Humans close to finding answers to origin of universe: Hawking

arjan de lumens said:
That is what scientists are doing to each other's new ideas and insights ALL THE TIME. If you cannot understand this concept and embrace it - if you cannot tolerate people trying to disprove whatever ideas you put forth when discussing ideas of science - then please get lost.

Any idea too weak to withstand merciless attack is also too weak to rely upon. This applies regardless of how wise and insightful the idea sounds.
Click to expand...

And who said everything in the scientific world is all rosy and right? Or are you trying to imply that they are always right because of this?

Disprove someone after studying the matter is acceptable. Disprroving NO MATTER WHAT isnt the same.
 
K.I.L.E.R said:
Neeyik was just saying that other people who specialise in the fields you mentioned have disproved that the Somarians discovered planets beyond Pluto(If you call Pluto a planet to begin with).

How could have Somarians discovered other planets let alone know what a star vs planet is by just looking at the sky?
Did they have special powers?
Click to expand...

Ofcourse not.
 
Nesh said:
No I didnt. He went to state that the book ment that 12 planets exist in our Solar System which isnt what the book sais. He has no idea of his study.
Click to expand...
You're right, I had no idea. But that is of no consequence, as his "study" was flat-out wrong.

Nesh said:
Ahm.....once again you misinterpreted what I am trying to say. 12 important bodies for the Sumerians under this logic
a)8 the major planets,
b)the major star in the solar system
c)the closest body to earth
d)a major planet that was destroyied leaving a ring of dust and rocks
e)another huge planet that passes near earth every period of thousands of years
Click to expand...
This is horribly stupid.

First of all, the word planet would be a very poor translation indeed for a word describing all of these objects. So saying "12 planets" would be quite stupid.

Secondly, there was no major planet that was destroyed leaving a ring of dust and rocks (if you're referring to the asteroid belt, I seem to remember that that planet never formed due to Jupiter's influence, but in either case, formed billions of years ago, far too long for the Sumerians to have any knowledge of the event).

Thirdly, the ancient Sumerians could not possibly have any knowledge about a period of any object in the thousands of years. That would have required many detailed measurements as well as intimite knowledge of orbital mechanics. I don't believe the ancient Sumerians had the capacity to do either.

Yes, I'm being very insulting, because, quite frankly, I'm very tired of this kind of pseudo-science nonsense. People get drawn in by this crap that purports to state that modern science really doesn't understand many things. It seems that the appeal is that since our knowledge of how the Universe works has changed so dramatically in the past few decades that people are hoping for the next big change in how we view the Universe, without bothering to actually be careful about it.

Real science is hard work. New theories have to hold up against centuries of evidence. New experiments have to be understood to incredible accuracy to remove systematic errors. Then there are these people like this Sitchin who come into a field without the training required to really understand it, and claim they have some new idea that those who have dedicated their lives to the science somehow missed. And even when their idea fails the most basic of logical tests, they plug forward, and often still manage to gather followers. It just really gets to me.
 
*Pats Chalz on head*
There, there. :p

Pseudo science is like pseudo colours, tehy exist only if you want them to.
One thing that Neeyik mentioned about the world being flat.

If the world was flat, then we wouldn't be able to use a sphere to do texture mapping. :LOL:
 
Instead of trying to attack me just like priests attacking and calling everyone that expressed something that seemed against their beliefs a heretic/witch in the medieval times, go study them by yourselves, buy a copy of the book if you dont want to give them money, and send them an email or mail if you have questions or disagree.

I am not the one who is going to change your minds, no matter how much right or wrong I am. If any of you care to discuss just pm me. Otherwise, I will leave you entitled to your own opinion. Its not my problem and noether I am trying to convince everyone.

I wont comment on any assumptions.

If you think you know everything write a book and inform me when you finish it. Ill be the first to get it.
 
Chalnoth said:
And even when their idea fails the most basic of logical tests, they plug forward, and often still manage to gather followers. It just really gets to me.
Click to expand...

Hmm, that reminds me of a certain institution still doing it big-scale nowadays...
 
Nesh said:
If you think you know everything write a book and inform me when you finish it. Ill be the first to get it.
Click to expand...
There's no way I'm going to spend that much time and energy attempting to debunk any of this pseudo-science. Some people feel it's worth their time, I guess. I don't. There are plenty of real books out there that do a good job of explaining in layman's terms some of the basics of modern scientific understanding. I personally really like Richard Feynman.

And you still continue to profess that I'm just dismissing these ideas because they're against my beliefs somehow. That couldn't be further from the truth.

I'm against these ideas because they fail the most basic logical tests. If you can't pass those, there's just no point in going forward. The upsetting thing comes in when these people engaged in pseudo-science inevitably fail to pay attention to the most basic rebuttals of their arguments. And the fact that so many people get caught up in all the nonsense just burns me up even more.
 
Nesh said:
And who said everything in the scientific world is all rosy and right? Or are you trying to imply that they are always right because of this?
Click to expand...
No. Stop reading into my writings things I am not saying - that kind of behavior is annoying :!: Scientists are human and as such not 100% perfect. They will from time to time produce wrong ideas, even ideas that stick around for a while, because nobody figures out quickly how to disprove them.

However, the whole point of having the scientific method is to have a self-correcting system for deriving knowledge, much like democracy provides a self-correcting system for government and capitalism provides a self-correcting economic system. Neither democracy nor capitalism are anywhere close to perfect, but just about any other system ever tried has turned out to be hugely inferior over time in comparison.

If you can describe a BETTER system of deriving knowledge than what the scientific community employs right now, then PLEASE SHARE IT WITH US :!:

Disprove someone after studying the matter is acceptable. Disprroving NO MATTER WHAT isnt the same.
Click to expand...
A disproof is a disproof, and proves that the idea under discussion is false. A disproof is final. As far as I can tell, you are using the word "disprove" wrongly here; a more appropriate term would be "dismiss" or "brush off", or perhaps "arguing against", depending on exactly what the hell you mean here.
 
Nesh said:
Ok ok you all know everything.
Click to expand...
Nah, not really. It's more that a whole bunch of people here have gotten extremely weary of non-constructive attacks on science and the scientific community, especially when the argument is one of close-mindedness and comes from someone who has just had their pet idea brushed off or picked apart.
 
I thought that was a good idea.
Imagine what would happen if that wasn't the case?
It would mean I would still be trying to prove the existence monsters under my bed. :???:

arjan de lumens said:
[...]who has just had their pet idea brushed off or picked apart.
Click to expand...
 
arjan de lumens said:
Scientists are human and as such not 100% perfect. They will from time to time produce wrong ideas, even ideas that stick around for a while, because nobody figures out quickly how to disprove them.
Click to expand...
Actually, I claim that scientists produce wrong ideas 99.9% of the time. New ideas that are actually correct are fairly rare :)
 
Chalnoth said:
And you still continue to profess that I'm just dismissing these ideas because they're against my beliefs somehow. That couldn't be further from the truth.
Click to expand...
It is the truth, your arguing against Sitchin's claims without understanding the details of them. Not that I buy into Sitchin's claims by any means, but back in college I worked a hardware store were a fellow employe left "Twelfth Planet" at the counter, which I wound up reading for entertainment's sake.

Having read the work in question; I can say with certainty that while your logic is sound, you arguments are bunk. You say Sumerians didn't have the technology to detect a planet so far away, Stichin makes no claim to the contrary. You say Sumerians weren't around to whiteness the creation of the asteroid belt, yet Stichin does not suggest otherwise here either. Those points show quite clearly that you are dismissing Stichin's claims without understanding the nature of them; and hence, your arguments here are worthless.
 
kyleb said:
Having read the work in question; I can say with certainty that while your logic is sound, you arguments are bunk. You say Sumerians didn't have the technology to detect a planet so far away, Stichin makes no claim to the contrary. You say Sumerians weren't around to whiteness the creation of the asteroid belt, yet Stichin does not suggest otherwise here either. Those points show quite clearly that you are dismissing Stichin's claims without understanding the nature of them; and hence, your arguments here are worthless.
Click to expand...
Then how does Stichin claim that the Sumerians obtained knowledge of the asteroid belt & the extra planets? (provided that I haven't misunderstood and Stichin doesn't actually claim that the Sumerians had such knowledge)
 
kyleb said:
You say Sumerians didn't have the technology to detect a planet so far away, Stichin makes no claim to the contrary.
Click to expand...
Stichin seems to be claiming, from what I can tell, that a Kuiper belt object travels into the solar system every 3600 years or so, and thus would have been much closer at that time. That's fine, but he has no basis at all for that 3600 year number.

You say Sumerians weren't around to whiteness the creation of the asteroid belt, yet Stichin does not suggest otherwise here either. Those points show quite clearly that you are dismissing Stichin's claims without understanding the nature of them; and hence, your arguments here are worthless.
Click to expand...
Then enlighten me. How could the Sumerians have any real observational data in support of a planet that was 'broken up'?

You're right, I haven't looked at Sitchin's claims, but I have read some websites debunking his claims based upon his interpretations of ancient texts. But since that's not my field, I instead chose to post a link instead of attempting to argue those points.
 
kyleb said:
He claims they learned about all that from E.T. ;)
Click to expand...
Oh, God, that's even worse. No wonder I haven't paid this guy any attention. Anyway, did a little bit more looking, and found this bit:

Edit: Quote below is from here: http://jcolavito.tripod.com/lostcivilizations/id14.html
"According to the ancient texts as interpreted by me, Nibiru was a planet ejected from some other planetary system in outer space that was captured into our Solar System as it passed near Neptune. It became involved in a collision with a pre-existing planet where the debris of the Asteroid Belt are now. As a result of that collision, some 4 billion years ago, the Earth and the Moon came to be where they are now."
Click to expand...
That's just complete and utter nonsense. First of all, the idea of a rogue planet interacting with our Solar System is rather ridiculous. There is absolutely no evidence of any such interaction, and the probabilities are just so absolutely miniscule as to be negligible. Furthermore, if any such rogue planet were to exist, the probability is just overwhelmingly in favor of it being a hydrogen gas giant instead of a smaller rocky planet, which would be required for it to collide with anything and result in an asteroid belt.

And finally, we don't believe that the asteroid belt came from a planet at all:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asteroid_belt
...but was instead prevented from forming into a planet through orbital resonances with Jupiter.

Now, if these ancient Sumerians received knowledge from an advanced alien society, why is it wrong?
 
kyleb said:
Why are you asking me? I told you straight up that I don't buy into the man's claims by any means.
Click to expand...
Well, that was more an argument against his statements than a specific question to you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top