People do not Understand Science, yeah I'm talking to you Creationist so bring it!

[Heisenberg]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=7Emen4R7Ch4

here are both sides

I enjoyed this video. I watched all the parts. Never seen it before. Are there any certain issues they bring up you want to discuss?

Some thoughts...

They seem to assume that if Darwin was wrong, then god must have done it. Do you feel it is fair to make such a conclusion? Do you think that because something is complicated and unexplained, it is forever unexplainable and therefore needs a magical explanation? I didn't see them present any evidence that a deity is responsible.

They seem to have the misunderstanding that evolution is random. They keep saying that things are too complicated to have just happened. They use the example, if you put a bunch of letters in a box and shake them, you do not end up with a book. Evolution however is not random. It's mechanism is a very specific filter called natural selection, and it has been operating for a very long time. What if we add the concept of selection to the words in a box example? What if we shake the box and it produces a jumbled string of letters, but we do it until the first letter is 'I'. We then select 'I' and shake the box again until we find 'T'. We select the 'T' and put it with the 'I' and shake again. Do you see where this is going? At some point, with the proper selection and if we shake the box enough times, we can spell out "It was a dark and stormy night".

Evolution is not just trial and error, it's trial and error with a specific selector, survival. Survival is challenged by specific pressures called the environment, and only those tries which provide harmony or an advantage over the environment are kept. Is it really that difficult to imagine this process, over many centuries, producing an insect wing?

 

[Heisenberg]

Having said that, I think that science is slowly catching up to the various religions in recognizing that some sort of guiding hand created our universe.

There is no evidence of this in scientific literature. In fact if any thing, atheism seems to be more largely represented than ever. With each year there are new discoveries in multiple independent fields of science which add to the serious doubt we can apply to creationism. The more science 'catches up', the less creationism makes sense.

 

[JustCoasting]

Well, I was thinking that quantum and string theory are catching up to the religions' notions. Or, in the least, going in the general direction.

Science still leaves us with a miriad of unanswered questions.

 

[JustCoasting]

Religion tries to answer our questions, claims that it does, and expects us to follow blindly. Science always asks that we question.

And I do question just as you do, Heisenberg. It's just that in any of our times (in human terms) we've never had the technology to confirm or refute the claims that religions make.

 

[Heisenberg]

Well, I was thinking that quantum and string theory are catching up to the religions' notions. Or, in the least, going in the general direction.

Science still leaves us with a miriad of unanswered questions.

Quantum study produces some spooky stuff for sure. It's all pretty interesting and still mysterious, but I am not sure any of it supports creationism or a divine presents. I guess I am not sure which notion you mean.

There is more unanswered by science than not, but the point is, science is very careful about the answers it does give us, and all answers are subject to change with new evidence. Religion gives us much fewer and more narrow answers than science, and it's answers have nothing to set them apart from pure guess or delusion, nor have they changed in light of centuries of discovery.

 

[cannabineer]

As a useful first approximation I like Gould's concept of "nonoverlapping magisteria", or schools of thought. Science is specialized toward asking questions and collecting answers about what we can observe and manipulate. Religion fits elsewhere and operates otherwise. cn

 

[PbHash]

JustCoasting: I think you need to look up what an agnostic is because your description is inaccurate.

 

[eye exaggerate]

JustCoasting: I think you need to look up what an agnostic is because your description is inaccurate.

...no worries, he just doesn't know

 

[axionjaxson]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=wivgDck1l88

 

[axionjaxson]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=wivgDck1l88

heres an interesting video.

 

[mindphuk]

heres an interesting video.

This is a thread about people that don't understand science, are not able to think skeptically, and you think an hour long video where someone reads from a book about some guy's personal philosophy following a NDE is interesting? What would have been more interesting is if you presented your own ideas and beliefs, even discussed what it is that you found so interesting about such a boring and worthless video.

 

[VILEPLUME]

As with al my posts, debating is welcome.

I'm frustrated with the average persons understanding of what science is. A prime example of this is letting creationism into the classroom of science.
Science is a systematic way of gathering knowledge through testable explanations and predictions. The "scientific method" is the hallmark of gathering data and knowledge. The data MUST be empirical and measurable for it to be considered scientific.
One must be as objective as possible in an attempt to exclude biased and extraneous variables.


This is a basic guideline to gathering data.
1. Define a question 2. Gather information and resources (observe) 3. Form an explanatory hypothesis 4. Test the hypothesis by performing an experiment and collecting data in a reproducible manner 5. Analyze the data 6. Interpret the data and draw conclusions that serve as a starting point for new hypothesis 7. Publish results 8. Retest (frequently done by other scientists).
All of this is subject to peer review.

Now explain to me how creationism fits into this. It doesn't so it should be kept out of science class.

And people say Christians are pushing about what they believe in!

 

[Heisenberg]

heres an interesting video.

I watched your last video so that we might discuss some points that you find interesting. I took the time to give you some thoughts and questions. You seem uninterested in exploring and discussing these things, and just want to spread your propaganda apparently. I wont be watching this video.

 

[Dislexicmidget2021]

Sooner or later the creationists point of view will be thrown to the side as illogical reasoning by scientific principle alone,The same can be said for theology its only a matter of time before people actualy "wisen up" and take what they observe for what it actualy is and not as something they imagine or believe it to be.

 

[eye exaggerate]

Sooner or later the creationists point of view will be thrown to the side as illogical reasoning by scientific principle alone,The same can be said for theology its only a matter of time before people actualy "wisen up" and take what they observe for what it actualy is and not as something they imagine or believe it to be.

...sorry man, I don't believe this for a second. And apparently, I believe in some pretty unbelievable stuff

 

[Farfenugen]

You simply cannot reason or debate logically with fundamentalists, no matter what persuasion they may be. Except of course, those looped out Scientologists, they're just plain whacko.

 

[Catchin22]

And people say Christians are pushing about what they believe in!

He was perfectly logical, you are not. This isn't about what he believes in, it is what we base REALITY on! Got it? We don't base that on your HUNCH that there's some God looking over us. Science and understanding of our reality gives you the life you have, the things you own. If it was wrong, we couldn't build the damn computer you're using to type thoughtless comments like the one above. Sorry if I sound harsh but you religious people have NO clue the damage you contribute by supporting nonsense.

You simply cannot reason or debate logically with fundamentalists, no matter what persuasion they may be. Except of course, those looped out Scientologists, they're just plain whacko.

Case in point, the above quote.

 

[Hepheastus420]

*pulls up chair. Sits down. Lights bowl. Watches pointless arguing.

Is this helping us advance as humans?

 

[Hepheastus420]

Man, I'm a hypocrite....

 

[PbHash]

*pulls up chair. Sits down. Lights bowl. Watches pointless arguing.

Is this helping us advance as humans?

I like to think that someone reading these threads may start thinking about what they have been told, what they believe, and maybe take a look at real science. MAYBE it will get some people to think, "hey maybe I should take a Real look at science. So yeah I hope it helps