Science - how Accurate?

[themadhair]

To make a claim takes ten seconds.
To debunk a claim can take ten minutes if the research has been done.
To debunk a claim can take ten days if the research has not been done and access to the find is allowed.
To debunk a claim can take ten weeks if no access to the find is allowed.
To make a claim, test it and produce credible scientific evidence to support it takes ten years.

Think about it.

 

[tumbleweed41]

Free4all..... best to check your facts before posting
Couple of helpful sites..

The Skeptic's Dictionary - Skepdic.com
snopes.com: Urban Legends Reference Pages

 

[tumbleweed41]

And in answer to any other "amazing" things to be found.....

Carl Baugh and his "Out of Place" Hammer
Carl Baugh

Trilobites in footprints
A supposed human footprint from Antelope Springs (Nevada, USA)

Missing Day hoax
Did NASA find Joshua's missing day? Or is it a hoax?

Peppered Moth hoax
The Peppered Moth

Ken Hovind's Lies
Buddika's 300 Creationist Lies - INDEX

The ID hoax
The 'Intelligent Design' Hoax

Duane Gish Falsehoods
Creationism: Bad Science or Immoral Pseudoscience? An Expose of Duane Gish

 

[Alceste]

That reminds me of a friend of mine who was out camping with some friends and one of them left a used menstrual sponge out in the woods. Somebody else found it and brought it back to the fireside and said "Guys! Guys! A forest sponge! I found a forest sponge!" and passed it around. Everyone marveled at the wondrous and inexplicable discovery of forest-dwelling sponges, until it got to the woman who'd left it. She chucked it into the fire, as I imagine anybody would in her shoes. The guy who found it shrieked "You killed the forest sponge! Murderer!"

Just goes to show you we are very imaginative monkeys, especially when confronted with what seems at first glance - and in ignorance of the facts - to be inexplicable. As with forest-dwelling sponges, so with creationist misinformation on the internet.

 

[Free4all]

That reminds me of a friend of mine who was out camping with some friends and one of them left a used menstrual sponge out in the woods. Somebody else found it and brought it back to the fireside and said "Guys! Guys! A forest sponge! I found a forest sponge!" and passed it around. Everyone marveled at the wondrous and inexplicable discovery of forest-dwelling sponges, until it got to the woman who'd left it. She chucked it into the fire, as I imagine anybody would in her shoes. The guy who found it shrieked "You killed the forest sponge! Murderer!"

Just goes to show you we are very imaginative monkeys, especially when confronted with what seems at first glance - and in ignorance of the facts - to be inexplicable. As with forest-dwelling sponges, so with creationist misinformation on the internet.

Reminds me of a Seinfeld episode......

 

[tumbleweed41]

That reminds me of a friend of mine who was out camping with some friends and one of them left a used menstrual sponge out in the woods. Somebody else found it and brought it back to the fireside and said "Guys! Guys! A forest sponge! I found a forest sponge!" and passed it around. Everyone marveled at the wondrous and inexplicable discovery of forest-dwelling sponges, until it got to the woman who'd left it. She chucked it into the fire, as I imagine anybody would in her shoes. The guy who found it shrieked "You killed the forest sponge! Murderer!"

Just goes to show you we are very imaginative monkeys, especially when confronted with what seems at first glance - and in ignorance of the facts - to be inexplicable. As with forest-dwelling sponges, so with creationist misinformation on the internet.

:camp: LMAO!!

 

[Free4all]

Well I guess, I'm considered spoon fed then....

 

[Free4all]

To make a claim takes ten seconds.
To debunk a claim can take ten minutes if the research has been done.
To debunk a claim can take ten days if the research has not been done and access to the find is allowed.
To debunk a claim can take ten weeks if no access to the find is allowed.
To make a claim, test it and produce credible scientific evidence to support it takes ten years.

Think about it.

Nope, never thought about it! funny how 10's work... BTW, isn't that a gentile number?

 

[logician]

"Intelligent humans date back much, much further than we realize."

Looking at this thread, I would say a couple of weeks would be pushing it.

 

[Don Penguinoini]

It's amazing sometimes - Just throw something into the mix and some have a conniption fit.

No, not sometimes. Almost all the time.

 

[Boris56]

How accurate? Accurate enough to land a probe on a comet traveling a couple hundred thousand miles per hour. Let's see Jesus perform a miracle like that. Poor Jesus couldn't even pull off the miracle of existing. Science has done a great job of proving just how inaccurate the claims of all religions really are. I think most Christians realize that their beliefs are absurd and unsupportable.

 

[Sapiens]

Well ---- give me a couple links so I can better inform myself.

"Google.com"

 

[psychoslice]

science is as accurate as they can be for now, ask the same question in 5 or 10 years time. If there is any think that has changed then science will adjust that to a new theory, unlike religion that says their right and that's it.

 

[s2a]

Just curious...of what level of "accuracy" do you seek?

Do refrigerators work near you? Microwave ovens? Cell phones?

Any modern medicines that seem "miraculous" in their effects and outcomes?

Just asking, but what levels of "accuracy" borne of "science" seem lessened by spurious and anecdotal claims of faith?

just for the record, and in brief..."science" relies upon claims put forth that are testable, repeatable, reproducible, and do not rely upon anecdotes of deus ex machina explanations alone. Sure, maybe "god did it", but is that source or result even testable? Maybe miracles "happen", but is that ever a phenomena that "science" can test or validate?

Please bear in mind that "science" is not about "disproving" faith-based religious claims. The dreaded evil of "science" is constrained to whatever evidence is discovered, available, and testable within rigorous experimentation to eventually be demonstrably and repetitively revealed to be consistently repeated or pure happenstance.

If you wish to label such outcomes as "faith", go ahead. Science can only grapple with reality, for super naturalism IS NOT "science". THAT, is religion.

 

[psychoslice]

Just curious...of what level of "accuracy" do you seek?

Do refrigerators work near you? Microwave ovens? Cell phones?

Any modern medicines that seem "miraculous" in their effects and outcomes?

Just asking, but what levels of "accuracy" borne of "science" seem lessened by spurious and anecdotal claims of faith?

just for the record, and in brief..."science" relies upon claims put forth that are testable, repeatable, reproducible, and do not rely upon anecdotes of deus ex machina explanations alone. Sure, maybe "god did it", but is that source or result even testable? Maybe miracles "happen", but is that ever a phenomena that "science" can test or validate?

Please bear in mind that "science" is not about "disproving" faith-based religious claims. The dreaded evil of "science" is constrained to whatever evidence is discovered, available, and testable within rigorous experimentation to eventually be demonstrably and repetitively revealed to be consistently repeated or pure happenstance.

If you wish to label such outcomes as "faith", go ahead. Science can only grapple with reality, for super naturalism IS NOT "science". THAT, is religion.

Not all science is about refrigerators and TV's, there are many theories about all sorts of things, just in case you didn't know.