Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Siquo]

It's all about could. Also, theories do not "dictate" anything. They predict. And can be wrong until their predictions are met, and then they are still liable to be wrong.

Also, for now it's just an hypothesis, it only becomes theory when the predictions seem to be accurate.

If it was a question of should, then why look for the boson at all? That's religious talk there, what you're doing. Masking it as science. I am remaining calm.

...

No I'm not. I hate it when people mask religious talk with science, or try to "back it up" with science. Go back to school all of you science-abusers! Science is pure, keep it that way.

[chaoticag]

Does the Higgs Boson particle have anything to do with god? I have no idea, but I doubt it. Einstien called entangled particles "spooky action at a distance" but that doesn't make them anything other than scientific (and the basis for teleportation no less).

Its just one of the odd nicknames scientists give to objects to better explain their function.

[Siquo]

No, it does not. If found, however, it will crown decades of hypotheses.

The discussion here is about how things that have no evidence to their existence (hypotheses are not evidence or even indirect evidence) might still exist.

[RAM]

Just because we have no evidence to support the existence of something does not mean that it isn't there, but if we have no evidence of it then we should assume that it is not. Until such time as we gain access to such evidence...

I am not personally familiar with the Higgs boson particle, but from what I have heard there very clearly IS evidence to support its existence. And obviously so, if there were no evidence then nobody would know what to look for... It may be that there is no such particle, and that the evidence also supports something else, or that the evidence was based upon faulty efforts and is itself inaccurate. One way or another there is evidence to support it, there may not be evidence enough to believe in it, but there is evidence for it.

 Unfortunately, there is more evidence that people would make up a god if they didn't have one then there is that there would be a god that people didn't make up...

[dreiche2]

I am not personally familiar with the Higgs boson particle, but from what I have heard there very clearly IS evidence to support its existence.

You're really being vague about the term evidence now, which will just incite further semantic arguments. There is no direct (strong) evidence, otherwise the question of its existence would have been answered. See the quote I've given. The Higgs boson is predicted by certain theories, and it's a plausible prediction, but saying there's evidence for its existence is a little bit of a stretch, unless you're using evidence in a sense different from what we've been doing so far.

There are multiple theories consistent with the evidence we have so far, some predict the Higgs boson, some don't. That's all.

And obviously so, if there were no evidence then nobody would know what to look for...

That doesn't make sense. To know what to look for, all one needs is a theory that makes predictions. But again, I think you're just being vague about 'evidence' here.

[Siquo]

I have a feeling that that is the problem here, and that Neruz uses the same "evidence" as RAM does.

Evidence within a scientific context has very clearly defined meaning, and it's an interesting read as well.

[Cheeetar]

The analogy is flawed only if you're still a child. The child sees it as evil because he doesn't know any better.

Yes, you may view those things as evil, but if you presume to know better than a parent who is omniscient (eg, almost infinitely more knowledgeable than you), that's quite something to presume.

Oh, and I can simply state that everyone goes to heaven, regardless of what you did. Not all christianity believes in a hell, or a judging God. And certainly not in a God that has human flaws such as the need for justice and stuff like morals.


To Cheeetar: Because I wanted to teach her something, maybe. She has a habit of scratching other children with her fiingernails, and I don't want her to do that. So she stands in the corner when she does that. Most evil and unfair of me, in her perspective.

'God works in mysterious ways'

[dreiche2]

So I don't care. 

[Phmcw]

God work in mysterious way is the religious equivalent of "because it's magic" in role playing game : you don't know, and it doesn't make sense at all.

It's exactly what I'm saying, you must avoid all criticism to believe in religion and be ready to believe there are dragon in your garage because you can never have absolute evidence therefore no evidence are liable.

Hence atrocity when thing goes sour. After all maybe they were witch and they saved their soul by burning and torturing them.

I'm not saying you would do that, but really, I can't understand you.

[Maggarg - Eater of chicke]

I never understand why we as humans don't funnel all our religious and/or anti-religious rage into something useful.

[masam]

Like a giant game of laser tag?

[Siquo]

Like charity? Because there's a lot of money in religious charity.

@Phmcw: Yes, I've been trying to avoid that specific line because of the standard response to it. However, it is a MUCH better stance than "God does not work in mysterious ways, we know exactly what He means", which is the reason for most religion-stained violence and bad stuff.

Believing in one thing with a lack of evidence does not mean you have to believe everything with a lack of evidence.
You probably believe the universe is real and there's nothing that can't be detected. And that's fine, but there's no evidence for that. However, that's no reason to believe in invisible dragons in your garage.

[Sordid]

I included the word wiser, and human construct. And I believe you're none the wiser than our forefathers, nor less human.

Then you have redefined the meaning of that word to suit your own views.

If it's invisible you have no evidence. I do have evidence there is no visible dragon in my garage.

Nope, still not evidence. You may be hallucinating an empty garage while in reality there's a perfectly visible dragon right in front of you.

And I don't need any to believe in him

Actually yes, you do. Otherwise you're believing something for no reason, which is just stupid.

Yes. TO ME it's absolute, what you believe has no impact on that.

Um, a subjective objective meaning is just as much nonsense as black white or round square.

I don't get my self-worth from the meanings of others.

....eeeexcept when that 'other' happens to be God.

[dreiche2]

If it's invisible you have no evidence. I do have evidence there is no visible dragon in my garage.

Nope, still not evidence. You may be hallucinating an empty garage while in reality there's a perfectly visible dragon right in front of you.

That conjecture applies, in practice, to any evidence. Sordid, what's your point. I can't tell whether you're trying to play devil's advocate or not.

[Maggarg - Eater of chicke]

Like a giant game of laser tag?

Put that on one of the moons of Jupiter and you have a deal. Playing laserquest on a world of radioactive, sulphur spewing volcanoes with insane acidic death-storms would be intense.