Off-Topic :
Fairfax Underground
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
Philosopher Stone
()
Date: September 12, 2017 08:02AM
Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Dark matter constitutes 84.5% of total mass, while dark energy plus dark matter constitute 95.1% of total mass–energy content.
Ive noticed a recent talking point by conservatives is that Science isnt 'certain' about some things like climate change being caused by man (it is) or that 'consensus' is an utterly flawed idea because its uncertain - hence we are 'no good' at predicting things. I have some pretty alarming news for those holding this position - Science really knows less than 5% of anything about the tiny fraction of the Universe we can observe.
If anyone here is 'waiting' for Science to improve to the point of certainty on literally anything know that that will never, ever happen. Not in infinity. Never. So be honest and start reading sparrow guts for information on weather, climate, cancer and earthquakes. Stop pretending to critique the very pragmatic application of the knowledge we do have with the unattainable.
Dark matter constitutes 84.5% of total mass, while dark energy plus dark matter constitute 95.1% of total mass–energy content.
Ive noticed a recent talking point by conservatives is that Science isnt 'certain' about some things like climate change being caused by man (it is) or that 'consensus' is an utterly flawed idea because its uncertain - hence we are 'no good' at predicting things. I have some pretty alarming news for those holding this position - Science really knows less than 5% of anything about the tiny fraction of the Universe we can observe.
If anyone here is 'waiting' for Science to improve to the point of certainty on literally anything know that that will never, ever happen. Not in infinity. Never. So be honest and start reading sparrow guts for information on weather, climate, cancer and earthquakes. Stop pretending to critique the very pragmatic application of the knowledge we do have with the unattainable.
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
Olldd
()
Date: September 12, 2017 08:08AM
I think people are talking about the affect humans...increasing out of control numbers of humans that affect the planet.
More people more problems...and those problems involve everything, idiots that can't drive, waiting on line for food, waiting on line to take a shit..
More garbage...more of everything...thats not really science. U don't need to be scientific to figure any of this out.
More people more problems...and those problems involve everything, idiots that can't drive, waiting on line for food, waiting on line to take a shit..
More garbage...more of everything...thats not really science. U don't need to be scientific to figure any of this out.
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
copernicus
()
Date: September 12, 2017 08:26AM
Compared to 500 years ago we've made enormously gigantic leaps and bounds in understanding the universe. That's a crazy-short amount of time in the scheme of things. Five hundred years ago educated people were just beginning to accept that the earth revolved around the sun, and not the other way around. Things like galaxies, nuclear physics, and general relativity were still another 400 years off and would've seemed like black magic. It's actually pretty amazing how much we actually do know about the universe, especially considering that only 10,000 years ago we lived in caves and couldn't write.
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
Crest
()
Date: September 12, 2017 08:58AM
And yet, most people still have no idea how to put excess toothpaste back into the tube.
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
Galileo
()
Date: September 12, 2017 09:07AM
copernicus Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Compared to 500 years ago we've made enormously
> gigantic leaps and bounds in understanding the
> universe. That's a crazy-short amount of time in
> the scheme of things. Five hundred years ago
> educated people were just beginning to accept that
> the earth revolved around the sun, and not the
> other way around. Things like galaxies, nuclear
> physics, and general relativity were still another
> 400 years off and would've seemed like black
> magic. It's actually pretty amazing how much we
> actually do know about the universe, especially
> considering that only 10,000 years ago we lived in
> caves and couldn't write.
On 7 January 1610 Galileo used his telescope, with optics superior to what had been available before. He described "three fixed stars, totally invisible by their smallness", all close to Jupiter, and lying on a straight line through it. Observations on subsequent nights showed that the positions of these "stars" relative to Jupiter were changing in a way that would have been inexplicable if they had really been fixed stars.
On 10 January Galileo noted that one of them had disappeared, an observation which he attributed to its being hidden behind Jupiter. Within a few days he concluded that they were orbiting Jupiter: Galileo stated that he had reached this conclusion on 11 January. He had discovered three of Jupiter's four largest satellites (moons). He discovered the fourth on 13 January.
His observations of the satellites of Jupiter created a revolution in astronomy: a planet with smaller planets orbiting it did not conform to the principles of Aristotelian Cosmology, which held that all heavenly bodies should circle the Earth, and many astronomers and philosophers initially refused to believe that Galileo could have discovered such a thing.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Compared to 500 years ago we've made enormously
> gigantic leaps and bounds in understanding the
> universe. That's a crazy-short amount of time in
> the scheme of things. Five hundred years ago
> educated people were just beginning to accept that
> the earth revolved around the sun, and not the
> other way around. Things like galaxies, nuclear
> physics, and general relativity were still another
> 400 years off and would've seemed like black
> magic. It's actually pretty amazing how much we
> actually do know about the universe, especially
> considering that only 10,000 years ago we lived in
> caves and couldn't write.
On 7 January 1610 Galileo used his telescope, with optics superior to what had been available before. He described "three fixed stars, totally invisible by their smallness", all close to Jupiter, and lying on a straight line through it. Observations on subsequent nights showed that the positions of these "stars" relative to Jupiter were changing in a way that would have been inexplicable if they had really been fixed stars.
On 10 January Galileo noted that one of them had disappeared, an observation which he attributed to its being hidden behind Jupiter. Within a few days he concluded that they were orbiting Jupiter: Galileo stated that he had reached this conclusion on 11 January. He had discovered three of Jupiter's four largest satellites (moons). He discovered the fourth on 13 January.
His observations of the satellites of Jupiter created a revolution in astronomy: a planet with smaller planets orbiting it did not conform to the principles of Aristotelian Cosmology, which held that all heavenly bodies should circle the Earth, and many astronomers and philosophers initially refused to believe that Galileo could have discovered such a thing.
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
Tiki Torch Carryin' Trumptard
()
Date: September 12, 2017 09:20AM
Galileo was a cuck!
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
WYB36
()
Date: September 12, 2017 09:33AM
Philosopher Stone Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding
> Reality
>
> Dark matter constitutes 84.5% of total mass, while
> dark energy plus dark matter constitute 95.1% of
> total mass–energy content.
>
> Ive noticed a recent talking point by
> conservatives is that Science isnt 'certain' about
> some things like climate change being caused by
> man (it is) or that 'consensus' is an utterly
> flawed idea because its uncertain - hence we are
> 'no good' at predicting things. I have some
> pretty alarming news for those holding this
> position - Science really knows less than 5% of
> anything about the tiny fraction of the Universe
> we can observe.
>
> If anyone here is 'waiting' for Science to improve
> to the point of certainty on literally anything
> know that that will never, ever happen. Not in
> infinity. Never. So be honest and start reading
> sparrow guts for information on weather, climate,
> cancer and earthquakes. Stop pretending to
> critique the very pragmatic application of the
> knowledge we do have with the unattainable.
The confusion here is "science". Few people seem to understand what that means. Science is geared toward producing models that describe reality and have predictive power. Some models are better than others. We can predict the orbits of planets with existing models that are hundreds of years old. It breaks down a little bit when you need to consider relativity for planets like Mercury. But still, a fairly good model. This model is based on some models of gravity. But this same model for gravity and orbits doesn't work for galaxies and larger systems. Is it complete junk? No, it simply doesn't account for the not well understood dark energy and matter.
As far as climate, these models are very young. The data is extremely complex -- there isn't a single simple force dominating the behavior. It's hard to say how good these models are because we aren't clear if what they predict is happening.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding
> Reality
>
> Dark matter constitutes 84.5% of total mass, while
> dark energy plus dark matter constitute 95.1% of
> total mass–energy content.
>
> Ive noticed a recent talking point by
> conservatives is that Science isnt 'certain' about
> some things like climate change being caused by
> man (it is) or that 'consensus' is an utterly
> flawed idea because its uncertain - hence we are
> 'no good' at predicting things. I have some
> pretty alarming news for those holding this
> position - Science really knows less than 5% of
> anything about the tiny fraction of the Universe
> we can observe.
>
> If anyone here is 'waiting' for Science to improve
> to the point of certainty on literally anything
> know that that will never, ever happen. Not in
> infinity. Never. So be honest and start reading
> sparrow guts for information on weather, climate,
> cancer and earthquakes. Stop pretending to
> critique the very pragmatic application of the
> knowledge we do have with the unattainable.
The confusion here is "science". Few people seem to understand what that means. Science is geared toward producing models that describe reality and have predictive power. Some models are better than others. We can predict the orbits of planets with existing models that are hundreds of years old. It breaks down a little bit when you need to consider relativity for planets like Mercury. But still, a fairly good model. This model is based on some models of gravity. But this same model for gravity and orbits doesn't work for galaxies and larger systems. Is it complete junk? No, it simply doesn't account for the not well understood dark energy and matter.
As far as climate, these models are very young. The data is extremely complex -- there isn't a single simple force dominating the behavior. It's hard to say how good these models are because we aren't clear if what they predict is happening.
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
trumpitality
()
Date: September 12, 2017 12:11PM
Science is the best we've got to understand reality but it is a slow and plodding process hampered by many things.
"Climate change" is too complex as you say and has too many unknown variables for us to understand; those who pretend to understand are delusional or corrupt.
If true it's not something we can reverse quickly enough and our only chance will be using technology to reduce insolation of Earth; and we'll probably screw that up due to lack of knowledge of effect.
"Climate change" is too complex as you say and has too many unknown variables for us to understand; those who pretend to understand are delusional or corrupt.
If true it's not something we can reverse quickly enough and our only chance will be using technology to reduce insolation of Earth; and we'll probably screw that up due to lack of knowledge of effect.
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
Philosopher Stone
()
Date: September 12, 2017 01:28PM
trumpitality Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Science is the best we've got to understand
> reality but it is a slow and plodding process
> hampered by many things.
>
> "Climate change" is too complex as you say and has
> too many unknown variables for us to understand;
> those who pretend to understand are delusional or
> corrupt.
>
> If true it's not something we can reverse quickly
> enough and our only chance will be using
> technology to reduce insolation of Earth; and
> we'll probably screw that up due to lack of
> knowledge of effect.
OP here and you hit precisely my point! Everything is too complex to understand. Literally. There is simply no arguing that point. As another poster mentioned we may use laws and models to predict with great accuracy movement of certain planets but when considered in the relativity of the Universe we really dont understand much.
My other point implied but not mentioned is those who reject our best efforts to understand live as existential absurdists. This is not in any way meant as an insult, it merely states that the only meaning reality has is the one we give to it. 'If I dont like climate change I give it no meaning.' While Climate is measurable and we do have the models to predict trends like warming caused by man's activity existential absurdists have every right to deny it.
As for those pragmatists and others that believe in an external reality (not an easy thing given the vastness of our ignorance), well, the overwhelming evidence and opinion of science is to be believed and acted upon.
Thanks for the discussion
-------------------------------------------------------
> Science is the best we've got to understand
> reality but it is a slow and plodding process
> hampered by many things.
>
> "Climate change" is too complex as you say and has
> too many unknown variables for us to understand;
> those who pretend to understand are delusional or
> corrupt.
>
> If true it's not something we can reverse quickly
> enough and our only chance will be using
> technology to reduce insolation of Earth; and
> we'll probably screw that up due to lack of
> knowledge of effect.
OP here and you hit precisely my point! Everything is too complex to understand. Literally. There is simply no arguing that point. As another poster mentioned we may use laws and models to predict with great accuracy movement of certain planets but when considered in the relativity of the Universe we really dont understand much.
My other point implied but not mentioned is those who reject our best efforts to understand live as existential absurdists. This is not in any way meant as an insult, it merely states that the only meaning reality has is the one we give to it. 'If I dont like climate change I give it no meaning.' While Climate is measurable and we do have the models to predict trends like warming caused by man's activity existential absurdists have every right to deny it.
As for those pragmatists and others that believe in an external reality (not an easy thing given the vastness of our ignorance), well, the overwhelming evidence and opinion of science is to be believed and acted upon.
Thanks for the discussion
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
Dumb as a Stone
()
Date: September 12, 2017 02:19PM
And you continue to miss the point.
It's not a matter of uncertainty. Rather, it's a matter of misrepresenting "consensus" (based on gamed derivations to begin with) and modelling as certainty, claiming greater certainty than science actually shows, and attempting to summarily dismiss anyone who questions ANY aspect of the approved interpretations of "science" by labeling them as heretics in the same way that is done by a church or cult, whose adherents then are encouraged to take this as faith far removed from any actual science involved.
The science of "climate change" has been completely hijacked by political and social interests who have little to no real concern with any of the science involved. The conclusions are predetermined by their desired outcomes and objectives. "Global warming" didn't become such a prominent issue based on inherent science or potential effects. It became a political talking point because it provides a near perfect vehicle for use by various activists and those with various vested interests which it serves.
This is fairly easily demonstrated by just looking at the nature of the debate itself. There is virtually no concern on the part of activists (or much of the opposition) regarding significant scientific aspects of the matter that typically would be at the front of any other scientific question. Precise levels and extent, time frames, sensitivities vs other factors, etc. All of that is secondary. Nobody really cares about the pesky details. All that's required to know is that it (whatever it may be) IS happening and that "97%" of the high priests all say that it is happening (even thought they really don't). Now go forth and speak against "Big Oil" who we hated for a variety of reasons anyway, provide government funding to our preferred groups and supporters, and send $100 million/year to those of us representing Indonesia, etc. at the UN who control the organization and funding for the committee of high priests making the determinations. e.g., The only hard requirements in the Paris agreement were not anything to do with actually reducing CO2. All of that was at the level of general recommendations and loose voluntary guidance. The only concrete elements are the money transfers from developed to non-developed nations.
It's not a matter of uncertainty. Rather, it's a matter of misrepresenting "consensus" (based on gamed derivations to begin with) and modelling as certainty, claiming greater certainty than science actually shows, and attempting to summarily dismiss anyone who questions ANY aspect of the approved interpretations of "science" by labeling them as heretics in the same way that is done by a church or cult, whose adherents then are encouraged to take this as faith far removed from any actual science involved.
The science of "climate change" has been completely hijacked by political and social interests who have little to no real concern with any of the science involved. The conclusions are predetermined by their desired outcomes and objectives. "Global warming" didn't become such a prominent issue based on inherent science or potential effects. It became a political talking point because it provides a near perfect vehicle for use by various activists and those with various vested interests which it serves.
This is fairly easily demonstrated by just looking at the nature of the debate itself. There is virtually no concern on the part of activists (or much of the opposition) regarding significant scientific aspects of the matter that typically would be at the front of any other scientific question. Precise levels and extent, time frames, sensitivities vs other factors, etc. All of that is secondary. Nobody really cares about the pesky details. All that's required to know is that it (whatever it may be) IS happening and that "97%" of the high priests all say that it is happening (even thought they really don't). Now go forth and speak against "Big Oil" who we hated for a variety of reasons anyway, provide government funding to our preferred groups and supporters, and send $100 million/year to those of us representing Indonesia, etc. at the UN who control the organization and funding for the committee of high priests making the determinations. e.g., The only hard requirements in the Paris agreement were not anything to do with actually reducing CO2. All of that was at the level of general recommendations and loose voluntary guidance. The only concrete elements are the money transfers from developed to non-developed nations.
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
True Republican Hypocrisy
()
Date: September 12, 2017 03:30PM
Understanding reality? Nah just hypocrites.
Nope, let me help you understand the rich republican.
1) Lie, cheat, sue and steal as much as you can.
2) Give the appearance that you are a good Christian who goes to mass every day. You really don't give shit.
3) Tell people you are not a racist but every chance you get in private conversations be a racist.
4) Complain about the poor ripping off the government while you file claims for every government subsidy and tax dodge you can.
5) Complain about gays and strange sexual acts while watching lesbian and strange porn.
6) Say government is way too big needs less regulations, then complain when the gov doesn't stop something against you fortune.
Nope, let me help you understand the rich republican.
1) Lie, cheat, sue and steal as much as you can.
2) Give the appearance that you are a good Christian who goes to mass every day. You really don't give shit.
3) Tell people you are not a racist but every chance you get in private conversations be a racist.
4) Complain about the poor ripping off the government while you file claims for every government subsidy and tax dodge you can.
5) Complain about gays and strange sexual acts while watching lesbian and strange porn.
6) Say government is way too big needs less regulations, then complain when the gov doesn't stop something against you fortune.
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
umfug
()
Date: September 12, 2017 03:43PM
True Republican Hypocrisy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Understanding reality? Nah just hypocrites.
>
> Nope, let me help you understand the rich
> republican.
>
> 1) Lie, cheat, sue and steal as much as you can.
> 2) Give the appearance that you are a good
> Christian who goes to mass every day. You really
> don't give shit.
>
> 3) Tell people you are not a racist but every
> chance you get in private conversations be a
> racist.
>
> 4) Complain about the poor ripping off the
> government while you file claims for every
> government subsidy and tax dodge you can.
>
> 5) Complain about gays and strange sexual acts
> while watching lesbian and strange porn.
>
> 6) Say government is way too big needs less
> regulations, then complain when the gov doesn't
> stop something against you fortune.
You realize your stereotypes are 40 years past their prime? You people been losing steadily this decade. Your stale identity politics bullshit isn't helping you. I guess you better get used to blaming elections on the Russians.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Understanding reality? Nah just hypocrites.
>
> Nope, let me help you understand the rich
> republican.
>
> 1) Lie, cheat, sue and steal as much as you can.
> 2) Give the appearance that you are a good
> Christian who goes to mass every day. You really
> don't give shit.
>
> 3) Tell people you are not a racist but every
> chance you get in private conversations be a
> racist.
>
> 4) Complain about the poor ripping off the
> government while you file claims for every
> government subsidy and tax dodge you can.
>
> 5) Complain about gays and strange sexual acts
> while watching lesbian and strange porn.
>
> 6) Say government is way too big needs less
> regulations, then complain when the gov doesn't
> stop something against you fortune.
You realize your stereotypes are 40 years past their prime? You people been losing steadily this decade. Your stale identity politics bullshit isn't helping you. I guess you better get used to blaming elections on the Russians.
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
Wierd Science
()
Date: September 12, 2017 03:59PM
Donald Trump is a stupid cackling buffoon with serious personality disorders and a pathological liar.
All this math and science and we get a Stupid Cheeto Orange President with a Wig, a mail order commie whore wife, and their anchor baby occupying the White House.
Trump must be the dark anti-matter President - a pragmatic application of the knowledge he will never have to the un-imagineable.
Attachments:
All this math and science and we get a Stupid Cheeto Orange President with a Wig, a mail order commie whore wife, and their anchor baby occupying the White House.
Trump must be the dark anti-matter President - a pragmatic application of the knowledge he will never have to the un-imagineable.
Attachments:
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
Philosopher Stone
()
Date: September 12, 2017 04:00PM
Dumb as a Stone Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And you continue to miss the point.
>
> It's not a matter of uncertainty. Rather, it's a
> matter of misrepresenting "consensus" (based on
> gamed derivations to begin with) and modelling as
> certainty, claiming greater certainty than science
> actually shows, and attempting to summarily
> dismiss anyone who questions ANY aspect of the
> approved interpretations of "science" by labeling
> them as heretics in the same way that is done by a
> church or cult, whose adherents then are
> encouraged to take this as faith far removed from
> any actual science involved.
>
> The science of "climate change" has been
> completely hijacked by political and social
> interests who have little to no real concern with
> any of the science involved. The conclusions are
> predetermined by their desired outcomes and
> objectives. "Global warming" didn't become such a
> prominent issue based on inherent science or
> potential effects. It became a political talking
> point because it provides a near perfect vehicle
> for use by various activists and those with
> various vested interests which it serves.
>
> This is fairly easily demonstrated by just looking
> at the nature of the debate itself. There is
> virtually no concern on the part of activists (or
> much of the opposition) regarding significant
> scientific aspects of the matter that typically
> would be at the front of any other scientific
> question. Precise levels and extent, time frames,
> sensitivities vs other factors, etc. All of that
> is secondary. Nobody really cares about the pesky
> details. All that's required to know is that it
> (whatever it may be) IS happening and that "97%"
> of the high priests all say that it is happening
> (even thought they really don't). Now go forth
> and speak against "Big Oil" who we hated for a
> variety of reasons anyway, provide government
> funding to our preferred groups and supporters,
> and send $100 million/year to those of us
> representing Indonesia, etc. at the UN who control
> the organization and funding for the committee of
> high priests making the determinations. e.g., The
> only hard requirements in the Paris agreement were
> not anything to do with actually reducing CO2.
> All of that was at the level of general
> recommendations and loose voluntary guidance. The
> only concrete elements are the money transfers
> from developed to non-developed nations.
You carry a great deal of shame - I posted a TED talk on vulnerability here today that would benefit you. I dont mean that as an insult by they way. But your 'dumb as a stone' and 'you miss the point' are the kind of intellectual defensiveness that disqualifies you as someone serious (of course I could say the same of my self posting on FFXU!).
I dont know who you are arguing against with all the not allowing 'ANY' questioning or dissent or complaints that models are not perfect. Man-caused climate change is now cannon in the field of climatology. You have every right to dissent, not believe it, argue against it but you are not changing that particular conclusion in that field by arguing with me. Nor will you convince me that you, an unpublished apparent non-scientist is right and the entire field of climatology wrong. That is absurd in the extreme.
Science welcomes dissent, prove them all wrong and publish and stop mucking around chat forums like this one. By the way there is absolutely nothing to admitting to being an existential absurdist either. Just state that we know appreciably nothing about the physical world as a whole and Id agree with you :)
Have a good one and check out that TED talk...
-------------------------------------------------------
> And you continue to miss the point.
>
> It's not a matter of uncertainty. Rather, it's a
> matter of misrepresenting "consensus" (based on
> gamed derivations to begin with) and modelling as
> certainty, claiming greater certainty than science
> actually shows, and attempting to summarily
> dismiss anyone who questions ANY aspect of the
> approved interpretations of "science" by labeling
> them as heretics in the same way that is done by a
> church or cult, whose adherents then are
> encouraged to take this as faith far removed from
> any actual science involved.
>
> The science of "climate change" has been
> completely hijacked by political and social
> interests who have little to no real concern with
> any of the science involved. The conclusions are
> predetermined by their desired outcomes and
> objectives. "Global warming" didn't become such a
> prominent issue based on inherent science or
> potential effects. It became a political talking
> point because it provides a near perfect vehicle
> for use by various activists and those with
> various vested interests which it serves.
>
> This is fairly easily demonstrated by just looking
> at the nature of the debate itself. There is
> virtually no concern on the part of activists (or
> much of the opposition) regarding significant
> scientific aspects of the matter that typically
> would be at the front of any other scientific
> question. Precise levels and extent, time frames,
> sensitivities vs other factors, etc. All of that
> is secondary. Nobody really cares about the pesky
> details. All that's required to know is that it
> (whatever it may be) IS happening and that "97%"
> of the high priests all say that it is happening
> (even thought they really don't). Now go forth
> and speak against "Big Oil" who we hated for a
> variety of reasons anyway, provide government
> funding to our preferred groups and supporters,
> and send $100 million/year to those of us
> representing Indonesia, etc. at the UN who control
> the organization and funding for the committee of
> high priests making the determinations. e.g., The
> only hard requirements in the Paris agreement were
> not anything to do with actually reducing CO2.
> All of that was at the level of general
> recommendations and loose voluntary guidance. The
> only concrete elements are the money transfers
> from developed to non-developed nations.
You carry a great deal of shame - I posted a TED talk on vulnerability here today that would benefit you. I dont mean that as an insult by they way. But your 'dumb as a stone' and 'you miss the point' are the kind of intellectual defensiveness that disqualifies you as someone serious (of course I could say the same of my self posting on FFXU!).
I dont know who you are arguing against with all the not allowing 'ANY' questioning or dissent or complaints that models are not perfect. Man-caused climate change is now cannon in the field of climatology. You have every right to dissent, not believe it, argue against it but you are not changing that particular conclusion in that field by arguing with me. Nor will you convince me that you, an unpublished apparent non-scientist is right and the entire field of climatology wrong. That is absurd in the extreme.
Science welcomes dissent, prove them all wrong and publish and stop mucking around chat forums like this one. By the way there is absolutely nothing to admitting to being an existential absurdist either. Just state that we know appreciably nothing about the physical world as a whole and Id agree with you :)
Have a good one and check out that TED talk...
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
Irma's Storm Surge
()
Date: September 12, 2017 04:36PM
WYB36 Wrote:
------------------------------------
> The confusion here is "science".
The confusion here is that the OP is a butthurt cuck who got his ass handed to him trying to argue "science" regarding hurricane tracking and can't let it go.
Hey OP, you got p'wnd. Accept it and move on. You butthurt is consuming you. Are you 12?
------------------------------------
> The confusion here is "science".
The confusion here is that the OP is a butthurt cuck who got his ass handed to him trying to argue "science" regarding hurricane tracking and can't let it go.
Hey OP, you got p'wnd. Accept it and move on. You butthurt is consuming you. Are you 12?
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
Rock Head
()
Date: September 12, 2017 04:38PM
Philosopher Stone Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You carry a great deal of shame - I posted a TED
> talk on vulnerability here today that would
> benefit you. I dont mean that as an insult by
> they way. But your 'dumb as a stone' and 'you
> miss the point' are the kind of intellectual
> defensiveness that disqualifies you as someone
> serious (of course I could say the same of my self
> posting on FFXU!).
>
> I dont know who you are arguing against with all
> the not allowing 'ANY' questioning or dissent or
> complaints that models are not perfect.
> Man-caused climate change is now cannon in the
> field of climatology. You have every right to
> dissent, not believe it, argue against it but you
> are not changing that particular conclusion in
> that field by arguing with me. Nor will you
> convince me that you, an unpublished apparent
> non-scientist is right and the entire field of
> climatology wrong. That is absurd in the
> extreme.
>
> Science welcomes dissent, prove them all wrong and
> publish and stop mucking around chat forums like
> this one. By the way there is absolutely nothing
> to admitting to being an existential absurdist
> either. Just state that we know appreciably
> nothing about the physical world as a whole and Id
> agree with you :)
>
> Have a good one and check out that TED talk...
No, you simply miss the point. Otherwise you wouldn't have made the OP to begin with. Your blabbering about "shame" is just more dumb distraction.
Nobody is questioning the fundamental nature of science or our understanding of various aspects of the physical world. That's just another in the same line of attempts to dismiss criticism by taking it to the level of absurdity. Which is rather typical by those without any real underlying understanding or a strong argument otherwise.
It's not a question of me doing anything beyond pointing out the obvious. Consensus does not imply certainty, yet it is presented as such. There's not even any capture of what specific elements are being agreed with as that's typically presented by advocates. Modelling is not reality, yet is it represented as such. Continually revising models so that they appear more accurate than they were is fine for modelling purposes but distorts the real level of accuracy. Ignoring significant details such as extent, timing, magnitude, etc. by waving that away because "97% consensus!" as you do yet again here is what's absurd. Those are facts. They don't need to be proven.
-------------------------------------------------------
> You carry a great deal of shame - I posted a TED
> talk on vulnerability here today that would
> benefit you. I dont mean that as an insult by
> they way. But your 'dumb as a stone' and 'you
> miss the point' are the kind of intellectual
> defensiveness that disqualifies you as someone
> serious (of course I could say the same of my self
> posting on FFXU!).
>
> I dont know who you are arguing against with all
> the not allowing 'ANY' questioning or dissent or
> complaints that models are not perfect.
> Man-caused climate change is now cannon in the
> field of climatology. You have every right to
> dissent, not believe it, argue against it but you
> are not changing that particular conclusion in
> that field by arguing with me. Nor will you
> convince me that you, an unpublished apparent
> non-scientist is right and the entire field of
> climatology wrong. That is absurd in the
> extreme.
>
> Science welcomes dissent, prove them all wrong and
> publish and stop mucking around chat forums like
> this one. By the way there is absolutely nothing
> to admitting to being an existential absurdist
> either. Just state that we know appreciably
> nothing about the physical world as a whole and Id
> agree with you :)
>
> Have a good one and check out that TED talk...
No, you simply miss the point. Otherwise you wouldn't have made the OP to begin with. Your blabbering about "shame" is just more dumb distraction.
Nobody is questioning the fundamental nature of science or our understanding of various aspects of the physical world. That's just another in the same line of attempts to dismiss criticism by taking it to the level of absurdity. Which is rather typical by those without any real underlying understanding or a strong argument otherwise.
It's not a question of me doing anything beyond pointing out the obvious. Consensus does not imply certainty, yet it is presented as such. There's not even any capture of what specific elements are being agreed with as that's typically presented by advocates. Modelling is not reality, yet is it represented as such. Continually revising models so that they appear more accurate than they were is fine for modelling purposes but distorts the real level of accuracy. Ignoring significant details such as extent, timing, magnitude, etc. by waving that away because "97% consensus!" as you do yet again here is what's absurd. Those are facts. They don't need to be proven.
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
Philosopher Stone
()
Date: September 12, 2017 05:26PM
No scientific theory can be proved with absolute certainty. No scientist would ever use the word 'certainty' as an absolute. Dont know who you are talking to but they are not scientists. Man caused climate change is accepted as fact by the field of Climatology - I dont know how much more simply I can say it.
You disagree, that is your right but it doesnt change what an entire field of science has concluded. Im sorry, I wish your generalized, un-referenced arguments carried more weight for you as I see you are passionate about it.
here are some links that might interest you
https://www.thoughtco.com/can-science-prove-anything-3973922
https://www.thoughtco.com/can-science-prove-anything-3973922
http://scienceblogs.com/evolvingthoughts/2009/02/21/laws-theories-and-models/
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_ylo=2013&q=anthropogenic+climate+change&hl=en&as_sdt=0,47&as_vis=1
As an aside I have a background in Philosophy as well as Science so my comments regarding Epistemology were genuine - there is a philosophical argument to discount science and I though perhaps that was the greater point you might be making.
You disagree, that is your right but it doesnt change what an entire field of science has concluded. Im sorry, I wish your generalized, un-referenced arguments carried more weight for you as I see you are passionate about it.
here are some links that might interest you
https://www.thoughtco.com/can-science-prove-anything-3973922
https://www.thoughtco.com/can-science-prove-anything-3973922
http://scienceblogs.com/evolvingthoughts/2009/02/21/laws-theories-and-models/
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_ylo=2013&q=anthropogenic+climate+change&hl=en&as_sdt=0,47&as_vis=1
As an aside I have a background in Philosophy as well as Science so my comments regarding Epistemology were genuine - there is a philosophical argument to discount science and I though perhaps that was the greater point you might be making.
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
Bat House
()
Date: September 12, 2017 07:07PM
^^^^LOL
The data has been proven to have been altered
The 97% is dubious as hell since it is based on ridiculously small numbers of sample sizes in both surveys and in abstracts published
The famous Al Gore hockey chart was wrong within 5 years of being published and the warming was so small, that it fell outside the largest deviation of the chart
There is a provable 'pause' in the rise of global temperatures, yet NOAA and other organizations continue to report record global temperatures by manipulating the data
Mars also had a measurable warming at the same time as earth, yet global warming scientists are silent on this fact or dismiss it as unrelated because Mars isn't earth.
Anyone who isn't skeptical about ACC claims is a blind zealot.
And, of course, the answer to all this is to tax the hell out of the West while Asia, Africa, and Russia skate. Follow the money. It all leads back to Al Gore and his backer and thier carbon tax and carbon credit exchange.
The data has been proven to have been altered
The 97% is dubious as hell since it is based on ridiculously small numbers of sample sizes in both surveys and in abstracts published
The famous Al Gore hockey chart was wrong within 5 years of being published and the warming was so small, that it fell outside the largest deviation of the chart
There is a provable 'pause' in the rise of global temperatures, yet NOAA and other organizations continue to report record global temperatures by manipulating the data
Mars also had a measurable warming at the same time as earth, yet global warming scientists are silent on this fact or dismiss it as unrelated because Mars isn't earth.
Anyone who isn't skeptical about ACC claims is a blind zealot.
And, of course, the answer to all this is to tax the hell out of the West while Asia, Africa, and Russia skate. Follow the money. It all leads back to Al Gore and his backer and thier carbon tax and carbon credit exchange.
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
lanced the boil
()
Date: September 12, 2017 07:20PM
The crazy finally burst like a boil - like lancing a boil. Hope he feels better whew.
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
Philosopher Stone bye
()
Date: September 12, 2017 07:46PM
Philosopher Stone
bye, your crying about the hurricane tracking thread has become obsessive
go find the appropriate TED talk and work it out
bye, your crying about the hurricane tracking thread has become obsessive
go find the appropriate TED talk and work it out
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
Philosopher Facepalm
()
Date: September 12, 2017 08:27PM
Philosopher Stone Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No scientific theory can be proved with absolute
> certainty. No scientist would ever use the word
> 'certainty' as an absolute. Dont know who you are
> talking to but they are not scientists. Man
> caused climate change is accepted as fact by the
> field of Climatology - I dont know how much more
> simply I can say it.
>
> You disagree, that is your right but it doesnt
> change what an entire field of science has
> concluded. Im sorry, I wish your generalized,
> un-referenced arguments carried more weight for
> you as I see you are passionate about it.
>
> here are some links that might interest you
>
> https://www.thoughtco.com/can-science-prove-anythi
> ng-3973922
>
> https://www.thoughtco.com/can-science-prove-anythi
> ng-3973922
>
> http://scienceblogs.com/evolvingthoughts/2009/02/2
> 1/laws-theories-and-models/
>
> https://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_ylo=2013&q=a
> nthropogenic+climate+change&hl=en&as_sdt=0,47&as_v
> is=1
>
>
> As an aside I have a background in Philosophy as
> well as Science so my comments regarding
> Epistemology were genuine - there is a
> philosophical argument to discount science and I
> though perhaps that was the greater point you
> might be making.
Again you miss the point. lol
It is not a question of science being certain at some absolute level. That's entirely separate and largely irrelevant. Rather, it's a matter of presenting something with some basis in "science" (no matter how loose or good or bad that may be in a given case) as being certain because "it's SCIENCE!"
You demonstrate this perfectly again here in your own post when you say "Man caused climate change is accepted as fact by the field of Climatology." As in period, done. "Settled science!" As others do, you present it as extending to a whole range of other specific things within as also being true and certain which then flows through to a whole pile of actions completely removed from any science extending from that.
Fact is that statement says little to nothing. It's just employed as a simple-minded device to shut down any further examination of all that follows by dismissing it as "denial." It's the equivalent of saying that man-caused _________ is accepted as fact in the field of __________. You could fill in those blanks for a million things, none of which necessarily implies anything about various elements within where there is much less consensus. It also says nothing with respect to relative importance within or vs other things. You could, and a few do, argue for human population control being a much more important matter requiring more immediate action vs C02. In fact the latter largely is driven by the former. But you don't see that being pushed politically because it doesn't as effectively serve as a proxy as CO2 does for the interests of advocates.
-------------------------------------------------------
> No scientific theory can be proved with absolute
> certainty. No scientist would ever use the word
> 'certainty' as an absolute. Dont know who you are
> talking to but they are not scientists. Man
> caused climate change is accepted as fact by the
> field of Climatology - I dont know how much more
> simply I can say it.
>
> You disagree, that is your right but it doesnt
> change what an entire field of science has
> concluded. Im sorry, I wish your generalized,
> un-referenced arguments carried more weight for
> you as I see you are passionate about it.
>
> here are some links that might interest you
>
> https://www.thoughtco.com/can-science-prove-anythi
> ng-3973922
>
> https://www.thoughtco.com/can-science-prove-anythi
> ng-3973922
>
> http://scienceblogs.com/evolvingthoughts/2009/02/2
> 1/laws-theories-and-models/
>
> https://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_ylo=2013&q=a
> nthropogenic+climate+change&hl=en&as_sdt=0,47&as_v
> is=1
>
>
> As an aside I have a background in Philosophy as
> well as Science so my comments regarding
> Epistemology were genuine - there is a
> philosophical argument to discount science and I
> though perhaps that was the greater point you
> might be making.
Again you miss the point. lol
It is not a question of science being certain at some absolute level. That's entirely separate and largely irrelevant. Rather, it's a matter of presenting something with some basis in "science" (no matter how loose or good or bad that may be in a given case) as being certain because "it's SCIENCE!"
You demonstrate this perfectly again here in your own post when you say "Man caused climate change is accepted as fact by the field of Climatology." As in period, done. "Settled science!" As others do, you present it as extending to a whole range of other specific things within as also being true and certain which then flows through to a whole pile of actions completely removed from any science extending from that.
Fact is that statement says little to nothing. It's just employed as a simple-minded device to shut down any further examination of all that follows by dismissing it as "denial." It's the equivalent of saying that man-caused _________ is accepted as fact in the field of __________. You could fill in those blanks for a million things, none of which necessarily implies anything about various elements within where there is much less consensus. It also says nothing with respect to relative importance within or vs other things. You could, and a few do, argue for human population control being a much more important matter requiring more immediate action vs C02. In fact the latter largely is driven by the former. But you don't see that being pushed politically because it doesn't as effectively serve as a proxy as CO2 does for the interests of advocates.
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
UXPJF
()
Date: September 12, 2017 08:34PM
Philosopher Stone Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> OP here and you hit precisely my point!
> Everything is too complex to understand.
> Literally. There is simply no arguing that point.
> As another poster mentioned we may use laws and
> models to predict with great accuracy movement of
> certain planets but when considered in the
> relativity of the Universe we really dont
> understand much.
That's rubbish. We managed to send a man to moon using the ordinary models for gravity and orbits. We didn't need to consider relativity, dark energy or dark matter. So, not _everything_ is too complex to understand.
We don't have a complete model for the universe. That doesn't mean we don't understand large parts of it. That doesn't give you the right to say "therefore we know nothing". Your argument is basically, we don't know why dark energy is so weak when it is predicted to be very strong therefore evolution is wrong. It doesn't work that way.
> My other point implied but not mentioned is those
> who reject our best efforts to understand live as
> existential absurdists. This is not in any
> way meant as an insult, it merely states that the
> only meaning reality has is the one we give to it.
> 'If I dont like climate change I give it no
> meaning.' While Climate is measurable and we do
> have the models to predict trends like warming
> caused by man's activity existential absurdists
> have every right to deny it.
I have problems with models predicting decades of behavior based on data that simply isn't well understand and has undergone "corrections" for measurement errors and localized weather effects. Many of these models are relatively chaotic. Small changes are going to have huge effects. Since we don't have enough data to see if they predicted observed results, they are hard to take seriously in anything other than the most general sense.
Yes, I believe the global average temperature is rising. What's the cause? I don't know. Increasing CO2, decreasing pollution, solar cycles. It's an entire field and I simply don't have the time to look into it.
> As for those pragmatists and others that believe
> in an external reality (not an easy thing given
> the vastness of our ignorance), well, the
> overwhelming evidence and opinion of science is to
> be believed and acted upon.
Yes, if you want to go to the extremes, we can't prove this isn't a simulation.
>
> Thanks for the discussion
-------------------------------------------------------
> OP here and you hit precisely my point!
> Everything is too complex to understand.
> Literally. There is simply no arguing that point.
> As another poster mentioned we may use laws and
> models to predict with great accuracy movement of
> certain planets but when considered in the
> relativity of the Universe we really dont
> understand much.
That's rubbish. We managed to send a man to moon using the ordinary models for gravity and orbits. We didn't need to consider relativity, dark energy or dark matter. So, not _everything_ is too complex to understand.
We don't have a complete model for the universe. That doesn't mean we don't understand large parts of it. That doesn't give you the right to say "therefore we know nothing". Your argument is basically, we don't know why dark energy is so weak when it is predicted to be very strong therefore evolution is wrong. It doesn't work that way.
> My other point implied but not mentioned is those
> who reject our best efforts to understand live as
> existential absurdists. This is not in any
> way meant as an insult, it merely states that the
> only meaning reality has is the one we give to it.
> 'If I dont like climate change I give it no
> meaning.' While Climate is measurable and we do
> have the models to predict trends like warming
> caused by man's activity existential absurdists
> have every right to deny it.
I have problems with models predicting decades of behavior based on data that simply isn't well understand and has undergone "corrections" for measurement errors and localized weather effects. Many of these models are relatively chaotic. Small changes are going to have huge effects. Since we don't have enough data to see if they predicted observed results, they are hard to take seriously in anything other than the most general sense.
Yes, I believe the global average temperature is rising. What's the cause? I don't know. Increasing CO2, decreasing pollution, solar cycles. It's an entire field and I simply don't have the time to look into it.
> As for those pragmatists and others that believe
> in an external reality (not an easy thing given
> the vastness of our ignorance), well, the
> overwhelming evidence and opinion of science is to
> be believed and acted upon.
Yes, if you want to go to the extremes, we can't prove this isn't a simulation.
>
> Thanks for the discussion
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
father of modern physics
()
Date: September 12, 2017 09:06PM
Tiki Torch Carryin' Trumptard Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Galileo was a cuck!
It's kind of funny because Galileo faced a MASSIVE amount of shit from the science-denial crowd. They arrested and censored him for what he published. The established powers-that-were just thought he couldn't be right, because he challenged and contradicted what they "knew". He did it all with data and experiments, and they couldn't handle that.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Galileo was a cuck!
It's kind of funny because Galileo faced a MASSIVE amount of shit from the science-denial crowd. They arrested and censored him for what he published. The established powers-that-were just thought he couldn't be right, because he challenged and contradicted what they "knew". He did it all with data and experiments, and they couldn't handle that.
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
Needle in the straw
()
Date: September 12, 2017 09:20PM
UXPJF Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Philosopher Stone Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > OP here and you hit precisely my point!
> > Everything is too complex to understand.
>
> > Literally. There is simply no arguing that
> point.
> > As another poster mentioned we may use laws
> and
> > models to predict with great accuracy movement
> of
> > certain planets but when considered in the
> > relativity of the Universe we really dont
> > understand much.
>
> That's rubbish. We managed to send a man to moon
> using the ordinary models for gravity and orbits.
> We didn't need to consider relativity, dark energy
> or dark matter. So, not _everything_ is too
> complex to understand.
Correct. We are very good at process modelling where (A+B)C following some known physical/chemical/whatever laws = some defined result. We suck at future predictive modelling for complex systems where there are even small degrees of uncertainty given that they can cause large differences in results. We can relatively easily simulate a range of more and less likely outcomes within that as is done as a specific example here in the case of potential hurricane tracks. That does not mean that we can determine in advance what the actual result will be within that. In fact, false conclusions are more likely and more easily arrived at within larger potential results given that there are many more false answers only one of which is correct and within that the actual correct result is more easily missed or discarded.
Beyond the level of this forum, but simply by the nature of mathematics you can (and people have demonstrated this) work in reverse to create a known perfectly calibrated model using known perfect data and end up with results that vary significantly from what are the known perfect results for that same model. That's due in large part to the fact that there are simply many solutions to the same problem which will generate different answers.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Philosopher Stone Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > OP here and you hit precisely my point!
> > Everything is too complex to understand.
>
> > Literally. There is simply no arguing that
> point.
> > As another poster mentioned we may use laws
> and
> > models to predict with great accuracy movement
> of
> > certain planets but when considered in the
> > relativity of the Universe we really dont
> > understand much.
>
> That's rubbish. We managed to send a man to moon
> using the ordinary models for gravity and orbits.
> We didn't need to consider relativity, dark energy
> or dark matter. So, not _everything_ is too
> complex to understand.
Correct. We are very good at process modelling where (A+B)C following some known physical/chemical/whatever laws = some defined result. We suck at future predictive modelling for complex systems where there are even small degrees of uncertainty given that they can cause large differences in results. We can relatively easily simulate a range of more and less likely outcomes within that as is done as a specific example here in the case of potential hurricane tracks. That does not mean that we can determine in advance what the actual result will be within that. In fact, false conclusions are more likely and more easily arrived at within larger potential results given that there are many more false answers only one of which is correct and within that the actual correct result is more easily missed or discarded.
Beyond the level of this forum, but simply by the nature of mathematics you can (and people have demonstrated this) work in reverse to create a known perfectly calibrated model using known perfect data and end up with results that vary significantly from what are the known perfect results for that same model. That's due in large part to the fact that there are simply many solutions to the same problem which will generate different answers.
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
WYB36
()
Date: September 13, 2017 12:02AM
Yes and no. For complex stachoastic systems, we can't reliably predict the behavior of individual elements but the overall prediction of the system can be accurate. An example might be heat flow. We know heat is vibration of individual atoms but predicting the position, speed of a particular atom is difficult. But the ensemble results in a bulk property known as temperature.
And yes, since we tend to model things as differential equations, those equations can easily have several different solutions. It may be you didn't pick the right solution for the given set of initial conditions.
And yes, since we tend to model things as differential equations, those equations can easily have several different solutions. It may be you didn't pick the right solution for the given set of initial conditions.
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
Random Walk
()
Date: September 13, 2017 12:48AM
WYB36 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yes and no. For complex stachoastic systems, we
> can't reliably predict the behavior of individual
> elements but the overall prediction of the system
> can be accurate. An example might be heat flow.
> We know heat is vibration of individual atoms but
> predicting the position, speed of a particular
> atom is difficult. But the ensemble results in a
> bulk property known as temperature.
That's not really the type of modelling that I'm talking about. I'd consider that more of a process model. We're good at that within reasonable bounds.
I'm talking more of purely predictive models for complex systems. e.g., We know that there's a hurricane of some magnitude that's headed in some general direction at some relative speed as well as other information regarding how hurricanes generally work. But knowing the 'bulk properties' as you phrase it doesn't provide good predictive value to yield an eventual future track. It's only when we eliminate most all other possibilities along the way that we eventually pare uncertainty down to near zero before we start to get things right and it's again subject only to more straight process-type functions.
>
> And yes, since we tend to model things as
> differential equations, those equations can easily
> have several different solutions. It may be you
> didn't pick the right solution for the given set
> of initial conditions.
True but again not really what I'm talking about. See for example here:
http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/pls/portallive/docs/1/39240.PDF
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yes and no. For complex stachoastic systems, we
> can't reliably predict the behavior of individual
> elements but the overall prediction of the system
> can be accurate. An example might be heat flow.
> We know heat is vibration of individual atoms but
> predicting the position, speed of a particular
> atom is difficult. But the ensemble results in a
> bulk property known as temperature.
That's not really the type of modelling that I'm talking about. I'd consider that more of a process model. We're good at that within reasonable bounds.
I'm talking more of purely predictive models for complex systems. e.g., We know that there's a hurricane of some magnitude that's headed in some general direction at some relative speed as well as other information regarding how hurricanes generally work. But knowing the 'bulk properties' as you phrase it doesn't provide good predictive value to yield an eventual future track. It's only when we eliminate most all other possibilities along the way that we eventually pare uncertainty down to near zero before we start to get things right and it's again subject only to more straight process-type functions.
>
> And yes, since we tend to model things as
> differential equations, those equations can easily
> have several different solutions. It may be you
> didn't pick the right solution for the given set
> of initial conditions.
True but again not really what I'm talking about. See for example here:
http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/pls/portallive/docs/1/39240.PDF
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
pledge pin
()
Date: September 13, 2017 07:03AM
father of modern physics Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Tiki Torch Carryin' Trumptard Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Galileo was a cuck!
>
>
> It's kind of funny because Galileo faced a MASSIVE
> amount of shit from the science-denial crowd.
> They arrested and censored him for what he
> published. The established powers-that-were just
> thought he couldn't be right, because he
> challenged and contradicted what they "knew". He
> did it all with data and experiments, and they
> couldn't handle that.
Why is that 'kind of funny' or funny in any way? You're weird as shit.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Tiki Torch Carryin' Trumptard Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Galileo was a cuck!
>
>
> It's kind of funny because Galileo faced a MASSIVE
> amount of shit from the science-denial crowd.
> They arrested and censored him for what he
> published. The established powers-that-were just
> thought he couldn't be right, because he
> challenged and contradicted what they "knew". He
> did it all with data and experiments, and they
> couldn't handle that.
Why is that 'kind of funny' or funny in any way? You're weird as shit.
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
jcc
()
Date: September 13, 2017 08:04AM
The field of Climatology considers man caused climate change a significant factor in global warming. That is a statement of fact.
These lay debates on the merit of that fact are interesting but in no way change the current conclusion of the field of Climatology. We can base our actions on the vast experience and study of the experts in the field or on lay people - its really just that simple.
Will Climatology come to a different conclusion someday - maybe. Will this stance evolve - definitely. Could the entire field of Climatology be wrong - of course. Could mans contribution and the outcome be worse than is projected - yes.
spare us the Fossil Fuel industry strawmen and vast conspiracy theories please...
These lay debates on the merit of that fact are interesting but in no way change the current conclusion of the field of Climatology. We can base our actions on the vast experience and study of the experts in the field or on lay people - its really just that simple.
Will Climatology come to a different conclusion someday - maybe. Will this stance evolve - definitely. Could the entire field of Climatology be wrong - of course. Could mans contribution and the outcome be worse than is projected - yes.
spare us the Fossil Fuel industry strawmen and vast conspiracy theories please...
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
History 101
()
Date: September 13, 2017 08:29AM
father of modern physics Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Tiki Torch Carryin' Trumptard Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Galileo was a cuck!
>
>
> It's kind of funny because Galileo faced a MASSIVE
> amount of shit from the science-denial crowd.
> They arrested and censored him for what he
> published.
History is filled with examples where new scientific findings threatened powerful interests like the church or political authorities, and provoked a furious backlash. Just like the climate change deniers of this era.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Tiki Torch Carryin' Trumptard Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Galileo was a cuck!
>
>
> It's kind of funny because Galileo faced a MASSIVE
> amount of shit from the science-denial crowd.
> They arrested and censored him for what he
> published.
History is filled with examples where new scientific findings threatened powerful interests like the church or political authorities, and provoked a furious backlash. Just like the climate change deniers of this era.
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
Reality Bites
()
Date: September 13, 2017 08:49AM
umfug Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> True Republican Hypocrisy Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Understanding reality? Nah just hypocrites.
> >
> > Nope, let me help you understand the rich
> > republican.
> >
> > 1) Lie, cheat, sue and steal as much as you
> can.
> > 2) Give the appearance that you are a good
> > Christian who goes to mass every day. You
> really
> > don't give shit.
> >
> > 3) Tell people you are not a racist but every
> > chance you get in private conversations be a
> > racist.
> >
> > 4) Complain about the poor ripping off the
> > government while you file claims for every
> > government subsidy and tax dodge you can.
> >
> > 5) Complain about gays and strange sexual acts
> > while watching lesbian and strange porn.
> >
> > 6) Say government is way too big needs less
> > regulations, then complain when the gov doesn't
> > stop something against you fortune.
>
>
> You realize your stereotypes are 40 years past
> their prime? You people been losing steadily this
> decade. Your stale identity politics bullshit
> isn't helping you. I guess you better get used to
> blaming elections on the Russians.
Actually that stereotype is getting much worse. Trump's motto of lie, punch and sue just makes things worse.
Trump presidency so far is shaping up to be worse than Bush. Already Trump has two major hurricanes to deal with and one crazy dictator.
-------------------------------------------------------
> True Republican Hypocrisy Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Understanding reality? Nah just hypocrites.
> >
> > Nope, let me help you understand the rich
> > republican.
> >
> > 1) Lie, cheat, sue and steal as much as you
> can.
> > 2) Give the appearance that you are a good
> > Christian who goes to mass every day. You
> really
> > don't give shit.
> >
> > 3) Tell people you are not a racist but every
> > chance you get in private conversations be a
> > racist.
> >
> > 4) Complain about the poor ripping off the
> > government while you file claims for every
> > government subsidy and tax dodge you can.
> >
> > 5) Complain about gays and strange sexual acts
> > while watching lesbian and strange porn.
> >
> > 6) Say government is way too big needs less
> > regulations, then complain when the gov doesn't
> > stop something against you fortune.
>
>
> You realize your stereotypes are 40 years past
> their prime? You people been losing steadily this
> decade. Your stale identity politics bullshit
> isn't helping you. I guess you better get used to
> blaming elections on the Russians.
Actually that stereotype is getting much worse. Trump's motto of lie, punch and sue just makes things worse.
Trump presidency so far is shaping up to be worse than Bush. Already Trump has two major hurricanes to deal with and one crazy dictator.
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
The butthurt stinks
()
Date: September 13, 2017 08:54AM
History 101 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> father of modern physics Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Tiki Torch Carryin' Trumptard Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Galileo was a cuck!
> >
> >
> > It's kind of funny because Galileo faced a
> MASSIVE
> > amount of shit from the science-denial crowd.
> > They arrested and censored him for what he
> > published.
>
> History is filled with examples where new
> scientific findings threatened powerful interests
> like the church or political authorities, and
> provoked a furious backlash. Just like the
> climate change deniers of this era.
^^^^ partisan fool. In 100 years, scientists will look back on morons like you and laugh at how stupid and gullible you were.
It's never the scientific findings that threaten. It's how scientific findings are used that threaten. Just like the worshipers of the Church of Global Warming want to shut down 30% of the economy of the west and redirect it to 3rd world shitholes. All with they get rich as shit on the back of the middle class, per usual.
Global warming is simply another attempt to decimate the middle class and equalized countries like the USA DOWN so that all the sheep are reliant on the government for everything. You and your ilk are enemies of freedom, individual liberty and the common man. Kill yourself now, before the uprising. It will be much easier for you in the long run
-------------------------------------------------------
> father of modern physics Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Tiki Torch Carryin' Trumptard Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Galileo was a cuck!
> >
> >
> > It's kind of funny because Galileo faced a
> MASSIVE
> > amount of shit from the science-denial crowd.
> > They arrested and censored him for what he
> > published.
>
> History is filled with examples where new
> scientific findings threatened powerful interests
> like the church or political authorities, and
> provoked a furious backlash. Just like the
> climate change deniers of this era.
^^^^ partisan fool. In 100 years, scientists will look back on morons like you and laugh at how stupid and gullible you were.
It's never the scientific findings that threaten. It's how scientific findings are used that threaten. Just like the worshipers of the Church of Global Warming want to shut down 30% of the economy of the west and redirect it to 3rd world shitholes. All with they get rich as shit on the back of the middle class, per usual.
Global warming is simply another attempt to decimate the middle class and equalized countries like the USA DOWN so that all the sheep are reliant on the government for everything. You and your ilk are enemies of freedom, individual liberty and the common man. Kill yourself now, before the uprising. It will be much easier for you in the long run
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
Crazy snowflake sez what
()
Date: September 13, 2017 08:56AM
Reality Bites Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Actually that stereotype is getting much worse.
> Trump's motto of lie, punch and sue just makes
> things worse.
>
> Trump presidency so far is shaping up to be worse
> than Bush. Already Trump has two major hurricanes
> to deal with and one crazy dictator.
Only to anti-American, anti-middle class fucktards like you. For the blue-collar worker in this country, Trump is knocking it out of the park compared to anything we've seen in the past 30 years.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Actually that stereotype is getting much worse.
> Trump's motto of lie, punch and sue just makes
> things worse.
>
> Trump presidency so far is shaping up to be worse
> than Bush. Already Trump has two major hurricanes
> to deal with and one crazy dictator.
Only to anti-American, anti-middle class fucktards like you. For the blue-collar worker in this country, Trump is knocking it out of the park compared to anything we've seen in the past 30 years.
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
Grand Ballroom
()
Date: September 13, 2017 09:01AM
The butthurt stinks Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> History 101 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > father of modern physics Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Tiki Torch Carryin' Trumptard Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > > > Galileo was a cuck!
> > >
> > >
> > > It's kind of funny because Galileo faced a
> > MASSIVE
> > > amount of shit from the science-denial crowd.
>
> > > They arrested and censored him for what he
> > > published.
> >
> > History is filled with examples where new
> > scientific findings threatened powerful
> interests
> > like the church or political authorities, and
> > provoked a furious backlash. Just like the
> > climate change deniers of this era.
>
>
> ^^^^ partisan fool. In 100 years, scientists will
> look back on morons like you and laugh at how
> stupid and gullible you were.
>
> It's never the scientific findings that threaten.
> It's how scientific findings are used that
> threaten. Just like the worshipers of the Church
> of Global Warming want to shut down 30% of the
> economy of the west and redirect it to 3rd world
> shitholes. All with they get rich as shit on the
> back of the middle class, per usual.
>
> Global warming is simply another attempt to
> decimate the middle class and equalized countries
> like the USA DOWN so that all the sheep are
> reliant on the government for everything. You and
> your ilk are enemies of freedom, individual
> liberty and the common man. Kill yourself now,
> before the uprising. It will be much easier for
> you in the long run
History 101 is the perfect example of the narcissistic, self-important generations that are the baby boomers and their even more shitty spawn, the millennials. They think everything started when they were born, that they are the most important things in the universe and that their opinions must be not only tolerated and coddled, but they must be agreed to as fact.
Ironic that he uses the name "History 101" when it's obvious he has no perspective of history and sees no value in anything that's happened before he was born.
-------------------------------------------------------
> History 101 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > father of modern physics Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Tiki Torch Carryin' Trumptard Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > > > Galileo was a cuck!
> > >
> > >
> > > It's kind of funny because Galileo faced a
> > MASSIVE
> > > amount of shit from the science-denial crowd.
>
> > > They arrested and censored him for what he
> > > published.
> >
> > History is filled with examples where new
> > scientific findings threatened powerful
> interests
> > like the church or political authorities, and
> > provoked a furious backlash. Just like the
> > climate change deniers of this era.
>
>
> ^^^^ partisan fool. In 100 years, scientists will
> look back on morons like you and laugh at how
> stupid and gullible you were.
>
> It's never the scientific findings that threaten.
> It's how scientific findings are used that
> threaten. Just like the worshipers of the Church
> of Global Warming want to shut down 30% of the
> economy of the west and redirect it to 3rd world
> shitholes. All with they get rich as shit on the
> back of the middle class, per usual.
>
> Global warming is simply another attempt to
> decimate the middle class and equalized countries
> like the USA DOWN so that all the sheep are
> reliant on the government for everything. You and
> your ilk are enemies of freedom, individual
> liberty and the common man. Kill yourself now,
> before the uprising. It will be much easier for
> you in the long run
History 101 is the perfect example of the narcissistic, self-important generations that are the baby boomers and their even more shitty spawn, the millennials. They think everything started when they were born, that they are the most important things in the universe and that their opinions must be not only tolerated and coddled, but they must be agreed to as fact.
Ironic that he uses the name "History 101" when it's obvious he has no perspective of history and sees no value in anything that's happened before he was born.
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
History 101
()
Date: September 13, 2017 09:19AM
I get all my history from real sources like Dinesh D'Souza and the Drudge Report.
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
9UML3
()
Date: September 13, 2017 11:50AM
Random Walk Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WYB36 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Yes and no. For complex stachoastic systems,
> we
> > can't reliably predict the behavior of
> individual
> > elements but the overall prediction of the
> system
> > can be accurate. An example might be heat flow.
>
> > We know heat is vibration of individual atoms
> but
> > predicting the position, speed of a particular
> > atom is difficult. But the ensemble results in
> a
> > bulk property known as temperature.
>
> That's not really the type of modelling that I'm
> talking about. I'd consider that more of a
> process model. We're good at that within
> reasonable bounds.
It's not a process model.
> I'm talking more of purely predictive models for
> complex systems. e.g., We know that there's a
> hurricane of some magnitude that's headed in some
> general direction at some relative speed as well
> as other information regarding how hurricanes
> generally work. But knowing the 'bulk properties'
> as you phrase it doesn't provide good predictive
> value to yield an eventual future track. It's
> only when we eliminate most all other
> possibilities along the way that we eventually
> pare uncertainty down to near zero before we start
> to get things right and it's again subject only to
> more straight process-type functions.
The point is that you can't predict street level behavior. You can get a general idea of the path but you aren't going to get a detailed specific path. Again, we simply have a lack of understanding of the problem. That doesn't mean the predictions are completely worthless. The news doesn't help -- They see one track pointing at Virginia and litte Timmy declares a state of emergency. That's why we have multiple models -- Some are better at some aspects of prediction depending on the conditions.
> > And yes, since we tend to model things as
> > differential equations, those equations can
> easily
> > have several different solutions. It may be
> you
> > didn't pick the right solution for the given
> set
> > of initial conditions.
>
> True but again not really what I'm talking about.
> See for example here:
>
> http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/pls/portallive/docs/1/3
> 9240.PDF
Not surprising. The have injected Guassian noise and can find other local maxima/minima that are reasonably good solutions. There is a similar problem with linear programming. You can find reasonably good solutions to difficult problems in a reasonable amount of time. But to find the "perfect" solution is essentially solving some powerset which is going to take far too long to be useful.
But is the model useless just because it doesn't find the absolute best solution?
-------------------------------------------------------
> WYB36 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Yes and no. For complex stachoastic systems,
> we
> > can't reliably predict the behavior of
> individual
> > elements but the overall prediction of the
> system
> > can be accurate. An example might be heat flow.
>
> > We know heat is vibration of individual atoms
> but
> > predicting the position, speed of a particular
> > atom is difficult. But the ensemble results in
> a
> > bulk property known as temperature.
>
> That's not really the type of modelling that I'm
> talking about. I'd consider that more of a
> process model. We're good at that within
> reasonable bounds.
It's not a process model.
> I'm talking more of purely predictive models for
> complex systems. e.g., We know that there's a
> hurricane of some magnitude that's headed in some
> general direction at some relative speed as well
> as other information regarding how hurricanes
> generally work. But knowing the 'bulk properties'
> as you phrase it doesn't provide good predictive
> value to yield an eventual future track. It's
> only when we eliminate most all other
> possibilities along the way that we eventually
> pare uncertainty down to near zero before we start
> to get things right and it's again subject only to
> more straight process-type functions.
The point is that you can't predict street level behavior. You can get a general idea of the path but you aren't going to get a detailed specific path. Again, we simply have a lack of understanding of the problem. That doesn't mean the predictions are completely worthless. The news doesn't help -- They see one track pointing at Virginia and litte Timmy declares a state of emergency. That's why we have multiple models -- Some are better at some aspects of prediction depending on the conditions.
> > And yes, since we tend to model things as
> > differential equations, those equations can
> easily
> > have several different solutions. It may be
> you
> > didn't pick the right solution for the given
> set
> > of initial conditions.
>
> True but again not really what I'm talking about.
> See for example here:
>
> http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/pls/portallive/docs/1/3
> 9240.PDF
Not surprising. The have injected Guassian noise and can find other local maxima/minima that are reasonably good solutions. There is a similar problem with linear programming. You can find reasonably good solutions to difficult problems in a reasonable amount of time. But to find the "perfect" solution is essentially solving some powerset which is going to take far too long to be useful.
But is the model useless just because it doesn't find the absolute best solution?
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
Into Foul Territory
()
Date: September 13, 2017 11:56AM
Crazy snowflake sez what Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> For the blue-collar worker in this
> country, Trump is knocking it out of the park
> compared to anything we've seen in the past 30 years.
Yeah totally man, at this rate Akron, OH will be known as the "Paris of the Midwest" before Trump leaves office.
-------------------------------------------------------
> For the blue-collar worker in this
> country, Trump is knocking it out of the park
> compared to anything we've seen in the past 30 years.
Yeah totally man, at this rate Akron, OH will be known as the "Paris of the Midwest" before Trump leaves office.
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
I'm OK, You're Not
()
Date: September 13, 2017 12:01PM
Into Foul Territory Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Crazy snowflake sez what Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > For the blue-collar worker in this
> > country, Trump is knocking it out of the park
> > compared to anything we've seen in the past 30
> years.
>
> Yeah totally man, at this rate Akron, OH will be
> known as the "Paris of the Midwest" before Trump
> leaves office.
Hope not. Paris is overrun with muzzie slime nowdays. Only the rich areas or tourist areas are passable. Trump can do a lot better than Paris.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Crazy snowflake sez what Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > For the blue-collar worker in this
> > country, Trump is knocking it out of the park
> > compared to anything we've seen in the past 30
> years.
>
> Yeah totally man, at this rate Akron, OH will be
> known as the "Paris of the Midwest" before Trump
> leaves office.
Hope not. Paris is overrun with muzzie slime nowdays. Only the rich areas or tourist areas are passable. Trump can do a lot better than Paris.
Re: Face it - We Are Terrible At Understanding Reality
Posted by:
VoteStrike
()
Date: September 13, 2017 12:16PM
As we witness the dawn of a new millennium so to have we witnessed the birth of a new era of Leaderless Resistance in our struggle for freedom and survival. No longer do we look to politicians and law-makers for a solution, they have been bought, their lips are full of lies; they have grown rich and powerful through sucking the life-blood of the crumbling ruin that Western Civilization has become. However their power has come at a price; greed, corruption and sloth are the adornments of their wealth. This leaves western society in a position ripe for foreign invasion. We will cast off our wishful belief in democratic salvation, our votes will now be cast with bullets and bombs.
No longer will we allow the politicians to live like parasites upon the body of our people. No longer will we tolerate money to influence our political system, our legal system or our mass-media. No longer will our children be taught the suicidal and baseless dogma of egalitarianism and racial inequality.
In this new era we demand swift and brutal justice for those who assisted in, or profited from, the destruction of our Republic. May their time be short upon the earth.
The purpose of this document is not to explain the Whys? of armed struggle, any person with a pair of eyes can appreciate the desperate situation we are in. Anyone can see that this situation cannot be turned around at the ballot box or through negotiation and compromise, it will end in tears and bloodshed. Of this there is really no doubt.
Western civilization will fall in a similar way and for the same reasons as ancient Egypt, Aryan India, ancient Greece, Rome. The situation is simple, a violent struggle will come about and if it happens we will win.
My purpose here is to provide information on the Hows? of armed struggle. How to select or fabricate weapons useful in an armed struggle, how to manufacture, handle and employ explosives as part of an armed struggle, how to conduct a guerilla campaign and how to select targets according to their value to our movement.
Read more:
http://www.copsrcorrupt.com/urban-guerrilla-.html
No longer will we allow the politicians to live like parasites upon the body of our people. No longer will we tolerate money to influence our political system, our legal system or our mass-media. No longer will our children be taught the suicidal and baseless dogma of egalitarianism and racial inequality.
In this new era we demand swift and brutal justice for those who assisted in, or profited from, the destruction of our Republic. May their time be short upon the earth.
The purpose of this document is not to explain the Whys? of armed struggle, any person with a pair of eyes can appreciate the desperate situation we are in. Anyone can see that this situation cannot be turned around at the ballot box or through negotiation and compromise, it will end in tears and bloodshed. Of this there is really no doubt.
Western civilization will fall in a similar way and for the same reasons as ancient Egypt, Aryan India, ancient Greece, Rome. The situation is simple, a violent struggle will come about and if it happens we will win.
My purpose here is to provide information on the Hows? of armed struggle. How to select or fabricate weapons useful in an armed struggle, how to manufacture, handle and employ explosives as part of an armed struggle, how to conduct a guerilla campaign and how to select targets according to their value to our movement.
Read more:
http://www.copsrcorrupt.com/urban-guerrilla-.html