What would the world be like without science?

ClockCat
ClockCat's picture
Posts: 2265
Joined: 2009-03-26
User is offlineOffline
What would the world be like without science?

Ken G.
Posts: 1352
Joined: 2008-03-20
User is offlineOffline
ClockCat wrote:World without Science ?

 That was very funny,Now if you can get Jenny McCarthy and Jim Carey to see this video. Now to answer your question ~ We defiantly need science in these modern times,but the further back we go into human history,you can see that such human species like the Neanderthal Man was around for over 110,000 years (without science),Homo Sapien been around for less than 70,000 years, and modern man since the scientific method,less than 600 years and now we're closer to extinction,due to the misuse of knowledge.      I can't think of the exact terminology to the quote by the Greek playwright Sophocles,but it went something like this ~ Nothing enters mans world of inventions without a negative response ~ he was a man who understood mans weakness,when it comes to knowledge. In my opinon. 

Signature ? How ?


Luminon
SuperfanTheist
Luminon's picture
Posts: 2455
Joined: 2008-02-17
User is offlineOffline
Well, this hilarious video

Well, this hilarious video is based on preventive and complementary medicine, mistakenly used for acute situations. It could be a good parody on parodies. You guys are satisfied with cheap humour, indeed.

World without science? 90% less diseases, free energy, antigravity traffic, and global peace. We'd have all that in 20th century, witout scientists, claiming that this is impossible. Science is not religion, but both are organized. Organized science is anachronism, just like organized religion. The structure of institution makes it rigid, resistant to change. Now, mathemathics is superior to the observations and their results. Yes, there are "changes" in science, but that's within an academic club of the chosen, while the underground scientific community grows with the exiled ones. Electric universe, non-existence of time, mistaken Einstein, Silvertooth experiment, these are some parts from the free science, which I admire.

As for the scientific proficiency of early people, I wouldn't underestimate them so much. I had read articles about brain surgeries and skull trepanations, which the patients survived. Some holes even had a bone plug, which grew together with the skull. Although, I wonder if the patients were volunteers.

Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.


MichaelMcF
Science Freak
MichaelMcF's picture
Posts: 525
Joined: 2008-01-22
User is offlineOffline
Luminon wrote:Well, this

Luminon wrote:

Well, this hilarious video is based on preventive and complementary medicine, mistakenly used for acute situations. It could be a good parody on parodies. You guys are satisfied with cheap humour, indeed.

World without science? 90% less diseases, free energy, antigravity traffic, and global peace. We'd have all that in 20th century, witout scientists, claiming that this is impossible. Science is not religion, but both are organized. Organized science is anachronism, just like organized religion. The structure of institution makes it rigid, resistant to change. Now, mathemathics is superior to the observations and their results. Yes, there are "changes" in science, but that's within an academic club of the chosen, while the underground scientific community grows with the exiled ones. Electric universe, non-existence of time, mistaken Einstein, Silvertooth experiment, these are some parts from the free science, which I admire.

As for the scientific proficiency of early people, I wouldn't underestimate them so much. I had read articles about brain surgeries and skull trepanations, which the patients survived. Some holes even had a bone plug, which grew together with the skull. Although, I wonder if the patients were volunteers.

 

Wow.  Just... wow 

Forget Jesus, the stars died so that you could be here
- Lawrence Krauss


KSMB
Scientist
KSMB's picture
Posts: 702
Joined: 2006-08-03
User is offlineOffline
Luminon wrote:Well, this

Luminon wrote:
Well, this hilarious video is based on preventive and complementary medicine, mistakenly used for acute situations. It could be a good parody on parodies. You guys are satisfied with cheap humour, indeed.

World without science? 90% less diseases, free energy, antigravity traffic, and global peace. We'd have all that in 20th century, witout scientists, claiming that this is impossible. Science is not religion, but both are organized. Organized science is anachronism, just like organized religion. The structure of institution makes it rigid, resistant to change. Now, mathemathics is superior to the observations and their results. Yes, there are "changes" in science, but that's within an academic club of the chosen, while the underground scientific community grows with the exiled ones. Electric universe, non-existence of time, mistaken Einstein, Silvertooth experiment, these are some parts from the free science, which I admire.

As for the scientific proficiency of early people, I wouldn't underestimate them so much. I had read articles about brain surgeries and skull trepanations, which the patients survived. Some holes even had a bone plug, which grew together with the skull. Although, I wonder if the patients were volunteers.

 

MichaelMcF wrote:
Wow.  Just... wow 

I believe the British call it "bollocks".


Jeffrick
High Level DonorRational VIP!SuperfanGold Member
Jeffrick's picture
Posts: 2446
Joined: 2008-03-25
User is offlineOffline
KSMB

 

 

 

   No   it's  true:    honest.

 

 

    Benny Hill Lives forever on this  site:   honest!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."

VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"

If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?


MichaelMcF
Science Freak
MichaelMcF's picture
Posts: 525
Joined: 2008-01-22
User is offlineOffline
KSMB wrote:I believe the

KSMB wrote:

I believe the British call it "bollocks".

 

We do that, although in this case I think I'd prefer the Glaswegian "Hunners oh' wind n pish"

Forget Jesus, the stars died so that you could be here
- Lawrence Krauss


ClockCat
ClockCat's picture
Posts: 2265
Joined: 2009-03-26
User is offlineOffline
:3

Without silly things like science, things like this become plausible!

 

 

http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_3394806.html

Theism is why we can't have nice things.


cervello_marcio
Superfan
cervello_marcio's picture
Posts: 210
Joined: 2009-05-19
User is offlineOffline
:15. Paisley gets a boner.

:15. Paisley gets a boner. Look at the directory on the left for the different wings.

Eh? Eh?

 


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3945
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
Luminon wrote:antigravity

Luminon wrote:
antigravity traffic

Without science?

I don't think that word means what you think it means. 

 

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


ClockCat
ClockCat's picture
Posts: 2265
Joined: 2009-03-26
User is offlineOffline
:3

cervello_marcio wrote:

:15. Paisley gets a boner. Look at the directory on the left for the different wings.

Eh? Eh?

 

 

I didn't even notice that part. Hahaha that is fantastic though.

Theism is why we can't have nice things.


Luminon
SuperfanTheist
Luminon's picture
Posts: 2455
Joined: 2008-02-17
User is offlineOffline
butterbattle wrote:Luminon

butterbattle wrote:

Luminon wrote:
antigravity traffic

Without science?

I don't think that word means what you think it means. 

 

I mean it kind of figuratively. In this sense, organized science is anachronism. Science should be completely egalitarian. Having a hierarchy of academic titles and their monopoly on medial attention, funds and membership, this is very unwise. Some of the greatest scientific discoveries came from people, who either weren't scientists, or had a completely different sphere of interest. For example, mr. Roentgen was a mechanical engineer, not a physicist. And Nikola Tesla didn't have a degree, maybe just a bachelor. But according to my information, Tesla invented a functional antigravity machine earlier, than Wright brothers did their first flight. Of course, together with numerous ways of gathering free energy from the environment.This is why many of his patents had to get lost.

However, I keep hearing people's complains, that they are not heard if they solve something which scientists couldn't solve. I keep hearing of academic indoctrination, pride, and awful things which happen to those who accept certain forbidden doctrines. I have seen a dissident scientist falsely accused and locked up in prison, because his technology threatened local petrol market. (namely, depolymerization) He also had some other ideas in his mind, which could, for example, allow people to build cheap, ecologic, well isolated and fireproof houses. But he's now in jail.
And that's not the only case of destroyed life. The world is full of crime, and the organized science is no exception at all. It is a focus of money, power, and technologies threatening to upset the status quo.

Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.


MichaelMcF
Science Freak
MichaelMcF's picture
Posts: 525
Joined: 2008-01-22
User is offlineOffline
Luminon wrote:I mean it kind

Luminon wrote:

I mean it kind of figuratively. In this sense, organized science is anachronism. Science should be completely egalitarian. Having a hierarchy of academic titles and their monopoly on medial attention, funds and membership, this is very unwise. Some of the greatest scientific discoveries came from people, who either weren't scientists, or had a completely different sphere of interest. For example, mr. Roentgen was a mechanical engineer, not a physicist. And Nikola Tesla didn't have a degree, maybe just a bachelor. But according to my information, Tesla invented a functional antigravity machine earlier, than Wright brothers did their first flight. Of course, together with numerous ways of gathering free energy from the environment.This is why many of his patents had to get lost.

However, I keep hearing people's complains, that they are not heard if they solve something which scientists couldn't solve. I keep hearing of academic indoctrination, pride, and awful things which happen to those who accept certain forbidden doctrines. I have seen a dissident scientist falsely accused and locked up in prison, because his technology threatened local petrol market. (namely, depolymerization) He also had some other ideas in his mind, which could, for example, allow people to build cheap, ecologic, well isolated and fireproof houses. But he's now in jail.
And that's not the only case of destroyed life. The world is full of crime, and the organized science is no exception at all. It is a focus of money, power, and technologies threatening to upset the status quo.

 

And now you've incurred my wrath because you've abused chemistry.

 

1.  The scientists you mentioned made discoveries when science wasn't a profession.  Science as a profession is a 20th century invention.  The reason so many people were able to investigate science in the 19th century was because they were men of wealth with time on their hands.  They were precursors to the current model, not examples against it.

2.  What the fuck do you think depolymerization is?  Because it's not something you can get put in jail for.  Thermal depolymerization is a known process that can be used to break down large organic molecules.  What is criminal about this?

Forget Jesus, the stars died so that you could be here
- Lawrence Krauss


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
I wish there was antigravity

I wish there was antigravity traffic, it would be like star wars.


Luminon
SuperfanTheist
Luminon's picture
Posts: 2455
Joined: 2008-02-17
User is offlineOffline
MichaelMcF wrote:1.  The

MichaelMcF wrote:

 

1.  The scientists you mentioned made discoveries when science wasn't a profession.  Science as a profession is a 20th century invention.  The reason so many people were able to investigate science in the 19th century was because they were men of wealth with time on their hands.  They were precursors to the current model, not examples against it.

Well, examples for good and bad. Just remember Thomas A. Edison's fervent war against alternate current or Pasteur's theft of Bechamp's discoveries. There should be no scientist privileged over another, because rivalry, slander and corruption in science has a particularly dangerous consequences. We must acknowledge, that scientists are just people, with possible human weaknesses  and flaws of character. And that sometimes a common person may solve something which a professional couldn't. But generally, on local universities and scientific workplaces, there are people who treat a common man like shit. They don't care about intellect, common sense or truth, they care only about academic titles, money and positions of power. Mass media love them.

The worst are the skeptics from Sisyfos club. They want to take from the people the right and freedom to choose the method of healing. So far, they strive for a biased, negative campaign in media and refusal to recognize the alternative medicine in legislative. But I guess, here I cry on a wrong grave

MichaelMcF wrote:
  2.  What the fuck do you think depolymerization is?  Because it's not something you can get put in jail for.  Thermal depolymerization is a known process that can be used to break down large organic molecules.  What is criminal about this?
Depolymerization is a method of breaking down organic waste on petrol, in water, under pressure and high temperature. In USA there is planned (or already built) a factory for that, but not here, in Europe.
One local scientist had a patent on this technology. He wanted to start a mass production of portable, depolymerized petrol-powered generators. He needed money, so he did what is usually done in such a cases. He received an expert's report on the device, and it was estimated on about 750 millions of dollars. He did put this value as a base capital to his company. But this would endanger the local petrol market. It would be a problem, if people could make their petrol at home. So some people hired another expert to estimate that depolymerization technology, and this time, it was only about 35 millions of dollars. The scientist was accused, that he intended to sell the overpriced technology. He had to hide from the police for several years, and then he was found and locked up. However, he had no intention of selling that technology, he specially wanted to keep it public and affordable, so the petrol magnates couldn't buy it and take it away from the people. This attitude took away his freedom. I know that, because people from our group had a personal contact with him when he was still free. He wouldn't sell the rights, no matter what.

Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.


MichaelMcF
Science Freak
MichaelMcF's picture
Posts: 525
Joined: 2008-01-22
User is offlineOffline
Luminon wrote:Well, examples

Luminon wrote:

Well, examples for good and bad. Just remember Thomas A. Edison's fervent war against alternate current or Pasteur's theft of Bechamp's discoveries. There should be no scientist privileged over another, because rivalry, slander and corruption in science has a particularly dangerous consequences. We must acknowledge, that scientists are just people, with possible human weaknesses  and flaws of character. And that sometimes a common person may solve something which a professional couldn't. But generally, on local universities and scientific workplaces, there are people who treat a common man like shit. They don't care about intellect, common sense or truth, they care only about academic titles, money and positions of power. Mass media love them.

So some scientists disagreed with each other.  This isn't uncommon. I don't understand how this links into some science malaise.



Luminon wrote:

The worst are the skeptics from Sisyfos club. They want to take from the people the right and freedom to choose the method of healing. So far, they strive for a biased, negative campaign in media and refusal to recognize the alternative medicine in legislative. But I guess, here I cry on a wrong grave

The who?

 

Luminon wrote:

Depolymerization is a method of breaking down organic waste on petrol, in water, under pressure and high temperature. In USA there is planned (or already built) a factory for that, but not here, in Europe.
One local scientist had a patent on this technology. He wanted to start a mass production of portable, depolymerized petrol-powered generators. He needed money, so he did what is usually done in such a cases. He received an expert's report on the device, and it was estimated on about 750 millions of dollars. He did put this value as a base capital to his company. But this would endanger the local petrol market. It would be a problem, if people could make their petrol at home. So some people hired another expert to estimate that depolymerization technology, and this time, it was only about 35 millions of dollars. The scientist was accused, that he intended to sell the overpriced technology. He had to hide from the police for several years, and then he was found and locked up. However, he had no intention of selling that technology, he specially wanted to keep it public and affordable, so the petrol magnates couldn't buy it and take it away from the people. This attitude took away his freedom. I know that, because people from our group had a personal contact with him when he was still free. He wouldn't sell the rights, no matter what.

 

There's a reason there are so few plants... it isn't cost effective.  It's cheaper to prodcue oil and other side products by other processes. After at least 5 years the company was still working at a loss.  That's not good - and can happen even if there isn't an "evil conspiracy" working against you.

 

And for the record... if you're inventing something you don't ask for an experts report.  You perform "due diligence" yourself.  If you want to start a company you assure investors of this due diligence, which they then check against current patents and scientific literature, and, if your claim stands, things can then move forward.  I know this because I have my name on 4 different patents and have gone through the process several times.  The only people that tell you what a technology may be worth are the people investing in it.  No outside expert will give you a value that means anything  unless you've paid them (and are therefore biased in your favour) or they have an invested interest.

 

Not only that, you don't fully explain what your scientist friend was accused of. He was a criminal because 2 different indepenedent experts gave him different values for his super secret technology?  Really? 

Forget Jesus, the stars died so that you could be here
- Lawrence Krauss


ClockCat
ClockCat's picture
Posts: 2265
Joined: 2009-03-26
User is offlineOffline
D:

Gauche wrote:

I wish there was antigravity traffic, it would be like star wars.

 

Look at the drivers you see on the roads today.

 

 

Do you really want them not limited to the ground?

Theism is why we can't have nice things.


Luminon
SuperfanTheist
Luminon's picture
Posts: 2455
Joined: 2008-02-17
User is offlineOffline
MichaelMcF wrote:So some

MichaelMcF wrote:

So some scientists disagreed with each other.  This isn't uncommon. I don't understand how this links into some science malaise.

It's about autohority. When an authoritative scientist disagrees about something, then all his henchmen disagree about it as well. They also dare to speak publically about things like alternative medicine or esoterics, which they have never studied nor practiced. I have heard of such a local scientists or academic professors, who reputedly said, that they would never believe in a thing like a free energy device, even if they would hold it in their hands. Seriously, WTF? I have written down such a statements of these authorities, that they should squirm with shame even in their graves. (their names would probably tell you nothing) I hope that there are no such people abroad, but unfortunately they're on local universities and places like observatories.

MichaelMcF wrote:
The who?

 The local skeptics' club. Warning: dangerous concentration of sky-high arrogance.
 

MichaelMcF wrote:

There's a reason there are so few plants... it isn't cost effective.  It's cheaper to prodcue oil and other side products by other processes. After at least 5 years the company was still working at a loss.  That's not good - and can happen even if there isn't an "evil conspiracy" working against you.

Well perhaps this is what the inventor's invention was about. I have seen a photography and description of that device, basically a trailer on wheels, fed by roughly milled plastic bottles and with output of 40 kW electricity and 50 kW of heat. The high efficiency and practically no waste besides CO2 is provided by a special system of jets through which the evaporated fuel is burned at a high temperature.

 

MichaelMcF wrote:
And for the record... if you're inventing something you don't ask for an experts report.  You perform "due diligence" yourself.  If you want to start a company you assure investors of this due diligence, which they then check against current patents and scientific literature, and, if your claim stands, things can then move forward.  I know this because I have my name on 4 different patents and have gone through the process several times.  The only people that tell you what a technology may be worth are the people investing in it.  No outside expert will give you a value that means anything  unless you've paid them (and are therefore biased in your favour) or they have an invested interest.

Not only that, you don't fully explain what your scientist friend was accused of. He was a criminal because 2 different indepenedent experts gave him different values for his super secret technology?  Really? 

Yes, that's what I know. Reputedly, what he did with the value of his invention is not illegal, it was only a bit noticeable, when in the trade register there was suddenly a new company, third in value in total, just after the local electricity monopole owners. Maybe he was just inexperienced, or maybe local laws are a bit different, I don't know exactly. Maybe the act of putting this estimated value into a new company, thus giving it certain market privileges, was the last proverbial drop.
His case was also well described on TV by journalists who specialize on such a very controversial cases. It was when the scientist was still hiding. The report was mostly about the mere possibility of making a fuel at home, which is here something unheard of. In his provisory lab, he made a 1 liter bottle of something, which after laboratory analysis appeared to be a genuine home-made petrol with some water. Apparently, he didn't need much more than a standard pressure cooker. 

 

Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.