Guybrush

Science never claimed the world was flat. Science is based on scientific methods and criterias like hypothesis testing which wasn't really formulated back then. People didn't believe those things because because they were based on science and so you can't just attribute any non-religious idea people have had about our world in the past to science.

__________________
Something Completely Different

MAStudent

Science/scientific method/physiology/biology/split tailed t-tests/within one standard deviation/etc once claimed that traction was good for a bone fracture.

Turns out it is the worst thing for a fracture. Bones need stress to respond with bone growth/ healing. So the very attribute that gives science the "higher ground" is the attribute that schould be looked at more closely. Namely, that we go with the best explanation until a better one comes along. If there has been no evidence to date that satisfies you. just say that. Don't try to argue down people who have had evidence that satisfies them.

After all, who really knows? The most accurate thing we can say is that we are just creepy monkeys and our logic and evidence gathering methods are inherently flawed.

__________________
"i think that's the real issue right there. first they tell us that there's no such thing as a brontosaurus, and then they tell us that pluto isn't a planet. i think after those two let-downs most americans have just decided "frag scientists." "- oops, I forgot who I quoted. adolescent something?

RVCA

Unfortunately, "science" never "claims" anything. "Science" develops theories, and the only reason we hold theories to be true is because they have yet to be falsified. Should some physicist discover tomorrow that gravity is not a universal constant (or some crazy thing), "science" would gladly throw everything it's "claimed" about our universe over the last several hundred years out the window.

MAStudent

Claim, posit, however you establish a position. Lets not argue semantics.



This is my whole point, really. If there is something that is a real entity in existence, that comes anywhere near the definition most people have for "god", and there is evidence for it, will "scientists" accept it?

The answer is of course. There are many deistic scientists. However, picking a world view that matches your inclinations is at the same time so normal, and so hypocritical. Humans are NOT logical. We are emotional and subjective. Then we find a world view that supports it. That doesn't make it, true, though.

If we are looking for truth, we should keep an open mind. An open mind doesn't mean being ready to overthrow traditional opinions, it means being ready to overthrow traditional opnions, fringe opinions, any opinions. Maybe an open mind means being able to see the validity in a traditional opinion, or see a "traditional" opinion in a different way. It should mean evaluating an issue in a way that considers all relevant information.

I was an atheist until God made itself known to me.

__________________
"i think that's the real issue right there. first they tell us that there's no such thing as a brontosaurus, and then they tell us that pluto isn't a planet. i think after those two let-downs most americans have just decided "frag scientists." "- oops, I forgot who I quoted. adolescent something?

RVCA

Interesting, how did it do that?

jordanthornburg

IF any one has a question for a christian BRING ITTTTTT!!!!!! Just kidding but seriously if someone truly wants to know what i think and not attack me ill do my best to honestly answer.....and not force anything on anybody

__________________
I love Jesus