FriendlyHacker

I was wrong about him believing in Geocentrism, because I had only heard that audio up to this: "The entire cosmological, anthropological, theological, etc.. views that we had of a Geocentric vision goes down... that was a total mistake, but people found the idea catchy, so catchy, that everyone believes on it (Heliocentric view) to this day." The Heliocentric view was also wrong in the sense that you put the Sun at the center of the Universe, and people who study astronomy now are well aware of it, plus we are neither at the Center of the Galaxy (good, there's a black hole there), and neither our Galaxy is at the center of the Universe. These Heliocentric ideas are 500 years old, so not sure what he means when he says that everyone believes them. Then he talks about scales: "It's all a matter of scales, if you look at the planet's scale, the Earth is at the center, from the the Star system scale, the Sun is at the Center, and etc..." Ok but that is not how Astrophysics actually look at it, and definitely anyone using GPS for navigation is not using a Geocentric based technology. Then he talks about Bohr and Heisenberg, like if their ideas are a matter of opinion, and should not believed on. Which misses the point of science, ideas are not believed on, they either work or they don't, and the fact that you're using a computer right now means that they work.

Post links here. Olavo has the gift of talking for 30 minutes, or writing 10 pages of text, while not saying anything. I think the gift comes from all that practice with astrology, where you try to convince the person that you can read the future, not mention anything specific, and then never actually be wrong in anything you say. If I say for instance: "The position of Mercury today indicates that you will meet a very important person." And then I can write 10 pages about why Mercury knows the future, while never being wrong or having any actual information. Because you will eventually meet a very important person, and if you die before that, the astrologer can say that person was God, or Jesus or "insert deity". So if you have a link of him explaining Einstein or the heliocentric view, where he actually says anything, please post here. Reading Olavo's work is like going around and around in circles, while never reaching anywhere. So no, I won't waste my time and money on his book, because I'm too busy reading Hawking, Klauss, Kaku, Einstein, Neil Tyson, Feynman, Dirac and etc to care about what an astrologer has to say about physics.

Yes, there is confusion on some of the scientific claims that I've seen, and the confusion is in this guy being clueless about what he is talking about. He thinks that Earth is the center of the Universe, c'mom, this has been shown to be false for the first time some 3000 years ago, so his science is 3000 years behind. But given the fact that he used to be an Astrologer, there's no surprise in him not understand basic astronomy, physics or how the scientific method works. Olavo is like a guy on a wheelchair, claiming to be able to run really fast, but who somehow never noticed his legs missing and his lungs being barely functional. Even though he talks about being the fastest man ever, nobody has actually seen him running. So if he claims to understand science and doesn't. What makes you think that he's not wrong about politics, or about anything else? If someone is missing a basic reality check filter, how do you know the person is not having delusions of grandeur and carrying some gullible folks along?

Am not a foreigner.I've seen a few of his videos, they have a lot of misinformation and logical fallacies. It's strange that someone who seems to be scientifically inept would go about trying to prove Einstein wrong. There is nothing wrong with trying to prove Einstein wrong, but for someone who understands the underlining physics, is like watching a child play the guitar for the first time and then brag about being a better player than Eric Clapton. He's just making noise and claiming to be a symphony, that's the level of sanity you're dealing with so don't take anything at face value.

Olavo de Carvalho? I know who he is, be careful about accepting any information at face value, please research about everything he talks about, or everything I talk about for that matter, there are a lot of people spreading misinformation out there, not because they are evil, but because they are misinformed.

Dilma is as much of a leftist as Obama. She may say she's on the left, but her policies are decided beforehand by other people who only care about money and power, they have no political affiliation. "The president's job - and if someone sufficiently vain and stupid is picked he won't realise this - is not to wield power, but to draw attention away from it." Douglas Adams I could not care less about left or right, as I said, there is no left or right in Brazil, and if people from the "right" start wasting their energy fighting people from the "left", then they are really drawing their attention away from real the real issue. And the real issue is that people will be screwed over no matter who is in power, because the power itself is corrupt.

As far as I know, there is no leftist movement, politics in Brazil is no different than in the USA, there is no left or right, only a marginally different center. The real issue is not with left and right, people are majorly pissed off because they have been screwed over for way too long, and the world cup related corruption is like playing with matches while soaked in gasoline.

To define yourself is to limit yourself, read this though:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_humanism

Olá, From where in Brazil are you from? I'm at Bauru. People in Brazil usually only speak Portuguese, you see, Fabiano is the second person in Brazil that I can spot proficiency in English writing, and I've lived here for about 30 years. Spanish is similar enough with Portuguese that people might understand you, but don't count on it because the conversation will be mostly broken.

People kill each other based on the jersey they use, it's fucking stupid. There will probably not be a world cup this year though, the massive protests won't allow for it. I only hope this won't trigger a civil war.

What I have actually mentioned above is that both Larmarck and Darwin might be valid and not be mutually exclusive, so you are either not reading what I'm writing or you don't understand it.

As far as I know nothing is beyond scientific inquiry. Religious claims can be measured, tested and reproduced just like anything else, saying it's impossible is completely ignoring the fact that 100 years ago, it was considered impossible to ever leave Earth's atmosphere. If you say something is impossible, it means that anyone who has ever lived, or who will live in the future, won't be able to come up with a solution for it. People don't know how science will be in 20 years, let alone 1 million years. I can't agree with you because you missed the point about approximation to reality, sometimes the general idea is correct and the details are wrong, so you fill in the blanks and it actually becomes better instead of going to the trash bin. For instance people have recently been able to measure DNA being changed by the environment, that does not mean that everyone should completely scrap Darwin's ideas and adopt Lamarck's instead. It only means that both things are probably complementary and both are, in a sense, a correct description of the known reality.

My point is that Darwin was wrong about Evolution, in the same way that Newton was wrong about Gravity. Darwin lived at a time where people didn't know about DNA sequencing. Newton lived at time where people didn't know about atoms. They are both wrong so both theories underwent massive change the past 150 years. Every scientific theory is wrong because they're not about the truth, they are about ever increasing approximation to a measured reality. Sometimes a new idea greatly decreases the margin of error to those approximations, or someone finds out about a previously unknown reality.

Obliviously Darwin was wrong, he didn't know about DNA, that's why I compare him with Newton, Newton was wrong about gravity, but saying that gravity is a myth is just silly. People who study biology today are not basing everything they know in a 150 years old book.

http://youtu.be/Tb7cAwd-cSIIf you think there's a problem with poverty in Canada, this video will give you a small glimpse about what being poor means here.

If the argument was made for the theory, would you be able to understand it? Do you know how DNA works in the offspring? Do you understand the decades old experiment done with bacteria, in fact, ever heard of it? Do you see how artificially changing a dog's appearance would be like, if it was done in a period of billions of years? Do you know how the bird flu virus might end up affecting human population, or how other monkey's HIV / ebola might end up in humans? Why there is such a thing as males and females? Why genetic disorders often happen when brothers / cousins have babies? Do you know the real nature of the coccyx bone, also referred to as the tailbone? Do you know why genetic sequencing of human DNA and chimp DNA has led to almost identical results? Have you looked into the fossil evidence? Do you realize how if there were no fossil evidence at all, the evidence going for evolution is still larger than the one going for gravity? Do you realize that intermediate species fossil evidence has been found in large quantities anyway? Do you understand that it makes less sense to look into Darwin's book for evolution, than to look into Newton's to understand gravity? That theories change over time because new evidence allows for improved theories? (Special Relativity/Quantum Mechanics)

You understand the issue, too bad I can up vote only one time, if it takes learning math, astronomy, chemistry and the scientific method to understand these ideas, no wonder atheists are a minority...

Too smart to realize that they are actually stupid. Newton is the smartest human that has ever lived, he also spent most of his life trying to calculate the exact date for the rapture and trying to turn led into gold. Newton was a fervent catholic who died a virgin. I say humans are dumb as fuck and most are too arrogant to realize how closely they resemble the other monkeys. That is why they make Gods, they don't want to be monkeys.

Hacking is a mindset, it pushes you into tinkering and making things better. It's really a thirst for knowledge while lacking any respect for the impossible.

Don't know what you mean there, Solar/Wind is an one time investment that generates energy for decades, if you burn fossil fuel it's gone. Does not matter if you use nuclear, fossil or solar, energy is not being made it's being converted, with different degrees of efficiency, but being converted. Human error is too great of a factor to deal with when survival of species is at stake, I don't trust nuclear power for this sole reason. Ever heard of solar shingles? You can replace your roof shingles with it and generate more energy from it than your house will ever need, in fact there is a whole industry in Germany on selling the extra energy from it. Solar cell energy efficiency is developing at near Moore's law scale, if you read any report on solar energy efficiency that is a few years old, you should know that the information presented there is now irrelevant. Same goes for electric batteries.

Let's say I have blue socks in one foot and red socks on the other, I never use same color socks and you are 1 light year away, the moment you hear me say I have blue socks on my left foot the information about red socks being on my right foot is acquired faster than light. Can you see how that is binary and actually useful for computing?

Interesting ideas.Only worthless for communication if you don't know how to do it, give me a few million dollars and I will show you. You might not know a way yet but It's called non locality, has been done repeatedly on labs for over 40 years.

Entropy is only a problem if you try to understand it from a philosophical point of view, try to understand it from an engineering point of view and you will see how both the human body and a combustion engine work fundamentally the same way.

Not directed at you, Stefan has repeatedly stated his opinions on poverty, watch the mentioned video.

You talk about the Omega point, like it's something verified, when in reality anything before the microwave background radiation event, can be at most considered an educated guess. But do come back to this when the necessary gravitational wave detection equipment is available. Hawking talks about what you describe as a suggestion of the non existence of God, if everything measured on the Universe adds up to 0, maybe it can't be the result of an outside force.Maybe the entire Universe can be simulated on a computer, until it happens you might want to skip the word proof and use the correct terminology: science fiction Proof is a mathematical term and scientists only use it in that context. You can prove that 2 + 2 = 4, but God is not defined mathematically so any calculation won't make sense.