Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"Belief" is the same as faith. It is a religious concept, which is not really an appropriate term to use when talking about science.
That you would use this word to describe your relationship with the field of science is troubling if not surprising. Personally, I am truly fascinated by science. I respect the work that scientists do, even when they do not get it right, which happens frequently. I certainly do not believe that it is appropriate to defer to these people as if they are less likely to be wrong in their field than other people are in their chose professions, which of course they aren't.
Science is not an all or nothing scenario. Belief in God and the belief systems that go along with that is a matter of faith, as people of faith will be happy to tell you. Science on the other hand, is a case-by-case arrangement, where what is right and wrong is picked and chosen, then eventually is usually discarded later for a newer model.
I was very excited about the series Cosmos before it aired. I watched the first two episodes before I deleted it from by DVR recording list, because of the anti-Christian zealotry being promoted by Neil deGrasse Tyson on this show, which was supposed to be about "the cosmos".
I wish it had of just been about science, which is what I and many others tuned in to watch. How disappointing. This sort of anti-Christian hostility was not only disrespectful and offensive, it was entirely unnecessary. It truly did not have to be that way.
I believe in science because there is evidence and research to back it up. I have yet to see evidence and research to back up a single religion.
I believe in science because there is evidence and research to back it up. I have yet to see evidence and research to back up a single religion.
Well sorry Tyson ruined Cosmos for you.
There is not evidence and research to back up belief in "science". There is evidence to support any number of hypotheses in a myriad of different fields, many of these hypotheses which conflict with one another.
The way you are holding this out is as if you worship science AS a religion. And that it was never intended to be.
There is not evidence and research to back up belief in "science". There is evidence to support any number of hypotheses in a myriad of different fields, many of these hypotheses which conflict with one another.
The way you are holding this out is as if you worship science AS a religion. And that it was never intended to be.
What does that even mean? The core of science is evidence, test-ability, and repeat-ability. The whole reason for it is to research, discover, document, and advance our knowledge.
What does that even mean? The core of science is evidence, test-ability, and repeat-ability. The whole reason for it is to research, discover, document, and advance our knowledge.
What does your post even mean? The previous poster said:
Quote:
I believe in science because there is evidence and research to back it up.
Could someone please provide me a link or some support for that statement? Not for some singular scientific hypothesis, but for "science" as a whole.
"Science" is not an all or nothing proposition. It is a case-by-case, never ending process of examination, experimentation, evaluation and debate. Nothing is ever "settled" in the field of science. Every hypothesis and even every scientific "law" is always open for scrutiny, re-evaluation and debate.
That is the nature of science. And it is always on a case-by-case basis. It is not now nor has it ever been a proposition of science being an all inclusive, take-it or leave-it, faith based belief system.
There is not evidence and research to back up belief in "science". There is evidence to support any number of hypotheses in a myriad of different fields, many of these hypotheses which conflict with one another.
The way you are holding this out is as if you worship science AS a religion. And that it was never intended to be.
Cute, I am not a scientist, all I can do is go on the research that those in science do. Let me know when research in religion proves that your god is real.
Cute, I am not a scientist, all I can do is go on the research that those in science do. Let me know when research in religion proves that your god is real.
Please let me know when research into religion proves God is not real.
What does your post even mean? The previous poster said:
Could someone please provide me a link or some support for that statement? Not for some singular scientific hypothesis, but for "science" as a whole.
"Science" is not an all or nothing proposition. It is a case-by-case, never ending process of examination, experimentation, evaluation and debate. Nothing is ever "settled" in the field of science. Every hypothesis and even every scientific "law" is always open for scrutiny, re-evaluation and debate.
That is the nature of science. And it is always on a case-by-case basis. It is not now nor has it ever been a proposition of science being an all inclusive, take-it or leave-it, faith based belief system.
True, in the case of your thread, I agree with the research that has been done that shows global warming is actually happening. Should we go case by case to satisfy you?
Please let me know when research into religion proves God is not real.
How exactly is that possible? If you cannot prove something is real, then it isn't real. Of course then that must mean my unicorn farm is real because you cannot prove that it isn't.
No, the right-wing scumbags who were scared into supporting torture are cowards. Whiny, too, considering how many soiled their diapers over the fact a total strange mentioned that December 25th is Isaac Newton's birthday. The whining coming from right-wingers in this thread is just pathetic. Are you all six years old or something?
True, in the case of your thread, I agree with the research that has been done that shows global warming is actually happening. Should we go case by case to satisfy you?
The Earth has certainly warmed or cooled, depending on when you start your measurements. I am partial to the last ice age. Since then, the Earth has certainly warmed.
So, you see, I do actually believe that "global warming" is a scientifically accurate proposition.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
