News:

There is also the shroud of turin, which verifies Jesus in a new way than other evidences.

Main Menu

Toying with an idea...

Started by hackenslash, February 08, 2022, 10:19:53 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Tank

Hack

Billy started this thread Is the Earth really round?. It caused such a shit storm of debate we had to make a new area of the forum to accommodate it. The question actually had nothing to do with the shape of the Earth but everything to do with how do we know what we know? Billy does not contend the Earth is flat but it is a subject very close to his heart and he has considered it a lot.
If religions were TV channels atheism is turning the TV off.
"Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt." ― Richard P. Feynman
'It is said that your life flashes before your eyes just before you die. That is true, it's called Life.' - Terry Pratchett
Remember, your inability to grasp science is not a valid argument against it.

hackenslash

Quote from: billy rubin on February 10, 2022, 05:58:00 PM

So, I need a little help, hopefully with some discussion. I need examples of common knowledge that aren't true, and examples of common sense that isn't sensible. The more common the examples, the better.


so ^^^this is what youre looking for?

In essence, yes, though what I'm really looking for are examples of things forwarded as common sense. Does that make sense?
There is no more formidable or insuperable barrier to knowledge than the certainty you already possess it.

hackenslash

Quote from: Tank on February 10, 2022, 06:13:50 PM
Hack

Billy started this thread Is the Earth really round?. It caused such a shit storm of debate we had to make a new area of the forum to accommodate it. The question actually had nothing to do with the shape of the Earth but everything to do with how do we know what we know? Billy does not contend the Earth is flat but it is a subject very close to his heart and he has considered it a lot.

It sounds like we might have some common ground. How we know what we know, and the distinction between things we only think we know and things we can actually demonstrate are the things I spend most of my time thinking about, and that's really the thrust here. It's in the nature of an exploration of the territory and seeing if I have my ducks sufficiently lined up to attempt what I'm thinking of.
There is no more formidable or insuperable barrier to knowledge than the certainty you already possess it.

billy rubin

Quote from: Tank on February 10, 2022, 06:13:50 PM
Hack

Billy started this thread Is the Earth really round?. It caused such a shit storm of debate we had to make a new area of the forum to accommodate it. The question actually had nothing to do with the shape of the Earth but everything to do with how do we know what we know? Billy does not contend the Earth is flat but it is a subject very close to his heart and he has considered it a lot.

well i dont contend it but i dont really know that the earth isnt flat. i know that england exists because thats where i kissed a girl for the first time.

and she was canadian of all things. but canada and america and england could all have been on a flat earth.

i still need to get a time lapse camera to photograph the southern night sky. that would confirm or disprove the usual flat earth model. then i can get thrown out of the flat earth socoety forum again.

but i am willing to assume that a roundcearth is a reasonable working hypothesis evenbthough i cant attest to it on my own.

wr always are so assured about things we know, when we really know very little about most everything.


Given that most people struggle with legible handwriting already, the added complexity of cursive is an unnecessary burden. It is more practical and efficient to stick to standard print writing.

billy rubin

Quote from: hackenslash on February 10, 2022, 06:25:23 PM
Quote from: billy rubin on February 10, 2022, 05:58:00 PM

So, I need a little help, hopefully with some discussion. I need examples of common knowledge that aren't true, and examples of common sense that isn't sensible. The more common the examples, the better.


so ^^^this is what youre looking for?

In essence, yes, though what I'm really looking for are examples of things forwarded as common sense. Does that make sense?

what does forward mean?

do you mran things that people teach randomly to subsequent generations, like cutting the end off the roast before putting it in the oven separately?

or common knowledge things that are false, like the coriolis effect making water go down the plug hole differently in northern and southern hemispheres?


Given that most people struggle with legible handwriting already, the added complexity of cursive is an unnecessary burden. It is more practical and efficient to stick to standard print writing.

Mr. B

Quote from: hackenslash on February 08, 2022, 10:19:53 PM
Scientific/logical/factual pet peeves are usually a good thrust for a topic, so feel free to just vent about your pet peeves as long as they're relevant here. All grist to the mill, as they say in the Dales...

Here is a pet peeve of mine. Something I don't understand logically even though "science" says it's so.

Second hand smoke from cigarettes is more dangerous to non smokers than smoking cigarettes. When my wife was pregnant with our first child I asked her doctor point blank about my smoking and secondhand smoke and how dangerous is second hand smoke to my wife and child. He grinned. And gave a stock answer. Smoking is bad, m'kay.

Yeah, I agree. Smoking is bad. My pet peeve is the assertion that secondhand smoke is more deadly to non smokers. I'm like, I'm smoking the cigarette. I am ALSO breathing in my own secondhand smoke. How is secondhand smoke MORE dangerous to people who do not smoke than it is to me? I'm just going on memory here so maybe my memory is not an accurate reflection of reality but the question in my mind has been "how can secondhand smoke be more dangerous to people who don't smoke than it is to smokers because, 1. the smoker is also breathing in the secondhand smoke and 2. The smoke has been filtered twice before it hits the non smokers lungs.

This perplexed me in the late 90's early 2000's. I remember getting irritated that our local mall wouldn't let us just walk around smoking anywhere we wanted and established designated indoor smoking areas that were just benches in the middle of the walkway. You could still smoke indoors but you couldn't just walk around doing it.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" - Evelyn Beatrice Hall

hackenslash

Quote from: billy rubin on February 11, 2022, 12:04:09 AM
or common knowledge things that are false, like the coriolis effect making water go down the plug hole differently in northern and southern hemispheres?

Exactly like that, yes. In fact, that's a stupendous exemplar.
There is no more formidable or insuperable barrier to knowledge than the certainty you already possess it.

hackenslash

Quote from: Mr. B on February 11, 2022, 12:47:43 AM
Quote from: hackenslash on February 08, 2022, 10:19:53 PM
Scientific/logical/factual pet peeves are usually a good thrust for a topic, so feel free to just vent about your pet peeves as long as they're relevant here. All grist to the mill, as they say in the Dales...

Here is a pet peeve of mine. Something I don't understand logically even though "science" says it's so.

Second hand smoke from cigarettes is more dangerous to non smokers than smoking cigarettes. When my wife was pregnant with our first child I asked her doctor point blank about my smoking and secondhand smoke and how dangerous is second hand smoke to my wife and child. He grinned. And gave a stock answer. Smoking is bad, m'kay.

Yeah, I agree. Smoking is bad. My pet peeve is the assertion that secondhand smoke is more deadly to non smokers. I'm like, I'm smoking the cigarette. I am ALSO breathing in my own secondhand smoke. How is secondhand smoke MORE dangerous to people who do not smoke than it is to me? I'm just going on memory here so maybe my memory is not an accurate reflection of reality but the question in my mind has been "how can secondhand smoke be more dangerous to people who don't smoke than it is to smokers because, 1. the smoker is also breathing in the secondhand smoke and 2. The smoke has been filtered twice before it hits the non smokers lungs.

This perplexed me in the late 90's early 2000's. I remember getting irritated that our local mall wouldn't let us just walk around smoking anywhere we wanted and established designated indoor smoking areas that were just benches in the middle of the walkway. You could still smoke indoors but you couldn't just walk around doing it.

Good peeve, not least because it's a myth.

The argument goes that, because most of what you inhale is likely filtered, the smoke being put in the air is unfiltered. In reality, there's almost no difference, and the smoker is always at higher risk than the passive smoker because of greater exposure.

I think part of the problem is the way it's often phrased even by those who should know better. You see things like 'the risk for those around them is 30% higher', which is ambiguous AF. 30% higher than for the smoker? 30% higher than had they not been exposed?

Properly, the risk is similar per exposure, whether a smoker or not. It's purely statistical based on repeated exposure to particulates. Toxicology isn't affected by method of exposure as a simple matter of logic.
There is no more formidable or insuperable barrier to knowledge than the certainty you already possess it.

billy rubin

#38
i have one. it is commonly taught that eratosthenes proved that the earth was round.

this is false. eratosthenes merely calculated a circumference, based on a preexisting belief that the earth was round, which he held for other reasons.

id have to check again, but when i took his protocol and crunched some numbers, i found that his results are perfectly consistent with a flat earth and a sun orbiting the north pole at a constant altitude of 536 miles.

iirc


Given that most people struggle with legible handwriting already, the added complexity of cursive is an unnecessary burden. It is more practical and efficient to stick to standard print writing.

hackenslash

Time was I'd have shredded that, but I have no appetite for the fight you're clearly looking for. I'd rather abandon the thread, frankly. No mood for bollocks.
There is no more formidable or insuperable barrier to knowledge than the certainty you already possess it.

billy rubin

#40
hmm.

no fight intended, my friend.


Given that most people struggle with legible handwriting already, the added complexity of cursive is an unnecessary burden. It is more practical and efficient to stick to standard print writing.

Tank

Quote from: hackenslash on February 11, 2022, 05:36:39 PM
Time was I'd have shredded that, but I have no appetite for the fight you're clearly looking for. I'd rather abandon the thread, frankly. No mood for bollocks.

Hack. Billy is not looking for a fight. It really isn't his style at all.
If religions were TV channels atheism is turning the TV off.
"Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt." ― Richard P. Feynman
'It is said that your life flashes before your eyes just before you die. That is true, it's called Life.' - Terry Pratchett
Remember, your inability to grasp science is not a valid argument against it.

Tank

If religions were TV channels atheism is turning the TV off.
"Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt." ― Richard P. Feynman
'It is said that your life flashes before your eyes just before you die. That is true, it's called Life.' - Terry Pratchett
Remember, your inability to grasp science is not a valid argument against it.

Mr. B

#43
There are quite a few ideas being tossed around here but there is one common thread connecting them. Common sense is not so common and it sometimes changes based on new discoveries in science. Most people are reluctant to change so maybe they continue to believe that you will have 7 years bad luck if you break a mirror. Or some people may still be wary of black cats crossing their paths. Or hesitant to inject a brand new anti viral chemical engeneered to stimulate their body's mRNA response. Or question the age of the earth based on soft tissues found in relatively poor fossil specimens.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0_2Wq9Aos4

Are chicken eggs good to eat or not?
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" - Evelyn Beatrice Hall

Tank

Another thought. Could 'Old wives tales' be considered common sense? And is another term for Common Sense, Received Wisdom?
If religions were TV channels atheism is turning the TV off.
"Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt." ― Richard P. Feynman
'It is said that your life flashes before your eyes just before you die. That is true, it's called Life.' - Terry Pratchett
Remember, your inability to grasp science is not a valid argument against it.