This is nothing entirely new:
This has been going on for decades and is nothing new to Europe. This line of thinking is precisely what motivated the French Revolution, the Stalin Revolution, Mao's Revolution.
It all leads to the same place.
[video=youtube;_dwz_Z62e0s]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_dwz_Z62e0s[/video]
You do not realize the path you walk, young one.
Who decides who is properly informed to speak about an issue?
How can one know if another is properly informed before he/she speaks? Isn't speaking part of the sharing of information? You get to tell me what you know and I get to tell you what I know?
The idea that any one individual or group of individuals knows all that is relevant to an issue of discussion is, frankly, ignorant of historical reality. We would barely have advanced beyond the steam engine and vacuum tubes were it not for the aspect of free speech and dissent.
Even the most basic of theoretical models we have been taught in elementary science for 40 years are being repealed by new observations. The universe is not expanding. Analysis of red shift data confirms that the spectra of supernova are different and therefor not a golden standard for determining redshift (even if the only means of explaining it was mysterious spatial expansion). Measurements of the universe show that it is flat to a degree well below the predictions made by the expanding universe model under the Big Bang.
Classic representations of space-time have been illustrated to be inaccurate as time has been confirmed to be a phenomena triggered by quantum entanglement. Time is emergent - it is not a fundamental concept or property and all of this has yet to be truly contemplated with regard to relativity (which has been under fire because of observations of the Sagnac Effect - which is what makes Ring Laser Gyros possible and shouldn't happen under Relativity).
These are all things, I am sure, a well educated man such as yourself has been properly informed to be true and accurate foundations of our universe.
However, I work in these fields and am constantly on the lookout for new phenomena to make use of in engineering solutions. I'm in the hobby of making the impossible happen and of finding new and more efficient ways of accomplishing age-old tasks. I'm among those whose goal is to engineer infinity.
We know, perhaps better than anyone, that information has an expiration date. Models are simply approximations that work to facilitate engineering. Does the universe care about math? No. Math is what we use to describe and predict the universe. It does what it does and we are left trying to puzzle together the pieces.
It is through discussion and dissent that we discover things we did not know. Even arguments I consider to be misguided (such as "young earth creationism") are productive in that these groups serve to expose weaknesses in a theory or model. They will expose things that cannot be explained or contradictory physical evidence that must be considered.
I would rather live in a world where I listen to a deluge of stupidity that gains no power than a world where self-appointed intellectuals of virtue rule by decree.
And I will stake my life upon that.
You must be registered for see links
This has been going on for decades and is nothing new to Europe. This line of thinking is precisely what motivated the French Revolution, the Stalin Revolution, Mao's Revolution.
It all leads to the same place.
Because your ideas aren't somehow toxic or backwards?
Everything is relative except that which supports my feelings of superiority. Got it.
Ah, yes.
[video=youtube;_dwz_Z62e0s]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_dwz_Z62e0s[/video]
You do not realize the path you walk, young one.
Who decides who is properly informed to speak about an issue?
How can one know if another is properly informed before he/she speaks? Isn't speaking part of the sharing of information? You get to tell me what you know and I get to tell you what I know?
The idea that any one individual or group of individuals knows all that is relevant to an issue of discussion is, frankly, ignorant of historical reality. We would barely have advanced beyond the steam engine and vacuum tubes were it not for the aspect of free speech and dissent.
Even the most basic of theoretical models we have been taught in elementary science for 40 years are being repealed by new observations. The universe is not expanding. Analysis of red shift data confirms that the spectra of supernova are different and therefor not a golden standard for determining redshift (even if the only means of explaining it was mysterious spatial expansion). Measurements of the universe show that it is flat to a degree well below the predictions made by the expanding universe model under the Big Bang.
Classic representations of space-time have been illustrated to be inaccurate as time has been confirmed to be a phenomena triggered by quantum entanglement. Time is emergent - it is not a fundamental concept or property and all of this has yet to be truly contemplated with regard to relativity (which has been under fire because of observations of the Sagnac Effect - which is what makes Ring Laser Gyros possible and shouldn't happen under Relativity).
These are all things, I am sure, a well educated man such as yourself has been properly informed to be true and accurate foundations of our universe.
However, I work in these fields and am constantly on the lookout for new phenomena to make use of in engineering solutions. I'm in the hobby of making the impossible happen and of finding new and more efficient ways of accomplishing age-old tasks. I'm among those whose goal is to engineer infinity.
We know, perhaps better than anyone, that information has an expiration date. Models are simply approximations that work to facilitate engineering. Does the universe care about math? No. Math is what we use to describe and predict the universe. It does what it does and we are left trying to puzzle together the pieces.
It is through discussion and dissent that we discover things we did not know. Even arguments I consider to be misguided (such as "young earth creationism") are productive in that these groups serve to expose weaknesses in a theory or model. They will expose things that cannot be explained or contradictory physical evidence that must be considered.
I would rather live in a world where I listen to a deluge of stupidity that gains no power than a world where self-appointed intellectuals of virtue rule by decree.
And I will stake my life upon that.
