The Desecration of Science

[Galileo Galilei]

The Desecration of Science

In the mid 17th century, Galileo Galilei was brought before the inquisition for heresy. His scientific beliefs had challenged established knowledge and Aristotelian scholars. Blind dogmatism even led some scholars of the day to refuse to look through Galileos telescope, insisting it was a trick. Galileo was judged ridiculous, and pitiable, that he could have anything to teach. Especially since he was a mathemetician, and they were the lowest on the pecking order. They used words like “moral duty” to diminish his work.

It was only after years of being unable to silence Galileo by logical argument or academic pressure that his enemies turned to the church. The church, having twisted the bible to announce that the sun and stars revolved around the earth, had to assert its authority. Twisting the words of any religion is desecration.

Today, we have the same kinds of scholars refusing to look through the telescope. And they do not like having their dogma challenged. They twist the scope and power of science with words like consensus, which mean nothing. We see the same attempt to destroy the academic careers of scientists who can reveal that climate change is not, and can not be, man made. The men who are supposed to be the vanguard of investigation, research, and discovery, wave their hand and say discussion is ended. The church never needed to defend Aristotelian theories, and it is sad that science has needed to defend Warmer theories. This desecration of science continues unabated, and we as a society are going to pay the price for it.

In case anyone hasn’t heard: at issue is an enormous dump of data from the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit that was leaked or hacked and placed online. The data included more than 1,000 e-mails – many of them back-and-forth communications among prominent scientists. The private e-mails showed potentially unethical or illegal behavior and a possible conspiracy to distort science for political gain. That scary list includes plans to avoid freedom of information requests, efforts to delete data and discussions of ways to intimidate the peer review process of scientific publications.

Read my take on it here.

http://www.examiner.com/x-19821-Libertarian-Examiner~y2009m12d5-The-Desecration-of-Science

[awake]

Marxism had the claim of science backing it...Eugenics had science backing its actions as well... now we have the environmentalists claiming scientific infallibility just as their for bearers.

[Theocrat]

Marxism had the claim of science backing it...Eugenics had science backing its actions as well... now we have the environmentalists claiming scientific infallibility just as their for bearers.

Add evolutionists to that list. They claim their religion is "peer-reviewed." This whole global warming issue has shown once and for all that just because something is peer-reviewed, it doesn't mean it is good science.

[t0rnado]

Add graviteists to that list. They claim their religion is "peer-reviewed". This whole global warming issue has shown once and for all that just because something is peer-reviewed, it doesn't mean it is good science.

[Freedom 4 all]

Oh, for fuck sakes, here we go again...

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

gravity doesn't exist, it's gods will that we stay on earth that keeps us on the ground :D

[MelissaWV]

gravity doesn't exist, it's gods will that we stay on earth that keeps us on the ground :D

You might be onto something. God created woman, and God is allegedly a man, therefore God created the whole "apple" situation so women would cover themselves, and he wouldn't get distracted. If we were all naked all the time, perhaps God would get so distracted we'd all fling off the face of the earth.




No, really, what's this thread ACTUALLY about?

[Dionysus]

Nice Galileo mention in here.

http://www.forbes.com/2009/12/03/climate-science-gore-intelligent-technology-sutton.html

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

The Desecration of Science

In the mid 17th century, Galileo Galilei was brought before the inquisition for heresy. His scientific beliefs had challenged established knowledge and Aristotelian scholars. Blind dogmatism even led some scholars of the day to refuse to look through Galileos telescope, insisting it was a trick. Galileo was judged ridiculous, and pitiable, that he could have anything to teach. Especially since he was a mathemetician, and they were the lowest on the pecking order. They used words like “moral duty” to diminish his work.

It was only after years of being unable to silence Galileo by logical argument or academic pressure that his enemies turned to the church. The church, having twisted the bible to announce that the sun and stars revolved around the earth, had to assert its authority. Twisting the words of any religion is desecration.

Today, we have the same kinds of scholars refusing to look through the telescope. And they do not like having their dogma challenged. They twist the scope and power of science with words like consensus, which mean nothing. We see the same attempt to destroy the academic careers of scientists who can reveal that climate change is not, and can not be, man made. The men who are supposed to be the vanguard of investigation, research, and discovery, wave their hand and say discussion is ended. The church never needed to defend Aristotelian theories, and it is sad that science has needed to defend Warmer theories. This desecration of science continues unabated, and we as a society are going to pay the price for it.

In case anyone hasn’t heard: at issue is an enormous dump of data from the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit that was leaked or hacked and placed online. The data included more than 1,000 e-mails – many of them back-and-forth communications among prominent scientists. The private e-mails showed potentially unethical or illegal behavior and a possible conspiracy to distort science for political gain. That scary list includes plans to avoid freedom of information requests, efforts to delete data and discussions of ways to intimidate the peer review process of scientific publications.

Read my take on it here.

http://www.examiner.com/x-19821-Libertarian-Examiner~y2009m12d5-The-Desecration-of-Science

First off, science was born out of the religions of Islam and Christianity. There was no science versus religion; rather, there was only unnatural philosophy (religion) there to juxtapose a developing natural philosophy (science) to. It was in fact the Catholic Church that developed the concept of natural philosophy by adopting Aristotle's works as God's natural laws. His works almost acheived the level of a third testament being read often times like the Holy bible itself.
The Catholic Church did not twist anything. It was Aristotle who mostly developed the concept of a finite universe in so much as the Greeks thought things like the number zero and the concept of infinity as illogical.
I mean, the purported conflict between Galileo and the Church just never existed. They were quite open to considering Galileo's new "theory" written using Plato's method of the dialogue. Galileo showed his brilliance by wisely choosing to take on the mighty Aristotle by using a technique used by the equally mighty man who taught him; but, he also showed how dense he could be by the way he clearly made a fool out of the Pope by casting him as a naive character in it.
If you want to blame anyone for the persecution of Galileo, blame Aristotle.

[Mattsa]

Oh, for fuck sakes, here we go again...

When gas is $20 a gallon, you can't heat your home and the IRS is pestering you to pay 'carbon' taxes, you might have be more patient and understanding

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

gravity doesn't exist, it's gods will that we stay on earth that keeps us on the ground :D

The theory that gravity exists was never adequately demonstrated. That is why Newton recanted his belief in it on his death bed and why he didn't use the mysterious force as proof when over turning Descartes theory of a mechanical universe -- a universe that operates like gears and pullys. The fact that Newton showed the integrity not to use the evidence greatly impressed Immanuel Kant later on, no small matter indeed. Instead, Newton used the oblong orbits of comets to show the folly in Descartes' thinking. Even Einstein in his theory of relativity did not support the theory of gravity but instead referred to three dimensional holes in space (mass) that fell into each other.
Perhaps gravity just does not exist as we clearly like to think of it as being.

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

The theory that gravity exists was never adequately demonstrated. That is why Newton recanted his belief in it on his death bed and why he didn't use the mysterious force as proof when over turning Descartes theory of a mechanical universe -- a universe that operates like gears and pullys. The fact that Newton showed the integrity not to use the evidence greatly impressed Immanuel Kant later on, no small matter indeed. Instead, Newton used the oblong orbits of comets to show the folly in Descartes' thinking. Even Einstein in his theory of relativity did not support the theory of gravity but instead referred to three dimensional holes in space (mass) that fell into each other.
Perhaps gravity just does not exist as we clearly like to think of it as being.

i learned all about the theories in college and i still get headaches trying to make sense outta all of em :P

[vegaspilot03]

if you want to know what gravity is, search for leedskalnin.

paraphrasing Ed Leedskalnin: "gravity is the positive individual magnets and negative individual magnets coming out of the earth's middle and interacting with everything they pass through and reaching into space and coming into the Earth's North and South poles accordingly, to repeat process"

[t0rnado]

It's actually just the holy ghost's ectoplasm holding us down.

[FindLiberty]

It's actually just the holy ghost's ectoplasm holding us down.

[Vader] "I find your lack of faith disturbing..." ;-)

Could it just be our lack of faith that's holding us down from (floating "up" to) Heaven?

Just playing Devil's advocate here. ;->

[dannno]

No, really, what's this thread ACTUALLY about?

I forgot, I had to scroll back up to the top :o

[Freedom 4 all]

When gas is $20 a gallon, you can't heat your home and the IRS is pestering you to pay 'carbon' taxes, you might have be more patient and understanding

I was referring to the whole creationism/evolution thing derailing this thread. No one will change their opinion and unless Kent Hovind or Richard Dawkins are going to try and impose tax based on whether evolution is true one way or the other, we should just leave the issue the hell alone.

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

i learned all about the theories in college and i still get headaches trying to make sense outta all of em :P

Science has become so arrogant that it feels it is above its own philosophy becoming quite weird run by weirdos in the process. I didn't learn about the anomalies of science in science. I learned about such things by taking a lot of philosophy of science courses. Strange as it might seem, philosophy is an art class.

[Brooklyn Red Leg]

gravity doesn't exist, it's gods will that we stay on earth that keeps us on the ground :D

No, its Electromagnetism that most likely causes us to stay put. What we think of as gravity is likely electromagnetism, a force 10x40 greater than that of gravity. The mathematical models made by Einstein and other standard mathematics-based astrophysicists/cosmologists has given rise to all sorts of contradictory and nonsensical (and unobservable) phenomena like Black Holes, Dark (Non-baryonic) Matter, Dark Energy, etc. It also led to the mathematical creation of Neutron Stars, something Nuclear Physics says is demonstrably impossible.

YouTube - Gravity, You Failed Us (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNgUMcyLpXs)

The Standard Model got dealt a mortal blow when the Space Age discovered that outer space isn't, in fact, a pure vacuum. 99.99% of the Matter in the Visible Universe is in fact in a Plasma state (the 4th, or Fundamental State of Matter). That giant self-illuminating object the Earth orbits, that we call The Sun, is a massive electrically active body (think a light bulb instead of nuclear fusion engine) surrounded by a plasma sheath that demonstrates the Earth's environment is LITERALLY part of the Sun's (plasma is electrically active, one of the main reasons we have those little power surges called Lightning).

Tesla was right, we have all the energy we could ever need and we're awash in a universe full of it. The problem is that the Oligarchs and their mind-numbed followers don't want that for us. Instead we have to putter along with lesser radiant energy forms like Solar, Wind and so forth, all of which are based on the Standard Model Universe I might add.

Do some research. Its called The Electric or Plasma Universe (or Plasma Cosmology).

[ClayTrainor]

I actually believe there is legitimate science on both sides of the debate, though I think the Alarmists are flatout wrong with their conclusions.

It's safe to say that "free money" from government, has once again muddied the waters of what should be an honest, scientific debate.



http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_tb0lU7SbvKE/SmiVIzkZ9NI/AAAAAAAACJI/CzZtQz7eChY/s400/funding.png

- The US government has provided over $79 billion since 1989 on policies related to climate change, including science and technology research, foreign aid, and tax breaks.

- Despite the billions: “audits” of the science are left to unpaid volunteers. A dedicated but largely uncoordinated grassroots movement of scientists has sprung up around the globe to test the integrity of the theory and compete with a well funded highly organized climate monopoly. They have exposed major errors.

- Carbon trading worldwide reached $126 billion in 2008. Banks are calling for more carbon-trading. And experts are predicting the carbon market will reach $2 - $10 trillion making carbon the largest single commodity traded.

- Meanwhile in a distracting sideshow, Exxon-Mobil Corp is repeatedly attacked for paying a grand total of $23 million to skeptics—less than a thousandth of what the US government has put in, and less than one five-thousandth of the value of carbon trading in just the single year of 2008.

- The large expenditure in search of a connection between carbon and climate creates enormous momentum and a powerful set of vested interests. By pouring so much money into one theory, have we inadvertently created a self-fulfilling prophesy instead of an unbiased investigation?

Full Article:
http://ilovecarbondioxide.com/2009/07/climate-funding-exposed-79-billion.html


Add evolutionists to that list. They claim their religion is "peer-reviewed."

Do you always go around looking to start conflicts on evolution?

[Reason]

Add evolutionists to that list. They claim their religion is "peer-reviewed." This whole global warming issue has shown once and for all that just because something is peer-reviewed, it doesn't mean it is good science.

http://i588.photobucket.com/albums/ss324/Civilradiant/128343688002656250hallelujahpra.jpg

[Carole]

Science has been hijacked by politicians, just as the conduct of wars was taken over by useless politicians. Education, poverty, the economy, healthcare (medicare), social programs, war on crime.etc. -- all now taken over by politics.

And just look at the mess they have made of all of them. Bankrupt, corrupt, lies, and more poor now than half a century ago when the war on poverty began. More crime than ever before. Terrible education, economy, and healthcare soon to become another victim.

Could this be why we no longer conclude wars and get out? Could this be why science now has been reduced to the level of used car salesmen and lawyers in the eyes of many people, because it is impossible to put one's faith in anything politicized.

[Carole]

Is that something like superglue? :D