What is pseudoscience?

[jinx]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoscience

Pseudoscience is a claim, belief, or practice which is presented as scientific, but does not adhere to a valid scientific method, lacks supporting evidence or plausibility, cannot be reliably tested, or otherwise lacks scientific status.[1] Pseudoscience is often characterized by the use of vague, contradictory, exaggerated or unprovable claims, an over-reliance on confirmation rather than rigorous attempts at refutation, a lack of openness to evaluation by other experts, and a general absence of systematic processes to rationally develop theories.





Evolutionism:the myth.

[Bill Wiltrack]

.





What is pseudothread?


Answer: A thread that does not have a clear thesis.






What is this thread about?


What is your thesis?



What is your supporting logic or philosophy?





.................................................................................................







.

[SpheresOfBalance]

Come on Bill I think it was clear. He's saying that Socrates was correct, that man only knows that he knows nothing. In other words that he, JINX, is like all others, that his knowledge is purely pseudo-knowledge. That he's pseudo-typing on a pseudo-computer, created by pseudo-science, such that it really doesn't work at all, that we are all just experiencing pseudo-belief that we are pseudo-communicating right now. It's pseudo-obvious!

[Bill Wiltrack]

.




I LOVE your interpretation of this thread.


I trust the original poster is in-line with your thought process.



Thank you for posting.




.

[SpheresOfBalance]

I hear you Bill.
I guess he'll just have to come to terms with the fact that often, ones argument, is argument, against their argument.

[jinx]

Science

http://oxforddictionaries.com/definitio ... ?q=science

the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment:

Bears stay bears, whales stay whales, elephants stay elephants, birds stay birds, plants stay plants, bacteria stay bacteria, giraffes stay giraffes. Evolutionism is not observable science. Then if evolutionism as a myth what is the source of life on earth??????????????? Hmmmm......

Genesis 1:1 "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth".

[Bill Wiltrack]

.










...........................................................................................










.

[SpheresOfBalance]

Science

http://oxforddictionaries.com/definitio ... ?q=science

the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment:

Bears stay bears, whales stay whales, elephants stay elephants, birds stay birds, plants stay plants, bacteria stay bacteria, giraffes stay giraffes. Evolutionism is not observable science. Then if evolutionism as a myth what is the source of life on earth??????????????? Hmmmm......

Genesis 1:1 "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth".

Obviously, you have never really come to terms with Hubble (the telescope) as it pertains to your gods universe. this my boy, is evidenced by your lack of understanding the full extent of both time and distance. As if you understood, then you'd see, your hoping to actually see, that extent of evolution in your lifetime, or in the lifetimes of even the last 2 to 4 thousand years, pretty much the extent of the written record, is ridiculous. Since your mind cannot fathom great distances, you fail to see the flaw in your limited logic. You don't believe me, learn all that you can about astronomy, take a look for yourself, not only the instruments that are used, but what they are finding. You my friend are a classic case of not being capable of looking past your own nose. I pity those close to you! Actually I hope you're just a kid, as then there's still hope, for you.

I'm agnostic, and I see everyone, my friend, in all 'our' folly. I see that evolution and the belief in a creator merge, and form the actual truth of things, as they can only be, taking 'ALL' evidence into account. I seek to unite, not divide. How about you?

No wonder the ignorant animal can't steer the ship, it's still, after all these fucking years, arguing that we are not all one! Are you fucking kidding me?

[jinx]

Do you have any scientific objections or just emotion and opinion?

[SpheresOfBalance]

Do you have any scientific objections or just emotion and opinion?

There is no accounting for ones ability in understanding, case in point! You're not worth arguing with if you either lie as to your ability at understanding, or are actually incapable of understanding.

[socratus]

PSEUDOSCIENCE:
' temperatures below absolute zero simple have no meaning.’
#
‘ It is true . . . there is such a thing as absolute zero; we cannot
reach temperatures below absolute zero not because we are not
sufficiently clever but because temperatures below absolute zero
simple have no meaning.’
/ Book : ‘Dreams of a final theory’ . Page 138.
by Steven Weinberg. The Nobel Prize in Physics 1979 /
====...

[SpheresOfBalance]

PSEUDOSCIENCE:
' temperatures below absolute zero simple have no meaning.’
#
‘ It is true . . . there is such a thing as absolute zero; we cannot
reach temperatures below absolute zero not because we are not
sufficiently clever but because temperatures below absolute zero
simple have no meaning.’
/ Book : ‘Dreams of a final theory’ . Page 138.
by Steven Weinberg. The Nobel Prize in Physics 1979 /
====...

Tell that to super computer enthusiasts, as they seek as close to absolute as possible.

[The Voice of Time]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoscience

Pseudoscience is a claim, belief, or practice which is presented as scientific, but does not adhere to a valid scientific method, lacks supporting evidence or plausibility, cannot be reliably tested, or otherwise lacks scientific status.[1] Pseudoscience is often characterized by the use of vague, contradictory, exaggerated or unprovable claims, an over-reliance on confirmation rather than rigorous attempts at refutation, a lack of openness to evaluation by other experts, and a general absence of systematic processes to rationally develop theories.

Evolutionism:the myth.

Evolution is science, but it has its limits. The bear example is not very useful in terms of how the future is gonna be like (it takes time it is not worth for us spending), but it can explain some features of the present and past. The Polar Bear for instance have paws specialized for swimming large distances, so you have your answer there.

The story an evolutionary theorist conducts is not meant to be the answer itself, I would think, but only an aid to sorting out as best as possible how things came along. The more you work in that manner, the closer you get, and you'll uncover features of people and animals that you might not had expected. A good evolutionary theory for instance can turn up answers that predict some thing to be in a specific way in the now, and we can go and find the animal, for instance, and look at how that animal is, and confirm whether it's true or not.

[Dimebag]

Bill, you do realise that every one of your threads has less if not no point than this thread. At least this thread is informative.

[socratus]

Lecture : Scientific heresy. Nov 1, 2011 in Edinburgh.
/ By Matt Ridley /
My topic today is scientific heresy.
When are scientific heretics right and when are they mad?
How do you tell the difference between science and pseudoscience?
#
Just this month Daniel Shechtman won the 2011 Nobel Prize
in chemistry for quasi crystals, having spent much of his career
being vilified and exiled as a crank
“I was thrown out of my research group.
They said I brought shame on them with what I was saying.”

http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2011/11 ... eresy.html