passwordprotected

Joined

• started 157 topics
• posted 2,338 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by passwordprotected

• 
  76

  eugenics anyone?

  by ninja in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  this is the brother of rahm emanuel not liking the spotlight being pointed at him.......we are in trouble folks.

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ho-0shfeggo.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  passwordprotected

  Should scientists have absolute authority on who gets to breed? Probably not, IMHO.

  Probably not?
• 
  76

  eugenics anyone?

  by ninja in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  this is the brother of rahm emanuel not liking the spotlight being pointed at him.......we are in trouble folks.

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ho-0shfeggo.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  passwordprotected

  So if it indirectly happens among humans, should scientists take a more pro-active role in the process and make it a little less indirect? In other words, should the breeding be directed by scientists?
• 
  57

  Are Most Scientists Atheists?

  by passwordprotected in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  james leuba conducted a survey of scientists in 1916. they were asked a whether they believed in a god who actively communicates with humanity, to whom humans can pray and expect an answer.. to believe in this sort of god would mean you were a theist.

  if you're a deist, or agnostic, you believe there's a god but he's not necessarily interested in humans and we wouldn't pray to this god.. the results of this survey revealed that roughly 40% of scientists believe in this sort of god, making them theists.

  40% didn't, making them either deists/agnostics or atheists.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  passwordprotected

  James Leuba conducted a survey of scientists in 1916. They were asked a whether they believed in a God who actively communicates with humanity, to whom humans can pray and expect an answer.

  To believe in this sort of God would mean you were a theist. If you're a deist, or agnostic, you believe there's a God but he's not necessarily interested in humans and we wouldn't pray to this God.

  The results of this survey revealed that roughly 40% of scientists believe in this sort of God, making them theists. 40% didn't, making them either deists/agnostics or atheists. 20% didn't know.

  Leuba predicted that the number of scientists who disbelieved in a God who answers prayers would rise significantly over the decades as a direct result of improvements in education and advancements in science.

  The survey was repeated in 1997 (82 years after the orginal, so a lot of time for education to improve and science to advance), using exactly the same question. This time the number of deists or agnostics had risen by 5% to 45% overall. The number of scientists who do believe in a God who communicates and answers prayers remained around 40%.

  In the group that answered no would be scientists such as Andrew Flew and Einstein. Flew and Einstein, however, both believe/believed in a god, just not a in a God who is interested in humanity. Thus they were not, by definition, atheists.

  So, are most scientists atheists?
• 
  35

  Have memes been scientifically proven?

  by passwordprotected in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i'm guessing lots of people here believe in memes.

  my question, have they been scientifically proven?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  passwordprotected

  I'm sort of surprised; this thread has been viewed over 170 times but no one has been able to provide me with the scientific proof that memes exist. I understand that they are a metaphor to describe an analogy, but that doesn't provide scientific proof that the concept of the analogy for which memes is a metaphor is even true.

  What surprises me about this is that I'm very sure that many people believe in memes due to the teachings of Dawkins. But surely before that belief comes the knowledge to back up or prove their existence. If memes are still theoretical and hopefully one day science will back up the metaphor, or they're such an abstract concept that a level of hope in their existence is necessary, surely that falls into the category of faith. And isn't faith delusional?
• 
  35

  Have memes been scientifically proven?

  by passwordprotected in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i'm guessing lots of people here believe in memes.

  my question, have they been scientifically proven?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  passwordprotected

  So, yes, memes have been scientifically proven? I thought they were an analogy. Can an analogy be proven in a lab?
• 
  35

  Have memes been scientifically proven?

  by passwordprotected in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i'm guessing lots of people here believe in memes.

  my question, have they been scientifically proven?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  passwordprotected

  double-post
• 
  76

  eugenics anyone?

  by ninja in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  this is the brother of rahm emanuel not liking the spotlight being pointed at him.......we are in trouble folks.

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ho-0shfeggo.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  passwordprotected

  Eugenics is all around us, on farms and stockyards, in horse paddocks, among the birds around our homes, among the fish in the rivers. It's been at work for thousands of yrs.

  Among humans?
• 
  35

  Have memes been scientifically proven?

  by passwordprotected in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i'm guessing lots of people here believe in memes.

  my question, have they been scientifically proven?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  passwordprotected

  So really there isn't anything that even needs to be proven, since an analogy only needs to serve an explanatory purpose.

  But if it doesn't really need to be proven or is just an analogy, how come the 'science' of memetics has sprung up?

  Again I'll ask, can memes be scientifically proven or not? Even if they're analogous, they're analogous of something; can that something be scientifically proven? Remember, if you believe in memes they need to be proven scientifically, analogy of the abstract or not.
• 
  35

  Have memes been scientifically proven?

  by passwordprotected in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i'm guessing lots of people here believe in memes.

  my question, have they been scientifically proven?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  passwordprotected

  double post
• 
  35

  Have memes been scientifically proven?

  by passwordprotected in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i'm guessing lots of people here believe in memes.

  my question, have they been scientifically proven?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  passwordprotected

  Scientific proof doesn't exist

  Is that true? I've heard that some scientists doubt the Theory of Relativity and there are conventions around the world, published papers etc that put forward their doubts, backed of course by research. However, the scientific 'establishment' rejects these doubters, stating that the Theory of Relativity is absolutely solid.

  So if scientific proof doesn't exist, how can science provide all of the answers? Surely those answers are subject to change or doubt? And if that's the case, how can mankind's hope and future be built upon them? I keep thinking of the term 'trial and error'. Scientists conduct experiments or trials, and these often result in error. Or have I missed the point?

  Something can be proven beyond any reasonable doubt, but that's not really possible with an abstract concept like memes.

  So if the subject is sufficiently abstract, it doesn't need to be proved beyond reasonable doubt before it can/should be believed?