All humans production including math. physics and all modern technologies HAVE natural or creation roots ... Just think if God created humans without amazing brain-mind or amazing natural computerAll humans production including math. physics and all modern technologies HAVE natural or creation roots ... Just think if God created humans without amazing brain-mind or amazing natural computer can we know what, where math or physics … absolutely no……. Can we calculate or assess or compute …… Can Archimedes computed or produced (not created) calculus without this amazing 'mind-brain' creation ….. absolutely no.

If sciences is about the knowledge acquired by the man then the oldest culture is as old as the history of the man. If it is according to methods then it may be thousand years old (since the fatherIf sciences is about the knowledge acquired by the man then the oldest culture is as old as the history of the man. If it is according to methods then it may be thousand years old (since the father of scientific method Alhazen al-Basri)

Third part of publication, according to further work on the 1914-case (erinnert, 3/2012, 5.3.2012, p.14).

Dear Mohammad Akhlaghi Thank you for returning to astronomy. Ancient knowledge often stressed lunar calendar. One of the cultures that you may study uses a 270-moon calendar. Understanding ourDear Mohammad Akhlaghi Thank you for returning to astronomy. Ancient knowledge often stressed lunar calendar. One of the cultures that you may study uses a 270-moon calendar. Understanding our sun's rotations, 26,000 year axis wobble is tough enough. But to place our sun in the context of multiple ancient lunar calendars offers many decoding issues. As archaeoastronomers have been reporting since 1975 large chunks of ancient astronomical knowledge seem to have been lost.. Ancients Egypt, Mayan, and other ancient lunar calendar based cultures require study to gain a sense of ancient thinking. Following my own advise "Read ancient texts in historical context and the great ideas from the past (may) come alive".. For the last two months a friend and I have been studying the ancient Mayan 405-moon lunar calendar. A table of probable lunar eclipse calculations are provided on pages 65, 66, 67 and 68 of the Dresden Codex. We are having difficulty connecting multiple eclipse calendars (indirectly?) mentioned to the single 405-moon cycle. At the proper time maybe we send a draft of our work to you for review? Discussing the past through mathematical astronomy is fun. Best wishes on achieving goals set out in your studies.

To James sir. Firstly, I would like to clear that though of a less relevance, mass of any object, is indeed a very important factor. When you talk of vertical fall i.e. fall due to gravity you doTo James sir. Firstly, I would like to clear that though of a less relevance, mass of any object, is indeed a very important factor. When you talk of vertical fall i.e. fall due to gravity you do not consider mass but when you refer to an object falling sidewards (moving horizontally) the mass and inertia are particularly taken into account. Secondly, Galileo is one of my heroes, and I am very certain he did not drop it masses from the tower of Pisa, it is an apocryphal. Thirdly, what you say if indeed correct that before Galileo disproved the concepts of Aristotle, Aristotle's statements were true. So, when we know that "real" and "true" are relative words we must be careful while stating anything because relativity isn't bound to physics it is, as Einstein said, is natural and persists in nature. Lastly, about my comment above mentioned, what was that you did not understand sir? I have tried to be as simple as possible. Please tell me a bit more explicitly.

I Think all scientists have one and only one unanimous belief: Knowledge is possible, but not without hard work. And this is their faith. No need of any religion.

"academic knowledge": what do you mean? Explain what iyou understand as "academic knowledge". Explain it, please, and then I think I can give you my opinion.

With all due respect, but: what the hell is going on here? Never thought I'd here myself say "Don't feed the troll!" on ResearchGate... some creationist or esoteric forum in the underbelly of theWith all due respect, but: what the hell is going on here? Never thought I'd here myself say "Don't feed the troll!" on ResearchGate... some creationist or esoteric forum in the underbelly of the internet seems a little more appropriate.

I can't answer your question, but I think that mostly of scientists are atheists, at least in relation to the social sciences. In relation to an answer above I don't believe that "religion is theI can't answer your question, but I think that mostly of scientists are atheists, at least in relation to the social sciences. In relation to an answer above I don't believe that "religion is the school where we learn the things of the spirit". If religion can teach about the things of the spirit, ethics can teach more beneficial to humanity.

It would seem that the academy is currently informed by Hobbes, who dismissed the "old philosophers" ideas of good and bad and supplanted them by the idea of the good as good order, that is, propertyIt would seem that the academy is currently informed by Hobbes, who dismissed the "old philosophers" ideas of good and bad and supplanted them by the idea of the good as good order, that is, property and peace. So, for Hobbes, man's natural brutality and desire for unlimited power must be constrained by contract enforced by the sovereign. For Rousseau, unlike Hobbes, natural man has sympathy for his fellows. Like Hobbes, society is needed for the harmony of men living with each other, but it is a democracy led by the virtuous. Following these moderns, Comte's organ and organism analogy seems scientific restatement of the social contract. That larger organism has been called the body politic by most. If it is unnatural, as the moderns propose, it follows that there will be conflict, and the larger and more developed, the more conflict. Considering Aristotle, who taught that the polis and political activity was natural to man, there would be no artificial transition from natural to political man. The ontology of natural man and artificial society has built and exposed the question.

Bas van Fraassen's constructive empiricism is related with the problem of unobservables.