Scientific facts do not exist

[Into the Night]

Baking Bread is a science.

No, baking bread is simply baking bread. No science here.

 

[David Jeffrey Spetch]

Material energy exists in a flux of 3-modes (as per Vedanta):

Maintenance, Creation, destruction
[literally, Goodness, passion, ignorance. Sanskrit: Satva, Raja, Tamas]

All matter and energy transition and transmutes ceaselessly through
the "three modes" of material energy
[similar to Chinese Ying/Yang duality principle...but extended to three]

All the above is call "Manifest" energy.

The "un-Manifest" energy [as per Vedanta] has three aspects,
the "un-Manifest" energy is called "Sat-chit-ananda" [aka, eternal-conscious-blissful]

When all varigated phenomena is erased,
when all Space is erased,
when all time is erased . . .

A] there still exists the potential for "Three-Dimensions".

B] there still exists the potential for "Locomotion"

By my use of the appellation "Potential", I am saying that even in a situation devoid of matter & energy & time & Space . . . there is still Potential for "Three-Dimensions" along with "Locomotion" ---irregardless of who/what/how initiates creation or whether there is an absolute state that transcends material phenomena ---there exists as a pre-creation/substratum/pre-requisite meta-physical blank page that ALLOWS for even empty space to occupy itself before its creative play:

"Three-Dimensions" along with "Locomotion" lay fallow until it is utilised ---yet interestingly, never are these "3-Dimensions" along with "Locomotion" actually a manifest; they don't manifest as entities unto them selves and yet they underlie all potential possibilities.

You can't measure "Three-Dimensions" along with "Locomotion".
You can't make them under your control ---they are a nuetral state that allows even the void to come and go as epochs pass into oblivion again and again.

When all is erased there sits "Three-Dimensions" along with "Locomotion"; selflessly, or as the prime self?

C] there still exists the potential for "onomatopoeia"
[onomatopoeia = the naming of a thing or action by a vocal imitation of the sound associated with it (such as buzz or hiss). Onomatopoeia may also refer to the use of words whose sound suggests the sense.
from Gk. onomatopoiia "the making of a name or word" (in imitation of a sound associated with the thing being named), from onomatopoios, from onoma (gen. onomatos) "word, name" (see 'name') + a derivative of poiein "compose, make" (see 'poet').]

According to the Vedas the soul is part and parcel of the "Supreme-Soul".
The Grand surprise is the the "Supreme-Soul" is a Person ['Bhagavan' ('the possessor and source of all opulences')]. According to the Vedas the soul is a person. According to the Vedas the soul is active by nature ---so the buddhist sense of Nirvana as the "Goal of merging the soul into a state of non-being" is a myth borne of a lack of knowledge that the "nature of the soul(s)", of all living entities, is "Persona".

The life-force in all animate bodies is the precence of a "Soul", and that soul is striving birth-after-birth seeking the supreme soul ---this is the mystery of life.

The fact remains that it takes energy matter and time to re create energy and matter hence where even a so called soul, like anything else that exists comes from ~ an endless duration of constant change. So in other words you have no example of scientific fact and shared that irrelevant drivel for what purpose?!

 

[David Jeffrey Spetch]

Science is a process which gives rise to more likely hypotheses than any others, which are de facto 'facts' until other convincing hypotheses are raised. surely?

Hypothesis are not facts, they might lead to recognition of fact or falsification of hypothesis but are not facts.

 

[David Jeffrey Spetch]

No. It is not a process at all. Science is a set of falsifiable theories, not any fact.

The process of science verifies or falsifies theory as fact.

 

[David Jeffrey Spetch]

No. Science isn't facts. It isn't observations either. All observations are subject to the problems if phenomenology.

Science is just a set of theories. Falsifiable theories.

I don't even know why I take the time with you, you are deliberately retarded and I'm not a big fan of answering for others deliberate ignorance. The process of science is what leads to verification or falsification slow poke.

https://www.brighteon.com/36b271ea-9582-490d-9bba-641d2776bc3a

 

[David Jeffrey Spetch]

eh. im going with its a process, that does have to do with facts, sometimes.

this whole thread seems retarded tho.

why this need to separate facts from science. just seems gay and sets off my bullshit-dar.

Oh really, the more lies the merrier is not retarded in your book Hat but sharing the fact that there is no such thing as scientific fact you call retarded and after I took the time to answer a question you requested an answer too and stressed you really needed an answer. I guess I answered it much better than you anticipated ...

 

[David Jeffrey Spetch]

Baking Bread is a science.

Pathetic

No, baking bread is simply baking bread. No science here.

That's because bread (different types even) are successful formulas hence fact and not science. You might not admit it but I think you get it subliminally at least.

 

[Iolo/Penderyn]

Hypothesis are not facts, they might lead to recognition of fact or falsification of hypothesis but are not facts.

That's what the inverted commas mean. Hypotheses that have not been disproved over a fairly long period are the nearest we get to facts, ever.

 

[Scut Farkus]

Oh really, the more lies the merrier is not retarded in your book Hat but sharing the fact that there is no such thing as scientific fact you call retarded and after I took the time to answer a question you requested an answer too and stressed you really needed an answer. I guess I answered it much better than you anticipated ...

I just don't get your passion in this. it seems like it is a process, of observing, hypothesisizing, experimenting, calculating, refining, in ideas and matter.

what's the harm if I go through life thinking it's a process? a scientific fact process?

 

[Scut Farkus]

#scientificfact

 

[Scut Farkus]

thought experiment a:

if you had a kid, and it came home from school and said, " mommy/daddy, today I learned that facts aren't scientific!", would you feel good about that education?

 

[Into the Night]

The process of science verifies or falsifies theory as fact.

Nope. No theory is ever proven True. Science does not use supporting evidence at all.

 

[Into the Night]

I don't even know why I take the time with you, you are deliberately retarded and I'm not a big fan of answering for others deliberate ignorance. The process of science is what leads to verification or falsification slow poke.

...deleted unrelated link...

Insults are a fallacy, dude. Science has no proofs. No theory, whether a scientific one or not, it ever proven True. Science does not use supporting evidence. Only religions do that.

 

[Into the Night]

Pathetic



That's because bread (different types even) are successful formulas hence fact and not science. You might not admit it but I think you get it subliminally at least.

Baking bread is not a theory. It is simply baking bread.

 

[Into the Night]

That's what the inverted commas mean. Hypotheses that have not been disproved over a fairly long period are the nearest we get to facts, ever.

A hypothesis is not a theory, nor turns into a theory. They stem from theories, not the other way around. An example is the null hypothesis of a theory.

 

[Into the Night]

I just don't get your passion in this. it seems like it is a process, of observing, hypothesisizing, experimenting, calculating, refining, in ideas and matter.

what's the harm if I go through life thinking it's a process? a scientific fact process?

The harm is turning science into a religion. Only religions use supporting evidence, not science.

 

[Into the Night]

thought experiment a:

if you had a kid, and it came home from school and said, " mommy/daddy, today I learned that facts aren't scientific!", would you feel good about that education?

Yes.

 

[David Jeffrey Spetch]

That's what the inverted commas mean. Hypotheses that have not been disproved over a fairly long period are the nearest we get to facts, ever.

Either recognized as falsified or recognized as fact, almost (the process incomplete) doesn't qualify as fact.

 

[Into the Night]

Either recognized as falsified or recognized as fact, almost (the process incomplete) doesn't qualify as fact.

If something is recognized as fact, it is fact..by definition. The moment someone does not recognize the fact, it is no longer a fact. It becomes an argument.

Science has nothing to do with it.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

It is either a fact or a science of which science is a process that determines recognition of fact. Once verified or falsified as fact, it's no longer a science.

edited this in fyi "The harnessing of electricity was a science until harnessing electricity became a successful formula thus a fact we harnessed electricity thus no longer a science but a fact. From there what to do with the electricity developed successful formulas which became fact such as the light bulb, radio, television was no longer a science because it became fact. Each new design for each new tv, radio or light bulb for example became fact through a successful formula. You want to create a new television, the science is making a successful formula and once the formula is successful, it is no longer a science but a fact that from that point that the tv exists."

love

Primary Factual Fundamentalist World Class Activist
David Jeffrey Spetch
Ps. Be good, be strong!
Hamilton Ontario Canada

As a person educated in science I can say, without reservation, that this is one of the most wacked out and illogical examples of a circular reasoning logical fallacy I've ever seen. Jeffery...I'm sure your family and loved ones have told you this many times already but you really need to seek professional help.