Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

  • Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
  • The Gospel of Jesus Christ

    Heard of "The Gospel"? Want to know more?

    There is salvation in no other, for there is not another name under heaven having been given among men, by which it behooves us to be saved."

[_ Old Earth _] The Psinetic Theory of Psionics

2024 Website Hosting Fees

Total amount
$905.00
Goal
$1,038.00
science is not made from critical thinkers, science is made from people who give other ideas a chance.

No discoveries are made by chance and luck and need to have no rhyme or reason to them. The structure of Benzene for instance came to its investigator in a dream, he imagined a snake biting its tail and came up with the benzene ring.

But science is built on the confirmation and testing of these ideas and first and formost the UNDERSTANDING of the significance of a discovery. Thousands of people can observe gravity lensing by galaxies, but Einstein showed how it worked.

no one could explain a black hole, not until they FOUND the physics for it. no one could explain why a ball hit the ground, until the DISCOVERED the physics to it.
Actually Black Holes were predicted by Einstein and not really found until the late 80s or early 90s. He figured out the physics for something like it existed, and predicted something like that would occur.
As for gravity, they all thought that they knew how things worked, until physicists figured out that they were wrong and using their work figured out a lot more about the universe.

Face it. You have not shown any way to support most of the things that you've said in your theory or any way to test your theory. These are the only ways that you can get people to take it seriously. The fact that you throw a good deal of physics out the window doesn't help either. Learn physics, then you can be relied on to discover things. At the moment all you're making is adolescent conjecture.
 
great critical thinker if you can't reach out and take the information handed to you.

That's the point...you haven't handed it to me. You expect me to reach out and grab it.

if you can't do that, what critical thinker are you? you're simply lazy and only analyze what you "feel" you have enough power to analyze.

Being lazy has nothing to do with being a critical thinker. I value my time and I don't want to waste it searching through some 8-page paper about magic and mind-reading.

since when did i say "I" tested anything? and besides, telling you how to test my theory would not be any advantage for me, considering how you don't even believe that it works. why spend the time to go over somethin you don't trust?

If I tested it and it worked then maybe I would believe that it works. However, if you honestly don't want to tell me because the test doesn't actually work, then I understand.

i can tell you right now, there are many people who trust this kind of work

Yeah, alot of people believe in fairies too.

and no, science is not made from critical thinkers, science is made from people who give other ideas a chance.

Yes, but they don't blindly accept those ideas on faith. We're talking about science, not theology. They may give other ideas a chance, but it is necessary that the idea be critically analyzed in the process.

if you keep pushing away the ideas in front of you, how would science ever expand?

I don't push away all ideas in front of me, just the ones without merit or basis.

if these stupid and idiotic critical thinkers were not butting into everything and trying to put good ideas down, science would be much broader.

If the good ideas worked then they wouldn't be butting them down. Scientists judge things based on evidence, if there's no evidence there's no reason to accept it.

but people like you tear it appart, not in attempt to make it better, but in attempt to ruin it.

People like me tear it apart to make sure it has validity, and if it does we attempt to make it better. It's much more efficient than making everything we come across better, just to find that 99% of them don't actually describe the world around us.

the things i have observed....let's see. kinetics. telekinetics, psionics, pyrokinetics, hydrokinetics, you name it, i've seen it. and no, you don't have to have a perfect understanding of physics to say that something works with it.

If you've observed them then there must be some way to replicate your results. Tell us how.

if it works, it works, and if physics doesn't apply to it, that means physics is wrong. am i not correct?

No, you're not correct. Physics has a certain plasticity to it that would allow for it to accomodate what we see around us.

no one could explain a black hole, not until they FOUND the physics for it. no one could explain why a ball hit the ground, until the DISCOVERED the physics to it. people every day put people who discover new things down, and say that they are wrong, when they are in fact riht. a good lesson of this is einstein himself. you people should learn from your mistakes.

Black holes were predicted sometime around 1918. We're only beginning to see indirect evidence of them. Get your story straight before you try and use it to prove a point.
 
well do you even know if it'll work? no. you ;haven't tested it and neither have i. so i think you can stop saying that it doesn't work, for a critical thinker like yourself, saying that something doesn't work before it's even been tested is a huge mistake (as einstein's beginning work proved, no scientist believed him until he tested it. even then there were skeptics, and ho looked dumb and unintelligent in the end? the skeptics.)

cd
 
cd27 said:
well do you even know if it'll work? no. you ;haven't tested it and neither have i. so i think you can stop saying that it doesn't work, for a critical thinker like yourself, saying that something doesn't work before it's even been tested is a huge mistake (as einstein's beginning work proved, no scientist believed him until he tested it. even then there were skeptics, and ho looked dumb and unintelligent in the end? the skeptics.)

cd

Well, Einstein was a genius...and from what I've seen you haven't proved anything mathematically...
 
well do you even know if it'll work? no. you ;haven't tested it and neither have i.

But your friends have apparently tested it. Quit whining and tell me how they tested it, so that I can verify that it works. Don't sit around and say "it works, it works" without giving any evidence that it works. Science depends on the reproducibility of experiments, and until you describe to us how we can test these ideas and we do, how do you expect us to accept that it's true? That's the difference between the atheist and the theist, you think that everything anybody says should be taken on faith and we don't believe anything until there's enough evidence to.

(as einstein's beginning work proved, no scientist believed him until he tested it. even then there were skeptics, and ho looked dumb and unintelligent in the end? the skeptics.)

Einstein's beginning work was generally accepted by the scientific community when it came out. It was his theory of GR that was contested, and with well reason. The skeptics did the right thing. The scientific method requires that you test something before you can say it's true. And besides, Einstein still wasn't completely right. Oh, and don't say the skeptics looked dumb and unintelligent in the end, because they didn't. Some of the biggest names in science back then didn't accept GR until there was evidence for it, and for good reason too. You're in no position to be saying that they look dumb and unintelligent.
 
okay, here, go to this site and read as much as you can, then maybe you'll be able to test my theory, this is the EASIEST way to test my theory (oh, by the way, Einstein wasn't a mathmetician until he was at elast out of high school, so would you have called him a genius then, before he tested his theory and had a mathematical background? either way, his theories, which he had already thought of BEFORE he went to college to test them, worked, how are you so sure that mine won't work the same? oh well, it's just your oppinion against mine really. just wait a couple of years, you'll be seeing me somewhere getting famous and i'll be looking at you like you're the idiot, or will i? no, i won't be that arrogant. you're not an idiot, jsut egotistic.)

http://www.psipog.net

good reading!

eric/CD
 
just to let you guys know, i'm not trying to make myself look right at all tiems, and i'm not trying to make you look dumb either, even though it looks like it. you guys are correct in many things you say, and you've got alot of time to do the things the way you do, i appreciate that, but please try to look at this the way i do. it won't work unless you do that. the only way to fully understand something is if you view it the same way the author did. thanks!

CD
 
just to let you guys know, i'm not trying to make myself look right at all tiems, and i'm not trying to make you look dumb either, even though it looks like it. you guys are correct in many things you say, and you've got alot of time to do the things the way you do, i appreciate that, but please try to look at this the way i do. it won't work unless you do that. the only way to fully understand something is if you view it the same way the author did. thanks!

CD
 
cd27 said:
just to let you guys know, i'm not trying to make myself look right at all tiems, and i'm not trying to make you look dumb either, even though it looks like it. you guys are correct in many things you say, and you've got alot of time to do the things the way you do, i appreciate that, but please try to look at this the way i do. it won't work unless you do that. the only way to fully understand something is if you view it the same way the author did. thanks!

CD
The problem with this is that your view of the universe is not necessarily the state of things. You show in your conjecture that you don't know much about physics. There is one thing you can do to alleviate this problem: learn physics. Go to your library or some other place that might have it, and check out the Feynman Lectures on Physics. Read them. Then you'll know a great deal more physics than you do now.
 
Back
Top