Psuedoscience in Russia: Exposed

>> Have you not noticed that the best brains (real scientists) on the planet haven't been able to (whatever)


Just a note that often knowledge precludes inovation.

Many breakthroughs in science have come from "laymen", whose imagination and endevour are not hampered by "knowing what will not work".

The points touched upon here are never a problem to a real scientist, because they would always be open to pseudoscientific ideas, always looking for a new angle.
 
well said zarkov

i dont know why some people seem so THREATENED by what we say in this section. it honestly seems like they are offended, adn they go to extremes to fight it. hah people are so close-minded.
 
Zarkov said:
Many breakthroughs in science have come from "laymen", whose imagination and endevour are not hampered by "knowing what will not work".

Name twelve.
 
>> Name twelve.

Not really interested here, you can google but for starters the greatest scientist of all

Nicola Tesla.

Pseudoscience is the root of all science. Without pseudoscience you can not have immagination and therefore science would not exist.

I think people confuse honest conjecture with deliberate misrepresentation...
But this process can not be censured because hidden amongst the mass of assertions are gems... after all, all science stems from the human mind, and quite a few people have one, I am told.
 
Actually, science has more to do with verifying hypotheses than with imagination.

Tesla certainly was a great scientist (not a pseudoscientist), both because of his successes (AC generators/motors, etc.) and because of his imagination (transmission of electricity through the ionosphere, etc.).

Just don't confuse imagination with science.
 
>> Just don't confuse imagination with science.

Observation, then Imagination, then science .... yields results.

ALL are as necessary as each other, IMO.
 
Zarkov said:
The points touched upon here are never a problem to a real scientist, because they would always be open to pseudoscientific ideas, always looking for a new angle.

Any real scientist that you know who is embracing pseudoscience is a fraud. Period. Pseudoscience is fraudulent science. It's fake science. It's baloney and bamboozle in the guise of science.

Take this so-called real scientist, for example. His credentials and degree were stripped from him for being open to "pseudoscientific ideas." He fabricated extraordinary claims of "of making electronic devices from organic materials and superconductivity at high temperatures in carbon-based materials."
Zarkov said:
Pseudoscience is the root of all science. Without pseudoscience you can not have immagination and therefore science would not exist.
Poppycock. There's a distinct difference between pseudoscience and imagination. One can allow imagination to give rise to hypotheses, but substituting imagination for scientific method is simply not done by scientists and researchers. Not real ones, anyway. When scientists speculate, they are careful to say so in order not to confuse their speculations with tested or testable hypotheses. Carl Sagan is a very good example of this: he was an avid opponent of pseudoscience, but wrote a wonderful speculation of ETI "Contact".
 
moementum7 said:
No Pholg, I didn't make that up, I'm not that creative. I heard that saying from somewhere, can't remember where.
Peace Out.

Obviously not in a reputable source, which I think is the crux of your problem. You believe what you read in pseudoscientific book, and don't seem to read enough real science books.

I know the pseudo stuff sounds more interesting on the surface, but actually learning real science which has real applications is far more rewarding, and worth the effort.
 
Zarkov said:
Many breakthroughs in science have come from "laymen", whose imagination and endevour are not hampered by "knowing what will not work" ...

... Not really interested here, you can google but for starters the greatest scientist of all

Nicola Tesla.

So are you saying Tesla was a scientist or a layman?
 
>> he was an avid opponent of pseudoscience, but wrote a wonderful speculation

OK, speculation /pseudoscience to me is the same......
I really need a definition of these....
Certainly putting speculation up as truth is not scientific.... but there is nothing wrong with mental stimulation from speculation/pseudoscience......

>> So are you saying Tesla was a scientist or a layman?

He was an intuitive with an interest....I think he had none/little scientific trainning, in modern circles he would not have got past the interview stage, no quals..
But there are many backyard laymen in scientific history who have developed the establishment's impossible.
(no one told them they couldn't do it)

Modern credentualism hides a multitude of ignorant and dangerous people.... passing exams is no guarentee (?sp) of mental agility, in many cases it just highlights a good memory or luck.

Often though a scientist will cross disciplines and shine.... is he a pseudoscientist in a field he has no formal trainning?????

No, this bias against mental juggling (speculation/pseudoscience... dreaming ) is just STUPID... and only the idiotic elite would actually make such distinctions.

After all we find (from history) that everything we though once is now incorrect....
science is constantly being corrected.... all science is hence WRONG and only a real fool would think they know the truth because some other bigger idiot told them it is so.

I believe my field, I believe observations, but I question all the time..... because it is only other human minds that have come up with the models of explanation..... and to error is human.
 
Moderators wake up or this "intelligent forum" will only become an out of date text book.... stiff, stale and heavy with shit. I can look up better references in an cold dead encyclopaedia, or just google...

What is the purpose for a FORUM.... to air ideas, views, to pass OPINION....
you say truth ????? what is that..... where you going to find it????
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top