The new normal // documentary

[Mawsley]

History.

Galileo did (allegedly) have a problem - he wrote 'Two New Sciences' under house arrest due to not agreeing with the 'acknowldged experts' at the time. The fact that we have hindsight on this doesn't change that?

Depends on whether you consider their equivalent to Stanton Glantz and Martin McKee “experts of the time”

His contemporaries are who you could actually describe as experts.

Tycho Brahe had been diligently cataloging the movement of heavenly bodies, Kepler built on that to form laws of planetary motion. Maths is the purest truth. They were experts - to the extent that Kepler had to bin his concept of divine shapes to describe orbits.

It’s not about hindsight, it’s about examining actual evidence.

 

[Mawsley]

For the benefit of the 3,421 of you now fascinated by Tycho Brahe and Johannes Kepler - I recommend:

 

[Crewella]

Depends on whether you consider their equivalent to Stanton Glantz and Martin McKee “experts of the time”

His contemporaries are who you could actually describe as experts.

Tycho Brahe had been diligently cataloging the movement of heavenly bodies, Kepler built on that to form laws of planetary motion. Maths is the purest truth. They were experts - to the extent that Kepler had to bin his concept of divine shapes to describe orbits.

It’s not about hindsight, it’s about examining actual evidence.

Tycho Brahe had to rethink too. But I think we're at cross purposes here. It wasn't viewed as 'the truth' at the time, to many it was just another theory, and to some a dangerous theory.

And therein lies the problem. Maths is only the purest truth to those that understand it. The rest of us are as reliant on 'the experts' to explain it to us as people used to be on priests to explain religion. Hopefully you choose your 'expert' wisely ........ but the bottom line is that for most people it's all a bit faith-based?

 

[Mawsley]

Tycho Brahe had to rethink too. But I think we're at cross purposes here. It wasn't viewed as 'the truth' at the time, to many it was just another theory, and to some a dangerous theory.
And therein lies the problem. Maths is only the purest truth to those that understand it. The rest of us are as reliant on 'the experts' to explain it to us as people used to be on priests to explain religion. Hopefully you choose your 'expert' wisely ........ but the bottom line is that for most people it's all a bit faith-based?

My earlier point about basing your opinion on respected experts right there.

You can’t say ‘But priests in the Dark Ages used to be called experts’ to excuse people relying on @BasedBrenda1971. People have to learn to own their limitations, they need to fight their inner Dunning Kruger desires. This isn’t the dark ages. You don’t need to know maths to find out who are the respected experts these days, or to discover who their detractors are and why they disagree. I believe what you are doing now is what the hip kids call whataboutism.

People chose their experts these days simply on the back of them saying things they want to hear. That’s the point I break the swears out.

Anyway, Kepler - his Mum was a whore and his shit Dad fucked off all the time to go fight, leaving her to shag in the pub. Then he was sent to a monastery where every single monk hated him. How much of a wanker do you have to be to be hated by monks?

 

[Mawsley]

I think I’m probably hated by monks.

 

[HAZZA1962]

Tycho Brahe had to rethink too. But I think we're at cross purposes here. It wasn't viewed as 'the truth' at the time, to many it was just another theory, and to some a dangerous theory.

And therein lies the problem. Maths is only the purest truth to those that understand it. The rest of us are as reliant on 'the experts' to explain it to us as people used to be on priests to explain religion. Hopefully you choose your 'expert' wisely ........ but the bottom line is that for most people it's all a bit faith-based?

Your fighting a losing battle Crew !!!

 

[Crewella]

My earlier point about basing your opinion on respected experts right there.

This is hilarious - I think it proves just the opposite - at the time Galileo was so 'respected' that he was under arrest!

I suspect we'll have to agree to disagree!

 

[Crewella]

My earlier point about basing your opinion on respected experts right there.

You can’t say ‘But priests in the Dark Ages used to be called experts’ to excuse people relying on @BasedBrenda1971. People have to learn to own their limitations, they need to fight their inner Dunning Kruger desires. This isn’t the dark ages. You don’t need to know maths to find out who are the respected experts these days, or to discover who their detractors are and why they disagree. I believe what you are doing now is what the hip kids call whataboutism.

I'm not, I'm just not wanting to devalue the currency of asking questions. I suspect you and I might well agree on the same experts .......... because of the quality of the answers we'd get?

 

[Mawsley]

This is hilarious - I think it proves just the opposite - at the time Galileo was so 'respected' that he was under arrest!

I suspect we'll have to agree to disagree!

No. You are misappropriating the definition of respected and using a 16thC episode as a distraction to which I only responded because it’s one of the areas of science I adore and replied on the phone while watching a football match and drinking beer.

He was acknowledged, that term better?, as an expert by people who were also experts. He wasn’t considered an expert by people who opposed his facts for religious reasons.

My point is that you have to determine who is an expert and who is on a religious quest.

 

[Mawsley]

I'm not, I'm just not wanting to devalue the currency of asking questions. I suspect you and I might well agree on the same experts .......... because of the quality of the answers we'd get?

I’m only ever about the evidence.

It’s why I was belligerent in the Brexit thread and why I’ve continued to ask for evidence of benefits.

Like John Peel, I only want to hear something new