Sciences as a religion.

[tumbleweed41]

Its a long history it all started with the abacus. Its not really on topic. If you want we could discuss it in another thread.

There are some sides I find interesting Like our current base 10 counting system and possibly improving it. A base 15 would have some interesting improvements and a base 16 would definately help us understand and work with computers better.

Ummm....
Computer science does use the Hexadecimal (Base 16) system.

 

[outhouse]

Science is a method, that is all. Not a belief system, not even a body of knowledge. It is a method that works to learn about the natural world.

Unlike religion, the scientific method includes the possibility that any specific belief can be changed, whenever evidence indicates it was wrong.

Because of these two important factors, science is not very much like religion at all.

correct

it is the exact opposite

one is a stale myth, followed blindly, and worshipped

one deals with the observation of facts and makes changes as needed, if or when, they may or may not need changing. Followed by constantly questioning itself. It is study method used for the betterment of mankind NOT worshipped :clap

 

[Iasion]

Gday,

Evolution is still based on observations of one way life developed. There is no comparison as of yet.

When we get one then maybe evolution can become law.

Wrong.

Evolution is ALREADY a fact of nature,
AND there is a theory to explain those facts.

Evolution is NOT "just a theory" which has not yet been proven and made a fact or a law - WRONG.
Evolution will never be a "law" (science generally does NOT use the word law in this sense now.)


THEORY has 2 meanings

It is all too common for people to confuse the two meanings of the word "theory".

In popular terms, "theory" means a guess, or speculation. Thus the common phrase "just a theory" meaning "just speculation".

But,
in scientific terms, there is another, different, meaning to the word "theory" - it means an EXPLANATION.


Theories EXPLAIN facts

Theories explain the facts we observe :

Gravity is a fact, we observe its effects.
Gravitational Theory describes how gravity works.

Electricity is a fact, we use it everyday.
Electromagnetic Theory explains the details of how it operates.

Germs are a fact.
Germ Theory explains how they cause disease.

Evolution is a fact, it is observed.
The Theory of Evolution explains how it works.



the ToE is an EXPLANATION, NOT speculation

The Theory of Evolution is NOT "speculation about evolution" - that is NOT what the phrase means at all.

Rather -
the Theory of Evolution is the EXPLANATION for how evolution works, it models the behaviour of the FACTS of evolution, and allows predictions to be made.

Just as Electromagnetic Theory is the explanation or model of how electricity works.
Would one say "electricity is just a theory" ?
Of course not.

And Gravitational Theory is the explanation or model of how gravity works.
Would one say "gravity is just a theory" ?
Of course not.

And Germ Theory is the explanation or model of how germs cause disease.
Would one say "germs are just a theory" ?
Of course not.


Yet
some people say
"evolution is (just) a theory"

as if it means
"evolution is merely untested speculation" (false)


EVOLUTION = FACT & THEORY

Evolution is a FACT.
We observe evolution.
And,
the Theory of Evolution is the EXPLANATION, or model, for the observed facts of evolution.


Iasion

 

[Iasion]

Gday,

This is all based on observations in the current solar system only.

Not so.
We have observed many other solar systems.
We have observed other galaxies.

Many 100s of planets have been discovered.
We have even directly observed some of those planets.


Iasion

 

[Iasion]

Gday,

Based on the known universe or the Actual universe. I am unclear, on how you could have a universal constant when you can't observe the whole universe.
Belief in the unknown is it not.

We HAVE observed much of the universe,
and the speed of light is seen to be constant (with provisos as discussed)

We have a good evidence that the speed of light is constant.

You are making a big fuss about the fact that somewhere far away, things MAY be different?

Why?
How?


Iasion

 

[Iasion]

If your constants are wrong you would not be able to find the flaw.

That is completely backwards.
We HAVE observed it, it IS constant, there is NO flaw.

Your argument is bizarre - that MAYBE things are wrong somewhere? In a way we can't actually see?

In fact -
We have vast amount of evidence that the speed of light is constant in a vacuum.

All you have is some odd word-games.


Iasion

 

[Iasion]

All findings on galaxies and planets outside of this solar system are based on the speed of light. If that one belief is wrong almost all of the laws of the universe are wrong.

THERE is your problem !
It's not a BELIEF at all.
It's a measured reality.

You seem tragically unable to tell the difference between an observed fact, and a BELIEF.

How truly bizarre.

It's like you think scientists just make stuff up, and some theories get believed, while others don't.

That is completely and utterly wrong.
Science is based on OBSERVATIONS and FACTS - NOT beliefs.

The speed of light is NOT a "belief".
It's a fact, an observed fact, confirmed by observations.
NOTHING to do with belief.


Iasion

 

[Iasion]

I wish the thread to specifically focus on the belief aspect of science.

There is NO "belief aspect" to science.
You have no idea how science works.


Iasion

 

[Iasion]

I believe I can show belief in everything scientific.

Really?
Then why have you failed to do so?

Because science has NOTHING to do with belief or worship.


Iasion

 

[Iasion]

It doesn't matter what it is. Everything comes down to belief.

Wrong.
You are preaching silly religious nonsense.
We aren't fooled at all.

So, what a surprise - your argument that science is based on belief actually turned out to be no more than the pathetic claim that EVERYTHING is belief.

What a laugh.


Iasion

 

[Sunstone]

If science is a religion, then why are there not thousands of scientists who rape children? :run:

 

[Iasion]

I guess you don't agree with my theory on speed of light.

Theory?
You don't have a scientific theory.
You have a vague hypothesis.

Understand that scientist do not directly come out and say belief because they will be laugh at but you can read into it.

Wrong.
Completely wrong.

Scientists do not say "belief" because it has NOTHING to do with belief.

You have fundamental mis-understanding - the WHOLE POINT of science is that it's NOT based on beliefs.

Science is based on the OPPOSITE of belief - on EVIDENCE.

Sadly, you don't seem to grasp this simple concept. Playing word-games and calling things "belief" does not change the facts :

• science is based on EVIDENCE, NOT beliefs
• religion is based on BELIEFS, NOT evidence

Iasion

I will do my best to come up with belief in an article.

What does that even MEAN?
Science is entirely based on EVIDENCE, not belief at all.

It's useless to make claims about beliefs, or play word-games with the word "belief".


Iasion

 

[Iasion]

All about science (web site)

"Abiogenesis – Conclusion
Clearly to get from the Miller-Urey experiment to a living cell by unguided materialistic processes requires that improbabilities be stacked upon improbabilities. For this reason, Dean Kenyon rightly concludes: “It is an enormous problem, how you could get together in one tiny, sub-microscopic volume of the primitive ocean all of the hundreds of different molecular components you would need in order for a self-replicating cycle to be established"

Sounds like if you support the theory of evolution you might be relying on at least one belief that has yet to be proven.

Wrong.

Abiogenesis and evolution are different subjects.

Evolution is a fact of nature,
AND there is a theory to explain those facts.

Bur creationists always seem to get that wrong, they get all excited with the word "theory" and think it means "unproven speculation". Wrong.

What about the Germ Theory of disease?
Does that make germs merely speculation?
No.

What about the Electromagnetic Theory ?
Does that make electricity merely speculation?
No.

What about the Theories of Gravity ?
Does that make gravity merely speculation?
No.

But the mere excistence of the phrase "theory of evolution" convinces creationists that evolution is merely speculation.

Which is completely wrong.

In fact -
evolution is an observed fact of nature.



Iasion

 

[Iasion]

Its funny nothing I post is good yet no one will provide me with a worthy challenge so I can put my money where my mouth is.

Pardon?

You ALREADY failed the challenge !

You failed to show science is based on belief.


Iasion

 

[Iasion]

As I said a scientific paper will never say belief.

Because science has nothing to do with belief.
If only you understood that.

He clearly indicates that certain scientists are against his position.

Yes, scientists reach different conclusions.
So what?

Only one could be fact the other must be belief.

Wrong.
They are both conclusions.
One MAY be wrong.
So what?

This has NOTHING to do with "belief".
If only you could grasp that.

You can't have 2 opposing facts or is science god like in that all things are possible.

No-one said that at all.
But people, including scientists, DO reach different conclusions - NOTHING to do with "belief".

Your argument is nothing more than silly word-games.


Iasion

 

[Iasion]

Why would I say science hasn't advanced human knowledge. Human knowledge advances day to day.

And that process is called "science".

Even mistakes advance human knowledge. Everything you do advances your knowledge and you have the ability to pass on that knowledge. Science or not.

Wrong.
The process IS science.

In reading and learning words you get knowledge. Read a bible learn a lot of new words. In helping others you learn about them. In helping others you get learn new skills. In defending religion you learn to debate. Religion passes on a lot of useful societal knowledge that science has no concern for.

No it doesn't.
Religion does NOT pass on useful information at all.

Learning a few new words?
That's IT?
That's ALL you can come up with ?


Iasion

 

[Iasion]

What I read is that he is trying to eliminate improper beliefs that exist in cosmology.
He is presenting the facts.

Wrong.
He is presenting different conclusions.
There is NO "belief" there at all.

You are STUCK on the word "belief".
What a pity you don't understand how science really works.


Iasion

You can take it as you want. Tommorrow some one will change the facts again and disprove his work. In a 100 years it will all be changed again. If you don't have faith in today's knowedge you won't believe if you do then you believe. This is religion.

Wrong.
We now know many facts - we will NOT unlearn them.

Your argument is silly - that EVERYTHING we know maybe wrong. It is completely false.

We know the earth is a a sphere (almost.)
We will NEVER find out we were wrong about that.
It is NOT like the ancient false BELIEF in a flat earth.
It's a FACT.
And it will ALWAYS be a fact.

You have no understanding of how science works - we DO know many FACTS that will NEVER change.

One of them is evolution.


Iasion

 

[Gloone]

Science is based on the OPPOSITE of belief - on EVIDENCE.

Sadly, you don't seem to grasp this simple concept. Playing word-games and calling things "belief" does not change the facts :

• science is based on EVIDENCE, NOT beliefs
• religion is based on BELIEFS, NOT evidence

Iasion

I was just reading an article the other day where a scientist had conducted some new studies and use the phrase "contrary to popular belief". So I guess that something that was once believed is no longer, because new information discovered. So what they once believed isn't what the believe any longer.

 

[Gloone]

If science is a religion, then why are there not thousands of scientists who rape children? :run:

Could always make a case for making cats glow in the dark and under black-lights abuse to animals. Animal Cruelty!

 

[Gloone]

flu shot vaccinations that have deadly side effects along with others effects. Especially with children with chemicals like mercury and everything else.

We are also about to have a world full of human-andriods too. Soon as the first chip is implanted into this human lab rat's brain to control sensory information for human prosthetic. I can only imagine the backlashes the guy would have if he is out in bad weather and his prosthetic short circuits along with his sensory chip. But I guess science will have all the information the need for the next participant.