The meaning and scope of science


JLM
#1
Just wondering what is the full impact of science on our lives. Is science the most important aspect? Does it trump other aspects such as logic or human tendencies?
 
JLM
#2
S.J. something of interest re your definition of scientific theories........................Theories may be good, bad, or indifferent. They may be well established by the factual evidence, or they may lack credibility....................an excerp from Definition of Scientific Theory
 
countryboy
#3
Quote: Originally Posted by JLMView Post

Just wondering what is the full impact of science on our lives. Is science the most important aspect? Does it trump other aspects such as logic or human tendencies?

Well, I just hated to see this one sitting here vacant. How about this?...

The application of science to the food industry has resulted in a deep, broad perversion of our food (I'm talking Canada and the U.S.) into things that are no longer as good for us as they once were. This application of science has found its way into many processed foods, animals, fruits & vegetables, and grains. We're looking at everything from very questionable genetically-modified plants all the way to over a hundred food additives derived from corn and found in many processed foods, to GMO corn itself, fed to cattle that shouldn't be eating it. Even that pretty jug of orange juice is a long way from orange juice, no matter how many nice words they put on the container. It's a looooong list of "food atrocities."

Why was it done? Bottom line results, of course.

What are the after effects? They're still piling up, but we might like to take a look at certain available stats and wonder why diabetes is on the rampage, as one clue.

I think it's a net negative impact on society when we talk about food and science in the same breath.
 
JLM
#4
Quote: Originally Posted by countryboyView Post

Well, I just hated to see this one sitting here vacant. How about this?...

The application of science to the food industry has resulted in a deep, broad perversion of our food (I'm talking Canada and the U.S.) into things that are no longer as good for us as they once were. This application of science has found its way into many processed foods, animals, fruits & vegetables, and grains. We're looking at everything from very questionable genetically-modified plants all the way to over a hundred food additives derived from corn and found in many processed foods, to GMO corn itself, fed to cattle that shouldn't be eating it. Even that pretty jug of orange juice is a long way from orange juice, no matter how many nice words they put on the container. It's a looooong list of "food atrocities."

Why was it done? Bottom line results, of course.


What are the after effects? They're still piling up, but we might like to take a look at certain available stats and wonder why diabetes is on the rampage, as one clue.

I think it's a net negative impact on society when we talk about food and science in the same breath.

I have no argument with that. It comes under the heading of "simple things being screwed up by people (who think they know more) complicating things"
 
countryboy
#5
Quote: Originally Posted by JLMView Post

I have no argument with that. It comes under the heading of "simple things being screwed up by people (who think they know more) complicating things"

I don't like what's happened with the food, but perhaps I would feel better about it if I could hear a qualified opinion from someone who is more educated and knowledgeable than me on the subject of science. You wouldn't happen to know anyone like that, would you?
 
talloola
#6
From what I have observed, diabetes is thriving and growing becausepeople eat too much, and in middle age become too fat.Most diabetes sufferers seem to be able to shake it if they lose weight,with exception of the younger folk who get it, of course, but evensome of them are too heavy, too out of shape, and eat all of thewrong foods. People have to be responsible for their own health, andnot blame everything on what is being done to the food we eat.I make it a bit of a habit, when waiting at grocery check out to havea look in some grocery carts and analyze what is in them, such awaste of money, and so many articles that are 'empty' foods, give yourheads a shake folks, eat real food that doesn't come prepared andhave a list of ingredients a mile long, you'll be much better off.And, get some excercise.Van Isle, you must be an expert at these observations.
 
countryboy
#7
Quote: Originally Posted by talloolaView Post

From what I have observed, diabetes is thriving and growing becausepeople eat too much, and in middle age become too fat.Most diabetes sufferers seem to be able to shake it if they lose weight,with exception of the younger folk who get it, of course, but evensome of them are too heavy, too out of shape, and eat all of thewrong foods. People have to be responsible for their own health, andnot blame everything on what is being done to the food we eat.I make it a bit of a habit, when waiting at grocery check out to havea look in some grocery carts and analyze what is in them, such awaste of money, and so many articles that are 'empty' foods, give yourheads a shake folks, eat real food that doesn't come prepared andhave a list of ingredients a mile long, you'll be much better off.And, get some excercise.Van Isle, you must be an expert at these observations.

I think you hit the nail on the head with "real food."
 
JLM
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by countryboyView Post

I don't like what's happened with the food, but perhaps I would feel better about it if I could hear a qualified opinion from someone who is more educated and knowledgeable than me on the subject of science. You wouldn't happen to know anyone like that, would you?


Apart from S.J. nobody really............
 
AnnaG
#9
As long as humans have curiosity about what things are, why they are the way they are, what makes them work, etc. there will be science. It is as much a part of life as hunting, gathering, and cooking food. I don't think it trumps much of anything except religion as a tool to describe life and what life deals with. We need logic to use science and science can describe "human tendencies" (behavior) but comparing science with logic or behavior is like comparing an ash tree with an aardvark.
 
lone wolf
#10
I can't help wondering if there is a connection between cancers and all the chemistry doctors prescribe. Is cancer so common in places where they take a more natural approach to healing?
 
JLM
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by talloolaView Post

From what I have observed, diabetes is thriving and growing becausepeople eat too much, and in middle age become too fat.Most diabetes sufferers seem to be able to shake it if they lose weight,with exception of the younger folk who get it, of course, but evensome of them are too heavy, too out of shape, and eat all of thewrong foods. People have to be responsible for their own health, andnot blame everything on what is being done to the food we eat.I make it a bit of a habit, when waiting at grocery check out to havea look in some grocery carts and analyze what is in them, such awaste of money, and so many articles that are 'empty' foods, give yourheads a shake folks, eat real food that doesn't come prepared andhave a list of ingredients a mile long, you'll be much better off.And, get some excercise.Van Isle, you must be an expert at these observations.

You shouldn't really get me started on this Talloola, as I do most of the grocery shopping in this house I see a lot and then I come home and turn on the local T.V. channel, and hear the requests for food hampers for the needy (which I've been known to contribute to) I know it's a delicate subject (and I know there are a lot of legitimate people and kids out there suffering. The amount of money being taken in daily by these grocery stores for absolute garbage, boggles my mind and I suspect a lot of it from those who can least afford it. I bet a ton of salt goes through the till daily in potato chip bags at $3 or $4 a shot. Your comments (and Art Hister's this morning on Global news) tie in with the tons of sugar going through the till each day. Education is needed far worse than food hampers.
 
countryboy
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by lone wolfView Post

I can't help wondering if there is a connection between cancers and all the chemistry doctors prescribe. Is cancer so common in places where they take a more natural approach to healing?

It's a good question. I've heard so-called anecdotal evidence regarding these things but it's hard to get a grip on the facts. One of the things I have heard is that cancer is virtually unknown in some "primitive societies" but once again, which ones?

Speaking of cancer, I'm wondering how many dollars have been spent on cancer research over say, the last 40 or 50 years? Does anyone know?
 
countryboy
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by AnnaGView Post

Concerning food, science has been used to get rid of pests that like the same food as we do (I sprinkle lime in the holes when I plant my potatoes, for instance), we use it to get rid of plant diseases, some businesses misuse science to control what we eat so they can make profit. Like pretty much anything else, science can be used for good or bad. Even radiation. It can be used for bombs or cancer cures.

BTW, Tonington knows quite a bit about the science of food. I would hardly call pompass an authority on science. He said he's an engineer, but he's also said that the speed of light cannot be changed. The speed of light through space is different than the speed of light through water, for instance.

Yep, lime in the 'tater holes works well. I think it beats pouring a few thousand gallons of round-up on a canola field to eradicate every living thing in the field except the (GM) "round-up ready" canola.

But I'm not a scientist and I can prove it...the only thing I know about the speed of light is that Silver (The Lone Ranger's horse) could run at that speed. Or was that Superman's flying speed. Gawd, there you go...too many facts to remember!
 
AnnaG
#14
I would think cancer research has gone through tens of billions, but it's hard to say.

Nationmaster might be able to help concerning which peoples have smaller rates of cancer:
Death from cancer by country. Definition, graph and map.
It looks incomplete to me, but perhaps the cancer rates in countries other than North American, European, and Oz have neglegible cancer rates.
 
AnnaG
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by countryboyView Post

Yep, lime in the 'tater holes works well. I think it beats pouring a few thousand gallons of round-up on a canola field to eradicate every living thing in the field except the (GM) "round-up ready" canola.

But I'm not a scientist and I can prove it...the only thing I know about the speed of light is that Silver (The Lone Ranger's horse) could run at that speed. Or was that Superman's flying speed. Gawd, there you go...too many facts to remember!

v of light = 186,000 miles per second in a vacuum approximately. lol That is about 14,500 times the speed of sound.
 
countryboy
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by AnnaGView Post

v of light = 186,000 miles per second in a vacuum approximately. lol

Sorry, having me participate in a scientific discussion would be like finding a turd in your punch bowl...just doesn't belong there!

But damn, that horse was fast! Didn't they always say, "With a cloud of dust, at the speed of light, and a hearty heigh-yo Silver", just before that cool music started (The William Tell Overture)? Never mind...off topic!
 
AnnaG
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by countryboyView Post

Sorry, having me participate in a scientific discussion would be like finding a turd in your punch bowl...just doesn't belong there!

No worries. Learning something new every day should be a delight.

Quote:

But damn, that horse was fast! Didn't they always say, "With a cloud of dust, at the speed of light, and a hearty heigh-yo Silver", just before that cool music started (The William Tell Overture)? Never mind...off topic!

I don't know. I can't remember seeing a show like that.
 
countryboy
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by AnnaGView Post

No worries. Learning something new every day should be a delight.

I don't know. I can't remember seeing a show like that.

What?!! Must be nice to be so young! Maybe JLM would know 'bout this...I'm not sayin' he's old, just experienced. And a guy. And we're still on topic too, because we're discussing the possibility of a horse being able to run at 186,000 miles per second. In a vacuum.
 
lone wolf
#19
Wasn't radio populated mostly by vacuum tubes then?
 
AnnaG
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by lone wolfView Post

Wasn't radio populated mostly by vacuum tubes then?

Some still are. Vacuum tubes are supposed to enable radios to reproduce the best sound. (Stereos, too).
I dunno how you'd get a horse inside one, though.
 
talloola
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by lone wolfView Post

Wasn't radio populated mostly by vacuum tubes then?

yeah, I remember those big tubes we had to replace when I was a kid.We had a large radio that stood on the floor, similar to our tvs oftodeay, without the picture tube, and we all sat around it and listenedto weekly shows.
 
countryboy
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by lone wolfView Post

Wasn't radio populated mostly by vacuum tubes then?

Radio? Naw, we were way beyond that. We had one of them Fairbanks-Morse TV sets, and a 19 incher at that! It got one channel (ch. 5) CKX-TV in Brandon, Manitoba. A year or so after first firing up that technological marvel, we we able to get a second channel, Ch. 12, KCND-TV in Pembina, North Dakota. "International television" without a satellite dish. (Sputnik wasn't available for TV then). The lavish entertainment fests on these two channels could only be accessed through something called a rotor antenna, which involved turning the antenna out on the roof via a switch located on top of the TV. Which usually froze up and stuck in the winter.

And look, we stayed on topic, didn't we? The science of video waves (?) and the technology of television coming together to bring Ed Sullivan into our living room every Sunday evening. In vivid black and white. Well, actually, mostly snowy-gray. Ahh, those were the days... END OF HISTORY LESSON
 
countryboy
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by talloolaView Post

yeah, I remember those big tubes we had to replace when I was a kid.We had a large radio that stood on the floor, similar to our tvs oftodeay, without the picture tube, and we all sat around it and listenedto weekly shows.

We had one of those too. After TV came along, I converted to a guitar amplifier and it's entertainment days were over. The thing had a giant speaker in it (about a 12 incher) and sounded really good. Until I hopped up the amp. and blew the cone. Science and I have never gotten along too well.
 
talloola
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by countryboyView Post

Radio? Naw, we were way beyond that. We had one of them Fairbanks-Morse TV sets, and a 19 incher at that! It got one channel (ch. 5) CKX-TV in Brandon, Manitoba. A year or so after first firing up that technological marvel, we we able to get a second channel, Ch. 12, KCND-TV in Pembina, North Dakota. "International television" without a satellite dish. (Sputnik wasn't available for TV then). The lavish entertainment fests on these two channels could only be accessed through something called a rotor antenna, which involved turning the antenna out on the roof via a switch located on top of the TV. Which usually froze up and stuck in the winter.

And look, we stayed on topic, didn't we? The science of video waves (?) and the technology of television coming together to bring Ed Sullivan into our living room every Sunday evening. In vivid black and white. Well, actually, mostly snowy-gray. Ahh, those were the days... END OF HISTORY LESSON

the science of 'remote' control, I never could have imagined not havingto get up everytime the channel had to be changed, amazing.For awhile I began watching the TV on the floor closer to the set, sothat I didn't have so far to go to do it. Layed on the floor with apillow so I didn't block anyone elses view.
 
countryboy
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by talloolaView Post

the science of 'remote' control, I never could have imagined not havingto get up everytime the channel had to be changed, amazing.For awhile I began watching the TV on the floor closer to the set, sothat I didn't have so far to go to do it. Layed on the floor with apillow so I didn't block anyone elses view.

Yep, I can relate. I had to lie on the floor close to the TV to try and make out what was on the screen during bad weather. SCIENCE and technology has come a long way. (But the Long Ranger, starring my hero, Clayton Moore, isn't on anymore)
 
countryboy
#26
Quote: Originally Posted by countryboyView Post

Yep, I can relate. I had to lie on the floor close to the TV to try and make out what was on the screen during bad weather. SCIENCE and technology has come a long way. (But the Long Ranger, starring my hero, Clayton Moore, isn't on anymore)

Er, better make that "Lone" Ranger up there, not Long Ranger. It was a children's show, after all!
 
lone wolf
#27
My Mom always threatened me with Television eyes if I kept getting so close. It was the easiest way to see through the ghosts
 
talloola
#28
Quote: Originally Posted by countryboyView Post

We had one of those too. After TV came along, I converted to a guitar amplifier and it's entertainment days were over. The thing had a giant speaker in it (about a 12 incher) and sounded really good. Until I hopped up the amp. and blew the cone. Science and I have never gotten along too well.

I was just a kid back then, but my brother was 12 years older than i,and I remember watching him changing a tube, or something, and thenext thing, he was on the other side of the room up against the wall,as he got a mighty shock, that taught him to check the cord next timeand make sure it is unplugged. He survived, but his eyes looked bigger.
 
lone wolf
#29
Quote: Originally Posted by talloolaView Post

I was just a kid back then, but my brother was 12 years older than i,and I remember watching him changing a tube, or something, and thenext thing, he was on the other side of the room up against the wall,as he got a mighty shock, that taught him to check the cord next timeand make sure it is unplugged. He survived, but his eyes looked bigger.

I did that with a capacitor in an old guitar amp - and I should have known better too. I needed power on to see the problem. My wife came running downstairs fearing I'd shot myself only to find me sitting (stunned) on the couch spattered in tar and tinfoil ... and all I could manage to say was WOW!
 
countryboy
#30
Quote: Originally Posted by talloolaView Post

I was just a kid back then, but my brother was 12 years older than i,and I remember watching him changing a tube, or something, and thenext thing, he was on the other side of the room up against the wall,as he got a mighty shock, that taught him to check the cord next timeand make sure it is unplugged. He survived, but his eyes looked bigger.

Yeah, they weren't exactly user-friendly things. We rebuilt the chassis on ours and installed twin 6L6GC tubes as used in Fender amplifiers of the day. I can still remember that tube number as they cost a bundle! The fiddling ultimately caused the speaker failure, but we were participating in an informal SCIENCE study at the time, as I explained to my mother.
 

Similar Threads

2
Science, Science Fiction
by givpeaceachance | May 6th, 2009
10
Science not pseudo-science needed
by Calberty | Jan 19th, 2006
15
The Meaning of it all??
by Jo Canadian | Dec 26th, 2005
12
Dream Meaning
by GreenGreta | Nov 15th, 2005
no new posts