Unsatisfactory Scientific Explanations?

[PsychoSarah]

Interesting. Then again, I've watched an embarrassing number "Ancient Alien" episodes, while feigning skeptical indignation. It often does have that "scientific train wreck" feel about it, and I just can turn the channel sometimes.

Ancient Aliens gives me a "stupidity" migraine

 

[Michael]

Ancient Aliens gives me a "stupidity" migraine

I hear you. I guess I remain open to the concept of intelligent alien life, but I'm stunned by the silliness of that show at times.

 

[stevevw]

In my experience, atheists tend to misunderstand, or at least misrepresent the "scientific method". It's never been restricted to demonstrated cause/effect relationships as they tend to *require* when it relates to the topic of God. Orch-OR theory is an excellent example of a typical "scientific theory" that might explain the concept of a "soul", and might explain how such a thing survives physical death.

Atheists tend to "take it on faith" that all the various mass/energy elements of Lambda-CDM are correct, even though not a single one of them actually has any tangible effect on a single photon in a real empirical experiment. On the other hand they *require* a demonstration of cause/effect relationships as it relates to the topic of God. It's a blatant double standard. Most of them don't even understand either the scientific method, or current theories about "reality"/the universe. They just "have faith" in anything labelled "science", so long as it's not related to the topic of soul or God.

Yes exactly.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Furthermore, it became apparent in the last decades of the 20th Century that DNA sequences often evolved in ways that reduced the fitness of the organisms that bore them.
-ibid.

This is an error. Whoever made that sentence up is forgetting the definition of "fitness" in evolutionary theory, which is merely that one set of DNA is better than another only if, and whenever if, it causes the descendants to be more numerous than the other.