What's Wrong With Science?

[Mua Dib]

I love science.....Im a christian scientist, The problem with science.....people twist things, or believe bullshit.

Science for me, has only ever proven repeatedly that thier is a designer, in fact, I no longer think I have faith, because its evident over and over when looking at the quantum level that there is 100% designership here.

Often I find the ignorant wrapping themselves in what they believe to be science, as the truth, well let me say, science is often wrong.

Isaac Newton developed a theory of gravity/discovered it, but......his theory was wrong, as Einstien showed, whom later developed the "THEORY" of relativity, which we KNOW to be wrong, it's not quite right. of course its also not perfectly wrong, so we base a lot of science off it, because its the best we have at this time, though without a doubt we all KNOW, that its failable, thats why its a theory.

Then of course we come to evolution, often portrayed as what scientists believe HAHHAHA, which like Ive said before could not be farther from the truth, its a theory that many don't believe in, often I think the non-scientifical mind resorts back to calling upon this or that theory to reason that they are right in everything they do. I could write volumes about this, in fact outside quantum physics Im quite interested in the pyschology of how people can believe in such garbage, although, I know how

Drugs...everyone here likes them right? nope, EVERYONE EVERYWHERE, likes them, from the soberest judge to the drunkest drunk, and do you know why?

They are un avoidable, do you know how many drugs you've taken? THOUSANDS, of different chemical cravings ravage emotional/mental state over the course of your life, and we/you are all addicted. What is he talking about you say, Im talking about you on the cellular level, every emotional response you have has an individual and distinct chemical(drug) specific to you released within your brain, they chemicals are ADDICTING, (im on quite a tangent here I realize) for instance, Bob Marley.....positive vibrations, what a scientist he was, he believed in this without truly knowing, because he had seen proof.

You have free-will guys, and totally don't appreciate it, which is sad, your the only creature in the entire universe with such a gift, you have the total power to be happy, or miserable, or skeptic, or loving, or selfish or any other form you desire. All you need to make this your natural is to practice.

Every time you have an emotion, or feeling, or thought, drugs are released and over time you get addicted to these, and tend towards these things. in effect someone who is "depressed" routinely, will ALWAYS tend to be depressed, because there cells are craving that particular drug released, likewise every other thought or attitude or anything really, releases drugs that your cells then begin to crave over time, that is science my friends.

You choose who you are...you are free to do so, and by the grace of God you are free to live without him, this is a vast science, and I could write tousands of pages on it, Im just trying to enlighten people to true reality, my prayer for the world is not anything but for enlightenment to the truth. Please stop using theoretical science to make yourself appear enlightened, just because a scientist thought up a theory thats VERY outdated, stop quoting it (evolution), because todays quantum scientist KNOWS, your only doing that because a drug is released that eases your concious about things you've done in the name of self-preservation at the expense of others, since ultimately all that matters is self survival.

Hitler was the perfect evolutionist, that was what he was attempting to do, in his own words, evolve the human race, come on guys, doesn't that path of hate/self love just show you that its an extremely dangerous theology, I have found evolution to not be a very common held belief in the scientifici community, and nil in my field, as we are studying the basic building blocks, which clearly have a signature all over them.

To quote Jerry Garcia "The order of chaos of things is much too complex to be but by design" what a wonderul quantum pyschist Jerry would of made.

sorry, Im only trying to help, I know its a rambling, evolution is a strong desire to change based on need, can anyone tell me Why would monkeys living in a jungle ever have a need to be humans? whom have a much harder time adapting to the jungle /boggle?

Celebrate being human, we are truly Gods greatest creation, we are unique among all things, in our power abilities and emotions, a complex machine of wonder.

Also wondering if we are speaking of evolution, why do you all want to stop it? if its the truth of life, who here was anti-hitler? and is anyone pro looking for a cure for cancer, because its easy to follow the logic of cancer being evolutionary especially since its our cells evolving to uncontrolled multiplication in possibly the earths effort to save it self from us driving SUVs?

LMAO IDK guys you lost me on the we were once monkeys part. Peace and I hope you all decide to use your resources to find the truth of life, and not what the chemical drugs your addicting to tell you to see. but the real reality of the beauty of life.

 

[Mua Dib]

Spirituality is the neo-religion. Wtf is spirituality anyways, I always ask people and they're like I think there is a higher being man but idk what. What kind of answer is that?

spirituality is the word we know use because you all so blindly talk about religion being bad? Spirituality is jesus christ, whereas catholic,methodist,lutherian and on and on would all be individual religions based on the spirituality of Jesus? Understand better?

 

[ginjawarrior]

I love science.....Im a christian scientist, The problem with science.....people twist things, or believe bullshit.

Science for me, has only ever proven repeatedly that thier is a designer, in fact, I no longer think I have faith, because its evident over and over when looking at the quantum level that there is 100% designership here.

Often I find the ignorant wrapping themselves in what they believe to be science, as the truth, well let me say, science is often wrong.

Isaac Newton developed a theory of gravity/discovered it, but......his theory was wrong, as Einstien showed, whom later developed the "THEORY" of relativity, which we KNOW to be wrong, it's not quite right. of course its also not perfectly wrong, so we base a lot of science off it, because its the best we have at this time, though without a doubt we all KNOW, that its failable, thats why its a theory.

Then of course we come to evolution, often portrayed as what scientists believe HAHHAHA, which like Ive said before could not be farther from the truth, its a theory that many don't believe in, often I think the non-scientifical mind resorts back to calling upon this or that theory to reason that they are right in everything they do. I could write volumes about this, in fact outside quantum physics Im quite interested in the pyschology of how people can believe in such garbage, although, I know how

Drugs...everyone here likes them right? nope, EVERYONE EVERYWHERE, likes them, from the soberest judge to the drunkest drunk, and do you know why?

They are un avoidable, do you know how many drugs you've taken? THOUSANDS, of different chemical cravings ravage emotional/mental state over the course of your life, and we/you are all addicted. What is he talking about you say, Im talking about you on the cellular level, every emotional response you have has an individual and distinct chemical(drug) specific to you released within your brain, they chemicals are ADDICTING, (im on quite a tangent here I realize) for instance, Bob Marley.....positive vibrations, what a scientist he was, he believed in this without truly knowing, because he had seen proof.

You have free-will guys, and totally don't appreciate it, which is sad, your the only creature in the entire universe with such a gift, you have the total power to be happy, or miserable, or skeptic, or loving, or selfish or any other form you desire. All you need to make this your natural is to practice.

Every time you have an emotion, or feeling, or thought, drugs are released and over time you get addicted to these, and tend towards these things. in effect someone who is "depressed" routinely, will ALWAYS tend to be depressed, because there cells are craving that particular drug released, likewise every other thought or attitude or anything really, releases drugs that your cells then begin to crave over time, that is science my friends.

You choose who you are...you are free to do so, and by the grace of God you are free to live without him, this is a vast science, and I could write tousands of pages on it, Im just trying to enlighten people to true reality, my prayer for the world is not anything but for enlightenment to the truth. Please stop using theoretical science to make yourself appear enlightened, just because a scientist thought up a theory thats VERY outdated, stop quoting it (evolution), because todays quantum scientist KNOWS, your only doing that because a drug is released that eases your concious about things you've done in the name of self-preservation at the expense of others, since ultimately all that matters is self survival.

Hitler was the perfect evolutionist, that was what he was attempting to do, in his own words, evolve the human race, come on guys, doesn't that path of hate/self love just show you that its an extremely dangerous theology, I have found evolution to not be a very common held belief in the scientifici community, and nil in my field, as we are studying the basic building blocks, which clearly have a signature all over them.

To quote Jerry Garcia "The order of chaos of things is much too complex to be but by design" what a wonderul quantum pyschist Jerry would of made.

sorry, Im only trying to help, I know its a rambling, evolution is a strong desire to change based on need, can anyone tell me Why would monkeys living in a jungle ever have a need to be humans? whom have a much harder time adapting to the jungle /boggle?

Celebrate being human, we are truly Gods greatest creation, we are unique among all things, in our power abilities and emotions, a complex machine of wonder.

Also wondering if we are speaking of evolution, why do you all want to stop it? if its the truth of life, who here was anti-hitler? and is anyone pro looking for a cure for cancer, because its easy to follow the logic of cancer being evolutionary especially since its our cells evolving to uncontrolled multiplication in possibly the earths effort to save it self from us driving SUVs?

LMAO IDK guys you lost me on the we were once monkeys part. Peace and I hope you all decide to use your resources to find the truth of life, and not what the chemical drugs your addicting to tell you to see. but the real reality of the beauty of life.

lol it always amazes me how much woo can be squeezed into a post...

i must ask what is the evidence of "designership " at the quantum level you speak of?

 

[Heisenberg]

I love science.....Im a christian scientist, The problem with science.....people twist things, or believe bullshit.

I am assuming he left out a line such as, "below is an example of twisting and believing bullshit"

 

[mindphuk]

Hitler was the perfect evolutionist, that was what he was attempting to do, in his own words, evolve the human race, come on guys, doesn't that path of hate/self love just show you that its an extremely dangerous theology, I have found evolution to not be a very common held belief in the scientifici community, and nil in my field, as we are studying the basic building blocks, which clearly have a signature all over them.

Yet don't IDers and creationists accept evolution occurs on a micro level? Is what Hitler did any different than dog breeders? Trying to impugn evolutionary ideas by linking them to Hitler while ignoring that even most religionist creationist also accepts the same ideas about evolution that Hitler did is an obvious attempt to poison the well, not to mention invoking Godwin's law.

BTW, the theory of evolution is accepted by more than 98% of the scientists that work in the fields of biology and paleontology. To claim that evolution is not a widely held belief by scientists is a clear lie and unsupported by any evidence. That doesn't even touch on the equivocation of conflating the theory of evolution with the fact that organisms evolved. Evolutionary theory is only about the mechanisms, not about the reality of universal common ancestry.

sorry, Im only trying to help, I know its a rambling, evolution is a strong desire to change based on need, can anyone tell me Why would monkeys living in a jungle ever have a need to be humans? whom have a much harder time adapting to the jungle /boggle?

Didn't you once claim you were a biologist? That's pretty sad if that's your interpretation of variation and natural selection. Show me what part of Origin of Species does Darwin mention that organisms evolve through either 'desire' or 'need.' Are you able to find such a claim on any website devoted to the science of evolution? Talkorigins? Panda's Thumb? Pharyngula? Smithsonian?

Celebrate being human, we are truly Gods greatest creation, we are unique among all things, in our power abilities and emotions, a complex machine of wonder.

Why do we need to believe in a god to celebrate our uniqueness? Belief in god or gods is what keeps most of us separate from one another. Just look at all of the hate directed at those that believe in other gods and those that believe in none. Indefensible beliefs in certain religious doctrines is what allows normally good people to perform evil acts. Do you think without religion that we would have parents in Nigeria killing their children if the bible wasn't given authority and allowed people to believe in such nonsense as witches?

Also wondering if we are speaking of evolution, why do you all want to stop it? if its the truth of life, who here was anti-hitler? and is anyone pro looking for a cure for cancer, because its easy to follow the logic of cancer being evolutionary especially since its our cells evolving to uncontrolled multiplication in possibly the earths effort to save it self from us driving SUVs?

Are you saying that acceptance of evolution means that we should give up attempting to rise above our station as mere animals? Do our thoughts and evolved empathy for other people and animals disappear if we accept evolution? Sorry, I just don't understand what point you are trying to make.

LMAO IDK guys you lost me on the we were once monkeys part. Peace and I hope you all decide to use your resources to find the truth of life, and not what the chemical drugs your addicting to tell you to see. but the real reality of the beauty of life.

All we want is for people to see the reality and beauty of life but we don't need to believe in a sky wizard to do so.
If we are not apes, was the creationist Linnaeus wrong when he categorized us as one? Remember, this was done prior to Darwin. If we are not apes, what are we? Do we not actually belong on a branch of the tree of life? You are a scientist and you actually think we were specially created separately from all other animals? Do yo think there is a basal 'kind' of each type of animals and plant? Do you have empirical evidence for this belief?

 

[Padawanbater2]

I love science.....Im a christian scientist, The problem with science.....people twist things, or believe bullshit.

No, you are not, cleeeeeeearly.

The problem with science is that ignorant people don't understand it.

Science for me, has only ever proven repeatedly that thier is a designer, in fact, I no longer think I have faith, because its evident over and over when looking at the quantum level that there is 100% designership here.

ROFL! If that's the case, you don't understand what faith is either.

But lets see what you've got.. What do you see at the quantum level that you believe is clearly designed?

Often I find the ignorant wrapping themselves in what they believe to be science, as the truth, well let me say, science is often wrong.

That's the beauty of it. PS. who do you think figures out something might be wrong?... other scientists, dick.

Isaac Newton developed a theory of gravity/discovered it, but......his theory was wrong, as Einstien showed, whom later developed the "THEORY" of relativity, which we KNOW to be wrong, it's not quite right. of course its also not perfectly wrong, so we base a lot of science off it, because its the best we have at this time, though without a doubt we all KNOW, that its failable, thats why its a theory.

You don't understand the meaning of any of these words you're emphasizing... Seriously man, you need to understand the difference between the scientific meaning of theory and the layman one.

And again, that is the beauty, essence and value of science. It progresses.

Then of course we come to evolution, often portrayed as what scientists believe HAHHAHA, which like Ive said before could not be farther from the truth, its a theory that many don't believe in, often I think the non-scientifical mind resorts back to calling upon this or that theory to reason that they are right in everything they do.

That's a straight up lie. If you don't accept the theory of evolution AT THIS POINT, the bottom line is you are not a scientist.

Good analogies might be you calling yourself a doctor but you don't accept the medical explanations for digestion or circulation.. A history teacher who denies the Holocaust...

Please stop using theoretical science to make yourself appear enlightened, just because a scientist thought up a theory thats VERY outdated, stop quoting it (evolution), because todays quantum scientist KNOWS, your only doing that because a drug is released that eases your concious about things you've done in the name of self-preservation at the expense of others, since ultimately all that matters is self survival.

ROFL! I'll give you credit... you phrased that in one of the most creative ways I've seen yet... but it still amounts to nonsense. Basically you're saying I believe in evolution because a chemical in my brain, as you keep referring to as a "drug" (which isn't the same thing, at all) is released when I'm somehow able to trick myself into buying it that makes me OK with the terrible shit I've done in my life. Brilliant. I mean, honestly, fu-king-brilliant.

Let's go through that... as I've said, I've heard it proposed before, just not in this exact way...

1. it is impossible, let me repeat that, IMPOSSIBLE, to trick oneself into believing something. In the exact same sense, I can't beat myself at a game of chess, I can't hide objects from myself, etc. So right off the bat, strike one...

2. belief is not a choice

3. I do good things because I feel good doing them and I know it increases the common good within our species. Conversely, I don't do bad things for the exact same reasons. Not for any kind of relief from the guilt I feel from doing terrible shit to people all day. That's where your - check it out, I'm actually going to use the word in the correct context right here, take note! - theory gets off the wall insane. Lets be honest, if I was out doing terrible shit to people all day... why would I feel any guilt about it? If I did feel guilt, I'd stop.

Interesting how giving something a little thought works, eh?

Hitler was the perfect evolutionist, that was what he was attempting to do, in his own words, evolve the human race, come on guys, doesn't that path of hate/self love just show you that its an extremely dangerous theology

...ugh God... not this shit again..

How do you not understand that IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT HITLER BELIEVED, he probably believed chocolate cake was tasty and pussy felt good, does that make cake automatically taste like shit and pussy feel bad?! THIIIIIIIIINK! That's not a scientific thought process buddy. This is one of the most common fallacies creationists make, you should be embarrassed for bringing it up it's that retarded. Not to mention, not exaggerating either, this is probably the 40 or 50th time I've addressed it on this forum alone...

I have found evolution to not be a very common held belief in the scientifici community, and nil in my field

You're either not looking in the right places or completely biased. Or this is just another straight up lie. Evolution is accepted by the VAST majority of the scientific community and that fact can't be disputed.

as we are studying the basic building blocks, which clearly have a signature all over them.

Be specific.

evolution is a strong desire to change based on need, can anyone tell me Why would monkeys living in a jungle ever have a need to be humans? whom have a much harder time adapting to the jungle /boggle?

You don't understand evolution.

 

[karri0n]

spirituality is the word we know use because you all so blindly talk about religion being bad? Spirituality is jesus christ, whereas catholic,methodist,lutherian and on and on would all be individual religions based on the spirituality of Jesus? Understand better?

"Jesus Christ" is not the definition of spirituality.

Ass.

New rule:

Whether you are an atheist, buddhist, Creationist, "paranormal expert",

FUCKING KNOW DEFINITIONS OF THINGS before making broad statements about them.

Here's a list of words that the "experts" of rollitup here have used when they obviously have no idea the definition:

1. Religion (especially the rabid anti-christian atheists out there who seem to think the word means "I follow the christian bible")

2. Atheist (strangely it seems to be mostly people claiming to be atheists that don't know this one. protip: before it became hipster to be "atheist" it was a derogatory term)

3. Evisural/Evisceral (this one isn't even a word)


Oh and stop claiming to be a "scientist" like it's going to help your fucking point. Even if you are(and if you were, you would realize this), your word on the internet is completely useless. Or, would any scientists care to post their real name, job title, and a picture of themselves holding up a "rollitup.org" sign on this website dedicated to cultivation of an illegal substance? Nobody gives a shit who you say you are, or even who you really are, in real life. Your merit in this place is judged by the content of your posts. If you can't string two sentences together to make a coherent thought, don't know basic grammar, or can't make a point without spewing a bunch of horseshit(usually the case in the pro-religion side) or hate speech(the anti-religion side), then you obviously are not qualified to be in discussion with people who can.

One more on the "scientist" note - the company that I work for just fired someone who had previously had 20 years experience as a scientist(his ACTUAL job title) because he just couldn't get a grasp of the work he needed to do. Most of our staff is hired just out of college, and this is menial office work I'm talking about. Being a "scientist" does not mean your thoughts and opinions are somehow more valid than those of others.

 

[Heisenberg]

Anything that has to qualify itself by incorporating the word "science" in it's title, is never science.

Computer science = not science
Christian science = not science
Scientology = not science
Entomology = science
Astronomy = science

 

[destructo]

Science doesn't seem to get a bad rap until it directly disagrees with someones beliefs. Creationists, for example, love to use science when it seems to confirm their claims, but the second it conflicts then it's dismissed in favor of god's mystery.

Pop culture loves to portrait the scientists as a naive narrow minded nerd who dismisses the possibilities of supernatural ideas. How many times was Scully left looking like an idiot trying to explain UFO sightings as odd electrical storms? When Hollywood needs to explain why a little girl can set things on fire with her mind, they say something like "science doesn't have all the answers". That's just fine for story telling, but many people adopt this attitude to justify their paranormal beliefs.

Science is accused of being closed minded. What I found personally is that people call you close minded when they are unable to get you to yield to their bad logic. Many people have an attitude such as "logic and reason are okay but I trust what I feel and that's what I believe". Religious people call that faith; giving oneself permission to be ignorant or persist in delusion. Many people have no conflict compromising reason to believe just about any subject, not just spiritual. When you are unwilling to compromise, they label you closed minded.

Science is a systematic way of carefully and thoroughly observing nature while using consistent logic to evaluate the results.

Which part of that is undesirable? Is it being thorough, using careful observation, being systematic, or using consistent logic?

I've heard the closed-minded argument too many times from pseudoscientific and supernatural believers. The ones that refuse to accept the fact that what they believe might be false. In reality, they are the closed-minded ones. I am willing to critically look at both sides of the argument, however, I will not accept something if there is no reason to, simple as that. I don't see the logic in going out of my way to believe in something without reason.

These people get so caught up in believing something that they completely ignore or create excuses for anything that might sway their beliefs. All the while they put enormous meaning behind anything that might confirm what they believe in. In the end, their mind is filled with memories of success with little to no recollection of failures. Thus, the credulous people stay credulous even when faced with overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

When someone calls me closed-minded in a conversation about these things, it means they have run out of things to say. If they had some meaningful evidence to present, obviously they would do it.

 

[destructo]

Anything that has to qualify itself by incorporating the word "science" in it's title, is never science.

Computer science = not science
Christian science = not science
Scientology = not science
Entomology = science
Astronomy = science

I disagree with the first one. I'm majoring in computer science. Science is one of the fundamental principles of the field.

http://www.cs.gmu.edu/cne/pjd/PUBS/CACMcols/cacmApr05.pdf

 

[mellokitty]

so i only gave this quick skim so far, but have you considered the idea that there's stuff going on that's beyond our level of science?
let me be clear:

i love science.

as a method, i think it's about the most realistic means to go about finding explanations for an inquisitive species intent on learning about its home environment, as we are. that said, it's a system based on asking a question and then finding answers to it; the very fact that there are still scientists *doing science today suggests that we haven't come close to asking all the questions, to me anyway.
i think, given enough science, anything can be explained. enough being the key word. i believe in evolution, but i also don't disbelieve in ghosts (aka sentient and/or nonsentient energetic entities), for instance. i believe there are energies at play that our science doesn't have the instruments to measure (yet).

as for god? i met it once. it was a point of light. but dude, i'd just eaten my first brownies and i was *really *high....

 

[Heisenberg]

so i only gave this quick skim so far, but have you considered the idea that there's stuff going on that's beyond our level of science?
let me be clear:

i love science.

as a method, i think it's about the most realistic means to go about finding explanations for an inquisitive species intent on learning about its home environment, as we are. that said, it's a system based on asking a question and then finding answers to it; the very fact that there are still scientists *doing science today suggests that we haven't come close to asking all the questions, to me anyway.
i think, given enough science, anything can be explained. enough being the key word. i believe in evolution, but i also don't disbelieve in ghosts (aka sentient and/or nonsentient energetic entities), for instance. i believe there are energies at play that our science doesn't have the instruments to measure (yet).

as for god? i met it once. it was a point of light. but dude, i'd just eaten my first brownies and i was *really *high....

Science also does not disbelieve in ghosts, it just doesn't acknowledge any evidence that they exist. When science makes any conclusion, it is with the understanding that new evidence can always change things. New ways to detect and measure come with advances in technology, and science is the first to step up and correct itself based on new evidence. However, when you point to something and say there is no evidence because science can't detect/measure it, you are actually using the fact that there is no evidence, as evidence, aka an appeal to ignorance. What science has done, is look at evidence of ghosts and found worldly things to explain it away. There are many things unexplainable by science, but ghosts, or rather any evidence of ghosts, isn't one of them. It not as if ghostly things are happening that has scientist puzzled, or as if science hasn't studied the evidence. All science can say is that we have no plausible reason to believe ghosts could exist, and no evidence to suggest they do. I realize ghosts were just an example, but we must be careful not to fool ourselves into believing special pleading on any subject.

Note how science takes a different view of UFO/aliens. Science says we certainly have plausible reason to think they could exist, but just not evidence suggesting they do. Science is very careful and specific even when expressing doubt.

 

[Kartel Kriminal]

The reason why you can't put science ahead of any religion is because the bulk of any science is based on theories just as religion is. Scientific findings don't always conclude things with a 100% proof. Theres a margin of error. People like Heisenburg place belief in studies that do not render true definate facts. Logic can't defeat faith.

 

[Mike Young]

Majority of science is based on theories? Where do you come up with this stuff? Science relys on theories to work toward conclusive facts. Religion is based on faith. Something that can't be seen, heard, measured, smelled, tasted, and yes felt. You may think you FEEL it, but that's all happening in your brain.

 

[Kartel Kriminal]

Science relys on theories to work toward conclusive facts.

Conclusive facts that are usually never found sounds more like it. Once a theory is embraced, its ideas become solidified as facts within the scientific community.

Theory of relativity = never proven to be true
Theory of gravity = never proven to be true
Theory of evolution = contrary to popular belief NOT PROVEN TO BE TRUE

The word “theory” means a number of different things, depending on the context. In the maths and sciences, for example, a theory is a tested and testable concept which is used to explain an occurrence. “Theory” usually refers to the non-practical aspect of work, unproven things, and speculation of a single idea.

 

[Mike Young]

The reason why you can't put science ahead of any religion is because the bulk of any science is based on theories just as religion is. Scientific findings don't always conclude things with a 100% proof. Theres a margin of error. People like Heisenburg place belief in studies that do not render true definate facts. Logic can't defeat faith.

Nice edit. Kinda like re-writing the bible to make it more relevant...

 

[Kartel Kriminal]

Nice edit. Kinda like re-writing the bible to make it more relevant...

More like clearly directing my post towards a certain induvidual. Your trying to hard now bud. Do you plan to address the issue at hand? What scientific theories have been proven lately?

 

[Heisenberg]

The reason why you can't put science ahead of any religion is because the bulk of any science is based on theories just as religion is. Scientific findings don't always conclude things with a 100% proof. Theres a margin of error. People like Heisenburg place belief in studies that do not render true definate facts. Logic can't defeat faith.

One glaring difference is that religion makes a theory and then goes looking for evidence to support it. Science looks at evidence and then develops a theory to explain it. Science then tries it's best to falsify the theory. In other words, it tries every way possible to render the theory false. When all efforts to falsify are exhausted, science then hands over the theory to the rest of the community and says, can anyone replicate or falsify these results? After the findings pass peer review, conclusions are then accepted. Scientific finding always come with error bars, it would be inaccurate to never admit mistakes. How often does religion try to falsify it's theories, or admit it's was wrong on any subject? Logical people place belief in studies which best accomplish the task of explaining our world, through a diligent and nuanced system of doubt. Logic does not try to defeat faith, but never the less renders it meaningless. Faith is giving ones self permission to be ignorant, or to persist in delusion. Faith is a way of satisfying questions without providing answers.

 

[Mike Young]

More like clearly directing my post towards a certain induvidual. Your trying to hard now bud. Do you plan to address the issue at hand? What scientific theories have been proven lately?

You've got much bigger problems than me. You have the likes of heisenberg & mindphuk to deal with. In the deep end with the sharks. I'm more like a pirana, in that I don't really possess any real cunning or strategy. I just come in for a quick lunch, and leave before the real predators come. Good luck to ya.

You should quit adding to your older posts. It's a bit deceptive.

 

[Kartel Kriminal]

You should quit adding to your older posts. It's a bit deceptive.

I feel this is both irrelevant and ironic. Especially since the portion of your post^ I quoted above was edited less than an hour after mine was revised.

When all efforts to falsify are exhausted, science then hands over the theory to the rest of the community and says, can anyone replicate or falsify these results? After the findings pass peer review, conclusions are then accepted.

Sounds alot like how the originators of any holy text decided to edit, revise, pick and choose what would be in their holy final draft. Regaurdless of concrete evidence.

How often does religion try to falsify it's theories, or admit it's was wrong on any subject?

I wouldn't know since I don't belong to a religion.

Faith is giving ones self permission to be ignorant, or to persist in delusion. Faith is a way of satisfying questions without providing answers.

Is there no aspect of faith within science? I'll answer for you, yes there is, and once again what you tell me is subjective. The answers you speak of are relevant to who exactly? The important questions about life, nature, earth and its inhabitants that I feel most people need to know haven't been satisfied by science because they can't be. A person who places whole hearted belief in science/logic is pursuing answers to questions that science/logic can not be reached (as of now). Therefore science also answers questions without providing answers.