Scientists - How was everything created from nothing?
Posted 10-22-2014 at 03:05 PM by cupper3
added
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unsettomati
Not even remotely. You are clearly conflating the word 'theory' in scientific terms, which means a model which has been rigoriously tested over and over by many individuals and which has been determined to comport with all available experiemental data in tests devised so that it could be proven false, with the colloquial use of the word 'theory', which means nothing more than any old conjecture, no matter how baseless.
Here's an example: the theory of gravity.
When amateur astronomers spot a new comet (it's almost always amateurs who do so, because there are so many more of them) swinging in from the Oort Cloud, knocked from its distant orbit by some sort of interstellar perturbation, they watch its movements for a few days, and then they plot its course. It's course is complex. Every planet in the solar system will exert an influential force on it, altering its course. So, too, will all the dozens of moons, and the myriad asteroids - though many will be so small that their effects will be too small to perceive. Anyway, if that comet is going to crash into Venus, we'll know about it months in advance and long before it's actually hurtling towards Venus, or even the place Venus will ultimately be when the impact occurs. Why? The theory of gravity - which also allows us to predict the Venusian movements that will be necessary for the impact to occur. The same theory tells us there will be solar eclipse tomorrow (October 23, 2014), visible over much of North America - and this eclipse was known to be coming hundreds of years ago. And when can never prove the eclipse will occur before it happens. Still, we know it will. Faith? That's laughable.
And, yes, it does matter that millions of physicians recommend antibiotics, and not sacrificing a chicken, for bacterial infections - and the notion this contains 'an element of faith', to quote you, is beyond absurd.
Your attempt to equate applied scientific knowledge with religious faith is a complete fail.
Here's an example: the theory of gravity.
When amateur astronomers spot a new comet (it's almost always amateurs who do so, because there are so many more of them) swinging in from the Oort Cloud, knocked from its distant orbit by some sort of interstellar perturbation, they watch its movements for a few days, and then they plot its course. It's course is complex. Every planet in the solar system will exert an influential force on it, altering its course. So, too, will all the dozens of moons, and the myriad asteroids - though many will be so small that their effects will be too small to perceive. Anyway, if that comet is going to crash into Venus, we'll know about it months in advance and long before it's actually hurtling towards Venus, or even the place Venus will ultimately be when the impact occurs. Why? The theory of gravity - which also allows us to predict the Venusian movements that will be necessary for the impact to occur. The same theory tells us there will be solar eclipse tomorrow (October 23, 2014), visible over much of North America - and this eclipse was known to be coming hundreds of years ago. And when can never prove the eclipse will occur before it happens. Still, we know it will. Faith? That's laughable.
And, yes, it does matter that millions of physicians recommend antibiotics, and not sacrificing a chicken, for bacterial infections - and the notion this contains 'an element of faith', to quote you, is beyond absurd.
Your attempt to equate applied scientific knowledge with religious faith is a complete fail.
Total Comments 0
