Ancient Science More Uniform With Nature

[Bartholomew Jones]

Being that modern science primarily serves mass manufactures, and that manufactures, by their third generation produce net plastic; and net concrete, and asphalt (producing antagonist gases); I submit that modern science works contrary to nature.

 

[Bartholomew Jones]

In effort to reverse said trend, I revise said present tense (is/does) to the tense, "has tended to."

 

[hellopunyhumans]

Ah yes. Eviromental science. University reasearch. The entire field of theororetical physics. All benefiting corporations.

 

[hellopunyhumans]

And from your other posts, you also seem to believe that Fossils aren't real. Who is that benefiting?

 

[Bartholomew Jones]

And from your other posts, you also seem to believe that Fossils aren't real. Who is that benefiting?

That isn't a claim. It's skepticism.

 

[Bartholomew Jones]

Ah yes. Eviromental science. University reasearch. The entire field of theororetical physics. All benefiting corporations.

For example, "vaping," is offered commercially, and new auto exhaust systems appear, as does vaping, beneficial, to the human and environmental health. To me the two technologies appear parallel. To me they appear deceptive.

 

[hellopunyhumans]

Vaping has not been beneficial to human health overall as it has encouraged many teenagers to get addicted to nicotine. I have seen examples of it helping smokers quit, however.
Are blissfully unaware of how much companies spend to lobby their way out of enviromental legislature?

Anyway, if science is never applied and used to benefit anyone, is it really worth doing? Many times reasarch is made availible and people try to use it to make money. People probably wouldn't have electric cars if it weren't for elon musk because he made it possible for someone to buy one. Hummanity mine as well benefit from its scientific advacements that we can't make without the technologies that are sold by science supply companies that were reasearched and invented by scientists. It really is dishonnest to expect people to not apply or even do science is the only upside is its there. If we treat it like some god that we can't touch or change, it becomes something we don't want to do.

In other news, have you seen your unfounded skepticism being debunked in that thread about dinosaur accounting that should be in your sidebar to the right? I gave a link to how we know what a fossil is. I support being skeptic of that which is around you, but don't expect it to always hold water.

 

[Bartholomew Jones]

Vaping has not been beneficial to human health overall as it has encouraged many teenagers to get addicted to nicotine. I have seen examples of it helping smokers quit, however.
Are blissfully unaware of how much companies spend to lobby their way out of enviromental legislature?

Anyway, if science is never applied and used to benefit anyone, is it really worth doing? Many times reasarch is made availible and people try to use it to make money. People probably wouldn't have electric cars if it weren't for elon musk because he made it possible for someone to buy one. Hummanity mine as well benefit from its scientific advacements that we can't make without the technologies that are sold by science supply companies that were reasearched and invented by scientists. It really is dishonnest to expect people to not apply or even do science is the only upside is its there. If we treat it like some god that we can't touch or change, it becomes something we don't want to do.

I'm not on a rampage against science; but modern economy, inclusive of modern science and manufactures. The village economy is the most advanced CIVIL economy. Primitive economy is more civilized than modern economies.

The workers in a village economy all pull together--for the village, not for enterprise. If there are some of interest in enterprise, it doesn't dominate the local economy. The goodwill toward the village dominates. That goodwill preserves and complements the total ecology.

 

[Astrid]

That isn't a claim. It's skepticism.

Why are you skeptical?