Meteor injures hundreds in Russia

2

Comments

  • know1know1 Posts: 6,794
    Cosmo wrote:
    know1 wrote:
    Cosmo wrote:
    The videos are spectacular.
    ...
    The thing I thought about... if this were 500 years ago, it would have been seen as a 'Sign From God' from most of the people of the planet.
    Today, we know what it is... a big ass rock moving within the confines of the laws of physics in our universe.

    Just imagine what we'll know and think about it 500 years from now.
    ...
    Agree... we will know many new things. But, we will still know that a meteor is still not a sign from God and simply a big ass rock moving within the confines of the laws of physics in our universe.

    I'm not as confident in that as you are. I think "science's" theories will change a ton over that time period.

    We can look at the past to see evidence of that.
    The only people we should try to get even with...
    ...are those who've helped us.

    Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Posts: 49,958
    know1 wrote:
    Cosmo wrote:
    know1 wrote:
    Just imagine what we'll know and think about it 500 years from now.
    ...
    Agree... we will know many new things. But, we will still know that a meteor is still not a sign from God and simply a big ass rock moving within the confines of the laws of physics in our universe.

    I'm not as confident in that as you are. I think "science's" theories will change a ton over that time period.

    We can look at the past to see evidence of that.
    Sometimes the facts are discovered, and that's that. Like, once they figured out the Earth is round, it's not like we kept on developing our views on the matter. They figured it out, and now we're done. We get it. I see no reason why people would view a meteor entering the atmosphere any differently in 500 years, except maybe by then they will have been able to stop it before it got there. I don't really understand what you think would happen to people's perceptions at this point to change anything unless you think we will all fall back into the dark ages by then, and regress to thinking it's some kind of omen from the gods again.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • CosmoCosmo Posts: 12,225
    know1 wrote:
    I'm not as confident in that as you are. I think "science's" theories will change a ton over that time period.

    We can look at the past to see evidence of that.
    ...
    That was sort of the point of my original statement.
    And i agree with you, Science will change its theories as new evidence is discovered. Religion, on the other hand, will never change its doctrine.
    I also agree with your statement about looking back to see evidence. In looking back 500 years, we see that the Church was in charge of the State and therefore in charge of 'science'. That is how science was forced to explain the geocentric model of the Universe... or risk losing you head over it... literally. The Church placed the Earth at the center of the Universe because Man was the center of God's focus.
    Science proved otherwise, despite the threat of death from the Church.
    That is why a meteor was a sign from God 500 years ago... but today (thanx to Science) we know it is just one of the trillions of giant bolder, meandering in the confines of our Universe.
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • know1know1 Posts: 6,794
    Cosmo wrote:
    know1 wrote:
    I'm not as confident in that as you are. I think "science's" theories will change a ton over that time period.

    We can look at the past to see evidence of that.
    ...
    That was sort of the point of my original statement.
    And i agree with you, Science will change its theories as new evidence is discovered. Religion, on the other hand, will never change its doctrine.
    I also agree with your statement about looking back to see evidence. In looking back 500 years, we see that the Church was in charge of the State and therefore in charge of 'science'. That is how science was forced to explain the geocentric model of the Universe... or risk losing you head over it... literally. The Church placed the Earth at the center of the Universe because Man was the center of God's focus.
    Science proved otherwise, despite the threat of death from the Church.
    That is why a meteor was a sign from God 500 years ago... but today (thanx to Science) we know it is just one of the trillions of giant bolder, meandering in the confines of our Universe.

    I think it takes as much faith to believe in science as it does to believe in God. Maybe more.

    And I disagree with the comment in your earlier post that religion stays the same. I've witnessed quite an evolution in religion in my life. The church I attend now is nothing like the one I was brought up in and its kind didn't exist or at least wasn't very common then.
    The only people we should try to get even with...
    ...are those who've helped us.

    Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
  • CosmoCosmo Posts: 12,225
    know1 wrote:
    I think it takes as much faith to believe in science as it does to believe in God. Maybe more.

    And I disagree with the comment in your earlier post that religion stays the same. I've witnessed quite an evolution in religion in my life. The church I attend now is nothing like the one I was brought up in and its kind didn't exist or at least wasn't very common then.
    ...
    The difference between the two, Science looks for anwsers... Religion believes it already KNOWS the answers. Ask many religious people... they will tell you they already know. That is the basis of religion... belief and knowledge are one in the same.
    And i agree... that people with religious beliefs evolve as Science provides answers... such as the Earth being older than 6,000 years, woman was not fabricated from a rib bone on a man and that snakes don't really talk to people and, probably, never did. It does not mean the core foundations of religious issues such as Creation has changed in the Religious doctrine... rather, people have evolved their thinking to fit in a world where Science continues to ask questions and provides answers... where answers are not written in stone and will change as more truth is revealed.
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • know1know1 Posts: 6,794
    Cosmo wrote:
    know1 wrote:
    I think it takes as much faith to believe in science as it does to believe in God. Maybe more.

    And I disagree with the comment in your earlier post that religion stays the same. I've witnessed quite an evolution in religion in my life. The church I attend now is nothing like the one I was brought up in and its kind didn't exist or at least wasn't very common then.
    ...
    The difference between the two, Science looks for anwsers... Religion believes it already KNOWS the answers. Ask many religious people... they will tell you they already know. That is the basis of religion... belief and knowledge are one in the same.
    And i agree... that people with religious beliefs evolve as Science provides answers... such as the Earth being older than 6,000 years, woman was not fabricated from a rib bone on a man and that snakes don't really talk to people and, probably, never did. It does not mean the core foundations of religious issues such as Creation has changed in the Religious doctrine... rather, people have evolved their thinking to fit in a world where Science continues to ask questions and provides answers... where answers are not written in stone and will change as more truth is revealed.

    So basically, you're saying that science doesn't really have any true answers, but rather that it is continually seeking more knowledge?

    If so, I agree with that and it's what I've been saying for years. People put a lot of faith in science when true science should never say that its answers are absolute. In other words, people are believing in something that says itself that it doesn't know.
    The only people we should try to get even with...
    ...are those who've helped us.

    Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Posts: 49,958
    know1 wrote:
    Cosmo wrote:
    know1 wrote:
    I think it takes as much faith to believe in science as it does to believe in God. Maybe more.

    And I disagree with the comment in your earlier post that religion stays the same. I've witnessed quite an evolution in religion in my life. The church I attend now is nothing like the one I was brought up in and its kind didn't exist or at least wasn't very common then.
    ...
    The difference between the two, Science looks for anwsers... Religion believes it already KNOWS the answers. Ask many religious people... they will tell you they already know. That is the basis of religion... belief and knowledge are one in the same.
    And i agree... that people with religious beliefs evolve as Science provides answers... such as the Earth being older than 6,000 years, woman was not fabricated from a rib bone on a man and that snakes don't really talk to people and, probably, never did. It does not mean the core foundations of religious issues such as Creation has changed in the Religious doctrine... rather, people have evolved their thinking to fit in a world where Science continues to ask questions and provides answers... where answers are not written in stone and will change as more truth is revealed.

    So basically, you're saying that science doesn't really have any true answers, but rather that it is continually seeking more knowledge?

    If so, I agree with that and it's what I've been saying for years. People put a lot of faith in science when true science should never say that its answers are absolute. In other words, people are believing in something that says itself that it doesn't know.
    Actually, science has produced a lot of actual answers.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • Let me just say first off that I am much more of a scientific than a religious. It does however make me laugh when people boast about what WE "KNOW" due to science. Science is not an answer. It is an endless question. If 90% of the Universe is unaccounted for.....a mystery. Why is intelligent design looked down upon so often?
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Posts: 49,958
    whgarrett wrote:
    Let me just say first off that I am much more of a scientific than a religious. It does however make me laugh when people boast about what WE "KNOW" due to science. Science is not an answer. It is an endless question. If 90% of the Universe is unaccounted for.....a mystery. Why is intelligent design looked down upon so often?
    Science isn't something that necessarily has answered all things, but not because it can't. Only because humans haven't managed to make it answer all things. And we do KNOW many things due to science. Just because we don't know most stuff yet doesn't mean that we don't know some stuff, nor does it mean that it COULDN'T answer all things, if only we could figure it out. Science is TRUTH. That doesn't change just because we don't know through science what the truth is yet. The truth is attainable through science - just not by us.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • Science is an educated guess. A hypothesis. And is always treated so until otherwise proven wrong. Oh yeah....it is merely OUR truth.
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Posts: 49,958
    whgarrett wrote:
    Science is an educated guess. A hypothesis. And is always treated so until otherwise proven wrong. Oh yeah....it is merely OUR truth.
    Science is NOT an educated guess or a hypothesis. I think you're thinking of scientific theory?? Or the scientific process?
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • know1know1 Posts: 6,794
    PJ_Soul wrote:
    whgarrett wrote:
    Let me just say first off that I am much more of a scientific than a religious. It does however make me laugh when people boast about what WE "KNOW" due to science. Science is not an answer. It is an endless question. If 90% of the Universe is unaccounted for.....a mystery. Why is intelligent design looked down upon so often?
    Science isn't something that necessarily has answered all things, but not because it can't. Only because humans haven't managed to make it answer all things. And we do KNOW many things due to science. Just because we don't know most stuff yet doesn't mean that we don't know some stuff, nor does it mean that it COULDN'T answer all things, if only we could figure it out. Science is TRUTH. That doesn't change just because we don't know through science what the truth is yet. The truth is attainable through science - just not by us.

    Science is absolutely not truth. In fact, it's the opposite of it.

    Science leaves open the possibility that new evidence tomorrow could totally overthrow what we think we know today.

    That's why I find it interesting that people put faith in something that maintains a position that it will always be seeking more answers.

    And it is exactly an educated guess as someone said above.
    The only people we should try to get even with...
    ...are those who've helped us.

    Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Posts: 49,958
    know1 wrote:
    PJ_Soul wrote:
    whgarrett wrote:
    Let me just say first off that I am much more of a scientific than a religious. It does however make me laugh when people boast about what WE "KNOW" due to science. Science is not an answer. It is an endless question. If 90% of the Universe is unaccounted for.....a mystery. Why is intelligent design looked down upon so often?
    Science isn't something that necessarily has answered all things, but not because it can't. Only because humans haven't managed to make it answer all things. And we do KNOW many things due to science. Just because we don't know most stuff yet doesn't mean that we don't know some stuff, nor does it mean that it COULDN'T answer all things, if only we could figure it out. Science is TRUTH. That doesn't change just because we don't know through science what the truth is yet. The truth is attainable through science - just not by us.

    Science is absolutely not truth. In fact, it's the opposite of it.

    Science leaves open the possibility that new evidence tomorrow could totally overthrow what we think we know today.

    That's why I find it interesting that people put faith in something that maintains a position that it will always be seeking more answers.
    Science is absolutely truth. It is people who don't necessarily know truth. Don't blame science. You act as though science is man made or something. It's not.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • rollingsrollings Posts: 7,124
    PJ_Soul wrote:
    You act as though science is man made or something. It's not.

    it actually is
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Posts: 49,958
    rollings wrote:
    PJ_Soul wrote:
    You act as though science is man made or something. It's not.

    it actually is
    No. :)
    Obviously we've got different ideas of what science is, so let's agree to disagree (but I think you're mixing up people working to prove scientific fact with science itself... i understand science is the study of knowledge, but it is also what it is - the natural state of things, all happening through the processes of science... I think the study of science is separate from science itself... perhaps this is simply a disagreement over semantics).
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • rollingsrollings Posts: 7,124
    PJ_Soul wrote:
    rollings wrote:
    PJ_Soul wrote:
    You act as though science is man made or something. It's not.

    it actually is
    No. :)
    Obviously we've got different ideas of what science is, so let's agree to disagree (but I think you're mixing up people working to prove scientific fact with science itself... i understand science is the study of knowledge, but it is also what it is - the natural state of things, all happening through the processes of science... I think the study of science is separate from science itself... perhaps this is simply a disagreement over semantics).

    I think it is semantics too....I don't think that science = truth, however.

    science can only go to the edge of what we as humans know.

    And that's way too limited to be factual.
  • rollingsrollings Posts: 7,124
    In other words, we are smart enough to know that our brains are limited.

    Yet often not smart enough to render this fact into our thoughts and discussions about such things.

    :wtf: what did I just say?
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Posts: 49,958
    rollings wrote:
    PJ_Soul wrote:
    rollings wrote:

    it actually is
    No. :)
    Obviously we've got different ideas of what science is, so let's agree to disagree (but I think you're mixing up people working to prove scientific fact with science itself... i understand science is the study of knowledge, but it is also what it is - the natural state of things, all happening through the processes of science... I think the study of science is separate from science itself... perhaps this is simply a disagreement over semantics).

    I think it is semantics too....I don't think that science = truth, however.

    science can only go to the edge of what we as humans know.

    And that's way too limited to be factual.
    I don't really understand what you mean. Just because what we know is limited doesn't mean that what we do know isn't fact and truth (or that which we don't know, for that matter, since there is always the potential to know it). There is an ultimate truth for everything, and humans are capable of finding it, and in many cases already have. What isn't known shouldn't make it so that nothing can be known.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Posts: 49,958
    rollings wrote:
    In other words, we are smart enough to know that our brains are limited.

    Yet often not smart enough to render this fact into our thoughts and discussions about such things.

    :wtf: what did I just say?
    :think: :lol:
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • MotoDCMotoDC Posts: 947
    rollings wrote:
    In other words, we are smart enough to know that our brains are limited.

    Yet often not smart enough to render this fact into our thoughts and discussions about such things.

    :wtf: what did I just say?
    That we are arrogant as a species. And quite well, at that. :ugeek:
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Posts: 49,958
    MotoDC wrote:
    rollings wrote:
    In other words, we are smart enough to know that our brains are limited.

    Yet often not smart enough to render this fact into our thoughts and discussions about such things.

    :wtf: what did I just say?
    That we are arrogant as a species. And quite well, at that. :ugeek:
    I thought that was just a given. I mean, look at religion.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • Is science your religion PJ_Soul? ;)
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Posts: 49,958
    whgarrett wrote:
    Is science your religion PJ_Soul? ;)
    I suppose it is, yeah! :lol: .... But no. It's not. :| I think you're calling me arrogant because of my thoughts on science? Is that what's going on?? because if so, I don't think you're reading what I'm saying carefully.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • I'm just messing with you. I totally believe in science. I do not believe in religion. Unfortunately I think science and applied science/technology is the tool MAN wields to destroy all that is beautiful.
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Posts: 49,958
    whgarrett wrote:
    I'm just messing with you. I totally believe in science. I do not believe in religion. Unfortunately I think science and applied science/technology is the tool MAN wields to destroy all that is beautiful.
    Okay.... I probably knew you were kidding... I'm in a pissy mood. :roll:
    Man certainly does fuck a lot of shit up with technology, that's for sure (although makes a lot of things a whole lot better with it too!).
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • CosmoCosmo Posts: 12,225
    know1 wrote:
    So basically, you're saying that science doesn't really have any true answers, but rather that it is continually seeking more knowledge?

    If so, I agree with that and it's what I've been saying for years. People put a lot of faith in science when true science should never say that its answers are absolute. In other words, people are believing in something that says itself that it doesn't know.
    ...
    Nope. Sorry.
    Science HAS come up with answers... such as the Earth is NOT the center of the Universe and planets to NOT spin around in little mini orbits to explain their movements across the night sky to fit the church's view of the geocentric Universe. Science has also provided the answer to gravity, plate tectonics and human genetics... AND... that meteors are just giant clusters of rocks and ice that adhere to the laws of physics and are NOT signs from God that the end of days is upon us. Yes... someday, one of those giant rocks will actually strike the planet and end all of humanity... but guesss what? The Earth will still be here. The End of humans is not the end of the Universe.
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • JeanwahJeanwah Posts: 6,363
    know1 wrote:

    Science is absolutely not truth. In fact, it's the opposite of it.

    Science leaves open the possibility that new evidence tomorrow could totally overthrow what we think we know today.

    That's why I find it interesting that people put faith in something that maintains a position that it will always be seeking more answers.

    And it is exactly an educated guess as someone said above.

    Let me guess, you don't believe in climate science, do you. So if science doesn't ascertain your beliefs, than you can claim that it's all hogwash. Uh-huh.
  • know1know1 Posts: 6,794
    Jeanwah wrote:
    know1 wrote:

    Science is absolutely not truth. In fact, it's the opposite of it.

    Science leaves open the possibility that new evidence tomorrow could totally overthrow what we think we know today.

    That's why I find it interesting that people put faith in something that maintains a position that it will always be seeking more answers.

    And it is exactly an educated guess as someone said above.

    Let me guess, you don't believe in climate science, do you. So if science doesn't ascertain your beliefs, than you can claim that it's all hogwash. Uh-huh.

    That's totally not what I'm saying.

    I'm saying that science does not call itself infallible, so why do people put so much faith in it.

    Science acknowledges that any of its conclusions could be overturned tomorrow with new evidence/observations.
    The only people we should try to get even with...
    ...are those who've helped us.

    Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
  • know1know1 Posts: 6,794
    Cosmo wrote:
    know1 wrote:
    So basically, you're saying that science doesn't really have any true answers, but rather that it is continually seeking more knowledge?

    If so, I agree with that and it's what I've been saying for years. People put a lot of faith in science when true science should never say that its answers are absolute. In other words, people are believing in something that says itself that it doesn't know.
    ...
    Nope. Sorry.
    Science HAS come up with answers... such as the Earth is NOT the center of the Universe and planets to NOT spin around in little mini orbits to explain their movements across the night sky to fit the church's view of the geocentric Universe. Science has also provided the answer to gravity, plate tectonics and human genetics... AND... that meteors are just giant clusters of rocks and ice that adhere to the laws of physics and are NOT signs from God that the end of days is upon us. Yes... someday, one of those giant rocks will actually strike the planet and end all of humanity... but guesss what? The Earth will still be here. The End of humans is not the end of the Universe.

    None of that has even the remotest relation to what I was saying.

    But I do believe that science hasn't really proven anything. Proof is a man-made convention anyway.
    The only people we should try to get even with...
    ...are those who've helped us.

    Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
  • CosmoCosmo Posts: 12,225
    know1 wrote:
    Proof is a man-made convention anyway.
    ...
    And so is the concept of God.
    So, it's a wash, right?
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
Sign In or Register to comment.