pop morality

[Drich]

Here the thing oh, great mover of goal posts.. I'm not saying it is a good or bad thing. I'm saying it takes faith to believe in a particle that can not be verified. You or DBP made the statement that 'science only deals with what is tangible/real' (the dig being God is not tangble or real, and it takes faith to believe in God.) I made the comment that 'science infact does not always operate on those principles, then I listed two common examples where faith in science fiction has bled over into science fact and blurred the lines in such away to make douche bags like yourselves believe things like black holes are indeed solid fact when in fact their is as much faith being expended in the belief of how a black hole works, as a religious person would expend in the existence of God.

Now that you can not argue that point you are trying to change the subject to something you feel you can argue. nice try, but if you want me to follow you down your rabbit hole, first concede the point I was making. Otherwise accept belief in 'science' still requires an expenditure of faith on the believers part and as such requires almost a religious devotion to fill the voids between what is observable and has solidified into theory.

You clearly do not understand that the existence of a particle and the measuring of its attributes has already been accomplished.  It fits the criteria for the Higgs and more research is being completed.  There is no "faith" needed, we have data.  No goalposts were moved, you clearly don't understand how science works.  Pick up a magazine.  Even Discover is good.  Or even better, "Particle Fever" is on Netflix.  It's a fabulous documentary.

How xtian of you to resort to insults and name-calling.  That's the kind of behavior I expect from a preechur.

You can't be this stupid... seriously??? Did you not read the research the denmark team did? I posted it like 3 or 4 different times!!!

While they (Denmark team) agree the particle behaves as predicted, they also point out several other particles would also behave in the way that has been recorded... It is a leap of Faith to say what was recorded was the higgs boson because again what was recorded was the particle decay and not the actual particle. that is why i used the Con-trail metaphore. Contrail is like the particle decay recorded. Yes it is evidence of a plane/Particle, but to say that can-trail/particle decay was the higgs boson it like looking at a con trail from an air plane and saying it was from a Boeing 787. Yes it is possible but their are an entire Air fleet of other possibilities as well.

I used the Cern scientist example to show that ALL Science is funded, and the Cern project was falling under tremendous pressure as 6 Billion Euros were spent to find nothing more than what they already had. So the sold us a pig in a poke.