BenVTrigger said: I cant believe how many people I got to fall for this thread....... Lol it was my first atempt at a Rolstopable type thread and Id say I did wonderfully

Well played, sir.

I didn't think you were a scientifically illiterate moron, but one can never be sure with these things.

Kantor said: BenVTrigger said: I cant believe how many people I got to fall for this thread....... Lol it was my first atempt at a Rolstopable type thread and Id say I did wonderfully Well played, sir. I didn't think you were a scientifically illiterate moron, but one can never be sure with these things.

On the other hand, playing the Rol card is such an easy way out.

That's just wrong.

We know a lot. Go to a hospital. Go into a university. 

Saying we don't know what is thousands of miles benath us in some of the most hostile considitions fathomable is just....not proving anything.

You keep saying I dont understand the processes........I do.

Im playing devils advocate.  But my point is that true knowledge, true unshakable without question doesnt exist much.  It all boils down to damn good hypothesis and theories.  Which is true.  

My general point is we dont know much beyond question.  You and I believe mostly the same things.  Im presenting the argument however that real absolute truth requires direct observation in one way or another.  It really does.  

In terms of the Scientific method.  We have very little factual proof of anything.  You hear things thrown around like their facts and that we "know things".

But when you use the scientific method you quickly realize its almost all hypothesis and theories.

Even basic things.  We dont actually even know what the center of the Earthis made of.  Sure weve got some good ideas but we dont actually know.

I just thought it was interesting how we don't really know anything......like seriously we dont know anything about the universe as much as some scientists will try to convince you they do.

The scientific method trumps human reasoning. 

Your thinking again is just wrong. You state that to know the temperature of the centre of the sun we would have to directly measure it. But that thinking is an infinite regression as how do we know the device is correct? We'd have to use a 2nd, and a 3rd, and a fourth etc, and then measure the measurements etc. It's nothing more then paranoia and not understanding how systems interconnect. 

The problem is what you are saying is not complex because you are not understanding the complex nature of the systems you are measuring. 

Here's a good example. To measure the movement of a glacier you believe some poor bastard would have to stand by it for decades with a ruler. 

However one indirect way glacial movement can be measured is when bodies emerge at the bottom of them. You determine when the person went missing, the date the body was found and there you have the movement of a glacier. 

Your central point is nothing more then you not understanding how systems are interconnected.

"You cant know something 100 percent without in some way observing it.  That my friend is a fact. "

Wrong. Due to the nature of waves, we can determine that the core of the earth is solid. We've never seen it, but thanks to physics, we know this to be a fact.