What is your FAVORITE SCIENTIFIC QUOTE?

Options
1235789

Replies

  • sbarella
    sbarella Posts: 713 Member
    Options
    "The proof of this is obvious and left to the reader"

    Pretty much every mathematician, as a way to signal holes in a proof.
    Also, literally every proof in homological algebra.
    Also, my first cause of migraine in high school :laugh:
  • fernandesg
    fernandesg Posts: 54 Member
    Options
    Modern neurosis began with the discoveries of Copernicus. Science made men feel small by showing him that the earth was not the center of the universe.
    — Mary McCarthy
  • inkedShimewaza
    inkedShimewaza Posts: 536 Member
    Options
    “Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.”
    ― Albert Einstein
  • JojoW8183
    JojoW8183 Posts: 540 Member
    Options
    “I look up at the night sky, and I know that, yes, we are part of this Universe, we are in this Universe, but perhaps more important than both of those facts is that the Universe is in us. When I reflect on that fact, I look up—many people feel small, because they’re small and the Universe is big, but I feel big, because my atoms came from those stars.”
    ― Neil deGrasse Tyson
  • CJisinShape
    CJisinShape Posts: 1,407 Member
    Options
    Anybody who has been seriously engaged is scientific work of any kind realizes that over the entrance to the gates of the temple of science are written the words: 'Ye must have faith.'
    MAX PLANCK



    A year spent in artificial intelligence is enough to make one believe in God.
    ALAN PERLIS


    How about juxtaposing these ideas:

    Max Planck said "As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about atoms this much: There is no matter as such. All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter"

    With this:

    He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.
    Colossians 1:17

    Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men.
    MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR.

    I like Planck, too. Particularly:

    "A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it."

    As far as his fascination with god, he's no different than Francis Collins. Both are brilliant men who made fantastic breakthroughs in their field and found spiritual meaning in them. However, it was their meaning and, just because they saw it, it doesn't mean their work actually supports those views. Both Planck's and Collins' scientific achievements tell us facts (amazing, glorious facts) about the universe, but anyone who sees religious or spiritual meaning in those facts does so for personal reasons. A fact is but a bit of truth with no inherent meaning of it's own.

    Speaking of Planck, I also like:

    "The belief in miracles must retreat step by step before relentlessly and reliably progressing science and we cannot doubt that sooner or later it must vanish completely."

    I think it's kind of funny that you would use Planck to support a couple of Bible passages considering Planck was a deist and on record that he did not believe in any type of personal god, much less a Christian one. I'm also waiting patiently for the name of that semen resistant wood from Leviticus, whenever you get a chance. I have...needs.

    Your post is sad. I feel kind of sorry for you. You take the base and refuse the glorious. It's like eating out of a trash can instead of sitting at the table to feast on world class cuisine. If only people really understood how much richer their lives would be, how much more joy and peace they'd experience if they really believed. I'm going to not comment further as I only engage in conversation that is mutually respectful.
  • TexasOFT76
    TexasOFT76 Posts: 475 Member
    Options
    "The greatest threat to the world is global warming" -multiple sources

    Not sure it counts as scientific but some think it does. Either way it's damn funny
  • bamagrits15
    bamagrits15 Posts: 131 Member
    Options
    The amazing thing is that every atom in your body came from a star that exploded. And, the atoms in your left hand probably came from a different star than your right hand. It really is the most poetic thing I know about physics: You are all stardust. You couldn’t be here if stars hadn’t exploded, because the elements - the carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, iron, all the things that matter for evolution - weren’t created at the beginning of time. They were created in the nuclear furnaces of stars, and the only way they could get into your body is if those stars were kind enough to explode. So, forget Jesus. The stars died so that you could be here today. - Lawrence Krauss

    That's a great one, and it always blows my mind!

    I'm surprise that someone who pretends to be so intelligent supports so many unproven theories. What I'm not surprised at is how you treat people with different opinions. Condescending like you have some sort of superior wisdom. People believe what they want to hear. This applies to everyone. There are just as many scholars who support a creationism as those who don't. Now, go ahead, reply with your usually ways. Spew away in an effort to make me seem ignorant. I find it funny because one thing all your wisdom hasn't taught you is how to treat people who disagree with you.
  • bamagrits15
    bamagrits15 Posts: 131 Member
    Options
    You view Christians as minions, but you may want to check the mirror. I would urge caution in where you follow. You would sure as hell hate to be wrong.
  • tincanonastring
    tincanonastring Posts: 3,944 Member
    Options
    Virtually every scientist now concedes that universe and time itself had beginning. So, whatever begins to exist has a cause. The universe began to exist. Therefore, the universe must have had a cause. ~Lee Strobel

    Apologetics is not science. It's Christian anti-science claptrap. Please try to stay on topic.

    Are you implying the universe has no beginning? And as far as staying on topic, I guess your input to favorite Biblical Quotes was about as on topic as this. Don't be a hypocrite.

    I've already addressed the "on topic" thing earlier in this thread. As far as the implying the universe has no beginning, it's not me making the implication. There have been several cyclic models of the universe over the years, the most recent involving M-Branes and increased expansion.
  • tincanonastring
    tincanonastring Posts: 3,944 Member
    Options
    The amazing thing is that every atom in your body came from a star that exploded. And, the atoms in your left hand probably came from a different star than your right hand. It really is the most poetic thing I know about physics: You are all stardust. You couldn’t be here if stars hadn’t exploded, because the elements - the carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, iron, all the things that matter for evolution - weren’t created at the beginning of time. They were created in the nuclear furnaces of stars, and the only way they could get into your body is if those stars were kind enough to explode. So, forget Jesus. The stars died so that you could be here today. - Lawrence Krauss

    That's a great one, and it always blows my mind!

    There are just as many scholars who support a creationism as those who don't.

    This is absurdly untrue, but unsurprising considering your acceptance of apologetics as science. It's also a fallacious appeal to authority. I challenge you to actually look at how many scholars involved in relevant fields such as biology, cosmology, geology, etc believe in a creationist model (that's how you appeal to authority without it being a logical fallacy). There really aren't many, but if you choose to believe people like Strobel without actually looking into it, I can understand how you'd get that impression.

    As far as the rest of your comment. I'm guessing that was irony? How many ways did you insult me (me personally, not my beliefs) before saying I don't know how to treat people with whom I disagree? If you have an opinion, be prepared for others to question and dismiss it if it's not backed up by evidence. That's not disrespect, that's discourse.
  • bamagrits15
    bamagrits15 Posts: 131 Member
    Options
    "The greatest threat to the world is global warming" -multiple sources

    Not sure it counts as scientific but some think it does. Either way it's damn funny

    I don't think it counts merely because the evidence against it is so much strong than the fabricated "evidence" that has come out. :)
  • tincanonastring
    tincanonastring Posts: 3,944 Member
    Options
    You view Christians as minions, but you may want to check the mirror. I would urge caution in where you follow. You would sure as hell hate to be wrong.

    I highly urge you to research and take the time to understand Pascal's Wager. It will help you understand why I am completely uninterested in statements like this.
  • JojoW8183
    JojoW8183 Posts: 540 Member
    Options
    "The greatest threat to the world is global warming" -multiple sources

    Not sure it counts as scientific but some think it does. Either way it's damn funny

    I don't think it counts merely because the evidence against it is so much strong than the fabricated "evidence" that has come out. :)

    I'm confused...evidence against what is strong?
  • tincanonastring
    tincanonastring Posts: 3,944 Member
    Options
    "The greatest threat to the world is global warming" -multiple sources

    Not sure it counts as scientific but some think it does. Either way it's damn funny

    I don't think it counts merely because the evidence against it is so much strong than the fabricated "evidence" that has come out. :)

    Sorry: I may have read your response wrong. Could you clarify that?
  • BeardedYoung
    BeardedYoung Posts: 229 Member
    Options
    "If you torture the data long enough it will confess to anything" - Not sure but I heard Chuck Missler say it.

    caught myself trolling :laugh:
  • Docmahi
    Docmahi Posts: 1,603 Member
    Options
    The art of medicine consists in amusing the patient while nature cures the disease. - Voltaire

    medical quote so dunno if it qualifies but this
  • TexasOFT76
    TexasOFT76 Posts: 475 Member
    Options
    "The greatest threat to the world is global warming" -multiple sources

    Not sure it counts as scientific but some think it does. Either way it's damn funny

    I don't think it counts merely because the evidence against it is so much strong than the fabricated "evidence" that has come out. :)

    That's my point as to why it's funny
  • tincanonastring
    tincanonastring Posts: 3,944 Member
    Options
    Anybody who has been seriously engaged is scientific work of any kind realizes that over the entrance to the gates of the temple of science are written the words: 'Ye must have faith.'
    MAX PLANCK



    A year spent in artificial intelligence is enough to make one believe in God.
    ALAN PERLIS


    How about juxtaposing these ideas:

    Max Planck said "As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about atoms this much: There is no matter as such. All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter"

    With this:

    He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.
    Colossians 1:17

    Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men.
    MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR.

    I like Planck, too. Particularly:

    "A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it."

    As far as his fascination with god, he's no different than Francis Collins. Both are brilliant men who made fantastic breakthroughs in their field and found spiritual meaning in them. However, it was their meaning and, just because they saw it, it doesn't mean their work actually supports those views. Both Planck's and Collins' scientific achievements tell us facts (amazing, glorious facts) about the universe, but anyone who sees religious or spiritual meaning in those facts does so for personal reasons. A fact is but a bit of truth with no inherent meaning of it's own.

    Speaking of Planck, I also like:

    "The belief in miracles must retreat step by step before relentlessly and reliably progressing science and we cannot doubt that sooner or later it must vanish completely."

    I think it's kind of funny that you would use Planck to support a couple of Bible passages considering Planck was a deist and on record that he did not believe in any type of personal god, much less a Christian one. I'm also waiting patiently for the name of that semen resistant wood from Leviticus, whenever you get a chance. I have...needs.

    Your post is sad. I feel kind of sorry for you. You take the base and refuse the glorious. It's like eating out of a trash can instead of sitting at the table to feast on world class cuisine. If only people really understood how much richer their lives would be, how much more joy and peace they'd experience if they really believed. I'm going to not comment further as I only engage in conversation that is mutually respectful.

    Sorry you feel the need to flounce. If you think my post is sad, I feel sorry for you (see what I did there). Not believing in supernatural miracles isn't sad. Quite the contrary; when you remove belief in a supernatural cause, it forces you to understand (or at least try to understand) all of the random, amazing, natural coincidences and phenomena that occurred to bring us to our current moment.

    I'm amazed and awed at the gradual evolution of the human eye from a tiny, light-sensitive cellular component in an ancient bacterial ancestor to an independent organ capable of letting us take in the grandeur of a Pacific sunset. Following the precarious advancements over eons of time through fossil records and core samples, knowing that just a slight nudge in another direction could have left us completely sightless (with no way of knowing the spectacular sights we'd be missing), and marveling at the vast differences in those organs across different species leaves me stunned and full of wonder. It doesn't, however, leave me searching for meaning. I don't need to follow all of that and then insert "because God," or worse, reject all of that understanding, all of those amazing discoveries, and replace it all with "God did it."

    So, thanks, I guess, for your pity.
  • bamagrits15
    bamagrits15 Posts: 131 Member
    Options
    Dr. William Gray, Colorado State University
    John Christy, Climatologist

    Check out their research and views. No grant money there. No Fakegate agendas.
  • bamagrits15
    bamagrits15 Posts: 131 Member
    Options
    No sense in saying anything else. None of us will change the views of the others and no one here has done their own research to create new evidence Some would just rush to discredit the research of those that disagree with them anyways.