in re: is GRIII on a tear
- Member for
- 5 years 36 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|14 min 48 sec ago||inflection pt? IDTTMWYTIM||
inflection pt? IDTTMWYTIM
|10 hours 58 min ago||Fair enough||
|11 hours 19 min ago||LOL, I'm still waiting for my||
LOL, I'm still waiting for my 'thank you.' I won't hold my breath.
|11 hours 24 min ago||Dark matter and dark energy||
Dark matter and dark energy and other "dark" things are no more than faith
As usual, people are mixing terms. It's not faith in terms of the common usage of the term 'faith". It's faith based on the evidence we have measured, calculated and predicted. You mentioned a lot of the evidence for a form of matter that only seems to be observed based on it's gravitational interaction with light and matter.
Same with "proven." Nothing in science is truely proven as most would interpret that term. Dark matter theory, tho it doesn't have the amount or diversity of evidence in support of it when compared to evolution, nonetheless has a lot of data to support it. The observational effects you mention (lensing, Rot curves, etc) all seem to be explained by the universe containing a type of matter that does not interact with light (except thru its gravity causing spacetime to curve). It's kind of shocking that you dismiss a fairly simple explanation for all those independent observations that indeed do span tens of orders of magnitude.
By the way, these include neither the higgs boson verification last summer, nor the theoretical calculations of large scale structure formation in the early universe whose timescale and size scales & structure cannot be explained without a dark matter component in the universe - and the results of which seem to match observations.
The same could be said for dark energy, tho that is a relatively new (last 15-20 years at most) set of ideas, that again are constructed to understand what is observed. It's not inventing something to "make ourselves right." It's inventing something that explains a varied set of observations and indeed makes accurate predictions of what we should observe in the future. It's inventing something that makes the universe make sense and become predictible. Sure, maybe what we're inventing could turn out to be the wrong model. But the fact is, we don't have a better one right now. And to be honest, I have seen papers that posit amended gravity theories (perturbation gravity theory). They have been published in peer reviewed journals. The thing is, they may explain this ONE thing- rotations curves for milky way-sized galaxies. But these theories don't get a lot of traction b/c they don't explain other size scales or the other myriad observations that DM theory doeas explain.
Still, the more disturbing issue to me is the following: in spite of all the evidence for DM (and lack of evidence to the contrary at this time), you still choose to believe (blindly by definition-if there is no counter evidence, which there isn't) in an alternative that just doesn't have much, if any, evidence behind it. It's very similar to the following thought experiment:
What if penicillin might cause autism (there's no evidence to think that right now, but it's possible)? Now, if your son catches a bacterial infection that threatens his life will you withhold a penicilin regimen treatment? Today, there is no evidence to suggest that he'd be better off WITHOUT that treatment, and a shit-ton to suggest that he's better off WITH it. It is therefore irrational (and criminal, IMO) to refuse the treatment EVEN IF 20 YEARS FROM NOW WE FIND OUT THAT PENICILIN CAUSES AUTISM.
So yeah, maybe we don't have sufficient gaurentees that DM (or any theory) is the correct model for the universe. But damn if it doesn't, 1) explain a shit ton of what we observe and 2) there isn't even close to an equal amount of evidence for a counter theory as of yet. So even if DM turns out to be dead wrong, you're still wrong to not "believe" it- b/c you're just ignoring the evidence for it. See, no one BLAMES ancient people for believeing that the Earth was flat or that the sun travelled around the Earth- b/c based on all the available evidence, that's the best theroy that explained observations up that point! You know what we DO blame ancient people for? NOT CHANGING THEIR MINDS IN THE FACE OF OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE CONTRARY TO THEIR OPINION. IOW, not "believing" the mountain of new evidence that has developed and the theory that explains it all and makes predictions that can be observed and verified. That's what scientists now do- b/c we've learned from the lessons of the past. Always question, always be open to other possibilities. Until the last 150-200 years or so, humanity was turrible at that and progress was slow. Now, it's different. In short, don't believe a theory just b/c it's there, believe the evidence in support of it: the theories' explanations and predictions for what we observe. Belief in spite of evidence is faith. Belief b/c of evidence is science. I encourage more people to engage in the latter rather than the former.
|12 hours 56 min ago||multiple anecdotes !=||
multiple anecdotes != data
not directing it at you specifically, but we don't need every tom dick and harry volunteering their flu shot history- it literally means nothing.
|15 hours 3 min ago||I also believe that there is||
I also believe that there is simply a good chance that the equations we use are good approximations at certain scales and not necessarily at others.
just asking: any evidence for/reason to believe this?
|15 hours 26 min ago||It's not blindly. there is||
It's not blindly.
there is literally a moutain of observational and empirical evidence that not only supports evolution, but verifies the predicitions that evolution makes.
Science presupposes that statements are to be believed based on evidence, not revelation. Based on logic and objective observations, not authority.
The amazing thing to me is, people seem to think that no scientist EVAH has questioned theories before. Like, that's actually how science works. People questioned EVERYTHING about evolution for the last 150+ years. Not just people, PhD's in bio, anthro, astrophysics, entymology, etc etc etc. And you know what convinced all these scientists over the last 150+ years? Not a teacher or a textbook or a gubmint office. The evidence convinced them.
|15 hours 38 min ago||Yeah, I think most do a great||
Yeah, I think most do a great job of that, to be honest.
|15 hours 44 min ago||All people who practice||
All people who practice religion do NOT seriously & publicly attack science (for a given definition of seriously & publicly attack)
All people who seriously & publicly attack science do seem to practice religion.
Long story short, there aren't a lot of "Cheaster" christians looking to get evolution out of biology textbooks.
Also, the International Astronomical Union screwed over Pluto almost a decade ago. Because the evidence was strong enough to do so.
|15 hours 56 min ago||Speciation is a thing. It||
Speciation is a thing. It happened/is happening and can be observed. Happy reading.
|16 hours 6 min ago||lemme know what side of the||
lemme know what side of the fence you fall on re: gravity.
|16 hours 8 min ago||AFA public speakers & science||
AFA public speakers & science educators, it's a tough choice b/t Sagan and Feynman.
|16 hours 9 min ago||I almost posted a thread last||
I almost posted a thread last night, but was too tired to do it. Bravo OP. As someone who knew all of the science in the show (except the biographical stuff), there were no AH HA moments, but nonetheless, I thought the production value was excellent, the graphics very well done and the show overall was great. Yes, there a lot of shows out there (morgan freeman, etc), but this was the pilot and they had to start somewhere. Connected to the Sagan series and everything. Very well done. I hope my kids can get into, but they are a little young (5 & 8).
|16 hours 22 min ago||I recall reading a lot about||
I recall reading a lot about the 1-3-1 when Beilein was hired and being intrigued- especially regarding the 1-3-1's ability to not just generate TOs, but to generate high percentage possessions off those TOs. The 1-3-1 has just ONE man at the baseline guarding the basket. 3 mid-way and the high man (Levert). Off a TO, that creates numbers on the fast break. The high man (Levert) needs to be a great fast break player and finisher at the rim (in addition to a long athletic quick defender obvs) b/c TOs off a 1-3-1 create fast break opportunities more so than a standard zone, or any other half court D for that matter.
It really is a great D if you have the personnel: Levert as the high man, long wings, and a quick PG who is willing to defend the baseline with reckless abandon. It seems to me, we've been slowly bring this out the last 2-3 weeks b/c the B10 was on the line and the team is gearing up for the post season. I bet they've been practicing that D a ton throughout the year (more than one would expect, given they haven't used it until recently) knowing it would be an "ace in the hole" so-to-speak when March rolls around.
|1 day 9 hours ago||b/t the UVa game, MSU losing,||
b/t the UVa game, MSU losing, and NEBRASKETBALL! ...
Everything's coming up Milhouse!
|1 day 10 hours ago||they have to be in. they get||
they have to be in. they get the OSU/Purdont winner, which means worst case is they lose to OSU. that shouldn't knowck out a 11-7 B10 team.
If we can beat the Neb/osu winner, and minnesota can win a couple games, we will be in with a good 2 seed.
|1 day 10 hours ago||M is going to win the B10 by||
M is going to win the B10 by 3 full games. unreal
|1 day 12 hours ago||Love it- in order, I'd want||
Love it- in order, I'd want to avoid. 1) Wisc 2) MSU 3) IU
it's 50/50 to see IU and we can only see one of MSU/Wisc- in the title game. We should try to get this one seed more often, LOL
|2 days 18 hours ago||Calling all lax experts. My||
Calling all lax experts.
My 5 y/o boy wants to start lax this spring. I have to get a stick and a mouth guard- any advice on a stick for a little one? any general advice for lax at this age?
|3 days 15 hours ago||This one's just for fun,||
This one's just for fun, Hoosiers. Let's call it a friendly- just like soccer. I hear soccer is the one thing your good at!
|4 days 9 hours ago||I'm glad we made the change||
I'm glad we made the change obviously and the past is the past and it's encouraging that Hoke could make a change like this (get ready for the but).
buuut, WTF kind of monumental failure was this that Hoke allowed to under his program? I mean, at no point did he look at the schemes, practices schedules, game plans and suggest to Borges, "hey Al, I was thinking, uhhhh how about we K.I.S.S. so that our young OL can learn to do ONE thing well?" I've read a lot of stories about Bo and other coaches and even Hoke & Mattison have said this: go back to basics, don't be a scheme coach, have an identity for the young players to lean on.
Come on, man. maybe I'm getting too old and have seen too much incompetence in others affect my ability to do my job, but man this kind of incompetence from staff making 6-7 figures is infuriating.
|4 days 14 hours ago||If Stauskas was a goalie, his||
If Stauskas was a goalie, his save %age would be 1.055.
wait, can he skate?
|4 days 14 hours ago||lolololol 105% EFG%. WTF.||
lolololol 105% EFG%. WTF. they could quote his EFG% at -3+2i and it would be just as plausible.
Stauskis makes buckets on the complex plane, bitches.
|6 days 9 min ago||so essentially it's an||
so essentially it's an average length FG, but not worth 3? IDK I guess it's fine. I know they have to change this somehow, but I keep thinking about other major changes like this in other sports.
3 pt line in basketball (Shot clock too I guess, but that's a natural evolution, IMO)
mound height in baseball
2 line pass in hockey I guess
IDK, what's the analog of EP changes in other sports? Moving the FT line back? Increasing the net size in hockey? Seems like the NFL at least is thinking outside the box here.
|6 days 35 min ago||Sound incredibly stupid but||
Sound incredibly stupid but ok
|6 days 9 hours ago||the old "worst loss" was to M||
the old "worst loss" was to M in 74.
I think I get why they hate us.
|6 days 9 hours ago||DOUBLE YOUR PLEASURE DOUBLE YOUR FUN|
|6 days 9 hours ago||I feel like I've seen this||
I feel like I've seen this gif before....
|6 days 15 hours ago||yep- this was on oblberman-||
yep- this was on oblberman- Izzo was the WORST. PERSON. IN THE WORLD.
|6 days 15 hours ago||I have M dentistry roots||
I have M dentistry roots (HA!) as well- I bet my grand dad went to MDental before your grand dad.