Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Is Logical Analysis To Be Proven?

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Richard D. Stafford, Ph.D. on April 23, 2002 13:32:28 UTC

Hi Scott,

I am willing to talk to almost anyone. The only time I don't is when I feel there are good reasons not to.

***** Scott:
I do agree with you that educated people don't put their intellect to use on a daily basis. Most people are just not that dedicated when it comes to their talents.

I am of the personal opinion that the real cause is the fact that the educational system has no way of determining ones ability to think; however, they can check very easily what one has managed to remember. As a consequence, idiot savants have a very strong advantage when it comes to success in academics. That advantage becomes more and more evident the higher one gets in the academic disciplines.

That guy who had no common sense but was good at school work turns out to be just as lacking in common sense when it comes to his chosen field; it is just that the great majority are not aware of that because rational judgements cannot be made without knowing everything he knows.

As an Academy matures, the percentage of idiot savants becomes overwhelming. (Just an opinion you understand!)

***** Scott:
I disagree with you on this. I think some people have opinions that are not well thought out. I don't think that makes them unworthy of our attention. Why not point out the error in their thinking? What ever happened to using your talents to inform people of their illogical statements. Any person that takes the time to put forth an opinion should be given considerate treatment (unless their opinions are full of insults).

I think you misunderstood my comment. I don't disagree with you at all on this issue. That is one reason why I do read all these things; and, when I see someone make a rational post, I am very willing to put forth my time to give them my perspective on what they are saying: sometimes to support them and sometimes to point out (what I think to be) their errors.

I was trying to point out that my position, that most of the posts on this forum (and the others that I have looked at) are simply not well thought out at all, is fairly well supported by our respected judges: i.e., I am certainly not in the minority with that position. This should not be taken as evidence of my support for the majority.

***** Scott:
I thought the nature of science was so that nothing could be proven, only disproven.

OK OK - Point taken

I do not know how good your mathematical abilities are, but if you can understand partial differential equations and matrix multiplication, what I have done should not be beyond your abilities to comprehend (however, it might take some careful work and some thought as it is not trivial). Let me know and arrangements can be made to get you a copy.

I do not know what "Point" that was which was taken! It should have been that any tautological relations should be taken into account prior any experiment (and would have been if the experiment had been carefully thought out). My position is only that the scientists have done a very poor job of laying out the foundations of their beliefs.

Have fun -- Dick

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2024 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins