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.
It amazes me that threads like this still exist. The theory of evolution is better understood by scientists than the theory of gravity, and that if something is just a theory then is much not be well understood.
Yet when evolution is brought into the discussion, suddenly we are looking at the entire universe and not our small little blue planet we live on where so far is the only place that we have detected life. Cosmology and the theory of Big Bang should not even be brought into the discussion unless you are trying to figure out questions surrounding why carbon is essential for all earth based life so far. Why is O2 so essential to most life? It does however not really have anything to do with evolution and natural selection. If you want to get to the point and ask an Agnostic Atheist if I know how life was created I will of course say "no, not yet." And we have entire fields of study where people are looking into that very question and in that research are discovering more and more about the human body than we ever have before. Information that will help fight diseases and other ailments.
While the other and opposite proposal is to say. "God did it" and it was supernatural and no one can see it or ever know how it was done.
Does that pretty much sum up many of your positions?
It amazes me that threads like this still exist. The theory of evolution is better understood by scientists than the theory of gravity, and that if something is just a theory then is much not be well understood.
That is a political statement, not a scientific statement.
The scientific establishment has become a political organization, with its own "truth" that no one is supposed to question.
The scientific establishment says it has figured out exactly how and why life evolved. And if you are skeptical and ask for evidence you are called a science denier.
More details are constantly being observed, and this is mistaken for understanding. Technology advances rapidly, and this is mistaken for scientific understanding.
The scientific establishment keeps promising cures for the diseases we are most afraid of, but cures do not happen. Just more deadly poison drugs that might extend life several months.
Science has great value, but the contemporary scientific establishment has become the opposite of real science, in some ways. We can't question their consensus, they are the ultimate authorities.
That is a political statement, not a scientific statement.
The scientific establishment has become a political organization, with its own "truth" that no one is supposed to question.
The scientific establishment says it has figured out exactly how and why life evolved. And if you are skeptical and ask for evidence you are called a science denier.
More details are constantly being observed, and this is mistaken for understanding. Technology advances rapidly, and this is mistaken for scientific understanding.
The scientific establishment keeps promising cures for the diseases we are most afraid of, but cures do not happen. Just more deadly poison drugs that might extend life several months.
Science has great value, but the contemporary scientific establishment has become the opposite of real science, in some ways. We can't question their consensus, they are the ultimate authorities.
not true. any scientist worth his weight will say question us. In fact, that stance is a requirement in the scientific community. "question everything". 'retest everything, again and again."
where scientists differ from religion sages is that we can "change our minds"when new information arises that we didn't know before.
now, there are dishonest lead scientists. In fact at least as many as dishonest religious leaders. thats due to them both being leaders of people. leaders tend to be a little more self serving than the masses. the day to day scientist has no problem with the day to day religious.
The mainstream scientific establishment is organized. It includes Wikipedia, Facebook, and Google. Also the New England Skeptics Society and its blog Science Based Medicine.
All these people THINK they are being skeptical and scientific, but they are really promoting a world view. They are protecting their status as the source of truth.
They disguise themselves cleverly as "skeptical" and "scientific." Willing to change their opinions as the evidence changes. This is an illusion.
They fight against alternative medicine and alternative science. For them, it is really a war. To them, any kind of spiritual beliefs are delusions.
They are influential, especially now since they control Wikipedia and Google, our major sources of information.
They are influential, especially now since they control Wikipedia and Google, our major sources of information.
This is one of your problems. Google is a search engine, not a source of information in and of itself. Wikipedia is a crowdsourced database/encyclopedia. It isn't meant to be a comprehensive source of knowledge. It has a few pages related to evolution, whereas the actual body of knowledge that comprises evolution is millions of pages long. Go to any decent university library and look at the shelves and shelves of books on evolution. Then think about the fact that most information on evolution is in journals, and you are probably looking at less than 1% of it.
You are buying into conspiracy theories. You aren't working with real knowledge or understanding.
This is one of your problems. Google is a search engine, not a source of information in and of itself. Wikipedia is a crowdsourced database/encyclopedia. It isn't meant to be a comprehensive source of knowledge. It has a few pages related to evolution, whereas the actual body of knowledge that comprises evolution is millions of pages long. Go to any decent university library and look at the shelves and shelves of books on evolution. Then think about the fact that most information on evolution is in journals, and you are probably looking at less than 1% of it.
You are buying into conspiracy theories. You aren't working with real knowledge or understanding.
Wikipedia is edited. They will not allow entries they consider "unscientific." This is a known fact, not a conspiracy theory.
Evolution is proven beyond doubt. That is not what I am talking about. I keep having to repeat this.
And Google decides what results we will see, and rates their "relevance." No one knows exactly what Google does, it's all secret. Not a conspiracy theory, just a fact. Google is pro-"science," like Wikipedia and Facebook.
The mainstream scientific establishment is organized. It includes Wikipedia, Facebook, and Google. Also the New England Skeptics Society and its blog Science Based Medicine.
All these people THINK they are being skeptical and scientific, but they are really promoting a world view. They are protecting their status as the source of truth.
They disguise themselves cleverly as "skeptical" and "scientific." Willing to change their opinions as the evidence changes. This is an illusion.
They fight against alternative medicine and alternative science. For them, it is really a war. To them, any kind of spiritual beliefs are delusions.
They are influential, especially now since they control Wikipedia and Google, our major sources of information.
Wikipedia is edited. They will not allow entries they consider "unscientific." This is a known fact, not a conspiracy theory.
Evolution is proven beyond doubt. That is not what I am talking about. I keep having to repeat this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good4Nothin
And Google decides what results we will see, and rates their "relevance." No one knows exactly what Google does, it's all secret. Not a conspiracy theory, just a fact. Google is pro-"science," like Wikipedia and Facebook.
They are also, by the way, progressive Democrats.
You haven't addressed my point that either is an inadequate source of information in the first place.
As for some editorial control, you talk like these are flaws, rather than benefits. Giving preferential placement to proven facts is a good thing.
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.
