Love of Truth and the criterion of scientific character

[The magical volleyball]

My Religion is the True Religion. No doubt is allowed.

This is why so many people are afraid of religion. Anything that forces you to abandon doubt to be member is promoting the removal of the most important survival instinct we as humans have been able to develop. Those who never doubt what they are told and go with faith give rise to groups like the ku Klux Klan, branch davidians, and the Manson family. Even the very idea that there is a coming apocalypse and that there is nothing you can do to escape it or survive it, is an idea that is very dangerous. We are humans the most powerful species ever known to exist. We have the power to destroy our own world and to create new worlds through books and movies. There is no answer we cannot find. Our imagination serves as our only limit. Our pride serves as our greatest enemy. being to prideful to say I might be wrong or maybe someone elses point is just as valid as mine is what destroys empires. This is why science always leaves open the possibility that it's wrong or incomplete and is willing to adapt when proven wrong.

 

[leibowde84]

Any slightest doubt is a sin in my Religion.

Where are you getting that from? Is that in scripture or has that just been added in?

Seems really dangerous and morally wrong, but to each their own.

 

[Milton Platt]

Here below is the quote from the fundamental research article in
Some Thoughts on Faith and Knowledge (Ходящий По Лжи) / Проза.ру

The criterion of scientific theory excludes the possibility of True Theory:
"Scientist must be able to refute any theory." The scientist is pooled into the destruction of the foundations and effects. The most convenient "philosophy" hereby is the false atheism. The adjective "false" describes the fact, what the sentence of atheism "No God" is proven wrong.

Proven wrong already by Jesus Christ, but also by the Thomas Aquinas, by many others and by me: term "reality" means "created by True God", the reality is there and touchable, so there is True God. Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. Matthew 22:37.

"To refute" Einstein is very simple: "Now science does not know, but (for the infinity of future research) can be said with certainty: Einstein's error will be detected."

And as He said these things unto them, the scribes and the Pharisees began to urge Him vehemently, and to provoke Him to speak of many things: Laying wait for Him, and seeking to catch something out of His mouth, that they might accuse Him. (Luke 11:53-54).

Scientists have introduced themselves artificial rules of research (But in vain they do worship Me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. Matthew 15:9). They do not lead to the creation of an intelligent life, but to unreasonable destruction. But the God blessed path of Truth makes people happy:

I propose to change the skeptical sign in Popper's criterion following way:
"a scientist must be able to confirm a theory or hypothesis." At the same time, confirmation tests can destroy the theory, but destruction is not the goal of the activity of scientists. The God can only be confirmed by researcher (if the researcher has stopped to exist, then he can not experience the negative result of the test), so the God necessarily exists. Applicable philosophy: Creationism, the Natural Theology. In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. Genesis 1:1.

Sorry, but i don't even follow what your are trying to say.....

 

[DavidFirth]

There is logic there to be agreed with?

Well, a certain comprehension level is required of the reader.

 

[LuisDantas]

You mean arbitrary, unevidenced premises and biases? That is very likely.

 

[Milton Platt]

Okay, your post is somewhat incoherent, but I can at least comment on a few aspects.

Here below is the quote from the fundamental research article in
Some Thoughts on Faith and Knowledge (Ходящий По Лжи) / Проза.ру

The criterion of scientific theory excludes the possibility of True Theory:
"Scientist must be able to refute any theory." The scientist is pooled into the destruction of the foundations and effects. The most convenient "philosophy" hereby is the false atheism. The adjective "false" describes the fact, what the sentence of atheism "No God" is proven wrong.

Atheism is a lack of belief in a god, not necessaily, or even u

Proven wrong already by Jesus Christ, but also by the Thomas Aquinas, by many others and by me: term "reality" means "created by True God", the reality is there and touchable, so there is True God. Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. Matthew 22:37.

"To refute" Einstein is very simple: "Now science does not know, but (for the infinity of future research) can be said with certainty: Einstein's error will be detected."

And as He said these things unto them, the scribes and the Pharisees began to urge Him vehemently, and to provoke Him to speak of many things: Laying wait for Him, and seeking to catch something out of His mouth, that they might accuse Him. (Luke 11:53-54).

Scientists have introduced themselves artificial rules of research (But in vain they do worship Me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. Matthew 15:9). They do not lead to the creation of an intelligent life, but to unreasonable destruction. But the God blessed path of Truth makes people happy:

I propose to change the skeptical sign in Popper's criterion following way:
"a scientist must be able to confirm a theory or hypothesis." At the same time, confirmation tests can destroy the theory, but destruction is not the goal of the activity of scientists. The God can only be confirmed by researcher (if the researcher has stopped to exist, then he can not experience the negative result of the test), so the God necessarily exists. Applicable philosophy: Creationism, the Natural Theology. In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. Genesis 1:1.

Here below is the quote from the fundamental research article in
Some Thoughts on Faith and Knowledge (Ходящий По Лжи) / Проза.ру

The criterion of scientific theory excludes the possibility of True Theory:
"Scientist must be able to refute any theory." The scientist is pooled into the destruction of the foundations and effects. The most convenient "philosophy" hereby is the false atheism. The adjective "false" describes the fact, what the sentence of atheism "No God" is proven wrong.

Proven wrong already by Jesus Christ, but also by the Thomas Aquinas, by many others and by me: term "reality" means "created by True God", the reality is there and touchable, so there is True God. Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. Matthew 22:37.

"To refute" Einstein is very simple: "Now science does not know, but (for the infinity of future research) can be said with certainty: Einstein's error will be detected."

And as He said these things unto them, the scribes and the Pharisees began to urge Him vehemently, and to provoke Him to speak of many things: Laying wait for Him, and seeking to catch something out of His mouth, that they might accuse Him. (Luke 11:53-54).

Scientists have introduced themselves artificial rules of research (But in vain they do worship Me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. Matthew 15:9). They do not lead to the creation of an intelligent life, but to unreasonable destruction. But the God blessed path of Truth makes people happy:

I propose to change the skeptical sign in Popper's criterion following way:
"a scientist must be able to confirm a theory or hypothesis." At the same time, confirmation tests can destroy the theory, but destruction is not the goal of the activity of scientists. The God can only be confirmed by researcher (if the researcher has stopped to exist, then he can not experience the negative result of the test), so the God necessarily exists. Applicable philosophy: Creationism, the Natural Theology. In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. Genesis 1:1.

"The criterion of scientific theory excludes the possibility of True Theory"
Which criterion? What is "true theory" as opposed to a scientific theory?

"Scientist must be able to refute any theory."
Any theory can and always has been refutable if sufficient evidence can be presented to demonstrate that the theory is false. The quickest way to fame is to provide testable, falsifiable evidence that shows the theory to be faulty. So what is your reason for pointing out the obvious?

"The God can only be confirmed by researcher (if the researcher has stopped to exist, then he can not experience the negative result of the test), so the God necessarily exists."
this makes absulutely no sense at all, but let me at least give it a try. Are you saying that the only way to know if a god exists is to die first? If that is the correct reading of what you say, then there should be nobody who believes in a god of any kind. This because that statement indicates that nobody living can possible know such a god exists.

"Scientists have introduced themselves artificial rules of research"
All rules of any sort are manmade and therefor "artificial" in that they do not exist in and of themselves.
Why do you think scientific protocols for observation, testing, and confirmation are somehow unworkable when the results of the use of these protocols permeates every corner of your life?

 

[Randy the Atheist]

Gods are man-made ideas that were invented extremely late in human history - first appearing in the Neolithic around 11,000 years ago and gradually spread from a tiny corner of the world that lay somewhere between the ancient cities of Ur and Nineveh.

Prior to the invention of gods, people long believed in various flavors of shamanism where a priest or "medicine man" would awaken sleeping spirits and call upon them to do good or evil deeds. Shamanism itself was preceded by an even older belief system called animism where every object including rocks and rivers were thought to contain a spiritual force.

The transformation from earth-bound spirits to sky gods followed the invention of agriculture. Agriculture required the precise charting of the sun and the stars in order to track the seasons. Large stone monuments appeared and curious points of light were discovered that crossed the constellations. These lights which are now known as planets became embodied in mystery and eventually into the realm of the divine.

Celestial gods were gradually replaced with supernatural personified beings after the Egytians and Greeks began immortalizing their kings, pharoahs and famous hero warriors. The idea of humans born as gods ultimately sparked the belief that ordinary men living on the fringes of society could also be gods as well - one individual in particular that continues to be celebrated to this day.

The progression of our religious beliefs demonstrate that gods are only provisional ideas - human ingenuities that have come and gone throughout our history - manufactured from previous concepts that faded from popularity as newer and bolder ideas emerged.