Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
Erm, no, I was pointing out that there was clear bias in allegedly unbiased scientists.Blah-blah-blah, bitchiness guised as pretentious discourse, blah.
This is all that shows up:
intoleranceandthepoliticizationofscienceatthesmith br sonian pdf intolerance politicization
I think god has it in for your argument.
Otherwise, I don't see a response in anything you've posted.
Originally posted by inimalist
most of the people you listed lived before real science... and I don't see what you mean by Einstein... Many of his theories were proven wrong in his lifetime....EDIT: Don't confuse scientific acceptance with popular acceptance. Coperican astrology had many enlightened followers in it's time.
EDIT 2: Also, the nature of science is to build knowledge over time. Most people you mention were recognized in their day by the people doing similar work... I was thinking you ment there was some old guy who lived in a cave whose writings we found years after he died...
I was primarily referring to Einsteins prediction of light bending because of gravity and he had many doubters until it was proven during the eclipse.
And there are countless LESS popular "scientists" from many fields who are/were looked down upon because of their theories only to later be vindicated with a breakthrough or discovery. Why would you deny that? Are you disagreeing because that idea doesn't agree with a point you are trying to make? What is that point, if you are trying to make one?
I mentioned those people because
1. They are well known.
2. Greater insight was achieved from their work after their death, or rather, greater appreciation and a greater understanding of their work was not fully realized until after their deaths.
3. Some were persecuted and mocked because of their "theories".
And about you first edit:
Originally posted by inimalist
EDIT: Don't confuse scientific acceptance with popular acceptance. Coperican astrology had many enlightened followers in it's time.
What the hell?????? Popular AND scientific acceptance is EXACTLY what we were talking about...at least that's what I thought we were talking about. What were YOU talking about????? 😕
Also...when did "real" science start happening?
Originally posted by debbiejo
Ummm all matter is simply energy oriented in such a way that it forms a bend in the space-time continuum. Bends in the space-time cause the attraction of particles and a distortion in time. Time passes more slowly around a strong gravitational field than a weak one. Kinda like a black hole.
Loaded question: what is the origin of matter? I know you are going to say that matter is energy and energy can neither be created nor destroyed right? Wrong. Everything in this universe has an origin.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Loaded question: what is the origin of matter? I know you are going to say that matter is energy and energy can neither be created nor destroyed right? Wrong. Everything in this universe has an origin.
The big bang was not the beginning, but just a change from what the universe was before. Energy is eternal.
We can have a conversation or even an argument, but every other word out of your mouth is AIDs this or ****** that.
And dadudemon, don't babble about levels and immaturity. Just because you come on here and offer thinly veiled insults wrapped in bad sarcasm, passing it off as friendly interest while engaging in arguments where you repeatedly talk out of your ass, doesn't mean anyone buys it.