Now is the time at SDA when we juxtapose!
Washington Post, 2005 – “[Bush’s] comments drew sharp criticism yesterday from opponents of the theory, who said there is no scientific evidence to support it and no educational basis for teaching it. Much of the scientific establishment says that intelligent design is not a tested scientific theory but a cleverly marketed effort to introduce religious — especially Christian — thinking to students. Opponents say that church groups and other interest groups are pursuing political channels instead of first building support through traditional scientific review.”
TIME, 2009 – While most scientists would write off the [Large Hadron Collider] event as a freak accident, two esteemed physicists have formulated a theory that suggests an alternative explanation: perhaps a time-traveling bird was sent from the future to sabotage the experiment. Bech Nielsen of the Niels Bohr Institute in Copenhagen and Masao Ninomiya of the Yukawa Institute for Theoretical Physics in Kyoto, Japan, have published several papers over the past year arguing that the CERN experiment may be the latest in a series of physics research projects whose purposes are so unacceptable to the universe that they are doomed to fail, subverted by the future. […] The theory as to why the universe rejects the creation of Higgs bosons is based on complex mathematics, but, Nielsen tells TIME, “you could explain it [simply] by saying that God, in inverted commas, or nature, hates the Higgs and tries to avoid them.”
h/t Revnant Dream
100 comments of troll feeding? Give it a rest people.
Bech Nielsen is trying to explain a -theory- about an effect that occurs in four or five dimensions. Presumably he’s done the math. Its an interesting idea from a novelty point of view. Probably wrong, but then most theories are. At least he’s thinking.
Phanton:
Wasn’t the derivatives market based on faith in a can’t-fail mathematical formula?
At least, in the Gospel according to Allan Greenspan.
Phantom, I thought this conversation went pretty well. Yes there was some passive flame-baiting, but full on trolling definitely did not occur.
syf, just because somebody has “done the math” doesn’t mean their theory is right. It means they have constructed an argument that is internally consistent.
Then they go measure the thing in question and see if the math matches reality. Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn’t. When it does, the bridge stays up, the airplane flies, or the vaccine doesn’t kill anybody.
BTW, the derivatives -market- is doing very well. They sell to all sides at a tidy profit. Its derivatives speculators that have taken a kicking of late. And deservedly so, IMHO.
I may yet take a big fat deletion key to this entire thread. What part of “this is not a debating forum” do you people not understand? Go find your own bandwidth.