SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Gottfried who wrote (252863)6/15/2014 8:28:08 PM
From: epicure  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 540836
 
We may not be smart enough. But it would be really stupid to believe in something just because you're too stupid to prove or disprove it. The obvious choice is to refrain from deciding- and wait for proof. My position is- "I don't believe in it now, but if you can prove it scientifically, I'll believe in it later" I mean maybe we're not smart enough to prove fairies exist. How about unicorns? And I would argue you don't have to understand the science yourself. But if scientists find something, and can find it repeatably, over time, using controlled experiments- you can give those experiments some credence- but not ridiculous credulity. I happen to think that's always inappropriate.



To: Gottfried who wrote (252863)6/15/2014 8:44:25 PM
From: Katelew  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 540836
 
Gottfried, what I don't understand about the expanding of the universe is that it states that mass doesn't thin out in the process. I wonder how that works. Is mass reproducing itself somehow to remain a constant. For some reason, this has intrigued me for awhile.