Page 12 of 12 [ 181 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12

Kosmonaut
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,253

15 May 2007, 7:25 am

i like the pictures: it's like sesame street, yes?
which one is the odd-one out ?
err.. the top left, because without the achemist there would have been no chemistry.
what do i win?



AlexandertheSolitary
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Dec 2006
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 945
Location: Melbourne

15 May 2007, 7:47 am

Kosmonaut wrote:
i like the pictures: it's like sesame street, yes?
which one is the odd-one out ?
err.. the top left, because without the achemist there would have been no chemistry.
what do i win?


Yes! The symbol representing modern chemistry is there in the viewer's left, the alchemist's/magician's right; this pattern is the opposite of the other parts of the picture, where the earlier, and by general modern consensus less well informed view is in the corresponding corner of the quarter of the picture. I have no idea what you win. 666? What are you offering Kosmonaut for undoubted perspicacity?


_________________
You are like children playing in the market-place saying, "We piped for you and you would not dance, we wailed a dirge for you and you would not weep."


Kosmonaut
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,253

15 May 2007, 8:00 am

well i never even thought about which side of the picture they were on.
all i am saying is that the alchemists layed the foundations for what they call chemistry today.
whereas astrology is f**k all do with astronomy.
draw yr conclusions about the other 2.



AlexandertheSolitary
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Dec 2006
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 945
Location: Melbourne

15 May 2007, 8:41 am

Kosmonaut wrote:
well i never even thought about which side of the picture they were on.
all i am saying is that the alchemists layed the foundations for what they call chemistry today.
whereas astrology is f**k all do with astronomy.
draw yr conclusions about the other 2.


True (with regard to alchemy). Probably the most that could be said for astrology is that a number of astronomical phenomena were first observed by ancient Mesopotamian astrologers, but I do not know what valid conclusions can really be drawn from this. I never understood how such a theory was supposed to work given its cosmology did not correspond to reality in the universe that it purported to provide predictions for. Phrenology - well I can see what they were trying to do, but in my not especially humble opinion almost certainly utter nonsense. Magic and physics? Well the first term is used for quite a diverse range of phenomena; I am not certain if it corresponds to physics in the same way as the other pairings correspond.

By the way, people did laugh at mediaeval barber-surgeons (once a united profession quite distinct from physicians, who could also double as astrologers) for using leeches, until modern science found an application. I do not know what you can validly conclude from that either.


_________________
You are like children playing in the market-place saying, "We piped for you and you would not dance, we wailed a dirge for you and you would not weep."


Griff
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Nov 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,312

15 May 2007, 11:59 am

Mordy wrote:
The problem with both creation and evolution is that there adherents are both religious nutjobs. The problem is people are so weak minded they cannot seperate "Creation" from "religion" nor evolution from "naturalism"
"Adherent" of evolution? Oy vey.

Quote:
The fact is you could have divinely decreed evolution
Or secular theory of creation
"Secular creation theory"? Oh, yeah! The aliens! The aliens did it! They were responsible! BLAME IT ALL ON THE ALIENS!! Also, so-called "intelligent design" actually is "divinely decreed evolution." The truth, however, is that this whole planet is just one great ALIEN CONSPIRACY. If you can prove it ain't true, shoot me dead.

Quote:
For the most part the Cretion/evo debate is just culture wars masqurading as rational argument
Duh. Creationists are funny. Smack them with boards, and watch them spin.

Quote:
anyone says that the below image does at least inspire thought about it being demonstration of engineering knowledge and scientific knowhow is living in their own mental dark age.
Funny. That's what I'd say of a person not genuinely curious as to its origins. An explanation like "someone made it like that" is hollow and cheap. When we came across the Grand Canyon, we didn't just assume the Indians had dug it and pass it by without investigation.

Quote:
The below is what exists in E. Coli bacteria, people like to think of "bacteria" as bug like but they are much more like a machine.
So are humans. Hell, so are bugs, actually, or any self-replicating gizmo.