Science thought, a journey back in time.

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience' started by theorist-constant12345, Jan 30, 2015.

  1. theorist-constant12345 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,660
    Hello all, I understand some of you think I am a bit nuts, so I wish to run an experimental thought procedure that is Pseudoscience related. This thread is not a thread to post you are wrong in or to explain present facts.
    This thread is science related based on we all have no knowledge except the knowledge of survival.
    There can be no wrong's in this thread because all the talk from the beginning of time until present will be based on having no knowledge.

    I will only post in this thread from now on.

    To get started we are going to travel back in time, the more we travel back in time the more knowledge we lose.
    I am going to take you back to a time where the only knowledge we have is survival.
    I want you to image that we are all sitting around a camp fire, and the first discussion on the agenda is how did we get here?, where did we come from?

    Now bare in mind that we do not know about evolution , we are relatively ''stupid'',

    also bare in mind that the beginning was humanity and not the big bang, the big bang is a prequel.


    The first person suggests?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. theorist-constant12345 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,660
    This is the first scientific question of our existence, I will open and say ''were we put here?''
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Enmos Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    There is no evidence for that, so I am not going to hold that position.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. theorist-constant12345 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,660
    The person would ask you, at this time do you have any reason to think we were not put here, we do not grow out of the ground like the trees and the grass?

    p.s- just to add this does firstly go down a bible path, then goes onto show the development of science and evolution etc.
     
  8. Enmos Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    There is a lot of evidence (understatement) for evolution. But then, I do not have to defend any position since I'm not making any claims.
    If anyone wants to convince me that we "were put here" they better come up with some serious evidence.
     
  9. theorist-constant12345 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,660
    I am not trying to convince you that you were put here, at this time we have no knowledge of evolution, in the thought experiment you have to have a blank open mind you do not know about evolution yet, the point I am trying to make is about our journey back in time, in the beginning we thought about how we got here, in the beginning religion won this argument, the bible pre-dates science, the first passages of the bible are science questions answered in the wrong perceived image, the perceived image was we were put here/created here by someone/something.

    1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
    2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
    3 ¶ And God said, Let there be light: 2 Cor. 4.6 and there was light.
    4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
    5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

    In the beginning we just did not have the knowledge to know any better or perceive anything else. The first page of the bible is an early representation of science thought process, a conjecture about how we got here that won the argument around the camp fire by any other suggestions lacking merit or scientific evidence at the time by no evidence means or technological means.

    The masses believed in the idea until proven otherwise except around this camp fire there was some unbelievers, who in time branched of to form science.
    In the beginning science and religion were entangled but over time science advanced.
    So far on my family tree I have the beginning science and religion in entanglement on a single branch. That in an amount of time on the time line I have two branches on my tree where science and religion become untangled.
    I then have the religion branch of the tree splits into more branches based on location and thought.<After the thoughts about creation, the rest is conjecture and the science ends>.
    I also have the science branch splitting into branches.

    Anyone still at the camp fire and got anything to add?
     
  10. theorist-constant12345 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,660
    Does anyone around the camp fire not agree that religion thought about creation and how we got here was the earliest - Pseudoscience- which is a claim, belief or practice which is falsely presented as scientific, but does not adhere to a valid scientific method, cannot be reliably tested, or otherwise lacks scientific status.

    From our branch of the tree and looking at early creation thought in the bible and religion in a scientific perspective, do we all agree has science like minded people in history that this is early Pseudoscience ?

    Where we has scientists have moved onto Protoscience, In the philosophy of science, there are several definitions of protoscience. Protoscience is sometimes distinguished from pseudoscience by a willingness to be changed through new evidence.

    Anyone at the camp fire in our camp disagree with this?
     
  11. theorist-constant12345 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,660
    The next question we ask at the camp fire is how big is all that we see, how far can we go, how far does it go?


    I say at the camp fire '' I think the size of the ? only has two logical choices, two choices that can only lead to one answer of the truth, an object can fit inside an object that contains empty, empty can fit inside something that is bigger and hollow, if we were in a cave we are in this emptiness that is surrounded by rock, the rock is surrounded by emptiness, the emptiness could be surrounded by rock, it could never end, so we must presume that the empty space or the solid rock never ends''
    You only have to realise about a box within a box within a box with space between the boxes, the scientist in the inner box is unaware they are even in a box because they can not see any sides to the box.


    matter occupying space occupying matter occupying space
    occupying matter occupying space occupying matter occupying space........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

    and because we can not see very far, we would never know if we were in space in a box or if we were just in a space.
    The two fire side choices that lead to one conclusion is the protoscience we are trying to achieve around the camp fire?
    We are talking in a sense of dimensions, what we are in or not in is not important, we are trying to reach an understanding by thinking that there is only two options that leads to one conclusion that will stand in present times to be true as good protoscience with valued reason to be true because there is no 3 rd choice at the present time,
    You will find that the discussion around the camp fire can be already defined by
    'Schrödinger's cat is a thought experiment, sometimes described as a paradox''
    We can conclude that the argument with religion and science will be infinite. We can conclude that if religion proved we was in a box and proved a creators existence, it also proves space outside the box and then religion would have to prove a box outside that space, but then that proves space outside that box and so on..... for infinite time.''
     
  12. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,846
    Science is the systematic classification of experience and knowledge:
    Science is what you know. Philosophy/Religion is what you don't know.
    Both pseudoscience and religion fail the scientific method, and as such are not scientific explanations.
     
  13. Seattle Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,062
    You don't need to bring up Schrodinger's cat. We all (except for Enmos) understand what a thought experiment is.

    I'm still intrigued by your misuse of "has" for "as". That is a curious misunderstanding that I've never seen anyone make irregardless of whether or not English was their first language or even when they may have some learning disorder.

    How did that come about?

    Also, "empty" doesn't fit inside something. Empty (like darkness) isn't a "thing". It is a state.

    Regarding your thought experiment. I'm sure it would play out as things have actually played out in reality. Religion would come first as an explanation and would serve (along with philosophy) as the earlier forms of "science" and then would branch off as actual knowledge became more available.
     
  14. origin In a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,929
    I wonder if there is some sort of point to this.
     
  15. theorist-constant12345 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,660
    It is very early science, at this stage we have not invented science terms, ''empty'' is to define the basic language and use of terminology we would of had .
    Infinite , finite, spacial volume would not fit into the fireside conversation of the now already getting wiser branch.

    As for ''as'' and ''has'' just a bad habit, I do know their uses as well.
     
  16. theorist-constant12345 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,660
    So far there is several points of reality, and a major Paradox for religion and science, which I will conclude and point out at the end of the thread if not observed already and understood.
     
  17. theorist-constant12345 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,660
    Protoscience is different to pseudoscience, some protosciences go on to become an accepted part of mainstream science, the story so far in the history thought and going back in time is infinite and finite space, that is what I have explained so far and created a Paradox so far.
    A Paradox that can not change unless a third option shows through new evidence something different to the only thing we can presently perceive.
     
  18. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,846

    yep, and Imagination and speculation is also a prelude to science. The problem is recognising when you are "pushing crap" and be big enough and ugly enough to forget it as anything resembling any logical explanation.
    We'll continue to perceive and to know through the disciplines of science
    The scientific method is essential...It sorts the wheat from the chaff.
    There's no getting around it or peer review, or offering fairy tale conspiracies as an excuse.
     
  19. theorist-constant12345 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,660
    ''Philosophy is the study of general and fundamental problems, such as those connected with reality, existence,knowledge, values, reason, mind, and language''

    and in using a Dialectic approach and discourse analysis, an age year old argument I have added a Paradox to end the argument.

    I will start on time tomorrow.
     
    Last edited: Jan 31, 2015
  20. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,846

    Science is what you know. Philosophy is what you don't know.
    Bertrand Russell (1872-1970) English philosopher, mathematician.



    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Time is simply that which evolved along with space in what we call the BB.
    Without time, everything would happen together...In fact, without time, nothing would have happened!
    Hope that helps.
     
  21. Seattle Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,062
    "Empty" is fine as a term. A can being full of empty is not however.
     
  22. theorist-constant12345 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,660
    Back to sitting by the camp fire, we sit there for a while and a person says, ''I wonder how long we have been sitting here'', which then brings up the issue of time and what is time?

    I reply ''time in empty space does not change and does not move, it is infinite like the space, but time for us moves, we move through and exist creating time within the none moving time, we are the cause of time and time does not exist without our presence, we are the time and only our time can change and the time in empty space stays at nothing, an unchanged entity, we pass time by and time does not pass us by''.

    The camp went on to eat their Dinosaur dinner while they thought for a while, and though, and thought , and thought about the words of apparent wisdom.

    ''Does anyone at the camp have anything to say''?
     
  23. origin In a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,929
    People did not exist when dinosaurs were alive, unless this is just describing the worst ever episode of the Flintstones.
     

Share This Page