Quote from yip1997:
HH:
You are indeed an agnostic. This type of logic or argument serves no significance to evidence.
Without true scientific method of proving or disproving it, we need to have some "indirect" methods of increasing or decreasing the significance of the hypothesis.
I used to enjoy this type of conversation when I was young, but found that it served me no good to solve my real problem in my real life.
I have to admit I sometimes enjoy to argue like the way that you did here, but I am trying to solve a problem here.
Quote from rcanfiel:
So your limitation as a mortal makes your view something which can be considered as ironclad?
Meanwhile, modern cosmology and physics now believes that:
1) We live in an 11-dimensional universe, because it fits the math. They have no concept what it looks like, and cannot prove it through direct observation, nor anything else.
2) We probably live in a multiversem where there could be an infinite number of parallel universes, possibly where every conceived permutation of reality happens at once. Why? It bests fits the data. They have no concept what it looks like, and cannot prove it through direct observation, nor anything else.
3) They postulate dark matter and dark energy to explain the universe. Why? It bests fits the data. They have no concept what it looks like, and cannot prove it through direct observation, nor anything else.
4) They have no concept of why the universe exists, or what causes singularities such as the Big Bang.
5) Many more
The list of the limitations of science is endless. All we know is, that much of what we understand has a good chance of being altered as we progress.
Quote from Hansel H:
It's true, Yip, I'm just playing here and I truly hope that you're not offended by this.
I am not offended. It reminds me the old good days that I could enjoy this type of arguments. But I just want to keep it on track.
Is the infallibility of the Bible so integral to your faith? If so, why? Also, if your faith were shaken would you be in crisis? It seems that you're already full of doubt.
A little bit, but not a crisis to me. My faith is shaken, but it is okay. This is life. No doubt, no breakthrough.
I'm full of doubt about my agnoticism. At times it seems obvious to me that there is what we can only call God but I'm troubled by my inability to either prove or disprove it logically or make a leap of faith in any direction.
Hans
IMHO there is no way of proving or disproving God. I remember something like math of possibility (not probability) when I studied AI. Someone tried to build a belief system using possibility math. It was well known in the AI community that we couldn't build a belief system based on probability. Instead they proposed the logic of Possibility. There are degrees of possibility.
Now we have fuzzy logic. We have "intelligent" machines built using fuzzy logic.
The concept is very simple. Life is full of uncertainty, or randomness. We need to have a sense of the degree of certainty or uncertainty, and belief system is build on that "fuzzy" degree.
Quote from Hansel H:
5) When we're outside the realm of pure science the results of experiments can often be easily rigged.
Quote from traderNik:
Sorry, I missed the point of this completely.
Quote from yip1997:
Quote from james_bond_3rd:
"I wasn't going to get involved in this until someone started attacking science again."
Nobody was "attacking" science. The poster gave a list of things which are no more impressive than the beliefs of science. And when you present your science credentials, I will be impressed. I suspect you are little more than a pedestrian. I have a BS-Biology, minor in Chemistry, MS - Computer Science. I stay versed in most of the latest developments in the sciences also happen to have a 20" Obsession telescope, and I think I can speak well of the state of science, thank you. And for those who will post "gee, posting your credentials?" I don't give a whoopee -- I am not talking to you, thx.
"None of these you listed are "believed" by anybody. "
Really, and what do you think a hypothesis or theory is? It is an educated guess, based on the best available evidence, and often having dissenting opinions from subgroups of other scientists, who believe differently based on the best available evidence. For a long time, several groups had differing opinions on the cosmos, based on multiple 10 dimensional space theories, until they had a eureka moment, and decided that 11 dimensions unified their opposing views.
"They are some of the hypotheses that scientists are working very hard to try to disprove."
They are trying to both PROVE and disprove simultaneously
"This is what separates faith from science. "
Yes. A little knowledge is dangerous. Those blind men "scientists" get very good at convincing themselves their extraordinarily limited views make them skeptically capable of commenting on things they have no concept about.
"In science, every hypothesis can be proven false. "
That is one of the more stupid things I have heard. Would you mind showing me how science has disproved the current paradigm containing thousands of hypotheses? How can they be proved false? Most of the current set are fundamentally true, and CANNOT be proven false. Would you mind proving false that all mammals provide milk for their yuong? That is the current hypothesis, nad has notyet been disproven. Etc. Etc. Etc.
Get your G.E.D., boy. Your ignorance is showing!
"In faith, you just believe it is true. "
Your ignorance is showing again. That is YOUR interpretation. There are a large number of "faith"ful people whose lives were changed by an event or based on the available evidence.
Quote from rcanfiel:
Quote from rcanfiel:
That works to both prove or disprove God. And it is probably similar to prolife/prochoice. No amount of efforts from one side will likely convince the other