Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #719703

Re: Why debate in science is dead

Show all headers | View raw

On 12/20/2018 12:10 PM, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> On Thursday, December 13, 2018 at 11:33:00 AM UTC-8, James McGinn wrote:
>> Humans have a deep-seated emotional need to believe they understand their world and there is a lot of money to be made fulfilling that need. And since most science consumers don't have the time or the education to put much effort into it, the most money can be made giving these science consumers excuses for why they don't actually have to literally understand it. And so--for reasons of fiscal necessity--many scientific disciplines have dumbed down their models to go with the flow of what people want to believe. 

      McGinn the "science consumer"

>>
>> It is for this reason that there are certain concepts in every scientific discipline that are sacred. Their validity is beyond dispute and cannot be contradicted without the person being shunned by the larger discipline. Or, more simply put, certain subjects are taboo. 

       McGinn, that is your belief.

>>
>> The anomalies of H2O are a severe embarrassment to all of the scientific disciplines in which water plays a central role. 


again, McGinn does not know what the word "anomalies" means.


>>And, obviously, this includes all of the natural sciences but also physics and chemistry. The misconceptions associated with these anomalies are central to all of the various disciplines in the natural sciences.

McGinn fails to understand the word "anomalies" therefore he shit-can
all science.  Ok.


>>
>> This results in a consensus of obnoxious dunces in the natural sciences. These nitwits dismiss and evade contradictions that conflict with these artificially simplistic models. Like martyrs to a religious cause, they are willing to sacrifice their own reputation in order to preserve the perceived sanctity of their science-based beliefs.

McGinn discuss his self.  and where are McGinn's facts ?

>>
>> Stupidity lies at the heart of most traditional notions in the natural sciences.

yes, McGinn's stupidity.

> 
> Strong belief in Gods make them to stupid to look for the truth.Science looks for the truth.Bert
> 

Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Why debate in science is dead James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2018-12-13 11:32 -0800
  Re: Why debate in science is dead "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-12-20 10:10 -0800
    Re: Why debate in science is dead Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-12-20 13:21 -0600
  Re: Why debate in science is dead jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2018-12-20 19:35 +0000
  Re: Why debate in science is dead Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2018-12-20 14:55 -0800

csiph-web