Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 30

Thread: Why can't we admit..

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    4,382

    Default Why can't we admit..

    ..That we just can't understand all things .. here's a quote .. " Space seethes with an enormous enigmatic energy, and, each second, trillions of cubic light-years more of it materializes from nothingness." óBob Berman, Astronomy, November 2007

    It 's just ridiculous that human-kind is so arrogant that we think that we can, and we have the comprehension to understand, realize and rationalize all things of the universe and beyond .. ahhhh ... the fucking arrogance .. just pisses me off .. -- venting --- /end rant // -- Thanks for listening ..

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    229

    Default

    ...But we have the capacity for learning, knowledge and understanding... Don't you WANT to know? I want to know...

    I think there is DEFINITELY a fine line between arrogance and confidence, the difference is knowing the difference... We know more about the universe than we did 100, 500, or even 2000 years ago... And that's a good thing. What's worse is the fact that certain groups, be they religious, social or governmental, think the only way to rule is to keep the masses ignorant and fearful... And tell me when you look back in history that this hasn't been done ad nauseam...

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    1 hr from everything in SoCal
    Posts
    2,549

    Default

    I know what you mean, Steve-o. I feel the same about the whole "global warming" thing. I am not an opponent of it but I don't believe for one second that we KNOW what WILL happen. We have simply not gained the kind of understanding that we require to KNOW what WILL happen.
    Those who fail to grasp art are the ones who criticize it.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,730

    Default

    42.

    Simples .
    This space for rent.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    4,382

    Default

    --oops .. there's me posting after toddy-time again .. I tried to delete it but got tired and went to bed..
    Anyhoo, yes I think it's a good thing and we should keep exploring, it's just that sometimes when I hear a "space expert" explaining exactly how the universe works it's just kind of presumptuous on his part to claim to know the inner workings of such an obvious unknown .. yep 42 .. D'Oh .. I should have realized
    Yes, Absolom, exactly the same principle there .. people conjecturing and claiming it as fact .

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Sumter, SC
    Posts
    269

    Default

    Here's my view on that stuff. Without trying to understand something, we won't make advances in understanding it further. We also wouldn't have technological advances. We may not fully understand what will happen with global warming for example. We do know some of what will happen if it continues. Burning fossil fuels is only a small part of global warming. The planet will continue with its trends of warming up and cooling down even without humans causing problems.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    My momentum is too precisely determined :S
    Posts
    1,771

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DrEvil View Post
    Here's my view on that stuff. Without trying to understand something, we won't make advances in understanding it further. We also wouldn't have technological advances. We may not fully understand what will happen with global warming for example. We do know some of what will happen if it continues. Burning fossil fuels is only a small part of global warming. The planet will continue with its trends of warming up and cooling down even without humans causing problems.
    There appears to be a statistical link between atmospheric CO2 levels and temperature (on a large time scale). The processes behind this phenomenon have been explained by science. Also this: when the temperature of the Earth changed it was always on large time scales so life could adapt. Humans are changing the conditions on this planet relatively fast (not just temperature, also the merciless destruction of habitats, exploitation, pollution, which contribute a lot more than global warming to biodiversity loss). Only the fastest adapters will be able to survive and those are usually prone to become pests.

    Quote Originally Posted by absolom7691 View Post
    I know what you mean, Steve-o. I feel the same about the whole "global warming" thing. I am not an opponent of it but I don't believe for one second that we KNOW what WILL happen. We have simply not gained the kind of understanding that we require to KNOW what WILL happen.


    There are roughly four situations.

    A: Humans cause global warming by burning fossil fuels and profit maximalisation. They can either
    1: Change their behaviour and stop using fossil fuel, or
    2: act like nothing is going on.

    B: Humans don't cause global warming and
    1: change their behaviour anyway due to mass hysteria, or
    2: don't do anything.

    Situations A2 and B1 are the ones we'd like to avoid... but I'd rather be in B1 than in A2. Better be safe than sorry. Fossil fuels are going to run out anyway.
    We don't know which of these situations will be reality. But does that matter?
    Last edited by colouredmirrorball; 09-03-2014 at 13:17.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    1 hr from everything in SoCal
    Posts
    2,549

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by colouredmirrorball View Post
    There appears to be a statistical link between atmospheric CO2 levels and temperature (on a large time scale). The processes behind this phenomenon have been explained by science. Also this: when the temperature of the Earth changed it was always on large time scales so life could adapt. Humans are changing the conditions on this planet relatively fast (not just temperature, also the merciless destruction of habitats, exploitation, pollution, which contribute a lot more than global warming to biodiversity loss). Only the fastest adapters will be able to survive and those are usually prone to become pests.





    There are rougly four situations.

    A: Humans cause global warming by burning fossil fuels and profit maximalisation. They can either
    1: Change their behaviour and stop using fossil fuel, or
    2: act like nothing is going on.

    B: Humans don't cause global warming and
    1: change their behaviour anyway due to mass hysteria, or
    2: don't do anything.

    Situations A2 and B1 are the ones we'd like to avoid... but I'd rather be in B1 than in A2. Better be safe than sorry. Fossil fuels are going to run out anyway.
    We don't know which of these situations will be reality. But does that matter?
    I despise the idea of doing something due to mass hysteria or being mislead. To pretend that we know the results (we've even made predictions that just fell flat) about something that we have an extremely limited grasp on it is nothing more than fear mongering. It is, in essence, lying. It's the reason I can't stand conservation as opposed to innovation. It's the reason I can't stand penalizing as opposed to incentivizing. I'll agree, we need to change our lifestyles, if for no other reason than human health and also it drives the power and money behind new technologies. To mislead the public into thinking that we know what's going on is ludacris, regardless of the outcome. I'm not saying that global warming doesn't exist or even that we're not causing it. We should change because we want to, to be better, to drive the science machine, to explore, to innovate, to keep industry rolling... We should not change just because we have been spoonfed souped up information of something we can barely grasp the fundamentals of, living in fear because of what we have been made to believe. I don't want to start any holy wars but this is the EXACT argument science based folks have against religion, e.g. living in fear makes you do the right thing. Both sides are not absolved of this. This is why I'm an agnostic all around

    Just like Steve-O's OP, it would be a far better thing to say that we "think" it "may" be that the universe is expanding by X amount but they don't. I don't exactly see it as arrogance. I see it more like validation. None of us here have the ability to access Hubble, Chandra or Spitzer to make our own observations and if we did, very few of us posess the maths needed to explain the data. Because none of us can see or even use this data , they have the freedom to say "Space seethes with an enormous enigmatic energy, and, each second, trillions of cubic light-years more of it materializes from nothingness." After all, they're scientists, they MUST know what they're talking about, right? That kind of thing bugs me too. I'm all for unlocking the universe but right now, our feeble minds can't even grasp it so let's not pretend we know and then state it like it is fact.

    Wow, long post, mainly ranting, sorry about that folks!
    Those who fail to grasp art are the ones who criticize it.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    2,155

    Default

    Hypothesis = educated guess. You have to start somewhere.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Brno, CZ / Povazska Bystrica, SK
    Posts
    491

    Default

    corporate environment could be seen as a small universe of its own, you can never fully understand all of its processes and their meaning of existence

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •