Guess what they found something in the universe not known to science

[hadit]

The obvious answer is, "because it makes us think".

One of the most valuable aspects of thinking outside of the box is that, along the way, we might discover other stuff.

Just imagine something, let's chase it down, and let's see what we learn along the way.

Holy crap, come on. Science makes a lot of mistakes because it asks crazy questions. It's CURIOUS. That's how we progress.

This is really at the very core of science. If you really don't understand this, that isn't the fault of science.
.

He said that you are not real, presumably you do know that you are part of the universe.

If another person said the EXACT same thing they might get committed to a hospital.

If you had courage you would mock this fool too

I'm not into mocking people who are curious.

Science is doing the best it can, asking questions, making mistakes, learning stuff.

Whom do YOU trust?
.

Mental patients can be curious too? The fact is that for Tyson to say what he did about the simulation means that Tyson has found God as it does not matter whether you use the term God, creator or simulation creator, the other fact is that Tyson can not deal with what he has learned which is that there is a really really really great programmer out there, who others have been saying writes DNA programs for a very long time. Tyson now agrees whether he admits this or not.

Trust, well other than me I trust no one, you wouldn't either

Well, I'm sorry to hear that.

Personally, I love watching science ask crazy questions and posit wild theories.

Curiosity is definitely one of my favorite human traits.
.

You only think you know what science is, again if another person posed the same theory they might be committed, why do people with degrees get to babble uncontrollably and simpletons like you call it science.

LOL

Babble on because you are a simpleton with no clue

They can say these things because they can back up their theories with observed reality. In fact, they formulate the theories FROM the observed realities. They do not formulate theories that obviously counter reality.

 

[gtopa1]

Spotted: A black hole that shouldn't be physically possible

Actually nothing outside our solar system is fully known but this thing might be a black hole too big to be possible


Nothing new, they are clueless and every new discovery invalidates previous facts

That's how Science should work, Fran. It's not being clueless; it's learning new things.

Karl Popper:

Greg

 

[Mac1958]

A quick usage of the Search function reveals that the OP is most likely a Trumpster.

If that's the case, this is all about discrediting science, and by extension, climate change arguments.

And that's about it.
.

 

[keepitreal]

My point is how can you seriously listen to these people after saying such nonsense?

The obvious answer is, "because it makes us think".

One of the most valuable aspects of thinking outside of the box is that, along the way, even if that theory is wrong, we might discover other stuff.

Just imagine something, let's chase it down, and let's see what we learn along the way.

Holy crap, come on. Science makes a lot of mistakes because it asks crazy questions. It's CURIOUS. That's how we progress.

Curiosity is really at the very core of science. And humanity, for that matter. If you really don't understand this, that isn't the fault of science.
.

Thinking outside the box is one thing,
Chasing nonsense is another

 

[Wry Catcher]

Spotted: A black hole that shouldn't be physically possible

Actually nothing outside our solar system is fully known but this thing might be a black hole too big to be possible


Nothing new, they are clueless and every new discovery invalidates previous facts

I thought you meant a compassionate conservative was one thing not known in the universe. Silly me. They exist, they are the RINO's who have been tossed under the bus by the neo fascist set.

 

[Mac1958]

My point is how can you seriously listen to these people after saying such nonsense?

The obvious answer is, "because it makes us think".

One of the most valuable aspects of thinking outside of the box is that, along the way, even if that theory is wrong, we might discover other stuff.

Just imagine something, let's chase it down, and let's see what we learn along the way.

Holy crap, come on. Science makes a lot of mistakes because it asks crazy questions. It's CURIOUS. That's how we progress.

Curiosity is really at the very core of science. And humanity, for that matter. If you really don't understand this, that isn't the fault of science.
.

Thinking outside the box is one thing,
Chasing nonsense is another

I addressed that fully in post 109.
.

 

[gtopa1]

A quick usage of the Search function reveals that the OP is most likely a Trumpster.

If that's the case, this is all about discrediting science, and by extension, climate change arguments.

And that's about it.
.

Huh? That's pseudo-Scientific!!!

Greg

 

[gtopa1]

Spotted: A black hole that shouldn't be physically possible

Actually nothing outside our solar system is fully known but this thing might be a black hole too big to be possible


Nothing new, they are clueless and every new discovery invalidates previous facts

I thought you meant a compassionate conservative was one thing not known in the universe. Silly me. They exist, they are the RINO's who have been tossed under the bus by the neo fascist set.

Huh? Who's tossed under the bus? What do you call a "compassionate" conservative? One who says jobs before welfare? (Trump V Hillary).

Greg

 

[gtopa1]

A quick usage of the Search function reveals that the OP is most likely a Trumpster.

If that's the case, this is all about discrediting science, and by extension, climate change arguments.

And that's about it.
.

What predictions does the AGW Paradigm make, and how accurate are they?

Do you seek to confirm or disprove?


Greg

 

[Mac1958]

A quick usage of the Search function reveals that the OP is most likely a Trumpster.

If that's the case, this is all about discrediting science, and by extension, climate change arguments.

And that's about it.
.

What predictions does the AGW Paradigm make, and how accurate are they?

Do you seek to confirm or disprove?


Greg

I seek to learn more, not make final decisions on open scientific issues.

There is no doubt that we have much to learn, and I think that's exciting.

We've learned much, we've made great strides, but there's a long way to go.
.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Spotted: A black hole that shouldn't be physically possible

Actually nothing outside our solar system is fully known but this thing might be a black hole too big to be possible


Nothing new, they are clueless and every new discovery invalidates previous facts

I thought you meant a compassionate conservative was one thing not known in the universe. Silly me. They exist, they are the RINO's who have been tossed under the bus by the neo fascist set.

Huh? Who's tossed under the bus? What do you call a "compassionate" conservative? One who says jobs before welfare? (Trump V Hillary).

Greg

Actually, a compassionate conservative never existed. It was a talking point for GWB, but originated by Michael Savage, the kook whose still on AM radio ranting about everything under the sun, moon and the seas.

 

[gtopa1]

A quick usage of the Search function reveals that the OP is most likely a Trumpster.

If that's the case, this is all about discrediting science, and by extension, climate change arguments.

And that's about it.
.

What predictions does the AGW Paradigm make, and how accurate are they?

Do you seek to confirm or disprove?


Greg

I seek to learn more, not make final decisions on open scientific issues.

There is no doubt that we have much to learn, and I think that's exciting.

We've learned much, we've made great strides, but there's a long way to go.
.

Of course but you "accept" the confirmation bias of AGW? How so? How predictive are the models? These questions inform my way of thinking. I look at the models and have found them wanting especially the CATASTROPHE ones. I say we develop the Science more and actively seek to DISPROVE it. That doesn't seem to be happening in Mainstream Science these days...at least the Popular Science.

Greg

 

[Mac1958]

A quick usage of the Search function reveals that the OP is most likely a Trumpster.

If that's the case, this is all about discrediting science, and by extension, climate change arguments.

And that's about it.
.

What predictions does the AGW Paradigm make, and how accurate are they?

Do you seek to confirm or disprove?


Greg

I seek to learn more, not make final decisions on open scientific issues.

There is no doubt that we have much to learn, and I think that's exciting.

We've learned much, we've made great strides, but there's a long way to go.
.

Of course but you "accept" the confirmation bias of AGW? How so? How predictive are the models? These questions inform my way of thinking. I look at the models and have found them wanting especially the CATASTROPHE ones. I say we develop the Science more and actively seek to DISPROVE it. That doesn't seem to be happening in Mainstream Science these days...at least the Popular Science.

Greg

Nowhere did I say I "accept the confirmation bias of AGW." Nowhere.

Do I think it's probable? Yes. That's the most I can say on the topic, since I don't/can't know for sure.
.

 

[gtopa1]

Spotted: A black hole that shouldn't be physically possible

Actually nothing outside our solar system is fully known but this thing might be a black hole too big to be possible


Nothing new, they are clueless and every new discovery invalidates previous facts

I thought you meant a compassionate conservative was one thing not known in the universe. Silly me. They exist, they are the RINO's who have been tossed under the bus by the neo fascist set.

Huh? Who's tossed under the bus? What do you call a "compassionate" conservative? One who says jobs before welfare? (Trump V Hillary).

Greg

Actually, a compassionate conservative never existed. It was a talking point for GWB, but originated by Michael Savage, the kook whose still on AM radio ranting about everything under the sun, moon and the seas.

How can a conservative NOT be compassionate? Conservatives see the world where we are all flawed creatures of God and in need of forgiveness and love. You lot just see the "masses" as exploitable means of production to be controlled by the "elites" who know what's best. Frankly your system is slavery.

Greg

 

[gtopa1]

A quick usage of the Search function reveals that the OP is most likely a Trumpster.

If that's the case, this is all about discrediting science, and by extension, climate change arguments.

And that's about it.
.

What predictions does the AGW Paradigm make, and how accurate are they?

Do you seek to confirm or disprove?


Greg

I seek to learn more, not make final decisions on open scientific issues.

There is no doubt that we have much to learn, and I think that's exciting.

We've learned much, we've made great strides, but there's a long way to go.
.

Of course but you "accept" the confirmation bias of AGW? How so? How predictive are the models? These questions inform my way of thinking. I look at the models and have found them wanting especially the CATASTROPHE ones. I say we develop the Science more and actively seek to DISPROVE it. That doesn't seem to be happening in Mainstream Science these days...at least the Popular Science.

Greg

Nowhere did I say I "accept the confirmation bias of AGW." Nowhere.

Do I think it's probable? Yes. That's the most I can say on the topic, since I don't/can't know for sure.
.

OK:how good are the models at predictions? No snow in the UK post 2005?? Greenland melted by 2010?

Last I saw the earth was warming a tad but causes quite uncertain indeed; even the warming is uncertain in degree.

Greg

 

[Wry Catcher]

A quick usage of the Search function reveals that the OP is most likely a Trumpster.

If that's the case, this is all about discrediting science, and by extension, climate change arguments.

And that's about it.
.

What predictions does the AGW Paradigm make, and how accurate are they?

Do you seek to confirm or disprove?


Greg

I seek to learn more, not make final decisions on open scientific issues.

There is no doubt that we have much to learn, and I think that's exciting.

We've learned much, we've made great strides, but there's a long way to go.
.

Of course but you "accept" the confirmation bias of AGW? How so? How predictive are the models? These questions inform my way of thinking. I look at the models and have found them wanting especially the CATASTROPHE ones. I say we develop the Science more and actively seek to DISPROVE it. That doesn't seem to be happening in Mainstream Science these days...at least the Popular Science.

Greg

Who says I accept AGW as the be all end all reason for climate change? Not me. But I don't deny it, and something is creating super storms, droughts, melting ice and rising sea levels.

I support green and renewable energy because the alternative, coal and oil, are toxic pollutants, they negatively impact our water, air and soil.

I support natural gas, but we've seen some might serous explosions from this source of energy.

We know these things, and we do our part. We have solar panels on our roof, a Chevy Bolt and a RAV4 Hybrid in our garage and a solar powered pump in a well to water out plants, veggies and fruit trees.

 

[Mac1958]

A quick usage of the Search function reveals that the OP is most likely a Trumpster.

If that's the case, this is all about discrediting science, and by extension, climate change arguments.

And that's about it.
.

What predictions does the AGW Paradigm make, and how accurate are they?

Do you seek to confirm or disprove?


Greg

I seek to learn more, not make final decisions on open scientific issues.

There is no doubt that we have much to learn, and I think that's exciting.

We've learned much, we've made great strides, but there's a long way to go.
.

Of course but you "accept" the confirmation bias of AGW? How so? How predictive are the models? These questions inform my way of thinking. I look at the models and have found them wanting especially the CATASTROPHE ones. I say we develop the Science more and actively seek to DISPROVE it. That doesn't seem to be happening in Mainstream Science these days...at least the Popular Science.

Greg

Nowhere did I say I "accept the confirmation bias of AGW." Nowhere.

Do I think it's probable? Yes. That's the most I can say on the topic, since I don't/can't know for sure.
.

OK:how good are the models at predictions? No snow in the UK post 2005?? Greenland melted by 2010?

Last I saw the earth was warming a tad but causes quite uncertain indeed; even the warming is uncertain in degree.

Greg

Models are models only; hell, first there's the software on which they're built, then there's the inputted data. Hopefully they'll get better. I'm sure they will.

Seems to me, though, that clean and renewable energy is simply the smart and obvious goal for an intelligent, advanced civilization. Dirty energy is, well, dirty.

So we push and keep making advances. We're obviously not ready for 100% clean energy, but to attack and/or dismiss it is destructive and slows progress.

We should be able to agree that that's the goal, and we should be able to at least work for it. But we can't even do THAT right now.
.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Spotted: A black hole that shouldn't be physically possible

Actually nothing outside our solar system is fully known but this thing might be a black hole too big to be possible


Nothing new, they are clueless and every new discovery invalidates previous facts

I thought you meant a compassionate conservative was one thing not known in the universe. Silly me. They exist, they are the RINO's who have been tossed under the bus by the neo fascist set.

Huh? Who's tossed under the bus? What do you call a "compassionate" conservative? One who says jobs before welfare? (Trump V Hillary).

Greg

Actually, a compassionate conservative never existed. It was a talking point for GWB, but originated by Michael Savage, the kook whose still on AM radio ranting about everything under the sun, moon and the seas.

How can a conservative NOT be compassionate? Conservatives see the world where we are all flawed creatures of God and in need of forgiveness and love. You lot just see the "masses" as exploitable means of production to be controlled by the "elites" who know what's best. Frankly your system is slavery.

Greg

This ^^^ seems to have been formed in your head, since you have no clue about me, my life and my beliefs. A post typical of an idiot-gram, lacking substance, thought and not one bit thought provoking.

How can a conservative not be compassionate? A whole lot in CA voted to deny gay and lesbian couples marriage, many more voted for Republicans to repeal the ACA and leave tens of thousands of our citizens without health care; fought and succeeded to deny the LGBTQ set to serve our country in our military and even supported bigots who refused to make them a wedding cake.

Of course I'm speaking about the faux conservatives, faux Christians and faux patriots who populate this message board.

My good friend, a former priest and a well respected therapist has loads of compassion, and does not believe all humans are flawed, and those who are can be cured.

 

[Frannie]

Well kid hadit is an alternate spelling of hadith of which the cartoon known as the Quran is the most authentic. So kiddy either you are a camel fucker or want to be perceived as one.

CIAO

Dude, hadit simply comes from, "I've hadit with all the stupidity". You really shouldn't assume stuff. It makes you look dumb.

Actually hadit is an alternate spelling for hadith, of which the Quran is the most authentic hadit.

So dude if you are not a Muslim you really ought to consider a different name than Quran, unless you want to appear as stupid as you actually are....LOL

Hadith
Islam
Written By:

• Albert Kenneth Cragg

See Article History
Alternative Title: hadīt
Hadith, Arabic Ḥadīth (“News” or “Story”), also spelled Hadīt, record of the traditions or sayings of the Prophet Muhammad, revered and received as a major source of religious law and moral guidance, second only to the authority of the Qurʾān, the holy book of Islam. It might be defined as the biography of Muhammad perpetuated by the long memory of his community for their exemplification and obedience. The development of Hadith is a vital element during the first three centuries of Islamic history, and its study provides a broad index to the mind and ethos of Islam.

So if you are not Muslim, consider another name than hadit/Quran

LOL

I hope my piggy cartoons do not offend any camel/burka fuckers

You're the only one that complained, so no.

Not complaining just exposing the ugliness of Islam

Tell us more about the glory of sharia law

PS. Care less about the universe, and care more about your neighbor

Jesus Christ

Care less about the universe? You mean like not creating a whole bunch of posts about it?

No shitface I said that you should care less about the universe and care more about your neighbor.
Christian's understand, it is no wonder that you cant grasp any concept other than jihad

Enjoy sawing

 

[Frannie]

Sure I remember and again nothing about the universe outside of our solar system is known, just speculated.

Can you explain what is known about dark matter, or is pretending that you have intelligence without ever referencing any of it your entire talent?

1. We know about the composition of objects by the spectra of light that comes from them.
2. We know about their mass by the motion of objects around them.

So you're completely wrong, again.

Dark matter is hypothesized because something is there that we don't see. Again, you should know that.

1. Only stars emit light, they all burn hot, reflected light is the same light as the source, planets are more interesting and essential than stars
2. You know about what's mass by the motion of objects around them (what again)

3. Can you explain what is known about dark matter, or is pretending that you have intelligence without ever referencing any of it your entire talent?

I need this info for my theory of idiots on the internet pretending to be physicist

You do know, don't you, that infrared, aka heat, is electromagnetic radiation, just as visible light is? Therefore, infrared spectroscopy tells us about the atmospheres of hot planets. And no, light reflected through the atmospheres of planets is not the same as the source. You're really not very good at this, are you?

I have been told that I was not very good "at this" before, haven't seen any of them in a while though, have you? No matter Google is going to be broken up into smaller companies and I will own them all...…………………….How bout you Mohammed?

The sad thing about simpletons like you, is that in some way you take a photo or spectrograph of something unknown and after looking and speculating about what it might be, you believe someone else that says they know, no one knows which is why things are changing every year or so. Tip the universe visible to humanity has never changed more than .0000000001 percent in all of human history so everything that has ever changed was a mistake, you will analyze the math and claim I can't do percent's. See AAPL

So why are you ashamed to be a muslim, I mean after all you named yourself hadit/quran

CIAO

I'm not ashamed because I'm not, nor have ever been, a Muslim. Of course the universe has appeared largely static for all of recorded history, we've not been around all that long. And no, you're not very good at this.

The universe has never been anything other than what it is. No human knows what this is. Funny how you can't explain dark matter