Richard Carrier solves the mystery of the universe

lesliedellow · May 9, 2016

HitchSlap said:
Perhaps they're a bit less close minded than you?

Perhaps they have got better things to do with their time.

Loudmouth · May 9, 2016

lesliedellow said:
I suspect that they would fix it by depositing it in the nearest waste paper bin.

A possibility that Carrier fully embraces, and expects.

FrumiousBandersnatch · May 9, 2016

Seems to me his approach here is an example of a good way to learn - ask an expert to explain in layman's terms why your probably naive idea won't fly. In the long term you learn more from having your errors explained than from being wrong and thinking you're right, or being laughed at. If nothing else, he'll probably learn that the subject is far more complex than he thought.

There's an important difference between inexpert people who think they're right, and inexpert people who want to know why they're probably wrong - it's known as the Dunning-Kruger effect.

lesliedellow · May 9, 2016

FrumiousBandersnatch said:
Seems to me his approach here is an example of a good way to learn - ask an expert to explain in layman's terms why your probably naive idea won't fly. In the long term you learn more from having your errors explained than from being wrong and thinking you're right, or being laughed at. If nothing else, he'll probably learn that the subject is far more complex than he thought.

If he wants to learn, a Bachelor's degree is the way to go. At the end of it he will stand some chance of being able to write a paper which isn't gobbledegook.

FrumiousBandersnatch · May 9, 2016

lesliedellow said:
If he wants to learn, a Bachelor's degree is the way to go. At the end of it he will stand some chance of being able to write a paper which isn't gobbledegook.

Well that's true, but I expect he considers himself a busy man already, and a Batchelor's degree probably wouldn't cut it anyway.

Maybe he has a romantic notion of himself as a renaissance man, effortlessly brilliant, who knows; perhaps he's just a prat... but if an idea occurs to you that seems clever but is outside your field of expertise, a sensible way to learn whether it's right or wrong and why, is to ask an expert. Simples.

pat34lee · May 9, 2016

lesliedellow said:
http://richardcarrier.blogspot.co.uk/2011/06/calling-all-physicists.html

I have got a brain, or at least there seems to be something attached to the other end of my optic nerve. However, without at least a PhD in physics, I wouldn't want the job of coming up with a quantum theory of gravity.

You would be better off learning the math and leaving
the rest of the indoctrination programs that make up
most doctorates today. Then again, without being fully
indoctrinated, you might not believe the logical fallacies
that are the basis of most theories.

lesliedellow · May 10, 2016

pat34lee said:
You would be better off learning the math and leaving
the rest of the indoctrination programs that make up
most doctorates today. Then again, without being fully
indoctrinated, you might not believe the logical fallacies
that are the basis of most theories.

I have already got the maths, thanks.

Derek Meyer · May 10, 2016

pat34lee said:
You would be better off learning the math and leaving
the rest of the indoctrination programs that make up
most doctorates today.

This one is funny. Yeah, all those Doctorates in Geology and Crystallography and Chemistry and Physics and every single form of the natural sciences from the US to England to Russia to Iran to Argentina to South Africa all are indoctrinated. What a great way to start a conversation.

HitchSlap · May 10, 2016

lesliedellow said:
Perhaps they have got better things to do with their time.

Time will tell.

You seem pretty bitter about it though.

pat34lee · May 10, 2016

Derek Meyer said:
This one is funny. Yeah, all those Doctorates in Geology and Crystallography and Chemistry and Physics and every single form of the natural sciences from the US to England to Russia to Iran to Argentina to South Africa all are indoctrinated. What a great way to start a conversation.

At least it begins with the truth. How much
evolution and old earth science do they cram
into each of those doctorates?

pat34lee · May 10, 2016

lesliedellow said:
I have already got the maths, thanks.

Nice.

Hoghead1 · May 10, 2016

pat34lee said:
At least it begins with the truth. How much
evolution and old earth science do they cram
into each of those doctorates?

Obviously, you have no understanding or respect for higher education. Your post is very much in line with the current fad, which is to see a conspiracy anywhere and everywhere.

lesliedellow · May 10, 2016

Hoghead1 said:
Obviously, you have no understanding or respect for higher education. Your post is very much in line with the current fad, which is to see a conspiracy anywhere and everywhere.

If you are a creationist, you haven't got much choice but to see conspiracies everywhere. After all, the entire scienfific establishment is conspiring to hide the truth.

joshua 1 9 · May 11, 2016

lesliedellow said:
I just love this. As clear a case of the Dunning-Kruger effect as could be wished for:

http://skeptischism.com/atheismneat/2013/07/24/carriers-theory-of-quantum-incoherence/

Having sorted out the historicity of Jesus, it seems the great man has decided to lend his services to cosmology now.

If they can get rid of the id why can't they get rid of the ego?

Loudmouth · May 11, 2016

lesliedellow said:
If he wants to learn, a Bachelor's degree is the way to go. At the end of it he will stand some chance of being able to write a paper which isn't gobbledegook.

There sure is a lot of consternation about an innocuous blog post that simply demonstrates a healthy dose of curiosity and interest in physics.

leftrightleftrightleft · May 11, 2016

lesliedellow said:
I just love this. As clear a case of the Dunning-Kruger effect as could be wished for:

http://skeptischism.com/atheismneat/2013/07/24/carriers-theory-of-quantum-incoherence/

Having sorted out the historicity of Jesus, it seems the great man has decided to lend his services to cosmology now.

Everything in this thread thus far presented by you is an ad hominem attack against Carrier.

If you wish to tear down his arguments, then point out where he is wrong rather than implying he is too low on the totem pole to come up with something interesting.

Furthermore, no matter how whacky someone's theory is, if he states very openly that he wants to hear criticism from leading researchers in the field, then he's approaching the subject in a good way. If someone has a whacky theory and does not want it falsified, then you should be suspicious. Carrier seems to have no problem having his theory critiqued and falsified and would seem to enjoy the learning that comes from it.

HitchSlap · May 11, 2016

lesliedellow said:
If he wants to learn, a Bachelor's degree is the way to go. At the end of it he will stand some chance of being able to write a paper which isn't gobbledegook.

Salty.

pat34lee · May 11, 2016

lesliedellow said:
If you are a creationist, you haven't got much choice but to see conspiracies everywhere. After all, the entire scienfific establishment is conspiring to hide the truth.

And for evolutionists, the choice is whether
God is incompetent or a liar, since most of
what he said about his creation is wrong.

Ophiolite · May 12, 2016

leftrightleftrightleft said:
Everything in this thread thus far presented by you is an ad hominem attack against Carrier.

I notice that Leslie has received zero support for his assertions thus far. So, if you don't mind Leslie, I'll weigh in on your side. (Warning: many people later regret having me on their side.)

I have a number of notions. I hesitate to call them hypotheses and they are certainly not theories. I have a sound education, rank high in IQ tests (which at least demonstrates an aptitude for IQ tests.) and have several decades of engineering and business experience. I am recognised by my peers as being very logical, objective and a sound critical thinker.

I mention these points not to blow my own trumpet, but as relevant background information. If we accept that this description is accurate would it be reasonable for me to present these notions to experts for their review? My belief is that it would be inappropriate. Although these notions fall within or immediately adjacent to the fields in which I graduated with an honours degree I do not feel, given their radical nature, that it would be appropriate to waste the time of a professional by asking them to review the notions.

It appears as if Carrier, with little if any more grounding than I, is willing to place this imposition on the professionals. Despite his protestations that he expects to be proven wrong it seems to me presumptuous to, nevertheless, trouble the professionals to explain in what way his thinking is mistaken. My own approach is to continue to expand my knowledge and to test my notions against current theory and observation. This seems to me a more sensible and respectful approach.

Leslie, does this broadly reflect your reservations about Carrier's approach, or am I in some remote no-man's land twixt the two "sides"?

lesliedellow · May 12, 2016

Ophiolite said:
Leslie, does this broadly reflect your reservations about Carrier's approach, or am I in some remote no-man's land twixt the two "sides"?

That is roughly my position. It is one thing for a layman to have an interest in physics, but it takes more than the ordinary amount of arrogance to suppose that, without any training in the subject, you are going to achieve something which defeated not only Einstein, but has, so far, defeated every PhD physicist since.

Richard Carrier solves the mystery of the universe

Member

Contributor

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Messianic

Member

Well-Known Member

PROUDLY PRIMATE

Messianic

Messianic

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Contributor

Well-Known Member

PROUDLY PRIMATE

Messianic

Recalcitrant Procrastinating Ape

Member

Similar threads