I think believing in science is just like believing in a religion. It's just a bunch of theories and shit. Just like religion. Only MY RELIGION is right.. and I'm better then those that disagree. It's called faith.
That is so completely wrong. Science is not like a faith. They have data and experiments that can be repeated to develop those theories. Science does not require some leap of faith that a religion does. To try and compare the two is like trying to compare an apple to a piano.
What IF they used science to MAKE a piano out of apples?
Also you won't see it in any of the journals i'm sure that you read because they are limited to natural phenomena. Floating sons of God are not what one typically considers a natural phenomenon.
Well damn, isn't that a pleasant coincidence?
Anyone finding serious scientific evidence of corpse-gravity-defiance would win a Nobel prize and become a scientific idol. The reason it's not being written about in serious scientific journals isn't because they have some bias against "non-natural phenomena" it's because it's bullshit.
Fields of science are commonly classified along two major lines:
* Natural sciences, which study natural phenomena, including biological life;
* Social sciences, which study human behavior and societies http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science
Same reason there aren't any scientists studying alchemy man. It's only Natural occurences which can be explained by natural laws. Anything which is supernatural can't be explained by science. Right now scientists can't see any other way for the shroud of turin to have been made than if the corpse was floating and glowing. Because that is not possible due to restrictions of natural laws it can't be accepted as a scientific explanation. I'm sorry if it came off as condescending. I do that sometimes.
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
edited February 2007
Light is a particle but also a beam.
Yeah, sure thing science man.
Munkus Beaver on
Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
0
Options
JC of DII think we're fucked up.I know I am.Registered Userregular
edited February 2007
Okay - I'm getting out of this topic before androo tries to convert me anymore.
Fields of science are commonly classified along two major lines:
* Natural sciences, which study natural phenomena, including biological life;
* Social sciences, which study human behavior and societies http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science
Same reason there aren't any scientists studying alchemy man. It's only Natural occurences which can be explained by natural laws. Anything which is supernatural can't be explained by science. Right now scientists can't see any other way for the shroud of turin to have been made than if the corpse was floating and glowing. Because that is not possible due to restrictions of natural laws it can't be accepted as a scientific explanation. I'm sorry if it came off as condescending. I do that sometimes.
Just FYI, quoting the Wikipedia entry for "Science" is incredibly condescending.
There are always nutjobs studying complete shit, and should one of them ever manage to find a way to convert base metals into gold then it would become natural and hence publishable in a journal of natural science. It wouldn't suddenly open up some new branch of "Magi-science".
"Rocks falling down can't be proven guys - we tried."
IT IS OKAY WE SCIENTISTS HAVE FAITH!
All I'm saying. Is God's pretty much in front of everyone's damn face.. and they're all too blind to see it. Pretty good comparison if you ask me.
Please elaborate on that. How exactly is god right in front of my face? When I view the world around me I see a place that became what it was over millions of years of change and adaptation. When I see a tree I see an organism that has developed it's own ideal means of growing, getting food from it's environment, and passing on it's traits through reproductiton. I don't see something where god went "*poof* a tree."
I'm not trying to convert anything. Do what you want man. Not my soul.
"How to win friends and influence people!
Tip 1: Tell strangers that they'll be tortured for eternity if they don't believe what you say."
SpongeCake on
0
Options
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
"Rocks falling down can't be proven guys - we tried."
IT IS OKAY WE SCIENTISTS HAVE FAITH!
All I'm saying. Is God's pretty much in front of everyone's damn face.. and they're all too blind to see it. Pretty good comparison if you ask me.
Please elaborate on that. How exactly is god right in front of my face? When I view the world around me I see a place that became what it was over millions of years of change and adaptation. When I see a tree I see an organism that has developed it's own ideal means of growing, getting food from it's environment, and passing on it's traits through reproductiton. I don't see something where god went "*poof* a tree."
Developed its own ideal means?
Oh hells no.
It happened upon it and got lucky enough to survive.
Munkus Beaver on
Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
0
Options
JC of DII think we're fucked up.I know I am.Registered Userregular
edited February 2007
...But it developed something that was ideal for its environment regardless...
God damnit guys this isn't keeping me out of the thread.
"There are always nutjobs studying complete shit, and should one of them ever manage to find a way to convert base metals into gold then it would become natural and hence publishable in a journal of natural science. It wouldn't suddenly open up some new branch of "Magi-science"."
Nutjobs don't get funding to study complete shit. Usually because nutjobs don't have tenure or a respectable degree. Base metals becoming gold through a series of incantations and spells isn't natural phenomena. People do study metals though. We call them chemists.
As condescending as posting a link to wikipedia was we would all be better people if we read it. Hail wikipedia, keeper of knowlege!
That's because you weren't taught to as a kid. That's how I'm comparing the two together. You'd say proof of the atom is RIGHT in front of my face.. and I'd probably agree.. but it's in front of my face just as much as God is in front of your face. I'll include a "in my beliefs in there." When you look at a tree you look at how it works and how it got there... I'm looking at more like why it was created.. and who made it. I doubt it went poof. But something created this almost near perfect world were humans seem to live almost undestructible as a whole. Something made this place perfect. So you can be blind to my religion.. and I'd still totally chill with you and play some videogames, they're just my thoughts and beliefs.. I'm not trying to piss anyone off in here.. and I kinda like argueing about such things.. but do you kinda understand what I'm trying to say. I don't care if you believe it.
It happened upon it and got lucky enough to survive.
You have me there, I didn't mean it how it came out. By ideal I meant the way that gave it an advantage over it's competition. That trait survived and is passed down to new generations. Using the term ideal isn't quite right.
"There are always nutjobs studying complete shit, and should one of them ever manage to find a way to convert base metals into gold then it would become natural and hence publishable in a journal of natural science. It wouldn't suddenly open up some new branch of "Magi-science"."
Nutjobs don't get funding to study complete shit. Usually because nutjobs don't have tenure or a respectable degree. Base metals becoming gold through a series of incantations and spells isn't natural phenomena. People do study metals though. We call them chemists.
There's a branch of the US government devoted to studying - literally - complete bullshit. They look at the craziest ideas which are so incredibly unlikely but if they actually work have a great pay-off. These are the guys who were working on the "Gay Bomb" during WWII.
Simialrly, the MoD recently funded research into psychic powers - if they had found evidence of psychic powers it would be natural no longer "super-natural".
Edit: And if you could convert base metals to gold it wouldn't be considered magic, as I've already said, it would be considered a previously undiscovered fact of chemistry.
SpongeCake on
0
Options
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
edited February 2007
It's amazing how many people give human attributes to natural selection.
It chose this.
It decided that.
Evolutionism is a crazy religion.
Munkus Beaver on
Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
0
Options
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
edited February 2007
NO THANK YOU RICHARD DAWKINS
I DON'T WANT TO SUBSCRIBE TO YOUR NEWSLETTER
YOU ARE A BIT OF A DICK
Munkus Beaver on
Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
That's because you weren't taught to as a kid. That's how I'm comparing the two together. You'd say proof of the atom is RIGHT in front of my face.. and I'd probably agree.. but it's in front of my face just as much as God is in front of your face. I'll include a "in my beliefs in there." When you look at a tree you look at how it works and how it got there... I'm looking at more like why it was created.. and who made it. I doubt it went poof. But something created this almost near perfect world were humans seem to live almost undestructible as a whole. Something made this place perfect. So you can be blind to my religion.. and I'd still totally chill with you and play some videogames, they're just my thoughts and beliefs.. I'm not trying to piss anyone off in here.. and I kinda like argueing about such things.. but do you kinda understand what I'm trying to say. I don't care if you believe it.
It's amazing how many people give human attributes to natural selection.
It chose this.
It decided that.
Evolutionism is a crazy religion.
New traits are not decided on. They come about due to mutations. If the mutation is in any way an advantage it gets passed on becuase that orgainism is now able to out-compete other similar organisms.
It's amazing how many people give human attributes to natural selection.
It chose this.
It decided that.
Evolutionism is a crazy religion.
I guess it's human nature to attribute human characteristics to random shit.
You could say we evolved that way!
Oh wow.
SpongeCake on
0
Options
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
It's amazing how many people give human attributes to natural selection.
It chose this.
It decided that.
Evolutionism is a crazy religion.
New traits are not decided on. They come about due to mutations. If the mutation is in any way an advantage it gets passed on becuase that orgainism is now able to out-compete other similar organisms.
Evolutionism is in no way a religion.
Yes, evolutionism is a religion. Ever read Dawkins? Natural selection achieves godhead and disproves God! Don't you see?
Evolutionism is religion, duderton. Difference between evolutionism and well, evolution.
Munkus Beaver on
Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
"There are always nutjobs studying complete shit, and should one of them ever manage to find a way to convert base metals into gold then it would become natural and hence publishable in a journal of natural science. It wouldn't suddenly open up some new branch of "Magi-science"."
Nutjobs don't get funding to study complete shit. Usually because nutjobs don't have tenure or a respectable degree. Base metals becoming gold through a series of incantations and spells isn't natural phenomena. People do study metals though. We call them chemists.
There's a branch of the US government devoted to studying - literally - complete bullshit. They look at the craziest ideas which are so incredibly unlikely but if they actually work have a great pay-off. These are the guys who were working on the "Gay Bomb" during WWII.
Simialrly, the MoD recently funded research into psychic powers - if they had found evidence of psychic powers it would be natural no longer "super-natural".
Edit: And if you could convert base metals to gold it wouldn't be considered magic, as I've already said, it would be considered a previously undiscovered fact of chemistry.
Just because someone is studying it, that doesn't make it science...
If there was a repeatable experiment done which achieved the same results for "Psychic Powers" and there was no scientific explanation as to how it came about then we would be at the same junction were at with the shroud of turin, wouldn't we?
Woops.. I need to reword something. When I say I don't care.. Well.. in my beliefs things are going to be sucking for some of you. So I'm sorry for that.. so I guess to some degree I do care. I guess I don't think less of anyone cause their beliefs don't agree with mine. Does that sound better?
androo87 on
0
Options
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
edited February 2007
Come on guys.
Light is a particle AND a wave.
How crazy is that.
Munkus Beaver on
Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
0
Options
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
edited February 2007
If you want a real treat, go compare the argument for intelligent design against the argument for global warming.
Munkus Beaver on
Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
"There are always nutjobs studying complete shit, and should one of them ever manage to find a way to convert base metals into gold then it would become natural and hence publishable in a journal of natural science. It wouldn't suddenly open up some new branch of "Magi-science"."
Nutjobs don't get funding to study complete shit. Usually because nutjobs don't have tenure or a respectable degree. Base metals becoming gold through a series of incantations and spells isn't natural phenomena. People do study metals though. We call them chemists.
There's a branch of the US government devoted to studying - literally - complete bullshit. They look at the craziest ideas which are so incredibly unlikely but if they actually work have a great pay-off. These are the guys who were working on the "Gay Bomb" during WWII.
Simialrly, the MoD recently funded research into psychic powers - if they had found evidence of psychic powers it would be natural no longer "super-natural".
Edit: And if you could convert base metals to gold it wouldn't be considered magic, as I've already said, it would be considered a previously undiscovered fact of chemistry.
Just because someone is studying it, that doesn't make it science...
If there was a repeatable experiment done which achieved the same results for "Psychic Powers" and there was no scientific explanation as to how it came about then we would be at the same junction were at with the shroud of turin, wouldn't we?
I don't even know what you're trying to say anymore. If you could reliably show evidence of psychic powers then someone would develop a scientific theory to encompass the new scientific evidence that psychic powers exist. Science would change in light of new evidence in order to incorporate the scientific truth that had been demonstrated.
The idea that anything "true" can exist outside of science is ridiculous, as anything "super-natural" instantly becomes "natural" as soon as there is enough evidence for it.
Just because someone is studying it, that doesn't make it science...
If there was a repeatable experiment done which achieved the same results for "Psychic Powers" and there was no scientific explanation as to how it came about then we would be at the same junction were at with the shroud of turin, wouldn't we?
If it were observed using a repeatable experimental method and those results could be observed and repeated in any other lab then there would be a scientific explanation. That's basically how it works.
I've read Richard Dawkins. For some guy who is a contemporary of stephen hawking he sure is full of shit. Some of his "experiments" are completley ludacris and unrepeatable. He doesn't seem to grasp the concept that if you design an experiment intending to prove something, it's not that big of a surprise if you do prove it.
Plus he's a total ass hole. Same old arguments in a book that cost me 17,50.
I've read Richard Dawkins. For some guy who is a contemporary of stephen hawking he sure is full of shit. Some of his "experiments" are completley ludacris and unrepeatable. He doesn't seem to grasp the concept that if you design an experiment intending to prove something, it's not that big of a surprise if you do prove it.
Plus he's a total ass hole. Same old arguments in a book that cost me 17,50.
I've read Richard Dawkins. For some guy who is a contemporary of stephen hawking he sure is full of shit. Some of his "experiments" are completley ludacris and unrepeatable. He doesn't seem to grasp the concept that if you design an experiment intending to prove something, it's not that big of a surprise if you do prove it.
Plus he's a total ass hole. Same old arguments in a book that cost me 17,50.
...wouldn't the contemporary Stephen Hawking be... Stephen Hawking?
Posts
What IF they used science to MAKE a piano out of apples?
All I'm saying. Is God's pretty much in front of everyone's damn face.. and they're all too blind to see it. Pretty good comparison if you ask me.
Fields of science are commonly classified along two major lines:
* Natural sciences, which study natural phenomena, including biological life;
* Social sciences, which study human behavior and societies
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science
Same reason there aren't any scientists studying alchemy man. It's only Natural occurences which can be explained by natural laws. Anything which is supernatural can't be explained by science. Right now scientists can't see any other way for the shroud of turin to have been made than if the corpse was floating and glowing. Because that is not possible due to restrictions of natural laws it can't be accepted as a scientific explanation. I'm sorry if it came off as condescending. I do that sometimes.
Yeah, sure thing science man.
I don't have anything to proove to ya. I could care less what you think of me. You can have a
There are always nutjobs studying complete shit, and should one of them ever manage to find a way to convert base metals into gold then it would become natural and hence publishable in a journal of natural science. It wouldn't suddenly open up some new branch of "Magi-science".
I'm not trying to convert anything. Do what you want man. Not my soul.
Please elaborate on that. How exactly is god right in front of my face? When I view the world around me I see a place that became what it was over millions of years of change and adaptation. When I see a tree I see an organism that has developed it's own ideal means of growing, getting food from it's environment, and passing on it's traits through reproductiton. I don't see something where god went "*poof* a tree."
Wow, this is easy! Thank god my soul is now saved!
Tip 1: Tell strangers that they'll be tortured for eternity if they don't believe what you say."
Developed its own ideal means?
Oh hells no.
It happened upon it and got lucky enough to survive.
God damnit guys this isn't keeping me out of the thread.
Nutjobs don't get funding to study complete shit. Usually because nutjobs don't have tenure or a respectable degree. Base metals becoming gold through a series of incantations and spells isn't natural phenomena. People do study metals though. We call them chemists.
As condescending as posting a link to wikipedia was we would all be better people if we read it. Hail wikipedia, keeper of knowlege!
You have me there, I didn't mean it how it came out. By ideal I meant the way that gave it an advantage over it's competition. That trait survived and is passed down to new generations. Using the term ideal isn't quite right.
Simialrly, the MoD recently funded research into psychic powers - if they had found evidence of psychic powers it would be natural no longer "super-natural".
Edit: And if you could convert base metals to gold it wouldn't be considered magic, as I've already said, it would be considered a previously undiscovered fact of chemistry.
It chose this.
It decided that.
Evolutionism is a crazy religion.
I DON'T WANT TO SUBSCRIBE TO YOUR NEWSLETTER
YOU ARE A BIT OF A DICK
New traits are not decided on. They come about due to mutations. If the mutation is in any way an advantage it gets passed on becuase that orgainism is now able to out-compete other similar organisms.
Evolutionism is in no way a religion.
You could say we evolved that way!
Oh wow.
Yes, evolutionism is a religion. Ever read Dawkins? Natural selection achieves godhead and disproves God! Don't you see?
Evolutionism is religion, duderton. Difference between evolutionism and well, evolution.
Just because someone is studying it, that doesn't make it science...
If there was a repeatable experiment done which achieved the same results for "Psychic Powers" and there was no scientific explanation as to how it came about then we would be at the same junction were at with the shroud of turin, wouldn't we?
Light is a particle AND a wave.
How crazy is that.
I don't even know what you're trying to say anymore. If you could reliably show evidence of psychic powers then someone would develop a scientific theory to encompass the new scientific evidence that psychic powers exist. Science would change in light of new evidence in order to incorporate the scientific truth that had been demonstrated.
The idea that anything "true" can exist outside of science is ridiculous, as anything "super-natural" instantly becomes "natural" as soon as there is enough evidence for it.
If it were observed using a repeatable experimental method and those results could be observed and repeated in any other lab then there would be a scientific explanation. That's basically how it works.
Dear Light,
RE:Being a particle or being a wave
Make up your fucking mind.
Plus he's a total ass hole. Same old arguments in a book that cost me 17,50.
Midgit porn FTW!
...wouldn't the contemporary Stephen Hawking be... Stephen Hawking?
Also: It's Ludicrous, not