Most of the threads I have made regarding scientific topics have failed because we all come from different backgrounds, making it hard to find a common topic we can actually debate about. But, looking over the types of people the post in the WEPR, I still feel like there is a general interest in science, so, following Moegreche's lead, this is going to be more of a philosophical discussion.
Feel free to join in even if you have no formal scientific education, everyone's opinion can contribute something worthy here. This is intended to be more of an opinion based thread, I'm interesting in what other people think about science. Feel free to make a new thread, however, if you want to talk about how science is different from religion. While it might come up here and there in this topic, religion is really beyond the scope of this thread.
Okay, now that you've read the fine print, lets get down to business. The first questions I would like to address are these:
1) Where do you think science comes from?
2) What is a typical scientist? How do you think one becomes a scientist?
I would to focus on current science for these questions, by the way. Current being the last 20 years.
Do you really claim that we know every edge of the universe (astronomy), every little plant and all their functions (botany, which is biology btw (just saying as you seemed to think biology still had a future in your previous post)) and every possible chemical compound, their functions and reactions?
Seriously, go talk to actual astronomers, biologists and chemists, they'll tell you we're far from having discovered everything.
What's the point if we know that there's another planet of star next to pluto, or if there's a shift in the milky way? I DON'T! Instead of funding people like this, we should be funding a cure for cancer. There's NO WAY that in this day and age we can't find a cure. They all worked hard to find a cure for aids to save all.... forget that, no hater comments. But still, They're just making too much money treating people for cancer that they don't want to find a cure. But it's not just cancer, there are millions of REAL problems we could have some extra work on, instead of studying about how the cells in a seed respond to different chemicals. Let's focus on here and now, and making this country a better place to live.
instead of studying about how the cells in a seed respond to different chemicals.
Studies like that are more prone to finding cures than you may realize. Also, as Emp said, all relevant sciences are contributing something to the betterment of society; that's why they're considered relevant in the first place. I think, and to use a juvenile example, if someone came up with the idea for the microwave because he left a chocolate bar in his pocket, then there's nothing wrong with any sort of focused, specific research.
Good lord, no wonder KnightDeclan has disdain for science--he doesn't understand the implications of research and why its important.
What's the point if we know that there's another planet of star next to pluto, or if there's a shift in the milky way?
You want to someday have the human race explore farther in space with advanced spaceships to settle on these satellites to mine ores to stimulate our economy? There you go. To achieve this, we need:
Microbiologists (study of micro organisms) Virologists (study of viruses) Mechanical Engineers Mathematicians Physicists Physicians Macrobiologists (or just plain Biologists) Naturalists (the people who provide additional evidence for the Theory of Evolution) Botanists
There's NO WAY that in this day and age we can't find a cure.
You know why in this day and age we can't?
--insignificant funding (sometimes they rely on private funding) --blockading schools with insistence on removing scientific courses from curriculum --excessive funding in areas (defense) which leaves less for what actually matters (NASA, General Scientific Research)
But it's not just cancer, there are millions of REAL problems we could have some extra work on
Do you know how to fix these millions of real problems? By researching sophisticated methods on how to solve them.
Good lord, no wonder KnightDeclan has disdain for science--he doesn't understand the implications of research and why its important.
He also flat out denies what information we do have. For example your argument about going further into space. He has stated that we've never been in space.
Yes we should stop funding those chemist who are possibly finding a cure for cancer so we can fund the finding of a cure for cancer.
Nooo Mage. Obbbbbviously Biologists and Archaeologists are the only scientists that can find out things we don't already know because science has yet to prove his version of God. Once they've done that, then there's nothing left for them to find.
Surely not including unmanned drones as well !? *cringes*
This would also include chemistry.
Oopsie. Yes! Chemistry! It's what goes into your pills you take every morning and evening. Big, fundamental part of searching for the cure to cancer, yet incredibly underfunded in comparison to other "ieces of the pie".
Instead of funding people like this, we should be funding a cure for cancer.
But the chemists who were studying molecules which could inhibit the demethylization of the DNA strand in cancer cells, and the botanists who were looking for copy-cat chemicals in the natural world all recoeved pink slips...
They all worked hard to find a cure for aids to save all.... forget that, no hater comments
Everyone else has everything covered...so my input would just be hammering in the nail that is shoved fully into the wood. But I do need to point this out. If you changed your mind in putting this comment in...Why leave in the part you have already type, which is enough for us to know what you are going to say?
