...
Last edited:
-
Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more here.
-
Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!
Do (some, many) Icmag Members Have A Science Problem?
- Thread starter Cannabologist
- Start date
they used bogus science experiments to justify its danger
monkeys exposed to pure smoke for 5 minutes periods led to brain damaged monkeys and thus dangerous marijuana
G
greenmatter
my compost pile is twice as smart as Stephan Hawking and vice versa ...... kinda depends on what exactly you are trying to do IME
context and relativity are key and the lack thereof is the cause of most arguments here
G
greenmatter
and the whole time i have been thinking it was because herding cats is impossible ......... even when most of them are really stoned
Science is great.
Here is the problem. Science is conducted by human beings who are not perfect thus science is never perfect. Science tries to negate this through the scientific method, but in the end science can be politicized, tainted with incompetence or fraud, and is subject to Ivory tower groupthink circle jerks aspiring for grant money (groupthink for funds).
So no, there is no science problem on these boards. I see people who do get very butthurt when science is questioned though. And it has nothing to do with conspiracy (which is what the butthurt ones write it off as).
Just questioning the politicization and potential groupthink corruption that happens time and time and time and time and time again in "science".
Here is the problem. Science is conducted by human beings who are not perfect thus science is never perfect. Science tries to negate this through the scientific method, but in the end science can be politicized, tainted with incompetence or fraud, and is subject to Ivory tower groupthink circle jerks aspiring for grant money (groupthink for funds).
So no, there is no science problem on these boards. I see people who do get very butthurt when science is questioned though. And it has nothing to do with conspiracy (which is what the butthurt ones write it off as).
Just questioning the politicization and potential groupthink corruption that happens time and time and time and time and time again in "science".
i have no probems with science,as long as its done with morals in mind,go right ahead. as some have pointed out progress can be had through the state, but what isn't seen is how long ago we could have had the technology without their interference and not waiting on funding ect... if there was a market demand to say go to space we would have just skipped nasa and let branson launch himself into orbit lol and if it did not work out the losses wouldn't be socialized,like green tech(solyndra/tesla) . perhaps calling people conspiracy nuts is a easy way to be dismissive of shocking facts. how a person takes it and disseminates this info does have a limiting effect on how many people will listen.i will agree that alex jones is a pefect example of how just generalizing things makes legitimate facts look off the wall.when people listento him they are not getting precise answers they just hear him yell CIA!,bohemian grove! yada yada yada, it leaves way more questions than answers wich brings them back for the next show.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/29/lamar-smith-science_n_3165754.html
i don't hold this to be the be all end all argument regarding political corruption and its influence on science, since it has'nt been introduced yet,but lamar smith is also the man who stalled out the ending federal marijuana prohibition act in the house judiciary.so make no mistake these politicians are not dumb they know what they are doing is,in colflict with the scientific method and it is dishonest at best.
think galileo galilea .
i just think the church and the state makes one question the validity of anything done under its authority real or presumed .its just one man trying to control another in both cases .
(no problem with religion , just authority disguised as something nice(deception)
examples to illustrate my point.
http://lysanderspooner.org/node/44
"INTRODUCTORY.
_____________
"The question of treason is distinct from that of slavery; and is the same that it would have been, if free States, instead of slave States, had seceded.
On the part of the North, the war was carried on, not to liberate slaves, but by a government that had always perverted and violated the Constitution, to keep the slaves in bondage; and was still willing to do so, if the slaveholders could be thereby induced to stay in the Union.
The principle, on which the war was waged by the North, was simply this: That men may rightfully be compelled to submit to, and support, a government that they do not want; and that resistance, on their part, makes them traitors and criminals.
No principle, that is possible to be named, can be more self-evidently false than this; or more self-evidently fatal to all political freedom. Yet it triumphed in the field, and is now assumed to be established. If it really be established, the number of slaves, instead of having been diminished by the war, has been greatly increased; for a man, thus subjected to a government that he does not want, is a slave. And there is no difference, in principle --- but only in degree --- between political and chattel slavery. The former, no less than the latter, denies a man's ownership of himself and the products of his labor; and [*iv] asserts that other men may own him, and dispose of him and his property, for their uses, and at their pleasure.
Previous to the war, there were some grounds for saying that --- in theory, at least, if not in practice --- our government was a free one; that it rested on consent. But nothing of that kind can be said now, if the principle on which the war was carried on by the North, is irrevocably established.
If that principle be not the principle of the Constitution, the fact should be known. If it be the principle of the Constitution, the Constitution itself should be at once overthrown."
.....
below, i will frame this for everyone in the form of a trust in perpituity,in wich we are the chattel of the estate.(property)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unam_sanctam
"Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff"
so in both cases above we never really had a choice in the matters of freedom.although no permission was needed to be born,immeadiatley after the state claims us under contract with whitnesses signing to the fact.its all by force of course,think of what happens if you where to not sign the birth certificate? ridicule kidnapping ,of you or the baby,being denied parental rights its all a system. the reason that make it legit to post this info, for me anyway, on this site is,because the people perpetrating the fraud are the same ones we petition to change the laws.they are not going to be cut out as middle men,they want their protection money at the state level. at the federal level they laugh.(except for ron paul he introduced a lot of mj legislation including the one lamar smith blocked)
i think the sooner the system is bucked ,the better.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/29/lamar-smith-science_n_3165754.html
i don't hold this to be the be all end all argument regarding political corruption and its influence on science, since it has'nt been introduced yet,but lamar smith is also the man who stalled out the ending federal marijuana prohibition act in the house judiciary.so make no mistake these politicians are not dumb they know what they are doing is,in colflict with the scientific method and it is dishonest at best.
think galileo galilea .
i just think the church and the state makes one question the validity of anything done under its authority real or presumed .its just one man trying to control another in both cases .
(no problem with religion , just authority disguised as something nice(deception)
examples to illustrate my point.
http://lysanderspooner.org/node/44
"INTRODUCTORY.
_____________
"The question of treason is distinct from that of slavery; and is the same that it would have been, if free States, instead of slave States, had seceded.
On the part of the North, the war was carried on, not to liberate slaves, but by a government that had always perverted and violated the Constitution, to keep the slaves in bondage; and was still willing to do so, if the slaveholders could be thereby induced to stay in the Union.
The principle, on which the war was waged by the North, was simply this: That men may rightfully be compelled to submit to, and support, a government that they do not want; and that resistance, on their part, makes them traitors and criminals.
No principle, that is possible to be named, can be more self-evidently false than this; or more self-evidently fatal to all political freedom. Yet it triumphed in the field, and is now assumed to be established. If it really be established, the number of slaves, instead of having been diminished by the war, has been greatly increased; for a man, thus subjected to a government that he does not want, is a slave. And there is no difference, in principle --- but only in degree --- between political and chattel slavery. The former, no less than the latter, denies a man's ownership of himself and the products of his labor; and [*iv] asserts that other men may own him, and dispose of him and his property, for their uses, and at their pleasure.
Previous to the war, there were some grounds for saying that --- in theory, at least, if not in practice --- our government was a free one; that it rested on consent. But nothing of that kind can be said now, if the principle on which the war was carried on by the North, is irrevocably established.
If that principle be not the principle of the Constitution, the fact should be known. If it be the principle of the Constitution, the Constitution itself should be at once overthrown."
.....
below, i will frame this for everyone in the form of a trust in perpituity,in wich we are the chattel of the estate.(property)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unam_sanctam
"Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff"
so in both cases above we never really had a choice in the matters of freedom.although no permission was needed to be born,immeadiatley after the state claims us under contract with whitnesses signing to the fact.its all by force of course,think of what happens if you where to not sign the birth certificate? ridicule kidnapping ,of you or the baby,being denied parental rights its all a system. the reason that make it legit to post this info, for me anyway, on this site is,because the people perpetrating the fraud are the same ones we petition to change the laws.they are not going to be cut out as middle men,they want their protection money at the state level. at the federal level they laugh.(except for ron paul he introduced a lot of mj legislation including the one lamar smith blocked)
i think the sooner the system is bucked ,the better.
Last edited:
problem with science is when hypothesis gets built up upon hypothesis with mathamatics it now becomes as unproven and dogmatic as religions became when it morphed from mysticism and spirituality into a daft storyline that retarded society.. science has been infiltrated essentially..
never used to be this way but modern science talks in absolutes..
all has to do with literalism and what people will believe or buy into.. cattle instinct keeps the paradigm turning over from one face to the next and suddenly we start losing a load of rights because of what science says..
too many unproven tenets forming the backbone of "western science" and so so many are starting to see the play.. and brilliantly they are the best we have produced for millenia, so thank god (or truth) for that..
never used to be this way but modern science talks in absolutes..
all has to do with literalism and what people will believe or buy into.. cattle instinct keeps the paradigm turning over from one face to the next and suddenly we start losing a load of rights because of what science says..
too many unproven tenets forming the backbone of "western science" and so so many are starting to see the play.. and brilliantly they are the best we have produced for millenia, so thank god (or truth) for that..
Scientia non habet inimicum nisp ignorantem.
There are more lay people than scientists... The lay person wants an easy explanation they can understand, whether or not its right. The scientist seeks the truth, regardless of what others think is right. Having a scientific understanding is something developed through education. 30% of the US has a 4-year degree. Only part of that 30% studies science. I'm not saying you need a 4-year degree to understand science, but when learning the difference between meiosis and mitosis it sure helps to have a professor to guide you.
I have a science problem.
My science teacher was a creationist cum sock who put me off all science in high school and i dropped it as a subject after scoring said cum sock 3 years running. Now in my 30's i love science but it would have been good to do it at uni. Some great and interesting jobs out there in science.
My science teacher was a creationist cum sock who put me off all science in high school and i dropped it as a subject after scoring said cum sock 3 years running. Now in my 30's i love science but it would have been good to do it at uni. Some great and interesting jobs out there in science.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wendull C.
There was no science in prohibition. Only politics. The one using the other as a tool should not quantify.
Bogus science isn't science.
Originally Posted by Wendull C.
There was no science in prohibition. Only politics. The one using the other as a tool should not quantify.
Bogus science isn't science.
stop splitting hares
it was a legitimate science experiment that did not replicate the smoking experience verbatim
no different that research studies payed for by big corporations focused on proving a particular value while obfuscating detriment for the sake of profit
google bias in research studies
good science gets used for foul purpose often, its not necessarily collusion on the part of the scientist.
the experiments were bogus when used in comparison to the smoking experience they themselves were done with scientific method and the results recorded
were the scientists in collusion with a Harry Anslinger or did Harry Anslinger ask for a certain test and use the results to his advantage?
either way real science was used to sway opinion and create laws and it doesn't invalidate science but illustrates human manipulation like your focus on my verbiage instead of the simple point made by said verbiage can be used to bias perceptions.
were the scientists in collusion with a Harry Anslinger or did Harry Anslinger ask for a certain test and use the results to his advantage?
either way real science was used to sway opinion and create laws and it doesn't invalidate science but illustrates human manipulation like your focus on my verbiage instead of the simple point made by said verbiage can be used to bias perceptions.
The reason CR is
so much is because you are arguing the case for us.Scientific studies are well documented, or they're not considered scientific. Since they are well documented, they're open to review from peers. Now we can go back and review to study, and pick out the biases and flaws. We are able to invalidate the study, through the methods that were used to obtain the information.
This is different from someone who claims that defoliation leads to higher yields... with no documentation to back up their claims. Most of the time there's nothing to review, just anecdotal claims.
When the psuedoscientists document and put their work up for review... Well then I guess they'll be considered scientists.
