2012 - What does it mean to you?

[dreadgeek]

Originally Posted by friskyfemme

dreadgeek

I, personally, do not find science boring...but what I have issue with is a scientists trying to make theory fact by agreement.

Frisky:

All we have in science is theories*. A fact is data. The way I like to explain it is like this: Fact: The Earth orbits the Sun. Theory: The Sun's gravitational mass describes various orbits around its center of mass. Earth occupies the third orbital position and is taking the least energetic path around the sun. Now, it so happens that theory is very much in agreement with observation and that is the mark of good science. It sounds like the issue you have with scientists is that they approach things like, well, scientists.

excerpt from dreadgeek 'This puts the burden of justification on the proponents of astrology to explain what kind of energy it is, to propose tests we could use to determine if this energy exists and whether or not it obeys the inverse square law (and if it doesn't why and how it breaks what appears to be a *fundamental* rule). '

I have the tenacity to believe that 'if ain't always true-meaning no exceptions-it ain't true'. To me this is 'truth' - that each person holds a portion of the truth emcompassing a merge from levels of understanding at the physical level (science), the mental level (change), the spiritual level (ominiscence). Incorporating all = truth, however dismissing a portion = theory. Each serves a invaluable reasoning for existence.

So the spiritual level is all-knowing? Because that's what I take the use of the word omniscience to mean?


*A theory, in science, isn't a guess. A theory, in science, is a well-established model for how some system works in nature. When I use the term theory, I am (almost) always using the scientific use of that term. In fact, when I use the term theory in these venues it's the *only* way I use that term because to do otherwise just creates confusion.

Cheers
Aj

[friskyfemme]

Originally Posted by dreadgeek

Frisky:

All we have in science is theories*. A fact is data. The way I like to explain it is like this: Fact: The Earth orbits the Sun. Theory: The Sun's gravitational mass describes various orbits around its center of mass. Earth occupies the third orbital position and is taking the least energetic path around the sun. Now, it so happens that theory is very much in agreement with observation and that is the mark of good science. It sounds like the issue you have with scientists is that they approach things like, well, scientists.



So the spiritual level is all-knowing? Because that's what I take the use of the word omniscience to mean?


*A theory, in science, isn't a guess. A theory, in science, is a well-established model for how some system works in nature. When I use the term theory, I am (almost) always using the scientific use of that term. In fact, when I use the term theory in these venues it's the *only* way I use that term because to do otherwise just creates confusion.

Cheers
Aj

Dread
Thanks for your clarification regarding the 'scientific' use of theory.
It is my intention to say spiritual= omiscience 'total awarenes/all knowing'. Each of the levels are representative of beginning of itself to the touch of the next. It is truly a simplistic view of existence. Each brings it's own properties to life. The physical(body), what is measureable, mental (mind), what is reasoned, spirit, what is.

[Toughy]

Originally Posted by friskyfemme

Dread
Thanks for your clarification regarding the 'scientific' use of theory.
It is my intention to say spiritual= omiscience 'total awarenes/all knowing'. Each of the levels are representative of beginning of itself to the touch of the next. It is truly a simplistic view of existence. Each brings it's own properties to life. The physical(body), what is measureable, mental (mind), what is reasoned, spirit, what is.

Maybe it's because I haven't had breakfast yet......

This post makes absolutely no sense to me. Can you clarify what you mean?

[BornBronson]

*snort*

I think that's the year Sarah Palin will be our first woman president.Y'all know we should of put Mrs.Clinton in first.

[Rockinonahigh]

Originally Posted by BornBronson

*snort*

I think that's the year Sarah Palin will be our first woman president.Y'all know we should of put Mrs.Clinton in first.

Lord help us if Sara Palin becomes our first woman prezz,Hillary should run again,but I doubt she will.