Until science understands how bicycles work I refuse to acknowledge their existence   



A few more here:

Liked those 

I kind of like that we invented the bike but don't know exactly how it works.

Number 12 on the second video - the moving rocks. I thought that had been explained. It's been years since I last heard or saw anything about them. One theory is that it's to do with heating and cooling. One side nearer the hot Sun expands more than the side in shadow. When it's night the expanded side contracts and pulls the cooler side with it. In this fashion they move around.

Yeah they are good aren't they

I've no doubt science will answer or might have already answered some of them already but as for the ones it can't answer, well I remain open minded.

Science still has a long way to go.

The question I would like answered is:

What is Human Consciousness ?

Once we figure that out, AI will surpass us, Data. Of that I have no doubts.

Well we all know what conciousness is, we just have a problem defining it. 

Quote from: Freddy on November 25, 2014, 18:12:52 PM
Well we all know what conciousness is, we just have a problem defining it. 

Point taken 

We could put together some ideas on conciousness. To me it's things like this :

Self awareness.
Understanding our thoughts.
Having an impact on the outside world either in a very small way or something large.
Knowing we exist.
Recognising when we are being communicated with and understanding (or not) it.
Experience(s).

I'll stop, I think those are my main ones.

I'm struggling to add to that list, it seems to be well thought through. 

For now here is a link to the Wikipedia page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consciousness

Science is the best way we have found to expand our island of knowledge. As it expands, our shoreline of questions gets larger. In the past, less was unknown 'cos we didn't know how to ask the questions. In the future we will know more but have even more questions that we haven't learnt to ask yet.

Science is not to know everything. It is a process to stop us fooling ourselves. It is a way of working out what questions to ask.

Science can also involve dreaming up new ideas and theories, they all come from the inner depths of the human mind, unfortunately science doesn't understand the human mind.

So you could say science doesn't know it's own origins. 

Try not to think too hard on that 

Human imagination dreams up the ways science can go. Science is the method to prove if they are real or not.

So Snowy, where did Science come from 

Was is not dreamt up by humans ?

You really want to get existential on me. I'm trying to ground this conversation.

Are there any objective thoughts? Does maths exist in its own right or is it a construct of the human mind? Can we ever really "know" anything? If the human brain is a biological computer, then, in theory, any suitably complex Turing machine should be able to emulate human conscience.

There are quite possibly an infinite amount of planets. Only a finite number (1?) of these have life. Infinity divided by a finite number is as near to zero as makes no odds so anyone you may meet from time to time is just a figment of your imagination. (DNA)

Science is the (dreamt up?) method of testing the universe and asking the right questions (via trial and error) so as to not believe in opinion. Science CAN answer anything but will never be complete so can't answer EVERYTHING. As our knowledge base grows so does our understanding of our ignorance. Science is not a thing, it is a method.

Well I'm kind of messing with you Snowy and trying to put some original thoughts out there. Good post btw   

So Science is a "method" dreamt up by the human mind, we agree that the mind exists and yes I stick to the dreamt up.

Thinking, thoughts, dreams are all part of the mind, who is to say what came from what bit ?  Science can't answer that.

Scientists have often mentioned the "eureka" moment but can't explain how it happens, it would seem that there are parts of our minds that only the subconscious can explore, occasionally little bits of information get through to our consciousness. I believe Einstein is a prime example, ok I admit Einstein was a philosopher of science and not a scientist before you pick me up on that. 

Anyway, science needs more eureka moments to answer some of the questions it still can't. Tiss all I'm saying.   

I don't really see science as something that was dreamt up.

Science evolved (and is still doing so) from like minded people who had solid ideas about describing the world and understanding what's in it. Sure the ideas have to come from somewhere, but like Snowy says and I agree; science is a method.

Science has taken hundreds, if not thousands, of years to develop to where it is now. It wasn't just dreamt up over night and is not some whimsical fantasy. The ideas are grounded by the things we record and observe in reality. And these things need to be demonstrable and proven to be accepted as what we see as true of the universe at that time.

I say at that time because things change and science doesn't always get it right. Things often get re-thought when new evidence comes to light. Just think of the Earth orbiting the Sun and not the other way around. Evidence is the watchword here.

But yes, the ideas have to come from somewhere, but the important distinction over mysticism is that those ideas cannot just be blindly accepted as fact - they have to earn it via thorough experimentation and other ways of proving that they are true.

Maybe some scientist woke up one morning after a particularly good dream that explained black holes. That's all very well and good, but it's not the dream itself that draws the truth. It's what he does with that idea. In other words; the dream is not the proof.

Science still has a lot of questions to answer though - but it has never claimed to explain it all. Mystics and the like can accept any old explanation and to be honest; they are the ones that have been dreaming things up and that can be a problem.