• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Paulos23

Never tell me the odds!
Mar 23, 2005
8,422
4,779
Washington State
✟368,056.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
The most common phrase in science: "Oops, I didn't mean for that to happen."
Yes. That is how we learn. Because aft were that comes, "I wonder why it did that?" And then finding out.
 
Upvote 0

Halbhh

Everything You say is Life to me
Site Supporter
Mar 17, 2015
17,340
9,285
catholic -- embracing all Christians
✟1,223,341.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married

Ideally science is only and exactly simply the effort to understand nature and how nature works.

Not other stuff.

But many will try to use the prestige of science to make a claim outside of science, past simply observations or theories of how nature works. When these extraneous assertions about things beyond the scope of science occur, it's merely the opinion or assertion of the person. Very often in some of the 'soft' sciences we can hear theories or even new hypotheses presented as if strongly definite conclusions also, which is just an unawareness of how to best do science, which is to be skeptical even of one's favorite theory. Ideally in science the scientist is not attached to their current theory, but instead is seeking to test it, and possibly prove it wrong or seriously incomplete.

"Dark matter" and "dark energy" are only the current names for unknown things that are surmised to likely exist, because of unexplained effects like extra gravity or the acceleration of the expansion of space, but the exact causes of these are not yet understood in astrophysics, and the things causing them don't emit light/radiation we can simply observe (or not yet) so as to make more definite conclusions about.

It's merely not yet understood. Nothing that remarkable, in that the sciences have only a very partial, very incomplete understanding of nature generally (if one pays attention to field broadly). It's normal to have things that are not yet figured out. That's the normal situation through time.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

HitchSlap

PROUDLY PRIMATE
Aug 6, 2012
14,723
5,468
✟288,596.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Science and religion use different ontologies. That doesn't make one superior to the other, it just makes them different.
Which is why Gould attempted to give theists a way out with non-overlapping magisteria. The problem is when theists assert what science can and cannot do.
 
Reactions: Brightmoon
Upvote 0

Jonathan Mathews

Well-Known Member
Dec 5, 2015
785
450
40
Indianapolis
✟40,981.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single

Science is defined as "Knowledge". The word Science means "to know" or "knowing", just as Conscience means "with knowledge".
 
Upvote 0

OldWiseGuy

Wake me when it's soup.
Site Supporter
Feb 4, 2006
46,773
10,977
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟1,005,242.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Which is why Gould attempted to give theists a way out with non-overlapping magisteria. The problem is when theists assert what science can and cannot do.

Science has no moral imperative, as does religion. Most of the human problems humanity faces dumbfound science but would be easily addressed by behavioral changes. Science views morality as invisible 'dark matter' (they know it's there but can't quite figure it out) as it doesn't give rise to the problems that are grist for mill of science (social sciences). Therefore they don't look to morality for these solutions. Besides, there's no money for science in behavioral changes.
 
Upvote 0

Kylie

Defeater of Illogic
Nov 23, 2013
15,069
5,309
✟327,545.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Female
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Mainly the established religious dogmas or scientific laws cannot be broken nor deemed false.

Yeah, it's not like Albert Einstein did that when he showed that Newton's ideas of gravity were wrong...

Oh wait, yes he did...
 
Upvote 0

sjastro

Newbie
May 14, 2014
5,762
4,682
✟349,785.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Yeah, it's not like Albert Einstein did that when he showed that Newton's ideas of gravity were wrong...

Oh wait, yes he did...
As a matter of interest here is what Einstein said of Newton's ideas of gravity.
 
Upvote 0

grasping the after wind

That's grasping after the wind
Jan 18, 2010
19,458
6,355
Clarence Center NY USA
✟245,147.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Science deniers ARE deniers . The evidence says that they’re wrong not the scientists .

There is no such thing as a science denier. That is a mythical character created by people who are incapable of defending their position when faced with evidence contradictory to their faith based beliefs.
 
Upvote 0

grasping the after wind

That's grasping after the wind
Jan 18, 2010
19,458
6,355
Clarence Center NY USA
✟245,147.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Yeah, it's not like Albert Einstein did that when he showed that Newton's ideas of gravity were wrong...

Oh wait, yes he did...

Einstein was a science denier.
 
Reactions: HitchSlap
Upvote 0

tas8831

Well-Known Member
May 5, 2017
5,611
3,999
56
Northeast
✟101,040.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
There is no such thing as a science denier. That is a mythical character created by people who are incapable of defending their position when faced with evidence contradictory to their faith based beliefs.
No, there are deniers. And the deniers are those that choose to believe that they, despite having no relevant education or experience, have outwitted or know more than people with actual expertise in an issue.
 
Reactions: tyke
Upvote 0

OldWiseGuy

Wake me when it's soup.
Site Supporter
Feb 4, 2006
46,773
10,977
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟1,005,242.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
No, there are deniers. And the deniers are those that choose to believe that they, despite having no relevant education or experience, have outwitted or know more than people with actual expertise in an issue.

Having knowledge and applying knowledge are not the same thing. Most people have the knowledge to properly order their lives, but they don't possess the ability or desire to do so.
 
Upvote 0

HitchSlap

PROUDLY PRIMATE
Aug 6, 2012
14,723
5,468
✟288,596.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0

usexpat97

kewlness
Aug 1, 2012
3,308
1,619
Ecuador
✟84,349.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
In its purest sense, I think it is fair to define science as truth-seeking, since if someone wasn't interested in the truth we would say they are being unscientific.

The problem comes in the impurities, such as tobacco companies performing scientific research which proves smoking does not cause cancer. They are only interested in certain truths. Otherwise they are not interested at all. Likewise we have self-professed "scientists" who are only interested in the truths which suggest there is no intelligent Creator--since that is "obviously wrong."
 
Upvote 0

HitchSlap

PROUDLY PRIMATE
Aug 6, 2012
14,723
5,468
✟288,596.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
In its purest sense, I think it is fair to define science as truth-seeking, since if someone wasn't interested in the truth we would say they are being unscientific.
Yes, this is every professional creationist, ever.

The problem comes in the impurities, such as tobacco companies performing scientific research which proves smoking does not cause cancer.
Or, much like creationists who perform "research" and claim evolution doesn't exist.
They are only interested in certain truths. Otherwise they are not interested at all.
Nope, creationists can't be bothered by the facts.
Likewise we have self-professed "scientists" who are only interested in the truths which suggest there is no intelligent Creator--since that is "obviously wrong."
You're right, evidence suggesting an "intelligent Creator" is non-existent.
 
Reactions: tyke
Upvote 0

grasping the after wind

That's grasping after the wind
Jan 18, 2010
19,458
6,355
Clarence Center NY USA
✟245,147.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Flat earthers, creationists, anti-vaxxers, climate change deniers... just to name a few.
You have just described creationism. Hovind is famous for this.

Labelling people makes it easier to de humanize them.
 
Upvote 0