Science is close-minded

[Thunderbird]

Thank you, that is incredibly accurate. Unfortunately, my conversational intolerance caused me to be uncourteous to members here, and that led to my suspension. I truly DON'T respect those beliefs which don't make sense, so it may be time for me to just give up my fight, or at the very least, stop waging it here at Hypo. This saddens me, but restraint is required of me.

 

 

Pharyngula: Open season on fresh meat

I want my commenters to be uncivil. There is no virtue in politeness when confronted with ignorance, dishonesty, and delusion. I want them to charge in to the heart of the issue and shred the frauds, without hesitation and without faltering over manners. These demands for a false front of civility are one of the strategies used by charlatans who want to mask their lack of substance — oh, yes, it would be so goddamned rude to point out that a huckster is lying to you. I am quite happy that we have a culture of being rude to frauds here.

 

 

 

This was a quote which really resonated with me, but its tone does not have any place in this community.

 

Inow have you seen this yet. You will love it! :)

bill mahr's new movie - Live Search Video

[InfiniteNow]

Inow have you seen this yet. You will love it! :hihi:

bill mahr's new movie - Live Search Video

Haven't seen it yet, but it sure does look funny. :doh:

[InfiniteNow]

YouTube - Open-mindedness http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T69TOuqaqXI

[freeztar]

 

Thank you infinite! That is exactly it (the whole purpose of this thread)! :doh:

[Pyrotex]

InfiNow!

Excellent video! Top rate! Dynamite! Thanks!

Pyro

[modest]

Bloody brilliant.

 

It's too bad those people who accuse science of being close-minded won't be able to recognize the validity of that video—being, as they are, close-minded :doh:

 

~modest

[InfiniteNow]

Here's another little gem. Enjoy. :naughty:

 

 

 

YouTube - Storm by Tim Minchin (with text) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UB_htqDCP-s&feature=player_embedded

[lemit]

Thank you, InfiniteNow. Both videos are very good. The first is excellent.

 

Part of the reason I haven't posted much lately, besides technical problems that make me long for graphite technology, is that some of the responses to some of my posts have seemed less than welcoming.

 

I have wanted to throw out some personal experiences in the hope that I might find corroboration in other people's experiences. If nobody else's experiences match mine, I will ascribe my experiences to faulty synapses. But I want more information, not peremptory judgment.

 

Yes, I seem to have memories of thought processes from infancy. Yes, I keep pets. Yes, I have seen what looks like complex problem-solving behavior in my pets. So that seems to make me cruel and superstitious. I feel like I've come here for an argument but have just got disputation.

 

I think I need to reconsider my initial response about science's open-mindedness. I don't want to. I'm looking for input from people who don't understand things that have happened to them. The people who, I guess, believe we can't have experiences we don't understand? I don't know. I don't want to dismiss them, but I sure don't feel like they're contributing to the discussion.

 

--lemit

[REASON]

Here's another little gem. Enjoy. :xparty:

 

I tried to rep you but I couldn't. Guess I haven't been enough of a socialist lately - concentrating the wealth and all. ;)

 

You always find such great little video gems like this to share.

 

Thank you for doing so. ;)

[lawcat]

Science is limited by human perception and utility of its tools, which can be called set A. The complement set of A, the set Ac, is the imperceptible and immeasurable. The power of deduction encompasses both set A and set Ac. Any science which limits itself to any subset of A + Ac, is close minded; which maybe necessary or convenient at times, and detrimental to inquiry or practice at others.

In essence, close-mindedness is a matter of judgment, and judgment is a matter of discretion.

Substantively, discretion is unlimited in the field of set A + Ac. Procedurally, on the other hand, we have developed a time tested convention of if-then deduction. Any judgment that does not use if-then is suspect, and may be deemed arbitrary. Arbitrary judgments are thus procedurally suspect judgments and have no place in science.

[Doctordick]

Science is not closed minded; scientists can be closed minded but thank god there exist some (every once an a while) who are not.

 

Have fun -- Dick

[Pyrotex]

Those who cry "close-minded" often do so because I merely disagree.

Disagreeing is NOT being close-minded.

If I have considered their POV and their arguments, and followed the evidence, then I have been "open-minded".

Even if I ultimately disagree.

[Glenn Lyvers]

I don't think science is closed minded. Of course, as others have pointed out, some scientists can be. Science itself is not. It is one of the few things which is pure, the seeking of knowledge. Of course science can lead to wrongful conclusions sometimes, but it is not in the "closed mindedness" that such an event usually happens. It is in bad testing or bad results, either way - it is seeking real answers and that's a noble thing.

 

I loved reading the posts in this thread. Some cool people here for sure.

 

Glenn

[maddog]

In other words, science is open-minded to the possibility that Jesus was a hermaphrodite? :)

No, I think it means the Virgin Mary was a hermaphrodite:naughty:

Not to sway too far off topic. This is Really a novel theory I have never heard speculated

before.

 

However, If I remember that the night Gabriel came to Mary and told her she was with

child. Until then she did not know she was pregnant. Wouldn't she [Mary] have "connected

the dots" if in truth she was doing herself with herself (i.e. in hermaphroditic way). :shrug: :confused:

 

Sorry for the off topic remark -- You can now view the rest of this thread already in

progress... :)

 

maddog

[maddog]

I must admit that I agree with the sentiment as expressed by Dr. Richard Feynman that

Science is "close-minded" to the results, yet open-minded to the expression of ideas.

I feel strongly in this as well.

 

We can hypothesize away yet we will always be measured in the crucible of Results! :confused:

 

maddog

[Turtle]

Not to sway too far off topic.

 

Not at all; you have nailed it. :hyper:

 

In other words, science is open-minded to the possibility that Jesus was a hermaphrodite?

No, I think it means the Virgin Mary was a hermaphrodite. :naughty:

This is Really a novel theory I have never heard speculated before.

 

However, If I remember that the night Gabriel came to Mary and told her she was with

child. Until then she did not know she was pregnant. Wouldn't she [Mary] have "connected the dots" if in truth she was doing herself with herself (i.e. in hermaphroditic way). :eek_big: :eek: :surprise:

 

maddog

 

While it is entirely possible that the J-man and his momma were hermaphrodites, neither it seems could have self-pollinated in spite of any activity toward that end. :hyper: To whit:

 

Hermaphrodites Avoid Self-Fertilization: Scientific American Podcast

Hermaphrodites Avoid Self-Fertilization

If you’ve ever given any thought to the lifestyle of the hermaphrodite, it’s probably occurred to you that being both male and female doubles your chances of having a date on a Saturday night. Yeah, it’s an old joke, but it’s sort of true. Because most hermaphrodites do have to date. In other words, they can’t simply fertilize themselves. (If they could, I’m sure they would.) So what actually stops them? ...

 

Mary (or possibly Marty :hyper:) obviously used Gabriel as a convenient cover for her/his dalliance(s), and she/he sought these promiscuities knowing full well from years of trying that she/he needed outside help getting a bun in the oven. Rather than the devil made me do it :evil:, the head angel said it was OK.

[IDMclean]

Open Mindedness http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T69TOuqaqXI

 

Watch and you shall grok.