Anti intellectualism directed against science.

[sjastro]

I said part of good science is to question things even facts. The link I posted supports this.
According to the Royal Society, the world's oldest independent scientific academy questioning established facts is actually at the heart of the scientific method.
Why getting things wrong is good for science - BBC Ideas

Quantum physics is a well establish fact. But that fact is open to interpretation ie many worlds, QBism, Von Neumann–Wigner, Copenhagen interpretations.

The links and video I provided on reproducibility and repeatability shows science does question the facts.
It’s called experimental science and involves use of statistics to calculate the reproducibility and repeatability of the developed experimental and observational procedures to determine if the data can be relied upon.

Where you continually fail in this thread is to bring up examples where it is the interpretation of the facts which is under question not the facts themselves.
Using your example of quantum physics highlights this point, each interpretation relies on the same data set or facts, it is about whether wavefunctions are real or mathematical, or if quantum theory is deterministic or probabilistic.

Isn't predictions based on the evidence.

Of course it is not.
A prediction is an outcome of the theory and must be falsifiable by new evidence which either supports or disproves the prediction.

Then why would the oldest independent science academy say "questioning established facts is actually at the heart of the scientific method".
How many scientific facts have been superceded or dismised over the years.

According to Scientific America
Science, when properly functioning, questions accepted facts and yields both new knowledge and new questions—not certainty.

Why Doubt Is Essential to Science

If people don’t understand how science works, they can’t properly understand how to think about new findings

www.scientificamerican.com

How many times do I need to explain myself before it finally sinks in.
Ideally when theorists get their hands on the data it has met the requirements for repeatability and reproducibility where the data is no longer under question and can be considered to be empirical evidence.
Theoretical science operates on skepticism but relies on experimental science’s empirical evidence otherwise a theory or hypotheses cannot be formed if the data is considered unreliable.

The examples you have given in this thread such as quantum mechanics and climate change, the experimental side has been settled leaving theory alone open to question which exemplifies science’s self correcting nature.
This is done with the acquisition of new empirical evidence after it passes the criteria of repeatability and reproducibility which either further supports the theory or disproves it.

So your saying there is no problem with woke or PC in education. The articles I supplied provided several examples of how woke ideology is being applied to education and they were not opinion but reality, actual examples from university policy and cirriculum.

How Identity Politics Is Harming the Sciences

Identity politics has engulfed the humanities and social sciences on American campuses; now it is taking over the hard sciences. Read the whole story here.

www.city-journal.org

Your creating an either/or fallacy ie if there is no drop in global unversity levels then there is no problem with PC and woke in education. This doesn't mean there is no problem. There is certainly evidence of a reduction in education levels in primary and secondary education. As woke is a relatively new ideology on society this may not have filtered through to university level outcomes. But it logicaly follows that if PC and woke deminish primary and secondeary levels of education this is going to effect higher education sooner or later.

There is certainly a problem with higher education levels regaredless of current Uni standings. Overall degrees have drop dramaticaly in recent years. A dwindling number of new U.S. college graduates have a degree in education
Males are falling further behind and have the highest drop out rate in enrollment and during college.

Men abandon higher education in droves, trail female student enrollment by record levels | The College Fix

‘A generation of American men give up on college.’…

www.thecollegefix.com

If its not a problem as you say then why would state legislature put forward a Bill to stop woke in education.

New Stop W.O.K.E. Act Fits Disturbing Pattern in Education Culture War - PEN America

Governor DeSantis’s Stop W.O.K.E. Act, while undoubtedly aggressive, is no aberration. On the contrary, it is increasingly business as usual.

pen.org

Why is it a prominant issue in society that most people think is real and a problem. Why does it dominate politics and commentry. Why do independent reports like from Civitas claim its a problem.
dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11638389/Half-universities-peddle-woke-agenda-students.html

There is evidence that most students lack the education levels for uni
Of the 330,000 students studying university courses that require mathematical knowledge beyond GCSE level, 210,000 of them (64%) do not have the required skills, causing problems for both students and universities.
Two thirds of students lack the mathematical knowledge required for their university cour

This is textbook mine quoting and Gish gallop tactics.
With your continuous rambling and burying this thread under an avalanche of links you seemed to have forgotten the point you have been trying to make.
Wokeism/PC has resulted in the dumbing down of science.
You still have provided zero evidence to support this or even a mechanism of how wokeism/PC has impacted on the quality of post doctorate research in science.

Your links fall into two categories opinion pieces or falling education standards which do not suggest the cause is due to wokeism/PC.
In fact one of your links states the opposite; it is based on the ideology where the restrictions are implemented against perceived wokeism in Florida schools resulting in teachers leaving the profession in droves which drives down the education standard.
Quote miners like you are clearly not interested in the details; you ignore the reasons given for the drop in education standards and blindly attribute it to wokeism/PC.

Despite what you think university global ratings are used to assess to health of a nation’s education system and a reason given for potential falling ratings is due to rising anti-intellectualism and not wokeism/PC.

I'm not changing the goal posts you are. If you read my comment is says that PC and woke was beginning to brew around the 80's and that Bloom had predicted in the 80s that woke ideology would become worse years later. So though it was around in the 80's it had yet to infiltrate society and Institutions. It is well acknowledged that PC and woke stemmed from the cultural revolutions of the 60's and 70's with liberalism.

Amazon.com: The Long March: How the Cultural Revolution of the 1960s Changed America: 9781893554306: Kimball, Roger: Books

Amazon.com: The Long March: How the Cultural Revolution of the 1960s Changed America: 9781893554306: Kimball, Roger: Books

www.amazon.com

Even the National Association of Scholars believes that cancel culture within higher education has reached an extraordinary level.

https://www.nas.org/blogs/article/tracking-cancel-culture-in-higher-educationhttps://www.nas.org/blogs/article/tracking-cancel-culture-in-higher-education

Yeah pull the other leg.
You are in denial mode after being caught out making contradictory comments and you are not doing yourself any favours by resorting to irrelevant and broken links.

Here are some real facts which refute your nonsense it takes time for wokeism/PC to take effect.
Affirmative action which I suppose you would classify as wokeism was first implemented in the States in the early 1960s and one of the earliest benefits was the eradication of Jewish quotas by the mid-late 1960s from universities.
It was such quotas that prevented Richard Feynman from studying at Columbia University.

The elimination of quotas whether it be based on race, sex or gender is a good thing, a point which seems to be lost on you with your ranting and raving over wokeism/PC.

But you have created an either/or fallacy by turning what I said about a high % of peer review declining into junk science to mean only fraud in peer review here.
sjastro said: #407 You made the claim there is a high percentage of junk science in peer review. By definition junk science is fraudulent and none of your links indicates fraud is rife in science.

Thats your definition and not mine. You are putting your thinking into my head lol. I was talking about a number of reasons why peer review had declined into junk including bias, poor standards and the reproducibility issue. Taken together these amount to a high % of junk science.
Admittedly the word 'junk' is probably a bit vague and strong. But I clarified soon after what I meant. But you have persisted with this either/or fallacy.

If there is a problem because of language then that is not my problem. It seems the scientists and supporters use the same language themselves. Even Hans link used the word 'crisis' in reproducibility in science which seems to imply a serious problem.

Junk science has a very specific meaning.
"The expression junk science is used to describe scientific data, research, or analysis considered by the person using the phrase to be spurious or fraudulent."

You get don’t get to change the definition of junk science and besides it’s too much of a coincidence you had used the term junk science and fraud in the same post.
A retraction rate of 2-4 papers per 10,000 papers is not a sign of rampant junk science or fraud as you would like to falsely portray.

The Hans link or more precisely the video was supplied by me.
If you had actually bothered to look at it instead of remaining in a state of deliberate ignorance, the reproducibility issue is mainly about peer review not keeping up with around the million scientific papers issued per year while the incidence of fraud or junk science is very small.

 

[sjastro]

Can you just stick to anti-intellectualism?

He obviously can't as he employs tactics commonly used by his fellow creationists.

Quote mining

Quote mining (also contextomy) is the fallacious tactic of taking quotes out of context in order to make them seemingly agree with the quote miner's viewpoint, to make the comments of an opponent seem more extreme, or to make it seem that the opponent holds positions they don't in order to make...

rationalwiki.org

Gish Gallop

The Gish Gallop is the fallacious debate tactic of drowning your opponent in a flood of individually weak arguments in order to prevent rebuttal of the whole argument collection without great effort. It's essentially a conveyor belt-fed version of the on the spot fallacy, as it's unreasonable...

rationalwiki.org

 

[Hans Blaster]

He obviously can't as he employs tactics commonly used by his fellow creationists.

Yes, but I meant "stick to (doing) anti-intellectualism" and drop the culture war whinging, though I guess all of the irrelevant complaints (sort of) about science do demonstrate one's anti-intellectual position. Sigh.

 

[stevevw]

Can you just stick to anti-intellectualism?

It was about anti-intellectualism. China was used as an example of a nation who does not do well intellectually on international measures. A big reason is because they subscribe to an anti-intellectual ideology of communism which restricts open and free thinking which is required for critical thinking and the basis for learning.

This was compared to the far left ideology of woke, PC and cancel culture which also restricts free and open critical thinking by cancelling certain thinking in favor of the ideological belief one has. Both positions are just opposite sides of the same coin of anti-intellectualism.

Any position thats anti intellectual will deny free and open thinking which allows us to discover the facts, truths and what is real. Even science itself (scientism) can deny free and open critical thinking. So we cannot divorce culture wars from anti-intellectualism because its the ideological belief over facts and reality that is anti-intellectual and ideological beliefs are culturally based.

But I agree that we should move on from woke ideology specifically as its just one way of being anti-intellectual. I am more interested in the fundemental issue, the overall issue of why people think in ideological terms and oppose science and critical thinking and whether this is a new movement in postmodern society towards perhaps a new form of thinking that will become dominant.

 

[stevevw]

He obviously can't as he employs tactics commonly used by his fellow creationists.

Quote mining

Quote mining (also contextomy) is the fallacious tactic of taking quotes out of context in order to make them seemingly agree with the quote miner's viewpoint, to make the comments of an opponent seem more extreme, or to make it seem that the opponent holds positions they don't in order to make...

rationalwiki.org

Gish Gallop

The Gish Gallop is the fallacious debate tactic of drowning your opponent in a flood of individually weak arguments in order to prevent rebuttal of the whole argument collection without great effort. It's essentially a conveyor belt-fed version of the on the spot fallacy, as it's unreasonable...

rationalwiki.org

Heres the ironic thing. What I am arguing 'that woke, PC & cancel culture are ant-intellectualism actually supports critical thinking and science. I am actually playing the atheist against woke religion lol. I am saying that this ideology is dumbing down the canons of western thinking and history such as Enlightenment, rationalism and science and replacing it with an 'Ideological belief' that is not rational or scientific.

The examples I have used prove my case. Climate change, gender and tans ideology, critical race theory, they are all associated with wild and irrational claims about what is fact and real. For example biological sex is a social contruction and has no biological basis. Twenty odd years ago this was a scientific fact and now it is being questionede and undermined by ideological belief. The way you can tell its about ideology is that it involves feelings because the ideology represents how a person sees the world and humans place in it based on a belief about fundemental nature. So its high stakes because it threatens peoples sense of self.

I noticed a quote from the OP about how people are challenging science which mentions a scientists got "threatening emails just for saying the Earth is round". That is the same ideological belief I am talking about. Its no different to people being threatened for saying a male cannot become a biological women. Thats the ideology speaking and in this case it comes from woke, PC and cancel culture ideology.

This ideology works the same whether its about climate change denial, the flat earth idea, gender ideology, critical race theory, vaccine denial, religion or even scientism. So I am defending the science and facts on this and saying that this woke ideology or any ideology is promoting anti-intellectualism by denying rational and critical thinking over ideological beliefs.

I might aded a cavet here. I think part of why science has a hard time being understood ande learned is because it goes against our innate way of thinking. We naturally think in ideological and non factual terms. Its easier for us to think and imagine outside the box then within it. So learning things like physics, evolution is harder to grasp ande requires almost indoctrination to make it sink in.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Any position thats anti intellectual will deny free and open thinking which allows us to discover the facts, truths and what is real. Even science itself (scientism) can deny free and open critical thinking. So we cannot divorce culture wars from anti-intellectualism because its the ideological belief over facts and reality that is anti-intellectual and ideological beliefs are culturally based.

But I agree that we should move on from woke ideology specifically as its just one way of being anti-intellectual. I am more interested in the fundemental issue, the overall issue of why people think in ideological terms and oppose science and critical thinking and whether this is a new movement in postmodern society towards perhaps a new form of thinking that will become dominant.

I'm more cocerned with your anti-intellectual attacks on science, some of which you have wrapped in a veneer of "protection from wokism".

 

[Hans Blaster]

This was compared to the far left ideology of woke, PC and cancel culture which also restricts free and open critical thinking by cancelling certain thinking in favor of the ideological belief one has. Both positions are just opposite sides of the same coin of anti-intellectualism.

I think you're going to have to recalibrate that political spectrum again...

A GOP war on 'woke'? Most Americans view the term as a positive, USA TODAY/Ipsos Poll finds

 

[Hans Blaster]

The examples I have used prove my case. Climate change, gender and tans ideology, critical race theory, they are all associated with wild and irrational claims about what is fact and real.

Only one of those things does not have at least a significant scientifically studied component -- CRT -- which is a social science theory about, well frankly, sociology of race and unintended consequences. (If you mean "Rufo's CRT", then it is entirely a political-historical issue, but then you are fighting against historical facts.)

For example biological sex is a social contruction and has no biological basis.

Only nutters think that. It's almost a tautology to say biological sex (including intersex) is biological in nature. It is therefore entirely within the realm of science to study it.

 

[sjastro]

Heres the ironic thing. What I am arguing 'that woke, PC & cancel culture are ant-intellectualism actually supports critical thinking and science. I am actually playing the atheist against woke religion lol. I am saying that this ideology is dumbing down the canons of western thinking and history such as Enlightenment, rationalism and science and replacing it with an 'Ideological belief' that is not rational or scientific.

The examples I have used prove my case. Climate change, gender and tans ideology, critical race theory, they are all associated with wild and irrational claims about what is fact and real. For example biological sex is a social contruction and has no biological basis. Twenty odd years ago this was a scientific fact and now it is being questionede and undermined by ideological belief. The way you can tell its about ideology is that it involves feelings because the ideology represents how a person sees the world and humans place in it based on a belief about fundemental nature. So its high stakes because it threatens peoples sense of self.

I noticed a quote from the OP about how people are challenging science which mentions a scientists got "threatening emails just for saying the Earth is round". That is the same ideological belief I am talking about. Its no different to people being threatened for saying a male cannot become a biological women. Thats the ideology speaking and in this case it comes from woke, PC and cancel culture ideology.

This ideology works the same whether its about climate change denial, the flat earth idea, gender ideology, critical race theory, vaccine denial, religion or even scientism. So I am defending the science and facts on this and saying that this woke ideology or any ideology is promoting anti-intellectualism by denying rational and critical thinking over ideological beliefs.

I might aded a cavet here. I think part of why science has a hard time being understood ande learned is because it goes against our innate way of thinking. We naturally think in ideological and non factual terms. Its easier for us to think and imagine outside the box then within it. So learning things like physics, evolution is harder to grasp ande requires almost indoctrination to make it sink in.

The trouble with using the word “wokeness” like the term “political correctness” it has lost its original meaning and has become a pejorative term to describe those who differ ideologically.
Since it is term now meant to insult rather than enlighten it doesn’t provide a reason behind an assertion.

This has shown up in your claim that wokeism/PC causes a dumbing down in science. Not one of the myriad of links you have thrown into this thread in anyway supports this.

To put the misuse of the word "wokeness" into perspective is your Harvard University example.
While affirmative action in the early 1960s led to the rapid ending of Jewish quotas from American universities, the same can’t be said of Asian-American enrolments at Harvard.

Despite the increasing Asian-American population, the percentage of enrolments at Harvard has remained low compared to other universities.
This has led to accusations of Harvard engaging in discriminatory practices leading to lawsuits.

Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

So perhaps Harvard’s recent actions of inclusion has nothing to do with “wokeness” but to rebalance the student intake as well as making itself more litigation proof.

 

[stevevw]

I'm more cocerned with your anti-intellectual attacks on science, some of which you have wrapped in a veneer of "protection from wokism".

Like what ?.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Like what ?.

We can start with these

Climate change, gender and tans ideology, critical race theory, they are all associated with wild and irrational claims about what is fact and real. For example biological sex is a social contruction and has no biological basis

1. Climate change is well established area of scientific inquiry. Attacks on climate science for "wild and irrational claims about what is fact and real" are anti-intellectual attacks on science.

2. Gender identity has also been studied scientifically. We've spoken about such things before. Attacks on those studies for ideological reasons are anti-intellectual attacks on science.

 

[stevevw]

I think you're going to have to recalibrate that political spectrum again...

A GOP war on 'woke'? Most Americans view the term as a positive, USA TODAY/Ipsos Poll finds

I was admonished for linking opinion pieces and yet here you are linking an opinion piece. I don't think a tabloid article is really a good way to determine the facts. A simple survey on what Woke means doesn't capture how Woke which originally had a noble meaning as most people understand to how it has been tranformed into a completely different meaning today which is used as a political weapon from both sides today to control peoples thinking.

The new meaning of Woke is just an evolution of PC and its modern version comes in the form of cancel culture which most people think is a problem in society. Ask the same question about PC or cancel culture and most will agree its a problem.

Poll: Overwhelming majority say cancel culture has gone too far
Poll: Overwhelming majority say cancel culture has gone too far

Even the most prestigious universities of Oxford and Cambridge which is where the issue is most revelant in relation to anti-intellectualism agree that Woke, PC and cancel culture have gone to far in university and is a problem.

Oxford thinks woke culture has gone too far
In the last several years, Universities have become a hotbed for debates over free speech with concerns over censorship and stifling of open discourse.
The Union voted last night 89-60 in favour of the motion “This House believes woke culture has gone too far.”
A similar motion at Cambridge Union, “This house believes in the right to offend”, was also carried this week with an even larger margin of 247 in favour to 72 against.
Oxford thinks woke culture has gone too far – The Oxford Student

 

[stevevw]

Only one of those things does not have at least a significant scientifically studied component -- CRT -- which is a social science theory about, well frankly, sociology of race and unintended consequences. (If you mean "Rufo's CRT", then it is entirely a political-historical issue, but then you are fighting against historical facts.)

CRT is an ideology. Its underpinned by postmodernist thought. As we know postmodernism opposes objective science and any truth in the world. Primarily an ideeology is about beliefs and assumptions about how the world is and how it should be ordered in relation to power. But its the same for any ideology like feminism, Marxism and gender and trans ideology.

Its a limited way to see the world and claims a truth about the world that we all should follow or how we all should think relating this back to anti-intellectualism. As opposeed to free and open critical thinking. Despite there being science that contradicts these ideologies ideologues still believe their ideology is truth. Similar to religious belief in many ways.

But heres the thing. These ideologies are forming the basis for how society should be. CRT and gender/trans ideology inform much of our policiy and education. So this anti-intellectual thinking is creeping into mainstream and infecting our institutions undermining science and long held truths of western thinking. The one thing all these ideologies have is that Western white thinking is suspect and oppressive and should be torn down.

Only nutters think that. It's almost a tautology to say biological sex (including intersex) is biological in nature. It is therefore entirely within the realm of science to study it.

Yes I agree but this thinking is creeping into all areas of society and undermining long help facts and truths even in science. Even the medical sector is going along who are suppose to promote evidenced based science. But CRT is the same. Its based on the belief and assumption that race has no biological basis and is socially constructed. This ideology is being used as the basis for educa and policy.

Scholars of CRT view race as a social construct with no biological basis.[9][10]
Critical race theory - Wikipedia

 

[stevevw]

We can start with these


1. Climate change is well established area of scientific inquiry. Attacks on climate science for "wild and irrational claims about what is fact and real" are anti-intellectual attacks on science.

I agree but like other ideologies because climate change denialism is an ideology. Its not just about climate change. They replace the facts with alternative so called facts like sex is not a biological fact but is socially constructed and this ideology can sneak in and become the truth or fact for which society then bases reality on. So to with climate change. We have been fooled many times in the past by climate change deenial claims that have become policy and law.

2. Gender identity has also been studied scientifically. We've spoken about such things before. Attacks on those studies for ideological reasons are anti-intellectual attacks on science.

I thought we already agreed that gender ideology is not science. So how am I being anti-intellectual when I am standing up for the science and renouncing the ideology.

What I am talking about is how those scientific facts are being undermined for ideological reasons to the point where they are replaced by alternative so called facts that seem to have the same weight as scientific facts in that they inform how society and reality for that matter should be viewed.

I am saying this is a new form of religious belief like in the past which governments/rulers made real or fact in how society should be. Scientific facts can become useless if they are rejected altogether. But the real issue is that this ideological thinking infects most people and they go along even the establishment. This I think is the greatest threat to science and our sanity for that matter.

 

[Diamond72]

I'm not looking for your help.

Then why do you keep asking me questions if you do not want answers?

 

[Diamond72]

The bot I used "Jackassbot"

Why does that not surprise me?

 

[Diamond72]

That's my point. They aren't science.

Correct, that means that different rules apply. I already told you that I had my son take a literature class. I was amazed that the book had been revised 22 times. Fiction can teach us a lot about the world and ourselves and give us a deeper understanding of people. For example, I have a friend that reminds me of the lead character of the character in To Kill a Mocking Bird. They also developed a character like this on an old TV program.

The Bible is filled with symbolism that people are ill-equipped to understand and interpret. If they trip and stumble over the literal Bible that a child can understand. How much more do they stumble and fail to understand the deeper meaning and the symbolism? I am not asking them to accept or reject the teaching. Just demonstrate that they understand what they are rejecting or accepting.

Even stories I object to can still contain a lesson that we can all learn from. If you look at people like Musk and Neil Degrasse they are very much into fiction. Sometimes they get their facts and fiction confused.

 

[Diamond72]

I only pointed out that your comment about gender identity was intellectual in nature.

There is a scientific answer for why we have gender, but that does not fully explain why God makes us male and female and what his objective is. THAT is why SCIENCE fails to get the job done. They are not working with a full deck or a full order of fries. They only have part of the truth so they fail to solve problems or answer questions.

You can not have science without the Bible or the Bible without science. It simply does not work.

 

[Hans Blaster]

CRT is an ideology.

There are two kinds of CRT. Neither has anything to do with science.

The original, which I'll call "academic-CRT" is a study of legal and economic impacts of policies and laws by race, particularly on unintended consequences that are racially imbalanced. It has nothing to do with science.

The newer version, which I call "Rufo-CRT" after it's "inventor", is a grab bag of white grievance politics about race, particularly the teaching of history of race relations in the US. It has nothing to do with science.

Its underpinned by postmodernist thought. As we know postmodernism opposes objective science and any truth in the world. Primarily an ideeology is about beliefs and assumptions about how the world is and how it should be ordered in relation to power. But its the same for any ideology like feminism, Marxism and gender and trans ideology.

Even if you claims are true about CRT and post-modernism, it still has nothing to do with science. It is not a form of anti-intellectualism directed at science.

Its a limited way to see the world and claims a truth about the world that we all should follow or how we all should think relating this back to anti-intellectualism. As opposeed to free and open critical thinking. Despite there being science that contradicts these ideologies ideologues still believe their ideology is truth. Similar to religious belief in many ways.

I'm not sure what any of that is supposed to mean, but I dig your crack at religious belief.

But heres the thing. These ideologies are forming the basis for how society should be. CRT and gender/trans ideology inform much of our policiy and education.

You've mistaken volume of noise for importance and impact.

So this anti-intellectual thinking is creeping into mainstream and infecting our institutions undermining science and long held truths of western thinking. The one thing all these ideologies have is that Western white thinking is suspect and oppressive and should be torn down.

The American mainstream has been anti-intellectual for a very long time. Not even sure what "western white thinking" is as I am not race obsessed.

Yes I agree but this thinking is creeping into all areas of society and undermining long help facts and truths even in science. Even the medical sector is going along who are suppose to promote evidenced based science. But CRT is the same. Its based on the belief and assumption that race has no biological basis and is socially constructed. This ideology is being used as the basis for educa and policy.

Your paranoia is showing.

Scholars of CRT view race as a social construct with no biological basis.[9][10]
Critical race theory - Wikipedia

It *is* almost entirely social construct with just a tiny veneer of a few phenotypes.

 

[Hans Blaster]

There is a scientific answer for why we have gender, but that does not fully explain why God makes us male and female and what his objective is. THAT is why SCIENCE fails to get the job done. They are not working with a full deck or a full order of fries. They only have part of the truth so they fail to solve problems or answer questions.

You can not have science without the Bible or the Bible without science. It simply does not work.

Science doesn't investigate gods.