Science Is/As A Religion

[sangha]

Originally posted by sangha
If you had admitted that you had made a mistake (ie a poor choice of words) from the beginning...

I did. Check post number 34, page 3:

By "evolutionary theory" I was reffering to the general, all encompassing scientific paradigm according to which the whole universe (including life) moves gradually from lower to higher levels of complexity.

And yes, the origin of life = abiogenesis is indeed one of the biggest Achiles' heel of the MODERN EVOLUTIONARY SCIENTIFIC PARADIGM.

But go ahead, DumberThanHick, nail me to a cross due to a poor choice of words...

Yes, you do use the phrase "poor choice of words", but you do not identify any mistakes that you have made. You dont actually take responsibility for any mistake you actually made. You just acknowledge that "mistakes were made"

Your failure to take responsibility is demontrated by your continued lie about the credibility of this "paradigm" you keep mentioning even though you can't back it up with anything credible. All you have is a link that even Wikipedia won't support.

 

[Intense]

The point is that just because you cannot prove something, it is not proof that something doesn't exist. The issue may be that something indeed does not exist, that is a given. The issue may also be in knowledge or capability. Maybe a day will come when the existence of cold can and will be proven.

Then your point is a straw man. No one here has argued that the lack of evidence proves non-existence. No One. Not One Person. You Made It Up.

And no, the existence of cold will never be proven because cold is defined (when used to describe temperature) as the lack of heat. In fact, even when used in a non-scientific manner (such as describing a persons' personality as "cold") the word cold is usually used to note a lack of something.

Summary: You are consistently wrong about nearly everything you say

Funny that someone who believes in invisible spirits and entities imagines that "cold" must be "something". The can "feel" cold, so it's as real as a "rock".

Not sure who you are addressing here. I believe in God, I have faith in our reason for being and have high hopes for us, in spite of the tangents we create.

 

[rdean]

You just proved you know less about science than even I gave you credit for, which is not very much.

Scientists do not know that either dark energy, which is not electromagnetic energy we cannot see, or dark matter exists. They believe dark energy exists because the universe is expanding faster than it should be given the vast amount of energy, both visible and invisible, that we can detect. They believe dark matter exists because the mass of the universe is more than the mass of all the possible galaxies.

Notice the words I used here. Scientists believe, they do not know. If we take your rather limited knowledge of science and your insistence that science and belief, faith, are completely incompatible, we are left with the demonstrated fact that we cannot explain the universe. The only way to explain the universe is hypothesize, or SWAG (scientific wild assed guess).

Explain to me again how that does not fit your definition of magical.

Because you had to lie in order to make your point

Scientists do not "believe" in dark matter; they suspect it exists and have offered HYPOTHESES about it

Wrong.

They observed some data that did not fit their theories. They hypothesized an explanation, and have offered theories to explain the existence of Dark Matter. To date no theory has been corroborated by experiment or observation. Scientists do not point to something they cannot explain and claim it proves something they made up to explain it.

If you will check back through the various explanations of the scientific method you will see that I am the one that is right here, and that Dark Matter is only a belief. No one knows if it really exists, or if some other explanation will eventually be found to explain the observations.

Why don't you post this in your thread about lies told by wingnuts? It will give people who are not reading this thread a chance to see how ignorant you are.

I never said it wasn't a hypothesis. You said that I said that but I never did. What I did say was that "SOMETHING" is causing a lensing effect and scientists refer to it as "Dark Matter". Something exists. Something is affecting the light.

Not every hypothesis has a "corresponding experiment". Why? Because it may be impossible to preform such an experiment with our current level of technology.

Go ahead. Keep trying to beat up on me if it makes you feel better about yourself. Personally, I think it's hilarious. Gives me a good "chuckle".

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Can you please stop making stuff up (ie lying)

We know what black matter is. We don't know everything abou it, but we know it exists.

Just like you exist even though we'll never know everything about you.

We do not. You will not find any educated person who says that dark matters is known to exist. Dark matter is a hypothesis to explain otherwise inexplicable observations. Some people point to the inexplicable and claims that it proves dark matters exists, but no scientist will do that because they know that amounts to circular logic, since dark matter is made up to explain those observations.

You are a complete idiot!! Why cant you post in complete sentences?? Is something that simple too much for your little pea brain.

You say "We do not"...We do not "WHAT??"" We do not know that dark matter exists? That "no educated person" knows that dark matters exists??

Then why did you say that scientists (actually you said "sciencers" and I expect you to use that word to weasal out) DO BELIEVE that dark matter exists? Are you saying the scientists are not educated?

So now your argument is that "some people" say that it proves dark matter exists? Once again, you're relying on lies and fictional "sciencers"?

See, it was a complete sentence, you actually figured out what I was talking about by using context.

I never used the word sciencers, so any attempt by you to discredit my posts by referring to it is a lie.

Scientists believe that dark matter exists, they do not know it exists. If you do not understand the difference between belief and knowledge it might explain why you think we know what black matter, whatever you think that is, exists and that we know everything about it.

Are you going to try to use more lies in an attempt to make me look stupid?

 

[Madeline]

I guess I am simple-minded. What I have difficulty understanding is why a faith in God would lead one to reject "science", or even just evolution.

What do the Creationists believe accounts for dinosaurs?

Two sides of the same coin, why do the sciencers think that there is no God just because we live in a complicated universe?

Who says that they do, asterism? You speak as if teaching science will impair faith in God, but I dun see how.

The two -- faith and science -- serve different needs. Why would meeting one satisfy the other?

 

[rdean]

Because they can measure the effects of "Dark Matter". Did you bother to visit the site? If they can "map it", then something exists.

We can also measure the effects of believing in God, does that prove God exists?

Dark matter is a hypothesis to explain the measurements they get. That means those measurements cannot be used to prove that dark matter exists. If you understood basic logic you would understand that without me having to explain it to you.

We can also measure the effects of believing in God, does that prove God exists?

Measure the effects? Examples?

 

[sangha]

Why is it exactly is it that you need to put people down? What good does it serve? Do you honestly think that it elevates you or your position?




What concern is it of yours? Further, You did not know my intent, and were not qualified to speak on it. You make many assumptions, mostly wrong.





Prove that I am unable to express my own ideas. Prove that you know the limits of my brain power. Prove that my statements are meaningless. What Theory doesn't have questions? Limits? Conclusions? Show me the main stream view of Modern Evolution Theory, and where my Link contradicts it? I am warning you again about derailing Threads and insulting Posters.

You are just as nasty as anyone else here, so stop pretending you're a prince. You dont fool anyone. That's why everyone IGNORED your post and your foolish attempts to direct the discussion.

And if you want proof that you are unable to express your own ideas, just read ahead in your own post. When you get to your question "What Theory doesn't have questions?" ask yourself "Do theories have questions, or do people have questions about theories?"

You are just as nasty as anyone else here, so stop pretending you're a prince. You dont fool anyone. That's why everyone IGNORED your post and your foolish attempts to direct the discussion.

Actually I am trying to be real tolerant and patient with you. I'm curious as to what fuels you, not only the hate and bitterness, but the drive. Should you ever overcome your handicap, I you will actually have allot to contribute. Are you redeemable, that is the first question. I know, if you don't, and I'm patient, sometimes. Sometimes, I lose patience, but we're good for now. I'm human too, yet find myself in a position where I have to put the interest of the Site above my own personal interest, it would be wrong to see that as an act, it is an obligation. Further, what I have found personally here, is that when I strike out at someone, the unintended consequence is that it offends people I care about, on both sides of the aisle. For that reason, I hold back, as best as I can. You should give it some thought too. Your style corrupts your message.

Your actions corrupts your soul.

You're not even honest enough to admit to the venom that you post. Like a typical christian, you want to falsely depict yourself as a victim. You are just SO BURDENED by your laughable "obligation"

If you can't hack it, give it up, you nancy-boy

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Atheism is not a belief. It's a "lack of belief".

Think of "heat and cold". Heat is energy. Cold is a lack of heat. Heat is NOT a lack of cold because heat is energy and cold is nothing.

Mysticism and the occult are "beliefs" without evidence. Atheism isn't a "belief", it's a "lack" of belief.

Atheism is a belief. Agnosticism is the lack of belief.

Fine, I have no mystical nor occult beliefs.

Angels and spirits are as likely to exit as leprechauns and water sprites. In fact, the evidence for all supernatural beings existence is "equal".

I am amazed rdean, that was almost an admission that you were wrong.

BTW, it might surprise you to know I agree with the entirety of your last paragraph.

 

[sangha]

You just proved you know less about science than even I gave you credit for, which is not very much.

Scientists do not know that either dark energy, which is not electromagnetic energy we cannot see, or dark matter exists. They believe dark energy exists because the universe is expanding faster than it should be given the vast amount of energy, both visible and invisible, that we can detect. They believe dark matter exists because the mass of the universe is more than the mass of all the possible galaxies.

Notice the words I used here. Scientists believe, they do not know. If we take your rather limited knowledge of science and your insistence that science and belief, faith, are completely incompatible, we are left with the demonstrated fact that we cannot explain the universe. The only way to explain the universe is hypothesize, or SWAG (scientific wild assed guess).

Explain to me again how that does not fit your definition of magical.

Because you had to lie in order to make your point

Scientists do not "believe" in dark matter; they suspect it exists and have offered HYPOTHESES about it

Wrong.

They observed some data that did not fit their theories. They hypothesized an explanation, and have offered theories to explain the existence of Dark Matter. To date no theory has been corroborated by experiment or observation. Scientists do not point to something they cannot explain and claim it proves something they made up to explain it.

If you will check back through the various explanations of the scientific method you will see that I am the one that is right here, and that Dark Matter is only a belief. No one knows if it really exists, or if some other explanation will eventually be found to explain the observations.

Why don't you post this in your thread about lies told by wingnuts? It will give people who are not reading this thread a chance to see how ignorant you are.

You are lying. You said

Scientists do not know that either dark energy, which is not electromagnetic energy we cannot see, or dark matter exists. They believe dark energy exists

Right there you say that scientists believe that dark energy exists. Too bad you have nothing to back up your lies with.

Scientists do not BELIEVE that dark matter exists. Some scientists SUSPECT that dark matter exists.

 

[sangha]

I never said they were magic. I said they sound like magic, or faith.

You also said that scientists believe in dark matter, which is a lie

They don't believe in Dark Matter? What do they believe in then?

They believe that the existence of dark matter is unproven.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Those of us who recognize science are always ready to accept that an old accepted "truth" is no longer correct when new discoveries/evidence is produced.

Unlike religion...

Please explain why scientists, when faced with incontrovertible evidence, rejected Copernicus and clung to the geocentric view of the universe. So much so that even a century later they rejected Galileo and his telescope. YOu seem to have an irrational belief in the rational nature of scientists despite overwhelming evidence that they are only human, and thus both fallible and petty.

That's your argument? What people believed hundreds of years ago?

No, my argument is that scientists are people, and just as likely to cling to a belief despite evidence as anyone else. I then provided evidence to back up that belief. If you want more modern evidence of it just read about the problems Pasteur had when he advocated the germ theory to his fellow doctors.

 

[sangha]

Atheism is a belief. Agnosticism is the lack of belief.

Actually, atheism is a lack of belief. What you are thinking of is anti-theism. Many people who call themselve "atheists" are in fact "anti-theists", or as I like to refer to them...Hate-theists

No I am not.

1. the doctrine or belief that there is no god.

Atheism | Define Atheism at Dictionary.com

Just because you have a problem with the English language it does not mean everyone else does.

You dishonestly left out the other definition of atheism because it proves you wrong

disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.

Just because you have a problem with honesty it doesn't mean everyone else is going to fall for your lies

 

[sangha]

I never said they were magic. I said they sound like magic, or faith. We see something we cannot explain, and take a guess at to why it is happening. Then we look around for evidence that refutes or supports the guess. Since the only thing we have to either refute or disprove either of these concepts is the stuff we cannot explain we cannot use that as evidence of the guesses.

These concepts sound like magic if you confuse the colorful phrases that have gained popularity to describe them with the actual science itself.

BTW, where did you get the idea that dark matter explains anything we observe with candles? Did you Google it and read something about candlepower and jump to the wrong conclusion? The distortion of the light from a single candle due to the possible existence of dark matter would be indistinguishable from the effects of the gravity from the mass of the Earth.

Are you joking? I (wrongly, it appears) assumed you knew a bit about cosmology. You're mixing up not only the concepts of dark matter and dark energy here but their usage in my post (see my post: "dark energy" is systematic redshift-apparent brightness anomaly in standard candles). A standard candle is an astronomical object whose absolute magnitude is fairly well-known, meaning their apparent magnitude can be used to gauge distance. Type Ia supernovae are the standard candles I'm referring to here, as they're what was used to discover the first evidence of dark energy twelve years ago.

The fact that you thought a standard candle is an actual wax candle is kind of mind-boggling.

I said something stupid, mock at will.

The concepts sound magical when people try to argue that the observational data proves the hypothesis. Scientists do not do that, but they are still at a loss to actually explain these concepts because our knowledge of the universe does not include an understanding of these concepts. I have said elsewhere that there are only a few physicists that begin to understand this, and the rest of us have to take it on faith. Since I am completely certain that you are not the one of the people who understand this, any attempt you make to claim that you are taking this on any basis other than faith is going to fall short.

That makes these concepts as magical to you as they are to me, even if you refuse to admit it.

Just because the facts seem magical to you, that doesn't mean the facts seem magical to anyone else.

 

[sangha]

Because they can measure the effects of "Dark Matter". Did you bother to visit the site? If they can "map it", then something exists.

We can also measure the effects of believing in God, does that prove God exists?

Dark matter is a hypothesis to explain the measurements they get. That means those measurements cannot be used to prove that dark matter exists. If you understood basic logic you would understand that without me having to explain it to you.

We can measure the "belief in God" because "belief in God" is something that exists. However, the only thing that is proven to exist is a "belief in God"

Gods' actual existence is unproven and unprovable.

 

[sangha]

Then your point is a straw man. No one here has argued that the lack of evidence proves non-existence. No One. Not One Person. You Made It Up.

And no, the existence of cold will never be proven because cold is defined (when used to describe temperature) as the lack of heat. In fact, even when used in a non-scientific manner (such as describing a persons' personality as "cold") the word cold is usually used to note a lack of something.

Summary: You are consistently wrong about nearly everything you say

Funny that someone who believes in invisible spirits and entities imagines that "cold" must be "something". The can "feel" cold, so it's as real as a "rock".

Not sure who you are addressing here. I believe in God, I have faith in our reason for being and have high hopes for us, in spite of the tangents we create.

You left out the part about believing that cold exists the way heat does

Like I said earlier, Intense is a master of profound and meaningless posts. He responds to a post about his dumb beliefs concerning cold, and he responds with "I believe in God" and other irrevelancies, which I'm sure he thinks are profound and meaningful

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Can you post in complete sentences? I have no idea what you are asking about.

You claimed that evolution disproves creationism, I posted a complete interrogatory statement in reply. How long have you had this reading comprehension problem?

Next time, just ask the question in English?

And I've already explained how evolution refutes creationism, so it would seem that you're the one with the reading comprehension issues. Try to keep up

But as long as I have your attention, can you explain why you said that scientists believe that dark matter exists, and then contradict yourself and say that scientists don't believe that dark matter exists?

No, you proved that evolution disproves the statement that humans were created as is at some point in the past. Since I have to point out the obvious to you, that does not disprove creationism, which is the belief that the universe, and everything in it, was created. Why should a Hindu creationist believe in the biblical account of creation, even if they believe that the Earth is 5000 years old?

The problem here is that you are attempting to stake out a claim based on positions you are making up for other people, and that, in truth, all you are accomplishing is making yourself look ignorant. Different people believe different things, and it is possible that God, if He did create everything, set the universe up to evolve us in His image.

 

[Intense]

You are just as nasty as anyone else here, so stop pretending you're a prince. You dont fool anyone. That's why everyone IGNORED your post and your foolish attempts to direct the discussion.

And if you want proof that you are unable to express your own ideas, just read ahead in your own post. When you get to your question "What Theory doesn't have questions?" ask yourself "Do theories have questions, or do people have questions about theories?"

You are just as nasty as anyone else here, so stop pretending you're a prince. You dont fool anyone. That's why everyone IGNORED your post and your foolish attempts to direct the discussion.

Actually I am trying to be real tolerant and patient with you. I'm curious as to what fuels you, not only the hate and bitterness, but the drive. Should you ever overcome your handicap, I you will actually have allot to contribute. Are you redeemable, that is the first question. I know, if you don't, and I'm patient, sometimes. Sometimes, I lose patience, but we're good for now. I'm human too, yet find myself in a position where I have to put the interest of the Site above my own personal interest, it would be wrong to see that as an act, it is an obligation. Further, what I have found personally here, is that when I strike out at someone, the unintended consequence is that it offends people I care about, on both sides of the aisle. For that reason, I hold back, as best as I can. You should give it some thought too. Your style corrupts your message.

Your actions corrupts your soul.

You're not even honest enough to admit to the venom that you post. Like a typical christian, you want to falsely depict yourself as a victim. You are just SO BURDENED by your laughable "obligation"

If you can't hack it, give it up, you nancy-boy

What is this? The Paper Chase? You are deluding yourself, thinking that you impress by talking down to everyone, Sangha. You don't. Neither do you respect people, or the Site, or yourself, knowing the damage that you do at times. It would be wrong for you to over play your hand. You need to work on those social skills, bro. It's not about judging or condemning you, it's about learning from your mistakes, and being better for it. Something only you can do, it can't be done for you. My Soul, is not within your reach Sangha, nor would I seek to damage yours. I am not depicting myself as a Victim, either. A reference to a thick skin, in context, is a reference to me handling anything you choose to throw at me. I'm a Alpha Type, alway's have been. I respect boundaries too, how about you trying that.

 

[Greenbeard]

I said something stupid, mock at will.

You attempted to use your aggressively stupid post as a launching point to mock me. It's certainly not my fault you ended up looking like a dumbass in doing so.

 

[daveman]

It's obvious that Dave lied about "sciencers" beliefs. He made it up to hide his lack of knowledge.

I'm not going to bother responding to your other posts before this one -- it's clear you're more than happy arguing your side AND my side. My participation is not required.

Nevertheless, I don't have to make stuff up.

That's why Dave will never post a list of these mythical sciencers who believe that evolution explains the origin of life.

I also explained that, but you're incapable of admitting that there are stupid people on your side, despite the overwhelming evidence.

Meanwhile, I would like to point out (again) that the definition of "lie" is NOT "something a leftist disagrees with".

 

[sangha]

Because you had to lie in order to make your point

Scientists do not "believe" in dark matter; they suspect it exists and have offered HYPOTHESES about it

Wrong.

They observed some data that did not fit their theories. They hypothesized an explanation, and have offered theories to explain the existence of Dark Matter. To date no theory has been corroborated by experiment or observation. Scientists do not point to something they cannot explain and claim it proves something they made up to explain it.

If you will check back through the various explanations of the scientific method you will see that I am the one that is right here, and that Dark Matter is only a belief. No one knows if it really exists, or if some other explanation will eventually be found to explain the observations.

Why don't you post this in your thread about lies told by wingnuts? It will give people who are not reading this thread a chance to see how ignorant you are.

I never said it wasn't a hypothesis. You said that I said that but I never did. What I did say was that "SOMETHING" is causing a lensing effect and scientists refer to it as "Dark Matter". Something exists. Something is affecting the light.

Not every hypothesis has a "corresponding experiment". Why? Because it may be impossible to preform such an experiment with our current level of technology.

Go ahead. Keep trying to beat up on me if it makes you feel better about yourself. Personally, I think it's hilarious. Gives me a good "chuckle".

This is the lie I've been referring to. QW continually and habitually keeps referring to some mythical people who believe that dark matter exists. Now he's lying about you believing in it.

I wonder if QW will ever defend his own claims by identifying who these fictional believers in dark matter are?