Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity (JW Speak)

by Perry 51 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Perry
    Perry

    The Sokal Affair

    The paper, “Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity”, was published in “Science Wars” in 1996. On the day of publication, Sokal announced (in a different paper,) that the article was a hoax. He said that Social Text was “a pastiche of left-wing cant, fawning references, grandiose quotations, and outright nonsense”. Much heated debate followed, especially regarding academic ethics. Why did he do it?

    Says he:

    "Why did I do it? While my method was satirical, my motivation is utterly serious. What concerns me is the proliferation, not just of nonsense and sloppy thinking per se, but of a particular kind of nonsense and sloppy thinking: one that denies the existence of objective realities, or (when challenged) admits their existence but downplays their practical relevance. At its best, a journal like Social Textraises important questions that no scientist should ignore — questions, for example, about how corporate and government funding influence scientific work. Unfortunately, epistemic relativism does little to further the discussion of these matters."

    One commentator said this:

    "I believe it shows three important things. First, that dubiously coherent relativistic views about the concepts of truth and evidence really have gained wide acceptance within the contemporary academy, just as it has often seemed. Second, that this has had precisely the sorts of pernicious consequence for standards of scholarship and intellectual responsibility that one would expect it to have. Finally, that neither of the preceding two claims need reflect a particular political point of view, least of all a conservative one.

    It's impossible to do justice to the egregiousness of Sokal's essay without quoting it more or less in its entirety; what follows is a tiny sampling. Sokal starts off by establishing his postmodernist credentials: he derides scientists for continuing to cling to the "dogma imposed by the long post-Enlightenment hegemony over the Western intellectual outlook," that there exists an external world, whose properties are independent of human beings, and that human beings can obtain reliable, if imperfect and tentative knowledge of these properties "by hewing to the 'objective' procedures and epistemological strictures prescribed by the (so-called) scientific method." He asserts that this 'dogma' has already been thoroughly undermined by the theories of general relativity and quantum mechanics, and that physical reality has been shown to be "at bottom a social and linguistic construct." In support of this he adduces nothing more than a couple of pronouncements from physicists Niels Bohr and Werner Heisenberg, pronouncements that have been shown to be naive by sophisticated discussions in the philosophy of science over the past fifty years. "

    People are so easily fooled. (myself included)

  • HintOfLime
    HintOfLime

    "Science Wars" was not a reputable source of scientific information. That's like considering "Mythbusters" to be "science".

    Or how about considering "Ted Haggard" to speak for all christians. Do you follow Ted Haggard?

    - Lime

  • Perry
    Perry

    Now-a-days even computer programs can generate a complete line of BOVINE EXCREMENT and get it published: Get a load of this manure:

    A Methodology for the Typical Unification of Access Points and Redundancy.

    Opening Abstract:

    "Many physicists would agree that, had it not been for congestion control, the evaluation of web browsers might never have occurred. In fact, few hackers worldwide would disagree with the essential unification of voice-over-IP and public/private key pair. In order to solve this riddle, we confirm that SMPs can be made stochastic, cacheable, and interposable."

    THE ABOVE IS ALL COMPLETELY COMPUTER GENERATED BULL CRAP - IT GOT PUBLISHED

    In 2005 a paper generated by SCIgen, Rooter: A Methodology for the Typical Unification of Access Points and Redundancy, was accepted as a "non-reviewed" paper to the 2005World Multiconference on Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics and the authors were invited to speak. The authors of SCIgen described their hoax on their website, and it soon received great publicity when picked up by Slashdot. WMSCI withdrew their invitation, but the SCIgen team went anyway, renting space in the hotel separately from the conference and delivering a series of randomly generated talks on their own "track." The organizer of all these conferences is Professor Nagib Callaos. The WMSCI was also sponsored by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers from 2000 until 2005. The IEEE stopped granting sponsorship to Callaos in 2006, while Callaos received again IEEE sponsorship in 2008.

  • HintOfLime
    HintOfLime

    Wow. Compelling stuff. Not cherry-picked at all.

    Here's some cherry picking for you: God's level of intellectual sophistication - Helping the pentecostals babble and spaz out.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKOhI1Oiv98

    Thank you Jesus!

    (BTW, did you write any of that yourself, or did you just copy paste it from some other person's blog? I suspect you were not able to conceive and express yourself.)

    - Lime

  • Perry
    Perry

    National Geographic Hoax

    Tasaday people

    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search

    Tasaday
    Tasaday with hand drill in an image released by the media, circa 1970.

    The Tasaday ( t?'s?d?j ) are an indigenous people of the Philippine island of Mindanao. They are considered to belong to the Lumad group along with the other indigenous inhabitants of the island. They attracted wide media attention in 1971 when they were first "discovered" by Western scientists who reported that they were living at a "stone age" level of technology and had been completely isolated from the rest of Philippine society. They later attracted attention in the 1980s when it was reported that their "discovery" had in fact been an elaborate hoax

    In 1986 the Marcos government was overthrown, and Oswald Iten, a Swiss journalist, accompanied and guided by a Filipino reporter named Joey Lozano, seized this opportunity to trek out into the jungle to find out what had become of the Tasaday. What Iten found shocked him, and soon became the basis for the second version of the Tasaday story, the one in which they’re an outrageous hoax.

    Iten found the Tasaday’s caves empty and the tribe members living in huts nearby, dressed in jeans and t-shirts, living a simple, but certainly not primitive, lifestyle. Upon questioning them (using Lozano as a translator), two of the Tasaday admitted to Iten that they weren’t really a stone-age tribe and never had been. They claimed that Elizalde had pressured them into posing as one. “We didnt live in caves, only near them, until we met Elizalde,” they said. “Elizalde forced us to live in the caves so that we’d be better cavemen. Before he came, we lived in huts on the other side of the mountain and we farmed. We took off our clothes because Elizalde told us to do so and promised if we looked poor that we would get assistance. He gave us money to pose as Tasaday and promised us security from counter-insurgency and tribal fighting.”

  • HintOfLime
    HintOfLime

    Can somebody get Shamus in here?

    This thread needs a monkey's touch (beyond Perry's).

    - Lime

  • HintOfLime
    HintOfLime

    The difference between science and religion is that when a scientific hoax is perpetuated, science is the one that recognizes and exposes it.

    In religion, when there is a hoax... who can tell?

    - Lime

  • Perry
    Perry
    The difference between science and religion is that when a scientific hoax is perpetuated, science is the one that recognizes and exposes it.

    THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THE LAST CULT WE WERE ALL IN CLAIMED !! What the heck does that prove? Nothing. You are making my point here.

    I'd like to meet that Sokal character at a party. That was brilliant.

  • HintOfLime
    HintOfLime

    So prove it. Demonstrate that it was the CHURCH that exposed the above claims as false, and not science itself.

    If science is readily exposing it's own faults - faster than any other discipline - then you have no point.

    Article 1: Sokal announced (in a different paper) - Not science - admitted hoax.

    Article 2: "non-reviewed" paper - Not Science to begin with

    Article 3: ALL your "references" are broken.... Wikipedia article (which you stole) fills in the details of an ongoing controversy.

    - Lime

  • Perry
    Perry

    Hint o Lime: You got a new god with about the same success record as your last. Meet the new boss - same as the old boss.

    Hockey Stick Hoax

    The Hockey Stick Hoax [1] was perpetrated by Michael Mann in the form of a fraudulent [2] reconstruction of the Earth 's atmosphere temperature created by Michael Mann from various proxies such as tree rings, superimposed on the record of thermometer readings from ground-based weather stations. The proxy estimates go back 1,000 years, while the thermometer readings date from 1850. It was used to justify the anthropogenic global warming theory (AGW), but the fraud was exposed by two Canadian statistics experts. Mann's graph, which was shaped like a hockey stick, portrayed temperatures as steadily declining since medieval times and then sharply rising in the last century and a half. Notably, his reconstruction fueled claims that 1998 and following years had the highest temperatures in 1,000 years.

    Michael Mann's hockey stick chart was obviously false. Because of its deceitful appearance, many scientists protested Mann's graph and the data behind it. However, Mann initially refused to reveal any of his data or methods - even though his work was supported by the U.S. government - which made it exceedingly difficult for other scientists to replicate his work.

    • In the case of the Mann et al [1998,1999] study, used for the IPCC's 'hockey stick'  graph, Mann was initially unable to remember where the data was located, then provided inaccurate data, then provided a new version of the data which was inconsistent with previously published material, etc. The National Post has recently reported on my experience as this unfolded. [3]

    Eventually, McIntyre and McKitrick learned enough about Mann's data and methods to discover where he went wrong. But the political climate made it very difficult for the correct information to find a publisher.

    Climate Gate

    The establishment’s peer review process is one that subjects an author’s scientific research to the scrutiny of other experts in the same field of research. An author typically submits their research to a recognized peer review publication, and this publisher then sends the article to a select group of peers for critical review. The peer review literature is a lot like the mainstream media. It’s an old system where the spaces on its pages are guarded by a very select group of gatekeepers. It’s a control system of sorts – an elite group is the decision maker that designates which papers are to be, or not to be, considered serious.

    As Climategate has shown, this process became compromised – causing an instability. As seen in the leaked emails, many within the climate establishment were interrelated and working together to ensure their message of global warming wasn’t diluted . There were even desires to redefine the peer review literature to punish journals that published skeptic’s papers.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit