Science is being corrupted to a point of fraud, Is there some truth in that ?

[arauca]

Irrationality in science is every bit as extreme as we see in media events, perhaps more so because of the increased demands in science. Very little science is visible to the public. The carbon dioxide issue is an example of science which has come to the surface of public concerns, and it shows a lack of objectivity which can only be called religion and a lack of standards to a point of outright fraud.

Corruption begets corruption, which means the state of science is deteriorating to where it is reversing every element of knowledge which is vulnerable. The simplest example may be the asteroid belt. For centuries, scientists have known that the asteroid belt was created by a planet exploding between Mars and Jupiter. Now scientists say it was not a planet exploding but the gravity of Jupiter which created the asteroid belt. Obviously, gravity cannot create broken chunks of rock. The explanation appears to address the wrong question, like why do the rocks orbit the sun instead of where did they come from. The rocks were scattered all over the solar system but swept away in all planetary orbits. Pluto is now said to be an asteroid, as it is too small to be a planet. Numerous other asteroids are near Pluto's orbit.
see more http://english.pravda.ru/science/earth/01-05-2013/124459-science_corrupt-0/

 

[andy1033]

There is a hidden science, and they are way ahead of what they tell the public. The stuff you learn in schools, is just to see how you process information and give it back.

If there are plenty of underground bases, and there are, what are they doing in them, and why the secrecy?
Anyone guess.

They give the public as numbing a version of science they can, so they think most cannot work out anything. If you give all humans false info, they can only operate and make decisions on this info. If the info they get is wrong, then the decisions are wrong they come up with. Its why they put out so much false info in wars, to misdirect the enemy.

What ever is going on in nato especially, the science really going on is way ahead of what we are told, and the control system is way ahead. Stuff i found out like 21 years ago at school in london, they talk about today in the press.

 

[spidergoat]

What's the fraud about carbon dioxide?

 

[exchemist]

Irrationality in science is every bit as extreme as we see in media events, perhaps more so because of the increased demands in science. Very little science is visible to the public. The carbon dioxide issue is an example of science which has come to the surface of public concerns, and it shows a lack of objectivity which can only be called religion and a lack of standards to a point of outright fraud.

Corruption begets corruption, which means the state of science is deteriorating to where it is reversing every element of knowledge which is vulnerable. The simplest example may be the asteroid belt. For centuries, scientists have known that the asteroid belt was created by a planet exploding between Mars and Jupiter. Now scientists say it was not a planet exploding but the gravity of Jupiter which created the asteroid belt. Obviously, gravity cannot create broken chunks of rock. The explanation appears to address the wrong question, like why do the rocks orbit the sun instead of where did they come from. The rocks were scattered all over the solar system but swept away in all planetary orbits. Pluto is now said to be an asteroid, as it is too small to be a planet. Numerous other asteroids are near Pluto's orbit.
see more http://english.pravda.ru/science/earth/01-05-2013/124459-science_corrupt-0/

Arauca, isn't this sort of change the natural result of science advancing? If there were no changes to existing theories, science would be a dead discipline, wouldn't it?

As for all the kerfuffle about climate change, surely all this shows is the normal human process of emotions sometimes getting in the way of objectivity. This happens of course, even though it shouldn't, but because scientists are in competition with each other, bad ideas inevitably get found out and discarded. The process is not perfect, but no human process is. We are not gods.

 

[billvon]

Obviously, gravity cannot create broken chunks of rock.

Of course it can. The author does not understand tidal forces if he thinks that.

Pluto is now said to be an asteroid, as it is too small to be a planet. Numerous other asteroids are near Pluto's orbit.

The change of Pluto's classification has nothing to do with the science of planetary bodies.

Numerous other asteroids are near Pluto's orbit.

Yes, they are called the Kupier Belt.

Whoever this guy is, he should learn some basic science before he attacks it.

 

[spidergoat]

Oh my God, this guy is an idiot.
http://moonflake.wordpress.com/2006/11/10/midweek-cuckoogary-novak/

He sounds peeved because no one will publish his nonsense, therefore science must be corrupt.

 

[arauca]

Of course it can. The author does not understand tidal forces if he thinks that.



The change of Pluto's classification has nothing to do with the science of planetary bodies.



Yes, they are called the Kupier Belt.

Whoever this guy is, he should learn some basic science before he attacks it.

Have you read that the chunks flying around Saturn are grinding themselves into smaller particles ?
Please stop elevating yourself by humiliating others .
Have we have not had enough different opinion on global warming and policy have been made to according to business desire ?

 

[spidergoat]

Have we have not had enough different opinion on global warming and policy have been made to according to business desire ?

We have the science on one hand, and we have the business interests of the fossil fuel industry on the other, the latter being one of the largest and most important industries in the history of mankind. It's industry who use their money to subvert public opinion and to create controversy where there is none.

 

[billvon]

Have you read that the chunks flying around Saturn are grinding themselves into smaller particles ?

And, on occasion, aggregating. Yes, both happen.

Please stop elevating yourself by humiliating others .

His foolish beliefs do not elevate me. And since I recognize him as foolish, they do not diminish me, either. How about you?

 

[arauca]

And, on occasion, aggregating. Yes, both happen.



His foolish beliefs do not elevate me. And since I recognize him as foolish, they do not diminish me, either. How about you?

For me is a stimulus that make me to look into the subject and to refresh refresh it, since there is so much material in science

 

[billvon]

For me is a stimulus that make me to look into the subject and to refresh refresh it, since there is so much material in science

Good! That's a very good way to handle such statements about science - do your own research and see if what they say makes sense.

 

[exchemist]

Have you read that the chunks flying around Saturn are grinding themselves into smaller particles ?
Please stop elevating yourself by humiliating others .
Have we have not had enough different opinion on global warming and policy have been made to according to business desire ?

Arauca, now that I've read the whole link it is apparent that this Novak person is deranged. I quote:

"A highly concealed but provable and significant error is the misdefinition of kinetic energy in physics. Physicists define kinetic energy as mass times velocity squared. Since nothing moves as velocity squared, the definition cannot properly represent real energy. Simple mathematical proof shows that kinetic energy is transformed in proportion to mass times velocity nonsquared.(1) The proof is based on the origins of the error in 1686, where Gottfried Leibniz stated that a 4 kilogram object dropped 1 meter will do the same thing as a 1 kilogram object dropped 4 meters. This proportionality conserves mass times velocity squared but not mass times velocity nonsquared. By using a rocket to replace gravity, it can be shown that the rocket uses twice as much fuel to accelerate the large mass to its final velocity compared to the small mass"


This is barking mad, and calls into serious question anything else he may say.

 

[arauca]

Arauca, now that I've read the whole link it is apparent that this Novak person is deranged. I quote:

"A highly concealed but provable and significant error is the misdefinition of kinetic energy in physics. Physicists define kinetic energy as mass times velocity squared. Since nothing moves as velocity squared, the definition cannot properly represent real energy. Simple mathematical proof shows that kinetic energy is transformed in proportion to mass times velocity nonsquared.(1) The proof is based on the origins of the error in 1686, where Gottfried Leibniz stated that a 4 kilogram object dropped 1 meter will do the same thing as a 1 kilogram object dropped 4 meters. This proportionality conserves mass times velocity squared but not mass times velocity nonsquared. By using a rocket to replace gravity, it can be shown that the rocket uses twice as much fuel to accelerate the large mass to its final velocity compared to the small mass"


This is barking mad, and calls into serious question anything else he may say.

Fine , what ever credibility the individual have , it is his problem , but Have we not had problem with information to the public and among science community on Global warming ? If so, then the individual rising criticism on Global warming is it proper. Or is it we take the position " any thing the individual published is not good.

 

[spidergoat]

Fine , what ever credibility the individual have , it is his problem , but Have we not had problem with information to the public and among science community on Global warming ? If so, then the individual rising criticism on Global warming is it proper. Or is it we take the position " any thing the individual published is not good.

No, all the papers are available in peer reviewed literature. People publish things individually because it's crap science and it doesn't hold up. The individual criticism about global warming isn't scientific, it's political.

 

[billvon]

Fine , what ever credibility the individual have , it is his problem

As long as you don't heed him. Once you start believing what he says, it becomes your problem.

but Have we not had problem with information to the public and among science community on Global warming ?

Not among the scientific community, no. In the general public? Yes. Politicians seek to twist the research on climate change to achieve their own political objectives.

If so, then the individual rising criticism on Global warming is it proper. Or is it we take the position " any thing the individual published is not good.

If he has a history of scientific fraud, then yes.

 

[Janus58]

Irrationality in science is every bit as extreme as we see in media events, perhaps more so because of the increased demands in science. Very little science is visible to the public. The carbon dioxide issue is an example of science which has come to the surface of public concerns, and it shows a lack of objectivity which can only be called religion and a lack of standards to a point of outright fraud.

Corruption begets corruption, which means the state of science is deteriorating to where it is reversing every element of knowledge which is vulnerable. The simplest example may be the asteroid belt. For centuries, scientists have known that the asteroid belt was created by a planet exploding between Mars and Jupiter. Now scientists say it was not a planet exploding but the gravity of Jupiter which created the asteroid belt.

Ceres was discovered in 1801 and it was 50 years before enough other bodies were found that the term "Asteroid belt" first came into use. So we haven't even been aware of the asteroid belt for "centuries". And while one early hypothesis was that it was formed from a destroyed planet, the hypothesis lost favor over time (mainly due to the issues of the amount of energy needed to break apart a planet and that the estimated mass in the asteroid only adds up to the equivalent of a small moon.) At no time has science "known" that this is how the belt formed and it has been a long time since this hypothesis has been seriously considered. The author would have us believe that this is was the prevailing explanation until just recently, and this is most certainly not the case.

Obviously, gravity cannot create broken chunks of rock. The explanation appears to address the wrong question, like why do the rocks orbit the sun instead of where did they come from. The rocks were scattered all over the solar system but swept away in all planetary orbits.

Orbital mechanics, especially when perturbation from other bodies have to be taken into account, can be a very complex subject so there is no "Obviously" about this.

Pluto is now said to be an asteroid, as it is too small to be a planet. Numerous other asteroids are near Pluto's orbit.
see more http://english.pravda.ru/science/earth/01-05-2013/124459-science_corrupt-0/

Pluto is a victim, in part, to better instrumentation. Early estimates ( and everyone knew that they were only estimates) of its size were inflated because we were seeing Pluto and Charon merged together and assumed we were seeing a single body. It wasn't until we able to resolve the two separate images that we got a truer idea of Pluto's size.

 

[Janus58]

Have you read that the chunks flying around Saturn are grinding themselves into smaller particles ?
Please stop elevating yourself by humiliating others .
Have we have not had enough different opinion on global warming and policy have been made to according to business desire ?

And do you realize that the bodies in the asteroid belt are so thinly dispersed that you could fly right through it without even seeing a single asteroid, let alone two grinding against each other?