Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
How we found out evolution is true: John van Wyhe at TEDxNTU
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="driewerf" data-source="post: 76876752" data-attributes="member: 258809"><p>All right. So the scientific community – the comunity of scientists – has just “opinions” about science, while the masses poses wisdom and scientific truth. </p><p>Let us see how that works in practice. First, scientific truth are not innate, or divinely revealed. They are the product of scientific research and then published by scientists. So the “Scientific truths” publishing scientists do not know what they have published – unlike the masses – and hence have just opinions. </p><p>One can wonder how these masses acquire these scientific truths – unknown and/ or not understood by scientists. When did the masses go to chemistry labs for performing chemistry experiments? When did the masses dissect rabbits and sea slugs and peaked through microscopes for understanding the structure of different tissues? When did the masses stain chromosomes for elucidating the meiotic cell division? Luckily we have the masses for giving us all that knowledge, because obviously we can’t count on the scientific community.</p><p></p><p>Again, scientists not knowing how science works.</p><p>Imagine that. It will come as a shock that on some subjects the evidence can be so compelling that indeed the debate is over.</p><p>• No scientist doubts the sphericity of the Earth or the heliocentric model</p><p>• No scientist doubts the existence of atoms</p><p>• No scientist doubts that DNA is the carrier of genetic information (I still have an old botany book where the proteins on the chromosomes are seen as carriers of the genetic information).</p><p>• No scientist doubts the action of plate tectonics.</p><p></p><p>These debates are over. And some were very intense. </p><p>Who ever wants to cast a doubt on any of these will need very, very compelling arguments. </p><p></p><p></p><p>The part you replied to did not say “theists or deists”. It said “fundamentalist Christians and conservative republicans”. And news flash: there are religious people that aren’t fundamentalist Christians. All 1.3 billion Roman Catholics, for starters. Not to speak of the many more liberal Christian denominations, 1 billion hindus, the jews, the 1 billion muslims and so on. All non atheists and non fundamentalist Christians. Go figure.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="driewerf, post: 76876752, member: 258809"] All right. So the scientific community – the comunity of scientists – has just “opinions” about science, while the masses poses wisdom and scientific truth. Let us see how that works in practice. First, scientific truth are not innate, or divinely revealed. They are the product of scientific research and then published by scientists. So the “Scientific truths” publishing scientists do not know what they have published – unlike the masses – and hence have just opinions. One can wonder how these masses acquire these scientific truths – unknown and/ or not understood by scientists. When did the masses go to chemistry labs for performing chemistry experiments? When did the masses dissect rabbits and sea slugs and peaked through microscopes for understanding the structure of different tissues? When did the masses stain chromosomes for elucidating the meiotic cell division? Luckily we have the masses for giving us all that knowledge, because obviously we can’t count on the scientific community. Again, scientists not knowing how science works. Imagine that. It will come as a shock that on some subjects the evidence can be so compelling that indeed the debate is over. • No scientist doubts the sphericity of the Earth or the heliocentric model • No scientist doubts the existence of atoms • No scientist doubts that DNA is the carrier of genetic information (I still have an old botany book where the proteins on the chromosomes are seen as carriers of the genetic information). • No scientist doubts the action of plate tectonics. These debates are over. And some were very intense. Who ever wants to cast a doubt on any of these will need very, very compelling arguments. The part you replied to did not say “theists or deists”. It said “fundamentalist Christians and conservative republicans”. And news flash: there are religious people that aren’t fundamentalist Christians. All 1.3 billion Roman Catholics, for starters. Not to speak of the many more liberal Christian denominations, 1 billion hindus, the jews, the 1 billion muslims and so on. All non atheists and non fundamentalist Christians. Go figure. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
How we found out evolution is true: John van Wyhe at TEDxNTU
Top
Bottom