a fundamental assumption is false. Ok. So now they know that. But how could any reasonable person possibly have confidence that there will ever be a situation in which no things they have NOT seen and which contradict other beliefs and assumptions out there. It's an inherently uncertain field due to the nature of the subject matter. And that would be true whether my own IQ was 165 or 65.

CitadelGrad wrote:There are always statistical outliers and astrophysics is in its infancy. Not a big deal.

It's not a statistical outlier. It's not a statistic at all. It's a fundamental assumption. A cornerstone concept.

JohnStOnge wrote:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/1 ... d=webmail1

The newly discovered LQC is so enormous, in fact, that theory predicts it shouldn't exist, researchers said. The quasar group appears to violate a widely accepted assumption known as the cosmological principle, which holds that the universe is essentially homogeneous when viewed at a sufficiently large scale.

Calculations suggest that structures larger than about 1.2 billion light-years should not exist, researchers said.

Just thought I'd mention this because it wasn't long ago that I made a post about astronomers and astrophysicists...about how they do all these calculations and think that the calculations are reality. Then they find out they are wrong.

Also on a larger level there's this thing where people have theories that can't be substantiated through experimentation. And they find out they are wrong a lot. And people actually act like people finding out they're wrong a lot means that everything they say should be taken as truth as though it's handed down by God.

Why, by golly, if the "scientific consensus" says something it MUST be true! That sort of thing.

So now that we find out that they're wrong about something...again...many will say, "See? Science corrects itself."

It's ironic for me to be saying this because I do love science. It's a wonderful process. Unfortunately I think a lot of people forget what it is. Or they don't understand what it is. And they think "scientists" are gods. Essentially.

I was thinking more like "tedious".

JohnStOnge wrote:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/1 ... d=webmail1

The newly discovered LQC is so enormous, in fact, that theory predicts it shouldn't exist, researchers said. The quasar group appears to violate a widely accepted assumption known as the cosmological principle, which holds that the universe is essentially homogeneous when viewed at a sufficiently large scale.

Calculations suggest that structures larger than about 1.2 billion light-years should not exist, researchers said.

Just thought I'd mention this because it wasn't long ago that I made a post about astronomers and astrophysicists...about how they do all these calculations and think that the calculations are reality. Then they find out they are wrong.

Also on a larger level there's this thing where people have theories that can't be substantiated through experimentation. And they find out they are wrong a lot. And people actually act like people finding out they're wrong a lot means that everything they say should be taken as truth as though it's handed down by God.

Why, by golly, if the "scientific consensus" says something it MUST be true! That sort of thing.

So now that we find out that they're wrong about something...again...many will say, "See? Science corrects itself."

It's ironic for me to be saying this because I do love science. It's a wonderful process. Unfortunately I think a lot of people forget what it is. Or they don't understand what it is. And they think "scientists" are gods. Essentially.

Sooo...what's the alternative?

Anything "unexplainable" = [insert religious deity here]'s work?

Science is a school of thought that allows itself to be wrong and adjusts accordingly. It is inherently flexible, MUCH more so than religion where anything to the contrary of "accepted opinion" is not accepted at all.

There was "scientific consensus" on a lot of different issues over the last few centuries of its existence (tracing back to the Renaissance), that aren't the cast today. That's what makes science so great.

Well shit! There goes my belief in global warming! I give up...don't wanna believe in anything anymore!

DSUrocks07 wrote:

JohnStOnge wrote:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/1 ... d=webmail1



Just thought I'd mention this because it wasn't long ago that I made a post about astronomers and astrophysicists...about how they do all these calculations and think that the calculations are reality. Then they find out they are wrong.

Also on a larger level there's this thing where people have theories that can't be substantiated through experimentation. And they find out they are wrong a lot. And people actually act like people finding out they're wrong a lot means that everything they say should be taken as truth as though it's handed down by God.

Why, by golly, if the "scientific consensus" says something it MUST be true! That sort of thing.

So now that we find out that they're wrong about something...again...many will say, "See? Science corrects itself."

It's ironic for me to be saying this because I do love science. It's a wonderful process. Unfortunately I think a lot of people forget what it is. Or they don't understand what it is. And they think "scientists" are gods. Essentially.

Sooo...what's the alternative?

Anything "unexplainable" = [insert religious deity here]'s work?

Science is a school of thought that allows itself to be wrong and adjusts accordingly. It is inherently flexible, MUCH more so than religion where anything to the contrary of "accepted opinion" is not accepted at all.

There was "scientific consensus" on a lot of different issues over the last few centuries of its existence (tracing back to the Renaissance), that aren't the cast today. That's what makes science so great.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1yCeFmn_e2c" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Scientific knowledge is now and always will be a work in progress. Science is a search for physical truth.

Physicists and astronomers are actually the least dogmatic of all scientists. Any theory will be considered no matter how strange so long as it doesn't clash with any observations of measurements.

People in health and climate sciences should try to mimmick the level of rigor and open-mindedness that exists within physics as much as they can (they can't do it completely of course because both are soft sciences).

Oh, and physicsts don't do the "if it isn't testable it isn't science" crap that doesn't make any sense.

JohnStOnge wrote: And people actually act like people finding out they're wrong a lot means that everything they say should be taken as truth as though it's handed down by God.

Why, by golly, if the "scientific consensus" says something it MUST be true! That sort of thing.

So now that we find out that they're wrong about something...again...many will say, "See? Science corrects itself."

It's ironic for me to be saying this because I do love science. It's a wonderful process. Unfortunately I think a lot of people forget what it is. Or they don't understand what it is. And they think "scientists" are gods. Essentially.

Do you not understand the idiocy and irony of your post? Science doesn't claim to be right all the time... science seeks to find the truth by finding evidence to back it up or prove it wrong, whereas most religion blindly believes in ridiculous shit without accepting the possibility of being wrong.

I was not comparing science to religion. I was thinking more of what happens during decisions and debates about public policy. The climate change issue was mentioned and that is a good example.

Yes, people pay lip service to uncertainty by talking about how "science" always allows for the possibility of being wrong. But then, in practice, they act as though there is absolute certainty that humankind is causing the climate to change in a certain way and that it will be "bad" if certain things aren't done; certain policy changes are made. And they ridicule people who express skepticism about the consensus of climate scientists. Whatever lip service they may pay to uncertainty, they act as though a scientific consensus is equivalent to what the ancients may have said "was decreed by the gods."

There's a related reality. As I've written before, there are different levels of certainty. The highest level of certainty is associated with things that can be established through controlled experimentation. There are an awful lot of areas in science that aren't in that category.

Science tells you that if you put put a 12 oz. glass of water in your freezer and your freezer is at 0 F and will remain at 0 F you will find a glass of ice if you leave it in there the whole time and come back 12 hours later. And it will happen every time. For all practical purposes, there is absolute certainty about that. You can do it every day for the rest of your life and it will happen every time. You can conduct that controlled experiment over and over again and you will always get the same result.

The level of certainty is dramatically different than that associated with statements by climate scientists, for example, holding that if X is done Y will happen with the climate. Its not the same situation as one in which controlled experiments can be conducted, and that makes a huge difference with respect to how sure people can be.

The idea is that one should think about the situation scientists are dealing with and ask oneself about how difficult it is to be certain about those situations. Can controlled experiments be conducted? Can critical parameters be directly measured (in astronomy, they often cannot)? So on and so forth. And it's not automatically "ridiculous" to be skeptical about a tenet of "scientific consensus." It's not ridiculous to say we're not going to dramatically disrupt people's lives or attack Liberty based on "scientific consensus" that has a lot of uncertainty associated with it.

Some hints on interpreting my motivations for writing things:

I am an agnostic. I do not believe that the Bible is a literal history of existence. I believe the theory of evolution is the most reasonable explanation for the diversity of life on our planet. I believe the universe is about 15 billion years old and the earth is about 5 billion years old. I believe life appeared on Earth about 3 billion years ago. If I Googled some of those things I might come up with slightly different numbers. But that's what I believe off the top of my head.

Oh, and I also believe humankind's activity has had an impact on the climate and that the atmosphere is warmer on average, than it would be if humankind wasn't present.

My motivation has to do with maintaining a certain discipline. It does not have to do with favoring religious explanations over scientific explanations.

Too lazy to read all the posts, but seeing Astronomy in the thread title, I'd like to know if anyone has brought up the seventh planet from the Sun yet?

It would seem appropriate...

BlueHen86 wrote:Good thing we have JSO here to keep these scientists in their place.

To be quite honest... very few people do, so it is good to have somebody point this out once in a while.

Screamin_Eagle174 wrote:

JohnStOnge wrote: And people actually act like people finding out they're wrong a lot means that everything they say should be taken as truth as though it's handed down by God.

Why, by golly, if the "scientific consensus" says something it MUST be true! That sort of thing.

So now that we find out that they're wrong about something...again...many will say, "See? Science corrects itself."

It's ironic for me to be saying this because I do love science. It's a wonderful process. Unfortunately I think a lot of people forget what it is. Or they don't understand what it is. And they think "scientists" are gods. Essentially.

Do you not understand the idiocy and irony of your post? Science doesn't claim to be right all the time... science seeks to find the truth by finding evidence to back it up or prove it wrong, whereas most religion blindly believes in ridiculous shit without accepting the possibility of being wrong.

You had me at hello. There is ONE science that does claim to be right all the time. I'll let you guess which one that is.

AZGrizFan wrote:

Screamin_Eagle174 wrote:
Do you not understand the idiocy and irony of your post? Science doesn't claim to be right all the time... science seeks to find the truth by finding evidence to back it up or prove it wrong, whereas most religion blindly believes in ridiculous shit without accepting the possibility of being wrong.

You had me at hello. There is ONE science that does claim to be right all the time. I'll let you guess which one that is.

kalm wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
You had me at hello. There is ONE science that does claim to be right all the time. I'll let you guess which one that is.

Don't play dumb, klammy.

Oh.....wait. You're not PLAYING.

I

AZGrizFan wrote:

kalm wrote:

Don't play dumb, klammy.

Oh.....wait. You're not PLAYING.

Meh, better than trying to climb into your mind and figure out WTFIGO....SH.

kalm wrote: I

AZGrizFan wrote:
Don't play dumb, klammy.

Oh.....wait. You're not PLAYING.

Meh, better than trying to climb into your mind and figure out WTFIGO....SH.

Come on, klammy: What "science" (and I use that term VERY loosely), routinely claims it's "settled", ignores data that doesn't fit it's preconceived premise, and has morphed into an all-encompassing shitstorm that allows it to claim that ANY change in data (for worse OR for better) is caused by it's premise?

Hint: It's kind of a religion in that respect...

AZGrizFan wrote:

kalm wrote: I

Meh, better than trying to climb into your mind and figure out WTFIGO....SH.

Come on, klammy: What "science" (and I use that term VERY loosely), routinely claims it's "settled", ignores data that doesn't fit it's preconceived premise, and has morphed into an all-encompassing shitstorm that allows it to claim that ANY change in data (for worse OR for better) is caused by it's premise?

Hint: It's kind of a religion in that respect...

Neo-liberal economics?

JohnStOnge wrote:It's ironic for me to be saying this because I do love science. It's a wonderful process. Unfortunately I think a lot of people forget what it is. Or they don't understand what it is. And they think "scientists" are gods. Essentially.

I think the issue with most people is that they are actually scientifically illiterate when it comes to the subject matter.

SeattleGriz wrote:

JohnStOnge wrote:It's ironic for me to be saying this because I do love science. It's a wonderful process. Unfortunately I think a lot of people forget what it is. Or they don't understand what it is. And they think "scientists" are gods. Essentially.

I think the issue with most people is that they are actually scientifically illiterate when it comes to the subject matter.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IlHgbOWj4o[/youtube]