The "Blob": monocellular species, half fungus, half yeast

General scientific debates. Presentations of new technologies (not directly related to renewable energies or biofuels or other themes developed in other sub-sectors) forums).
izentrop
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 10638
Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
Location: picardie
x 927
Contact :

Re: The "Blob": a monocellular species, half fungus, half yeast




by izentrop » 21/06/17, 02:55

Janic wrote:The evidence is only accumulating in this direction. So people who still believe in religions voluntarily put on blinkers.
Do not confuse evidence with indications. To date, no scientist has been able to prove the spontaneous generation which would have resulted from a self-organization that Sen no sen likes to evoke. “Now if the facts are like stones… .etc” We are not at the facts, but at hypotheses, assumptions, theories, the famous SI.
Do not put the cart before the horse.
What I wanted to express is that in a lot of science documentaries that fall within the scope of the theory of evolution, often the commentator cannot help but use the mount "creature" which is incongruous in this case and , tends to discredit a theory which is proven in multiple ways while the theories of the universalist religions of Salvation (Judaism, Christianity, Zoroastrianism, Buddhism or even Islam) are completely invalidated due to ever more precise scientific discoveries .

It's widely proven, so we have to let go of old beliefs and change the paradigm. The man did not come from Jupiter's thigh nor from I do not know which "god";)
0 x

Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 16841
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 2273

Re: The "Blob": a monocellular species, half fungus, half yeast




by Janic » 21/06/17, 07:48

What I wanted to express is that in a lot of science documentaries that fall within the scope of the theory of evolution, often the commentator cannot help but use the mount "creature" which is incongruous in this case.

Your point of view is not completely wrong, but is only a partial view of the phenomenon. In fact, not all scientists are atheists
and suddenly their language suffers,
but atheist language is no more acceptable in a non-evolutionary discourse, such as the notion of chance.
Monod marked his time with his work on chance and necessity, well argued (in appearance) since he tries to prove that chance (which is only seen from the mind) is at the origin of the living world (which Darwin in the first original editions of his work attributes to god and which have been eliminated from the following editions) and which the observable order is the fruit of necessity. There are hardly any more "scientists" to take up again this theme of chance which does things so well. Then the word chance is replaced by the notion of indeterminism which means the same thing but which is more learned: hypocrisy of language?
tends to discredit a theory that is proven in multiple ways while the theories of universalist Salvation religions (Judaism, Christianity, Zoroastrianism, Buddhism or Islam) are completely invalidated due to ever more precise scientific discoveries.

You fall into the trap of comparing what is not comparable: science is a particular thing which describes phenomena (when it has the means), but cannot take them for granted in order to support ONLY ONE theoretical discourse. " the facts are stones… etc The facts are not evidence, but only indicators.
In fact to maintain that it is largely proven (whereas it is only an assembly of facts which one makes agree with more or less of happiness) it is exaggerated because the opposite points of view can assemble these same facts in a different way.
Re example: legos are like facts in this construction game, but their assembly depends only on who will assemble them ACCORDING TO THE DECISION IT TAKES TO MAKE SUCH OR SUCH CONSTRUCTION.
It's widely proven, so we have to let go of old beliefs and change the paradigm. The man did not come from Jupiter's thigh nor from I do not know which "god";)

It is widely claimed as proven in certain circles only.
It is therefore not a question of changing paradigm in this one rather than this one since it is only a theory, not a proof since nobody to this day knows how life appeared that either by chance or by creative decision. Do not put the cart before the horse!
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
izentrop
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 10638
Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
Location: picardie
x 927
Contact :

Re: The "Blob": a monocellular species, half fungus, half yeast




by izentrop » 21/06/17, 09:12

Janic wrote: not all scientists are atheists

Each individual can be sharp in his area of ​​competence and believing in other areas for lack of information, see negationist if he asserts it vehemently. I have examples if you ask.

My point is about the consensus whose discoveries are made with the scientific method and you know it, but you can't help but blur the trail.
Janic wrote:
and suddenly their language suffers,
but atheist language is no more acceptable in a non-evolutionary discourse, such as the notion of chance.
You make quotes without giving the name of the author so that nobody understands anything and your affirmations are based only on "we say".
Islam provides us with all the surprising details of the creation of Adam [1]. The Judeo-Christian tradition provides details that are both similar and very different from those found in Islam. Genesis states that Adam was created from the dust of the ground and the Talmud claims that he was modeled from mud. http://www.islamreligion.com/fr/article ... ie-1-de-5/
Hello what!
0 x
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 16841
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 2273

Re: The "Blob": a monocellular species, half fungus, half yeast




by Janic » 21/06/17, 09:40

Janic wrote:
not all scientists are atheists

Each individual can be sharp in his area of ​​competence and believing in other areas for lack of information, see negationist if he asserts it vehemently
.
You are funny ! It is not a question of the average person, but of scientists whom you therefore consider, a priori, as lacking information even when it is their field of scientific competence.
I have examples if you ask.
the subject was 216 pages and these examples were probably mentioned there but if you have originals, go for it! (You should first consult these 216 pages! Good luck!)
Although Christophe having closed the subject, I doubt that he accepts that he will leave for a ride!
My point is about the consensus whose discoveries are made with the scientific method and you know it, but you can't help but blur the trail.

Of course you can talk UN consensus is like invoking that Christians adhere to the consensus of Christianity, but not to that of Buddhism, Confucianism or any other philosophy and their reverse. However, the scientific method is a principle applicable to ALL areas, not to those arbitrarily selected by both to self-justify their own discourse.
But as you only remember what suits you, what bothers you, you call that blurring the trail. I sympathize!
Janic wrote:
and suddenly their language suffers,

but atheist language is no more acceptable in a non-evolutionary discourse, such as the notion of chance.

You make quotes without giving the name of the author so that nobody understands anything and your affirmations are based only on "we say".

You have never heard of Jacques Monod, where do you come from? : Shock: But you may not have been born at that time! :(
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
izentrop
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 10638
Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
Location: picardie
x 927
Contact :

Re: The "Blob": a monocellular species, half fungus, half yeast




by izentrop » 21/06/17, 12:18

Janic wrote:the scientific method is a principle applicable to ALL areas
Of course, but it highlights the weakness of religions in relation to science
The description of the scientific method highlights the intellectual superiority of scientific discourse over the mythical story.

The truth of mythical discourse cannot be verified either by an experimental procedure or by a demonstration. It is imposed by authority. What founds it is a revelation or the prestige of those who in the city are experienced as having an understanding of sacred things. Prophets, shamans, sorcerers, priests, imams etc. these men are considered superior to those who are not in the secrecy of the gods. Their word is therefore not disputed. Mythical truth has a dogmatic character requiring faith. "Everything can be changed except the Koran" says a Somali proverb.

It has the arbitrariness of what claims to escape the test of empirical or rational evidence.

One understands in these conditions its weakness. That men dare to use their understanding, that the data of observation contradict dogmas and these must necessarily appear for what they are: statements without theoretical value. http://www.philolog.fr/la-science-est-e ... -religion/
0 x

Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 16841
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 2273

Re: The "Blob": a monocellular species, half fungus, half yeast




by Janic » 21/06/17, 13:28

The description of the scientific method highlights the intellectual superiority of scientific discourse over the mythical story.

There is no superiority of one over the other, but only the criteria used are not necessarily the same. Our history books relate to us events and individuals whose historicity can hardly be denied: Vercingétorix, Charlemagne, Henri IV, Napoleon or Macron! All those who have not had the good fortune to be leaders of something, would not be and are then only myths? Who can decide as pointed out by the signatory of the cited article
The truth of mythical discourse cannot be verified either by an experimental procedure or by a demonstration. It is imposed by authority. What founds it is a revelation or the prestige of those who in the city are experienced as having an understanding of sacred things. Prophets, shamans, sorcerers, priests, imams etc. these men are considered superior to those who are not in the secrecy of the gods. Their word is therefore not disputed. Mythical truth has a dogmatic character requiring faith. "Everything can be changed except the Koran" says a Somali proverb.
This passage is no problem in exaggeration. In the biblical discourse (alone that I know enough) there is no sacred in the usual sense of religions.
This term means set aside for a particular use. A spade is not sacred, it is just put aside for its gardening use. The teachers are also sacred since they are set apart for teaching, doctors for care, engineers for industry, gendarmes to enforce safety laws, etc. However, each of these parts is fine in the pretension of having an understanding of the things which are set aside for their use and are therefore considered superior to those who are not in the secrecy of their sacred thing: the surgery entrusted to a mason is to get out of the sacred in question, but for what result!
ETC… provided that her article is not without interest, but she cannot help but be biased, but could it be otherwise?

Our French mathematician who has just joined Macron said in an interview that it was often intuition that guided him in his work. Does intuition come from the exact sciences? And so is the result of his work only anti-scientific because no one has ever seen, dissected, intuition?
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
User avatar
Exnihiloest
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 4695
Registration: 21/04/15, 17:57
x 415

Re: The "Blob": a monocellular species, half fungus, half yeast




by Exnihiloest » 21/06/17, 21:57

izentrop wrote:What I wanted to express is that in a lot of science documentaries that fall within the scope of the theory of evolution, often the commentator cannot help but use the mount "creature" which is incongruous in this case and , tends to discredit a theory which is proven in multiple ways while the theories of the universalist religions of Salvation (Judaism, Christianity, Zoroastrianism, Buddhism or even Islam) are completely invalidated due to ever more precise scientific discoveries .

Let us remember that the proof of God for believers is: "if there is a creation and creatures, it is because there is a creator" : Lol:

It's widely proven, so we have to let go of old beliefs and change the paradigm. The man did not come from Jupiter's thigh nor from I do not know which "god";)

Unfortunately civil society, under the pretext of respect for religions, does not dare to attack their very foundation, for example by opposing their sacred texts filled with absurdities or precepts contrary to human rights, scientific knowledge and to laws. Yet it is its role, education is a public service mission, and religion cannot claim it because education is not the respect of dogmas, it is on the contrary openness to everything.
There would be perhaps a little less of these stupid suicide bombers if they were repeated to them at the same rate as the mind-numbing prayers of the minarets, that there is not the slightest indication of the beginning of proof that they would have an afterlife .
0 x
User avatar
Exnihiloest
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 4695
Registration: 21/04/15, 17:57
x 415

Re: The "Blob": a monocellular species, half fungus, half yeast




by Exnihiloest » 21/06/17, 22:16

Janic wrote:
The description of the scientific method highlights the intellectual superiority of scientific discourse over the mythical story.

There is no superiority of one over the other, but only the criteria used are not necessarily the same ...

Of course they are not the same, but not to decide on intellectual superiority.

The intellectual superiority of scientific discourse over religious discourse is obvious, because religion is essentially nothing intellectual. Science emerges victorious for lack of an adversary, since nothing that religion asserts is refutable. Religion is a display of superstitions placed at the service of vaguely "psychological" considerations dating from an era of mentalities which today appear to be outdated and backward.

"If an ox strikes a man or a woman with his horns, and death follows, the ox will be stoned, its flesh will not be eaten, and the master of the ox will not be punished. But if the ox was previously subject to strike, and that the master, who did not watch him, was warned, the ox will be stoned, in the event that he kills a man or a woman, and his master will be punished of death.…".
Exodus 21-28
: roll: : roll: : roll:
0 x
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 16841
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 2273

Re: The "Blob": a monocellular species, half fungus, half yeast




by Janic » 22/06/17, 11:03

The intellectual superiority of scientific discourse over religious discourse is obvious, because religion is essentially nothing intellectual.

Wow! this is called self-proclamation: I am the most beautiful, the strongest, the most intelligent.
Science comes out victorious for want of an adversary, since nothing that religion says is refutable.

You mean that spontaneous non-generation is refurable? Example?
Religion is a display of superstitions placed at the service of vaguely "psychological" considerations dating from an era of mentalities which today appear to be outdated and backward.

Oh, the brilliant exegesis! We feel behind many years of studies, of atheist sites, to reach such conclusions.
"If an ox strikes a man or a woman with its horns, and death is the result, the ox will be stoned, its flesh will not be eaten, and the master of the ox will not be punished. But if the ox were previously subject to strike, and that the master has been warned, who did not watch him, the ox will be stoned, if he kills a man or a woman, and his master will be punished with death. ... " .
Exodus 21-28

And on top of that, you did theology, for years there again!
Fuck the guy!
In our country we sing in schools and elsewhere . " that impure blood water our furrows .. . But it is pure and hard jihadism, that, an incitement to French murder.
While the biblical text says, " you will not kill », Neither steal, nor lie, nor disrespect your parents by insulting them, molesting them, racket them, etc ...! But that only concerned a bygone and backward era, of course!
On the other hand, currently, if a dog bites a person it is slaughtered, without a drum or trumpets, under the sole suspicion that it can be dangerous, (Pasteur way) except that an ox is obviously not a dog ! What can we be downgraded!
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
izentrop
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 10638
Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
Location: picardie
x 927
Contact :

Re: The "Blob": a monocellular species, half fungus, half yeast




by izentrop » 22/06/17, 11:59

Janic wrote:Wow! this is called self-proclamation: I am the most beautiful, the strongest, the most intelligent.
Science comes out victorious for want of an adversary, since nothing that religion says is refutable.
You mean that spontaneous non-generation is refurable? Example?
We are more into spontaneous generation to characterize life.
For the first time, researchers show that ribose, a sugar that is the basis of the genetic material of living organisms, may have formed in cometary ice.

All living organisms on Earth, as well as viruses, have a genetic heritage made up of nucleic acids - DNA or RNA2. RNA, considered to be more primitive, would have been one of the first characteristic molecules of life to appear on Earth. Scientists have long wondered about the origin of these biological molecules. According to some, the Earth was "seeded" by comets or asteroids containing the basic bricks necessary for their construction. And indeed, several amino acids (constituents of proteins) and nitrogenous bases (one of the constituents of nucleic acids) have already been found in meteorites, as well as in artificial comets, reproduced in the laboratory. But ribose, the other key constituent of RNA, had never been detected in extraterrestrial material, nor produced in the laboratory under "astrophysical" conditions ... http://www2.cnrs.fr/presse/communique/4497.htm
Eating and reproducing are the 2 principles of life. These are the mistakes that make the evolution. Hence the increasing complexity to adapt to changes in the environment.
0 x


 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "Science and Technology"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 12 guests