Question about "faith"

[John 6IX Breezy]

1.No, dendritic spines aren't similar to ghosts.  The first had tentative evidence for its existence, was postulated and was testable in-principle, and later shown to be the best hypothesis.

2. It also wasn't an extraordinary claim, since it wasn't disallowed by current science. 

3. Are you arguing that because science doesn't know all, and finds new ideas, that somehow that makes it scientific to postulate gods?

1. We agree that carefully defined propositions and models are essential for falsification. But we disagree that ghosts and leprechauns are by their very nature unfalsifiable. There is nothing stopping the conjecture from being properly defined and tested. Likewise, by ghosts in science I mean conjectures that are just outside the scope of research, but not outside the realm of possibility. Dendritic spines had to wait until the tools of research advanced enough to encompass it's claims.

2. I think that unless you have a way to measure how extraordinary a claim is, this idea should be discarded. It is subjective in nature.

3. I'm arguing that things aren't off the table simply because you think they are far-fetched. Scientists aren't skeptics; their job isn't to sit around and reject conjectures a priori. We agree that ghosts haven't been formulated in a testable manner; but we disagree that if they ever are formulated in such a manner, that we should still reject them simply because "we all know ghosts aren't real." As it stands, we don't know anything about ghosts other than we can't currently test them.

---

Just like I do not have to consciously rule out gods as an explanation for the universe, I need justification to rule it in.

That's not how we do science ironically enough, quite the opposite.

Seriously? Ever hear of the null hypothesis?

Exactly; you aim to reject the null hypothesis, not to justify the alternative hypothesis. You don't prove anything in science.

[Abaddon_ire]

I think you mean falsifiable ?  There are many things that are irrefutable, my guess is a supreme being that actually wants us to know him, would certainly be irrefutable.

Refutation, falsifiability, testability, they all refer to the same thing in a scientific contact.

Why have you got that so wrong?

Science starts with observation.

How many gods have been observed? Zero.

Step 2 is to develop a hypothesis to explain said observation.

Step 3 is to test/falsify the observation already made and see if the hypothesis withstands scrutiny.
If it does not, the hypothesis fails. If it does then the hypothesis stands

Step 4 the hypothesis graduates to the status of a theory. 

You failed at step 1. There is no observation to even posit an actual hypothesis. Because nobody has ever observed any god of any sort, ever.

[John 6IX Breezy]

No. I'm sorry; that is incorrect.

[Rahn127]

John,

I get it now. You don't understand science at all.
That explains so much.

[John 6IX Breezy]

I get it now. You don't understand science at all.

If hypotheses graduate to theories when's the next ceremony lol?

[LadyForCamus]

I miss you guys. ❤️

[possibletarian]

I think that unless you have a way to measure how extraordinary a claim is, this idea should be discarded. It is subjective in nature.

Magical, invisible, unprovable universe creating beings extraordinary enough for you  ?

[John 6IX Breezy]

Magical, invisible, unprovable universe creating beings extraordinary enough for you  ?

No; provide a way to measure extraordinariness. If you cannot measure it, then it is not science.

[possibletarian]

Magical, invisible, unprovable universe creating beings extraordinary enough for you  ?

No; provide a way to measure extraordinariness. If you cannot measure it, then it is not science.

So let me get this right, you have no way of assessing if something is a reasonable proposition  or not and you are open to any suggestion on equal footing ? If this is the case it's very easy to see how you would believe in an invisible mega-being of your minds choice.

If we have no way to measure what your god is and does outside the imagination of the  mind, if he does nothing we can test or measure in any way, then in what way is that ordinary ?  

Do you for instance think that our existence is ordinary ? (with no special or distinctive features; normal.) What is it about existence that has you creating magical beings ?

---

I miss you guys. ❤️

Nice to see you pop your head in from time to time

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

This thread is taking a decidedly anti-leprechaun turn. The cultural insensitivity has been noted and logged for possible future action. 

That is all.

Boru