surfer. there is a big difference. any scientific idea can be changed by a new piece of evidence. try that with religion. religions tend to cling to their beliefs until it becomes laughable to do so. take the global flood. many believers still cling to the belief that a flood once covered the highest mountains on earth and killed all people less eight even though the evidence is indisputable that it never happened.
Intelligent Design struck down in Federal Court
- Thread starter ZZZzzzzzzz
- Start date
surfer. there is a big difference. any scientific idea can be changed by a new piece of evidence. try that with religion. religions tend to cling to their beliefs until it becomes laughable to do so. take the global flood. many believers still cling to the belief that a flood once covered the highest mountains on earth and killed all people less eight even though the evidence is indisputable that it never happened.
hey nik,
i dont have the time to respond in detail to your querry. however, i did mean the damage religion did to science --not the other way around. religion burned libraries and scientists of the early days, as you know. i am just seeking enlightened discussion in the classroom--not indoctrination of any sort.
as i stated on another thread, several of my best friends are hardcore objectivists/atheists----in fact one of them owns several original darwin books/manuscripts (talk about hardcore!) however we maintain respect for each other in the utmost.
i don't understand why these threads are sooooo angry when it comes to this subject....
best wishes,
surfer
hey vehn,
i am certainly not in a postion to argue with you--- i lack knowledge in this area.... however it does seem it will take tons of info to alter science's world view... i dont think science changes as easily as you would like it to.
best wishes,
surfer
no it doesnt easily change because many things in science are settled. that means that they have been observed and tested for so long it is unlikely that any new evidence will change them.
they will change however if you can come up with a new idea and it can be tested and pass peer review. a recent change that i can remember is ulcers. for decades it was thought that stress caused ulcers. new evidence has caused them to change the cause to a bacteria.
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/health/digestive-diseases/peptic-ulcer/ulcer.about.cause.htm
these threads become "angry" because you have a lot of losers that respond, they don't know how to reason, as a result they don't play by the rules but believe they're the hallmark of critical thinking and it becomes very frustrating to those of us who DO know how to reason correctly.
case in point (reference the prior post) :sad:
STABILITY and INERTIA is a STRENGTH of science, not flaw or weakness, geez.
but it will REVISE under the weight of evidence.
The following exchange says more about the contents, if not the subject, of this thread than perhaps any other
he owns a darwin book? horrors. dont you think every believer should read a darwin book so they can decide if what he observed makes sense? how can knowledge hurt anyone?
Surf, you do have a point, coming back to the dogmatism of science.
It doesnt change that quickly, some chap by the name of copernicus, and a few others ran into obstacles of various sorts.
But you cannot ignore, the obstructionism, the blinkered, blindfolded bastardry of religion has always been the main thing holding the human race back, from learning and understanding.
Ive stated myself, that science is highly
dogmatic, but this is because people are really stupid, not because science "IS" a religion of some sort.
In order to understand science, how it operates, or more importantly is allowed to operate, its necessary to understand sociology, mass dynamics and many other factors.
This is difficult, because the masters of these sciences, are church's and religions.
Wow, this is the first time i noticed "difficult" has the word "cult" in it.
I may be drunk, but thats spooky.....:eek:
It doesnt change that quickly, some chap by the name of copernicus, and a few others ran into obstacles of various sorts.
But you cannot ignore, the obstructionism, the blinkered, blindfolded bastardry of religion has always been the main thing holding the human race back, from learning and understanding.
Ive stated myself, that science is highly
dogmatic, but this is because people are really stupid, not because science "IS" a religion of some sort.
In order to understand science, how it operates, or more importantly is allowed to operate, its necessary to understand sociology, mass dynamics and many other factors.
This is difficult, because the masters of these sciences, are church's and religions.
Wow, this is the first time i noticed "difficult" has the word "cult" in it.
I may be drunk, but thats spooky.....:eek: