View Single Post
Old 01-03-2009, 04:52 AM   #41
Darth Avlectus
@Darth Avlectus
I'd buy that for a dollar
Darth Avlectus's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: My pervert mansion
Posts: 4,397
Current Game: A dirty old man.
You are too generous! I get praise for my "intelligence" and stuff, but to be honest I'm not surprised if my imbalance of attributes here cancels out any usability whatsoever. Thanks though.
This may be a confusing statement, as it appears to liken pseudosciences like naturopathy with hard sciences like medicine.
Perhaps I was overgeneralizing to compensate for my lack of concise presentation in other threads. (Well, that and I just get nauseated of debating something with people who basically are telling me "how it is" and refuse to see it any other way than theirs regarding just about any matter.)

I think I should have separated that last thing about crop cirlces rumors. MY BAD!

I was more speaking to the development of mathematics and, like you say hard sciences. Or social sciences that at least hold some validity to a lesser degree. I suspect that this raw state of science is much more susceptible to political machinations. Sadly, hard sciences are soon making their way into that arena as you addressed below.
Good scientific process begins with a falsifiable hypothesis, offers testable results from reproducible experimentation and observation in nature and is subject to peer review.
Yes. What was it called that separated lab science from social science? Ceterus Paribus? (latin for: all other variables assumed equal) That is one very important distinction to be made.
Good scientific process is not simply asserting a conclusion such as prophecy or alien influence, whilst some religious communities may be accepting of this practise the scientific community is not and would consider such contentions nothing more than falsifiable hypothesis without any further research undertaken by its proponents (therefore failing at the beginning of peer review: where is the independent and collaborative data suggesting these conclusions?).
EXCELLENT POINT! I'm often disappointed by a lack of factual data or evidence when seeing some kind of study I'd like to look into from time to time.
OR how some con artists (conspiracy theorists) use factual data in a fallacious manner to gain $$$. OR that that same sort of thing is done by kooks pushing political agendas and/or extremism in religion.

I'm a little rough around the edges to be an academic type. Still R&D is quite rewarding to those who pursue it. I find the amount of...crud... hindering their progress to be disconcerting. After these people do so much work only to have it lambasted or hyperbolized or what have you. I quite appreciate these people.

So far as prophecies, though, I'm not quite sure how it is done except by mathematic formulae or statistics trends research. Nikola Tesla made predictions back in the late 1800s that have come true. The coming of age for aluminum, handheld communications devices, robotics advancement. THIS was a guy who actually bothered to go the distance, become an electrical physicist, and crank numbers and figures as well as invent.

Eugenics is probably the best example of pseudoscience. In fact, eugenics has got to be one of the most disgusting practices with regard to human life I have ever seen!

As an independent with many conservative values, I find Stalin reprehensible, actually. I'd call myself a "Soverigntist". I don't care to debate the politics of it, or talk about it here but if you'd like to speak in private?

Yes, I am all too suspicious of ulterior motives. Since scientists and engineers are concerned with HOW more than that of WHY (plus the creativity is mostly beaten out of you in those directions), I can see ways researchers are duped.

Again I believe the classical example of modern concern was the almost universal acceptance of Eugenics during the late 19th century, for political reasons regarding indigenous rights claims. Here science was being used as a "get out of jail free card" to absolve the financial responsibility of succeeding generations towards indigenous claims. Yet this popular acceptance unwittingly procreated "runaway nationalism" so that within a few decades, benefit of quickly developing international domestic communication mediums, it formed the very backbone of Nazism in Europe. Indeed pseudosciences, that is a mimicry of scientific formulation for political or personal reasons are a popular trend. There has been a movement among American university students recognised during the late-90's and believed to be a direct result of "affirmative action" policies,
Ah, yes. This. (Side note: I am glad to have an independent view from someone not in America!)

These policies (as best I can determine) have considerations into a number of factors to a student's background. Factors which, I'm not all that convinced, is concerned with *actual performance*. Hence my bewilderment that it claims meritocracy has been trampled as its main reason of concern--and yet I see little else to that end actually being done.

known as neo-Eugenics. This asserts that instead of cranial capacity and brain structure to differentiate the human races, that environments of social and economic background may be used as predictors of individual behaviour through genetic adaptation (ie. animal husbandry).
Yes. Indeed! I am actually curious as to what you have uncovered. If you don't mind.

This latest attempt at veiling a completely pseudoscientific superstition with the label of scientific contention is of course likened to the "scientific racism" declared by the Anthropological Society, of Eugenics.

It is these types of concerns which are foremost in the mind of university lecturers. That students might attempt to apply a semblence of scientific syntax to personal conclusions in order to manipulate others. And that political agents would attempt to hijack scientific research and procreate pseudoscientific claims whenever money and power are involved.
Which scares me, more and more all the time. Sad too.

Too bad I myself don't have any hard data to do justice for someone I know personally (not greatly, but well enough) who grew up in Italy and left it because of Mussolini. He grew up in an environment such that he is wise enough to see the start of fascism.

Take the ICBM for example. Werner von Braun originally conceived such designs to get man into space. Governments hijacked these intentions, and put man into space only to develop ICBM technologies. This reinforces what you say.

I believe we are in agreement, but I wished to extrapolate to make a clear distinction between pseudoscientific claims and true science.
WOW! Wonderful extrapolation! THANK YOU VERY MUCH! Are you a professor or at least a university student by chance? Very enlightening actually. It sounds like it may confirm some of my suspicions about the institutions of higher education in America.

What I was getting at is the overall progression has varied results.
While it is natural for minds to entertain on fictions generated from actual work, I marvel at how ideas have such exponential influence in the first place. As you said, though, it is also plagued with everything from petty to extremes. You said that plenty better than I ever could!

That's right, Bixby Snyder folks.
Darth Avlectus is offline   you may: quote & reply,