Bad astronomer: Why Science is Important

[granddad2002]

Science for understanding Nature is a reliable methodology. People tend to take for granted how 'advances' bring change into our lives! The polio vaccine changed the demographics of public health on Earth in the 20th Century. Nuclear weapons changed how Nations behave towards other countries. Satellites and telecommunications make it possible for billions of humans to instantly know what is happening on our planet and beyond! Without Science, we'd be no better off than beasts.

[Newtoon]

@zeplinair : by the way, that's not true that nothing changed in poor countries (do not quote 3rd world since it includes India, see def on Wikipedia...) because of tech/med, even if it is far better from rich countries. The biggest change EVERYWHERE is that deaths of babies and youngs are going down, thanks to Science/tech : there is a causal link. U can check statistics.

[Newtoon]

@zeplinair : That's an argument I know already and it almost convinced me of a flaw in my reasoning for a while. Yet, if it's true that the population growth is abated when standard of living rise. Yet, it cannot be the case for everybody (for evolutionary reason which put emphasis on dominance and hierarchy) and when it does anyway, as where you and I live, it is worst because one person in his (long in average) life will take far more ressources than a whole family of, let's say,10 poor people

[crazyspacechick]

I always get really annoyed when someone asks either of these two questions...

Why is science important?

Why is space travel important?

*head desk*

[zeplinair]

@crazyspacechick Please, not too hard with the head on the desk! We need to keep the brains healthy of those who can use them intelligently.

[RobertSHilton]

Liquid Crystal Diode Display

[zeplinair]

@NASAvsPETE

Actually, Einstein was still banging his head against the wall, trying and failing to construct a viable "Theory of Everything"-that obsessive pot of gold at the end of the rainbow of physics. We're still working on it and the efforts have yielded much ultimately applicable knowledge, but no T.O.E. yet. That's ok. But if you are tempted to put a spiritual mystical force in this unknown, remember from history that these gaps are ever shrinking as verifiable knowledge expands.

[zeplinair]

@NASAvsPETE

The answer to the meaning of life is 42. This is according to a mega-computer in Douglas Adams Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy series. Problem was nobody knew what the actual question to that answer. So a world sized computer was built, that over the billions of years is computing to this day...the time is near for it to produce this question to the answer-unless it is destroyed to make room for a hyperspace bypass...

[caste2510]

@zeplinair well now we have more and more scientists who add spirituality. It has nothing to do with magic. Albert einstein also figured out that everything that exists in creation is merley energy condensed to slow vibrational matter. And this energy is consciousness consisting of pure unconditional love. This understanding is not magic. Its very well proven. (E=mc2) all matter is energy

[zeplinair]

@caste2510

NO scientific validity to"this energy is consciousness consisting of pure unconditional love"; a common new age feel good misinterpretation along w/ quantum=anything possible. It's also the quickest way to get a real physicist mad at you. At a symposium, DeGrasse Tyson very publicly & nastily dressed down the prior speaker for mis-applying quantum theory in his idea of brain consciousness. Real acting real love is made by a real sublimely arranged mass btwn our ears-our brain.

[caste2510]

@zeplinair of course there is no scientific validity because some scientists simply refuse to open their minds for higher knowledge. Everything is energy.... Even an atom is not solid... Its energy and consisits of 99 % empty space according to open mined scientists... This understanding cannot be denied and btw is had nothing whatsoever ti do with new age.. do u know what new age understanding actually is?

[zeplinair]

@caste2510

Scientists refusing to open their minds is misunderstood. Unlike belief, if evidence does not support, you must drop the hypothesis, no matter how attractive (in social power structures, can take awhile ie. behaviorism vs serious study of animal cognition). When an idea contradicts observable nature +/or yields no testable predictions, science must drop it. Open mind vital, even to the strange, but not so much that one's brains fall out. Your use of energy to feeling is incorrect.

[zeplinair]

@NASAvsPETE

But forget that bleak look of how we got here. No being wants this. But with their big, material brains, humans of this age have the unprecedented chance to escape the mere survival cycle. Meaning, takes on a new higher meaning. We can favor kind emotions that motivate positive social actions and interactions. We can seek solid verifiable truths so our actions are effective and on the right track. This meaning, not innate, is nonetheless real. It is a better life - for everyone..

[zeplinair]

@NASAvsPETE

Regardless of our make, with the first sentient experience came the first meaning. Mobile sentient beings sense and feel and have minds to quickly respond to their world-to get what is needed and escape harm-because it matters. It is life and death-the eons long natural culling favoring nervous systems that take this very very seriously-that is motivation. Dopamine to seek, adrenaline to escape, holding to life even in misery.

[zeplinair]

@NASAvsPETE

The vast universe with billions of stars in billions of galaxies, does not owe us an ultimate meaning. How can it? There is no meaning until something means something to someone. Sentient beings(fish Included), by experiencing and feeling have brought meaning into the cosmos. "are we just walking fish...?" etc, projects negative values onto flesh and matter that is also is not there. If you think less of us beings of "just" matter, you have much to learn about matter.

[caste2510]

@zeplinair i dont think science is bad. Science can be used for good purposes and bad purposes. Due to science ive also learned a lot about our universe/stars/planets and creation etc... But only the mechanics... for me.. It wasnt enough. I wanted to know more about life. I couldnt just accept the whole thing to be a cosmic accident. I asked myself "there must be more to life" and due to spirituality applied to science im more satisfied with the answers ive found.

[zeplinair]

@caste2510

Try symphonyofsciencedotcom-melody sheep on youtube . "Only" mechanics is dismissive of what has been plied out of the natural world by generations of dogged persuit of truth, swallowing pet theories when evidence said otherwise. Some find 'spirituality' in science & its implications & don't ask of the universe a meaning by reason they can't expect it to have. Yet meaning is vital-make yours-great! But magic thinking & fuzzy 'truth' leaves people open to exploiters and charlatans.

[zeplinair]

Is his poster in the background a subliminal cue :)

[zeplinair]

@NASAvsPETE

It is science (as to use science or do science) that allows us to understand by evidence to come closer and closer to the truth to understand how we actually did get here-no matter what we want to believe. And that understanding of how this all works, generalizes to all of biology and allows us to make discoveries and testable predictions that lead us to effective medicine, etc....now think (and see how such word games are made to confuse, not contribute, to discussion)

[caste2510]

@Newtoon well ive changed my mind. This post is a year old. Once one understands the true nature of the universe then we wouldnt even need technology. Of course there is nothing wrong with science but it would be meaningful to apply spirituality to science... Only then the real answers would be found about our existence

[zeplinair]

@caste2510

Only material can be shown to be real regardless of the culture and desires of subjective minds. As opposed to the subjective feeling/wish that there must be meaning, the only non-negotiable objectively real answers will be out in that objectively real material world-the rest is only what we then apply to it-which is not objective truth, but our own imaginations and ingenuity-that lead to us further tools to discover objective truth and lead to further tools. Sorry, no magic.

[MardukHail]

@82integrity Why people like the sounds I don't know. I view music as a vice, not an art. I view music as a vice like alcohol, lust, gluttony, dancing, television, idle conversation, etc. It is something that distracts one from achieving important goals. It's a time waster like sports and should be avoided and discouraged by and large.

[MardukHail]

@82integrity If you want a scientific answer it is this: The sounds are created by different lengths of sound waves. On a string instrument as you shorten the string with your finger on a fret board you limit how far the string can vibrate making a shorter sound wave. This makes a higher pitch. The same is done on a wind instrument by taking your fingers off the holes. This allows the air to escape making the tube shorter.

[lzoli18B]

Subliminal messaging!

'You will bow to me' is written behind Phil Plait.

[zeplinair]

@lzoli18B

I noticed that too-should we be afraid? Or proud that we, personally, will not be so weak willed. Yes, Phil, of course you are sooo right!...? ....umm....

[lzoli18B]

@zeplinair :D well i was merely joking, if i remember right.

[MT443]

Science is not important.

Understanding the world is like air, it is such a critical aspect of humans that it is impossible to have them without it.

Calling it "important" is a massive understatement.

[the0fart0machine]

Science we need, modern science is starting to look like a organized religion.

[caste2510]

yea without science we wouldnt live in a modern world. imagine the world without tv's, without music, without computer, without the internet, without cars.. without... without... without... what a boring life it would be ;)

[Newtoon]

@caste2510 That's most of people on Earth do however : no internet, no car, no computer, no TV (no electricity anyway). If they can put their hands food, water and... on a book (and can read), that is ultimate joy.

[82integrity]

ive never heard a scientist explain music and where that comes from and why its always been a factor in all civilisations. debunk if you will/can? please... i mean that. ya books good too by the way :)

[cashcleaner]

@82integrity

That's because the concept of music isn't a science, but rather an art form. A scientist can tell you all about HOW a flute or a drum work and HOW you hear and make sense of the noise, but music is perceived differently by everyone and therefore can't be accurately quantified in a normal sense.

[zeplinair]

@82integrity

A couple of books on science and music...

Musicophilia, by Oliver Sacks

This Is Your Brain On Music-the science of a human obsession, by Daniel J. Levitin

Also, if you slow down bird song, its creepy how human seeming its aesthetics are-the roots of this phenomenon has been around longer than humans.

[jarlhelvete]

an then ridiculing shitheads like you came and ruined it all?

[AnonymousElektron]

Science has not done crap for me.

science wont get me a job, sceince wont fix my car, science wont love my children.

science isnt a damn.

go to church any day of the week to get real answers to the important questions.

does your life even have a purpose, mr bad astronomer?

[happyidiottalk]

@AnonymousElektron Yeah you keep going to church, this stuff is too hard for you. Stick to whats easy, pondlife.

[notanon666]

@AnonymousElektron Science won't fix my car.

Science won't fix my car.

Science won't fix my car.

Wtf.

[Juxtaroberto]

@AnonymousElektron Science is the reason you have clean water and a permanent home. Science is the reason you haven't died of some infectious disease. Science is the reason you can post these ignorant comments onto YouTube. If science is so bad, don't go to the doctor the next time you're seriously sick. Don't go to the hospital when you're seriously hurt. Gather your water from rivers and rain. Watch your children die of smallpox and measles. Put your money where your mouth is.

[byScrooby]

"God: Hidden Science" - Google it!

[Eidolon1977]

Phil, I really love your movies but this one is a bit over the top. What are we made of and where are chemical elements formed are both scientific question, sure. But "why are we here" clearly is not one. Get your epistemology right or say belief system instead of science, either way.

A (bad) astronomer

[Simpson654]

@Eidolon1977 No, "why are we here" is a scientific question, which has been answered, ever better and better by evolutionary biology (or biology for short), our modern world works because of the scientific principle, finding out why thing go, and making things go our way.

If you extend the question "why" to include some kind of purpose, you're at a loss in science, since you can't answer silly questions with science, that's for religion to fill. The green corner with bloussards.

[AnonymousElektron]

@Simpson654 no u, dont understand at all.

your answering why are we here, not how are we here.

duh.

your probably bible dumb and havent gotten to chuch enough if you ever want to go i will be happy to get you learned about with the bible.

[jwheel69]

Great video Phil!

[jwil2570]

Great job Phil. I would say science is the pursuit of the Universe to understanding itself. It's a curious thing that this unintended pursuit has led to misunderstandings and ideological perceptions. It's as if our consciousness will do whatevers necessary to obtain a all knowing state. Natural selection must favor the ability to comprehend its own function.

[pillsareyummy]

j;jkl;

[Newtoon]

@PITIREY No fallacy, cause I do not say that Lorenz is a "proof" of whatever. It is the just the introduction of MY arguments. You say humanity is better now than 100 years from now thanks to Science but I want PROOFS !

More and more SCIENTISTS fear for our immediate future and think world population might crash soon.

See another irony : thanks to Science (hygiena) there were less and less babys dying (good) => so they lived but ... hungry (FAO : 1.02 billion people hungry in 2009) (bad).

[pillsareyummy]

The 'proof' is in the fact that we have access to information in ways we didn't 100 years ago (the Internet). Science has given us the means to refrigerate our food, cook our food, preserve our food, it gives us the means to heat our selves, etc. Over 'population levels' doesn't have anything to do with science, but rather ignorance, and in some cases religious beliefs (The church's outlook on Condoms for example). Also, if people go hungry, that because of politics; not science.

[Newtoon]

"Over 'pop levels' does not have anything to do with science". Are you kidding ? Do U think that it is pure coincidence that pop levels went through the roof (exponential growth) just as the same moment that industrial revolution arose ? (and hygiena and medecine with it).

[pillsareyummy]

The main reason behind our 'population explosion', is our 'procreational behaviour'. Although, science does help to insure that we live to be old enough to procreate, the main reason for our population growth is our 'mating habits', that are based on ignorance, stupidity and religious ideology. The main problem behind our current population explosion, is social; not scientific.

[bigsmall246]

Yea the reason is social, but that doesn't mean existing mating habits are stupid or bad...

But banning condoms/contraceptives without banning premarital sex is just retarted. You either ban both or allow both.

[ScientificaNakool]

by the way, ccd means charged couple device, it's an important advance.

[ScientificaNakool]

Wait, you forgot that the ccd was developed for the Galileo mission to Jupiter.

You also forgot that we are arguing our view of reality against that weird history of religion. You need to understand religion before you can teach the important lessons you are trying to teach.

I need you, you need me.

[DkOn24]

thank you. amen.

[BeHereNow21]

Well, yes, only if we -our conciousness- can be explained by scientific methods. Which I don´t think it ever can so, science might be much but it can never be everything.

[SanitysEdg3]

BeHereNow21: We have already answered that question, at least the beginnings of it. Our consciousness arises from the interactions between individual neurons in our brain. If you are asking about our individuality and personalities then that comes from the way our neurons are connected to each other.

[BeHereNow21]

I believe science is both practical; enjoyable; but in no way can science be "everything" - As his philosophical viewpoint here is. Science is not about the search for "truth" but the search for facts - as you may have heard.

If you want the "truth" about the meaning of life, whatever that is, you gotta look inside YOU. Your conciousness is not a logical construct, but an experience.

Ask any philosopher and they will laugh at the idea that you can know everything through science. Look it up.

[kungfro]

Truth and facts are interdependent. In the same way that truth is supported by facts, you can't have facts that don't represent some truth. It's possible that you can know everything (within the limits of human perception) through science, including consciousness.

Though I don't understand your notion to "look it up." Look what up?

[BeHereNow21]

Yeah I´m sorry bout that. I was under the influence of really bad philosophy by the time I wrote that, so, forget it.

I was correct in the sense that I did not see science as the ultimate method of truth - science already presupposes a form of philosophy to uphold it. So, philosophy is where you start. Didn´t realize it at the time in the same way I do now.

Epistemology is a notoriously hard subject. I recommend however that you look up the philosopher "Ayn Rand", she makes alot of sense.

[kungfro]

Does science presuppose a form of philosophy? Science isn't more than the practice of, "I've observed this phenomenon. What causes this? What predictions does this make?" It's not really philosophy.

Science is great because with it you can make deductions and predictions. Skepticism is helpful for discarding the countless absurd claims thrown at us on an almost daily basis. Science as a construct is objective. Religion and politics have skewed the meaning of the word, "truth."

[Jegermeister0]

Family Guy!

[crazykb]

I love this dude on "are we alone" (SETI).

[Newtoon]

What is the BIGGEST thing that Science has brought to humanity ?

, to all of us, not only the elite (you, me, Phil) who have car, internet (and CCD camera) and can afford air-travel.

LIFE EXPECTANCY.

Everywhere, people who are born survive far more than ever. What a JUMP of world population and ratio of births/deaths since 200 years!

Now, wonderful science progress? Surely Yes (I still live for being despised by Youtube viewers, sigh !) and No (overpopulation).

Science has a double face.

[bigsmall246]

Don't you realise we can use more science to solve the unexpected problems brought about by previous scientific developments? -.-

(e.g. use science to build taller buildings, grow more food, etc. to solve overpopulation)

[Newtoon]

@bigsmall246 You got the point. "Technoscience" is mostly adressing problems that it created in the first place ! My hope is that the balance will one day be in favor of Science but that is not what it is right now : I do not think that one billions of hungry stomachs would say "Thanks ! Science !". Just to be a bit nasty : ask Japanese of Tokyo what they think of Science right now...

[zeplinair]

@Newtoon

Problems tech created like disease, disaster and the elements that plagued us since before we picked up the first stone? Think. Problems like most western people having most if not all children in their families reach maturity? The billions with hungry stomachs if you notice, are areas steeped still in superstition and religious/magical thinking and cultures of unreason and over reproduction based on powerlessness and self-insurance. Most of THEIR children do NOT reach adulthood.

[Newtoon]

@zeplinair I do not know what you mean by "adulthood" exactly but globally accepted statistics show clearly they reach age of reproduction...

[zeplinair]

@Newtoon Folk confuse the population with the rise of tech/med because they are happening concurrently.-but in developing and third world with the greatest pop. growth, few have regular access and as the only self insurance available, many more children are born as many die. Regardless of disease and calamity, population has been rising since we left Africa and the greater the population, the more dramatic the subsequent rise. This natural geometric rise is cause of the "explosion".

[zeplinair]

@Newtoon (cont. last reply). Actually if we want to slow the rise...Where the standard of living rise, and women are educated and empowered members of society calling the shots in their own reproduction (especially when they can take for granted as we do in the developed world with ready access to medicine and tech, that the children they do have will be around to have children of their own....the birth rate drops. At that point having extra children then is generally more cost than asset.

[netenute]

That's all true but...who doesn't think science is important?

[bigsmall246]

You'll be surprised how many retards out there see science being used for negative means and say science is bad and should be abolished.

[Newtoon]

Should I quote what Konrad Lorentz had to say about Science :

All the advantages that man has gained from his ever-deepening understanding of the natural world that surrounds him, his technological, chemical and medical progress, all of which should seem to alleviate human suffering... tends instead to favor humanity's destruction.

Just to mention the "Dark Side" of the force...

[PITIREY]

You are missing the point: Sience is knowledge, wich can't be something bad by itself. You can criticize the way people use it but it's absurd criticize knowledge itself.

By the way, here is another quote from Konrad Lorentz :

"I'm able to say that my whole scientific work is devoted to the ideas of the National Socialists."(nazism).

You shouldn't "worship" random quotes.

[Newtoon]

So you despise Konrad Lorenz 's work ?

I know a bit about Lorenz bio (I do not quote just to boast) and you may fall into a cliché ; one could then as well argue that Einstein was responsible for nuclear bombs.

Anyway, Lorenz (sorry for the "t" I used because of Lorentz force), had the time to understand what Science encompasses and that it is not "only" absolute knowledge search. Phil begins by talking about a wonderful internet camera : that is application of Science and so, e.g. bombs.

[Newtoon]

By the way, I just remembered. Your argument about Lorentz is a fallacy, an "ad hominem" one to be precise. So, it does not stand...

[PITIREY]

No, your argument is a fallacy. specifically "ad verecundiam" . You can't prove your point by saying: X said Y. Your "reasoning" just doesn't make sense if you look at real facts. Humanity is better now than 100 years ago. And we should thank scince for it.

[DarkMatter2525]

@Newtoon

Even the weapons of war, which I'm assuming you're referring to, are more humane thanks to science. No more carpet bombing entire cities. Now we have precision bombs that pinpoint the enemy alone. Even the nukes have put an end to the old days of world war, when millions died. Now, we start worrying when only dozens die, and that's definitely a good thing, and it's thanks to science. Btw, if a nutjob manages to get a nuke and use it, I guarantee you it'll be a religious nutjob.

[Newtoon]

Your arguments are controversials but not new (Tesla) but ask irakians their about precision bombs and no millions of deaths.  So far, the only nukes that were used where from non religious guys + recently, USSR was considered the main threat and no religious.

With Science and Technology, whole civilization + humanity are in danger (overpop + nuclear + climate). Let me be clear : I luv Science but I wanted to emphasize that the portrait that Phil (i luv his work) gives is quite naive.

[bigsmall246]

Right... So what other 'absolute knowledge' is possible besides science?

I think what you're trying to say is that science is good but it must be used responsibly... Besides science you need responsibility in the world.

[Newtoon]

French author Rabelais said it "Science sans conscience n'est que ruine de l'âme" but... I actually and unfortunately do not say that ! I say : looking for knowledge seems incredibly cool (I do it all the time) and not evil at all ... apparently. I just would advise people to go further : get knowledge about the idea & act of getting knowledge itself. Why we do it and what are the consequences ? Seems waste of time but is not & answers the question "Why Science is important ?"

[Newtoon]

If you worship Science, please read the following from Konrad Lorentz :

"All the advantages that man has gained from his ever-deepening understanding of the natural world that surrounds him, his technological, chemical and medical progress, all of which should seem to alleviate human suffering... tends instead to favor humanity's destruction."

[10mintwo]

if you worship pseudointellectual sociology and postmodernist nonsense, whilst also having no real understanding of how science or evidence based rational inquiry as a whole actually functions, please read the following from me: fuck off.

[Newtoon]

@10mintwo

The shock for me is that I discovered that you claim to be 31.

I do not know why but with this gross and untolerant behaviour, I was especting a teenager.

Reminds me of a popular XKCD about internet anonymous commenting activity ...

[bigsmall246]

Erm, 10mintwo doesn't sound like a teenager at all...

Anyway what does he claiming he is 31 have to do with anything?

[Newtoon]

There are creationnists / religious guys post videos on Youtube proving God exist with "beauty is everywhere", showing valleys, seas, flowers. This is a utterly partial view because I could show "terrible" and ugly things as well : diseases, pest, deaths and suffer.

The same is at play here but for Science. If before being being born, God would have told you : you will live long + Internet + cars but with potential Human extinction(nuclear + climate change), is it such a bargain ?

[10mintwo]

ehhh I don't think Hubble had much at all to do with the invention of the CCD.

[reevesAstronomy]

He hit the point hard and where it is most felt. Love it!

[SpunkMonkey]

Umm.... it's currently showing as "no longer available". Has this indeed been removed, or moved elsewhere?

[Saukko31]

Science!

[mshades]

Gotta love the Bad Astronomer! Thanks, Phil!

[CousinoMacul]

Very nice explanation.