James Webb telescope

[Taunton Blue Genie]

Re: James Webb telescope

Maybe solipsism is the key after all.

As intelligent beings, we have the choice of realising that we know very little and that it's a joy to even scratch the surface of knowledge attained courtesy of far more brilliant minds than ourselves and using incredibly sophisiticated technology (and even though we may only be able to grasp most of the concepts in part at best)
or.......

[A Quiet Monkfish]

Re: James Webb telescope

Thanks for explaining. I'll put down my two scientific tomes as they are obviously spinning things out to a ridiculous degree.

sorry for spoiling the ending[s].

[A Quiet Monkfish]

Re: James Webb telescope

Maybe solipsism is the key after all.

I admit I had to look that up, but I always consider that religion and science are the same thing, not complete opposites. We then enter into other other philosophical areas which may offer solutions that conventional science cannot.

[Rjk]

Re: James Webb telescope

I admit I had to look that up, but I always consider that religion and science are the same thing, not complete opposites. We then enter into other other philosophical areas which may offer solutions that conventional science cannot.

I disagree entirely.
you see this bogus argument from religious folk nowadays trying to make some equivalence between the things science can't yet explain and the existence of a magic sky man on a cloud.
Religion and science are fundamentally opposite. religion is about blindly following the "truth" that has been handed down to you, usually by your parents at a young age, and in the face of any evidence to the contrary.
science is as changeable as religion is fixed. if new evidence emerged that blew away all of the laws of physics then the scientific consensus would change. if there was evidence that the earth was created by a deity then that would be part of science too, but there isnt

[Harry Paget Flashman]

Re: James Webb telescope

I disagree entirely.
you see this bogus argument from religious folk nowadays trying to make some equivalence between the things science can't yet explain and the existence of a magic sky man on a cloud.
Religion and science are fundamentally opposite. religion is about blindly following the "truth" that has been handed down to you, usually by your parents at a young age, and in the face of any evidence to the contrary.
science is as changeable as religion is fixed. if new evidence emerged that blew away all of the laws of physics then the scientific consensus would change. if there was evidence that the earth was created by a deity then that would be part of science too, but there isnt

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=ricky+gervais+on+religion+youtube&view=detail&mid=427A7FEFF5837656F406427A7FEFF5837656F406&FORM=VIRE

[Taunton Blue Genie]

Re: James Webb telescope

I admit I had to look that up, but I always consider that religion and science are the same thing, not complete opposites. We then enter into other other philosophical areas which may offer solutions that conventional science cannot.

Complete opposites but let's not go down the religion route as we have exhausted that subject on here.

The purpose of science is not to 'offer solutions'. It means knowledge. Science/knowledge may provide us with solutions, of course.

[A Quiet Monkfish]

Re: James Webb telescope

I disagree entirely.
you see this bogus argument from religious folk nowadays trying to make some equivalence between the things science can't yet explain and the existence of a magic sky man on a cloud.
Religion and science are fundamentally opposite. religion is about blindly following the "truth" that has been handed down to you, usually by your parents at a young age, and in the face of any evidence to the contrary.
science is as changeable as religion is fixed. if new evidence emerged that blew away all of the laws of physics then the scientific consensus would change. if there was evidence that the earth was created by a deity then that would be part of science too, but there isnt

I think you entirely missed the point I was making. I wasn't arguing the case for religion or faith. Let's put it simply. If it was proved that the earth et al was created by a deity that could be science, that could be religion, that could be philosophy - they're just tags.

[Rjk]

Re: James Webb telescope

I think you entirely missed the point I was making. I wasn't arguing the case for religion or faith. Let's put it simply. If it was proved that the earth et al was created by a deity that could be science, that could be religion, that could be philosophy - they're just tags.

no, I've seen your point quite clearly, I just don't agree.

[Joe Gillis]

Re: James Webb telescope

which guff do you believe?

I believe in the Church of Baseball. I've tried all the major religions and most of the minor ones. I've worshipped Buddha, Allah, Brahma, Vishnu, Siva, trees, mushrooms and Isadora Duncan. I know things. For instance, there are 108 beads in a Catholic rosary and there are 108 stitches in a baseball. When I heard that I gave Jesus a chance. But it just didn't work out between us. The Lord laid too much guilt on me.

[Dorcus]

Re: James Webb telescope

I admit I had to look that up, but I always consider that religion and science are the same thing, not complete opposites. We then enter into other other philosophical areas which may offer solutions that conventional science cannot.

Fair point sir 👍

[Undercoverinwurzelland]

Re: James Webb telescope

There was an interesting Horizon programme about the project last night. It'll be on the BBC iPlayer I'm sure.

Very impressive for something that was clearly inspired by the Blockbusters Gold Run. https://www.cnet.com/a/img/resize/25...ebp&width=1200

[bobh]

Re: James Webb telescope

Some "facts" need correcting, so...