Why I Don't Want To Be An Atheist

[Drich]

That's crap. Let look at the scientific method.
In step number 3 you are to formulate a hypothesis and step 4 you are develop testable predictions BASED ON YOUR HYPOTHESIS! That my friend is the definition of a self fulfilling prophesy. like it or not the whole of scientific discovery is based on faith/the honor system that your precious 'scientists' do not fudge their findings to support their theories. Which we know to be the case as theories based on the scientific method are always changing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

All science offers you is a way of outside verification. Meaning a tangible object or physical phenoma can be manipulated or re-verified by this method. The problem? Not all of the universe can be made to fit those two categories. For instance besides God Science can't even be used to explain the complete nature of love.

Or are you so foolish to try and deny love exists even without a scientific explanation?

Science has it limitations, and to use the term science to bridge all the gaps in life is no different than using God to bridge gaps in knowledge.


Not according to the scientific method. Again, Facts are manipulated to fit a theory until they are so overwhelming that a new theory must be formulated. (higgs bosen particle is a good example)

You don't know the first thing about the scientific method Drich.

1) Look at the evidence.

2) Form a hypothesis.

3) Make testable predictions.

4) NOW TEST THOSE PREDICTIONS. (You conveniently forgot this bit)

Really?!?!? If only there was some way to go back to what I said, and maybe make larger or embolden the type face so you could see, that what you said here is not only wrong but by extension your conclusion based on the Idea that I forgot this part, also invalidates any future thoughts based on this conclusion.

5) If the experiments succeeded then the hypothesis is likely to be correct.

6) If the experiments failed then you have more evidence and can go back to step 1

Unless you don't have funding... you know to go back and rest the experiments because you were only given enough to make a finite number of experimental runs before the project is canned. So then what is a 'scientist' who's whole life is on the line to do?

Admit to a multi billion dollar failure and be shunned from the community or does one fudge the results?

The whole cern team thought the latter was the way to go.

What's more, the whole system is set up so that everybody is trying to find flaws in what everyone else is proposing.

On a highschool/common or core level yes, but you've got to be smart enough to see, no one is building a second Haydon supercolider, no one is putting 20 billion dollar probes on mars to verify data that has been found. No one is putting black hole telescopes in orbit to verify what the first one finds..

THAT'S MY POINT!

The origins crap you guys suckle at the teet at (the gospel big bang stuff found in the majority of your arguements) is compiled from the data mined in particle accelerators, on mars, off the space telescope findings, and you... 'smart/good people' put this on par with the science that powers your flat screens. Not the same thing. To few people have access to and can decipher the raw data.

What you are not considering is that your whole world/creation view revolves around one singular data point.

For instance have you ever seen what constitutes as proof of a 'black hole.'
One it not something that can be seen as supposedly visible light can not escape it's gravity. So they use radio telescopes and search for anomalous reading that have been deemed the 'black hole frequency range.' Then these bounced radio signals are compiled into massive data streams and then some animator gives a visual representation based on some 'scientist interpretation of what a black hole supposedly look like if infact it could be lit with viable light. hence when i say there is no proof for black holes you get moron posting pics of a painting or C/G hole and ask me what I am looking at...

-AND
This whole dog and pony show is based off of one point of data in space. Meaning from earth's orbit a hundred bazillion light years away. with maybe 30 years of data out of hundreds of trillions of supposed existence . we pretend to know enough about this phenoma to say this is this and that is that...

Again, not saying this crap is all valid or invalid. I am just point to the fact that your 'system of finding flaws and comming up with something better' is like trying to paint a HD potrate of an actual landscape with a blind guys description. Blind because he only has one point of data to describe it. Then the painter/scientist fills in the gaps with what he thinks he can "KNOW" from one point of data.

My point is all this orgins/fringe science crap bottle necks as instrumentation is limited and actual scientists on this level are severely limited. Not to mention heavily influenced by those who fund such research projects.

Science is not this pure incorruptible bastion of truth. It is only as pure as those who fund these larger grandiose projects and in conjunction with the time tables and deadline people put on them and those scientists working those projects who are all looking to make a name for themselves..

The fact that you all simply gobble up anything these guys say, and try and brow beat those who oppose you because you think you have the lock on factual truth, are just fooling yourselves. because all of what you say has been through a 'vetting process' that would be a joke in any other industry beside it's own.

It takes as much faith if not more to believe in your single perspective 'science,' that it does to believe in God. Yet you all can't/won't see it.

And when you do come up with a hypothesis that succeeds, you can then use the knowledge for practical purposes. This is why we have engineering and medicine. Things that work in practice. If the scientific method was nothing more than an honour or faith system as you claim, the modern world would not exist and we wouldn't be chatting about this on a discussion forum.

Again apples and oranges. I am an engineer who patented and sold said equipment, and developed and manufacture my own transport refrigeration systems, on a international level. I get practical science. whether you b-holes want to believe that or not. I have made a very nice life from my knowledge of practical science. I have challenged the status quo and found a better way of making my industry a little more efficient, as an off shoot of the scientific method. But again fringe science, the crap they do at the cern research facility or the crap the come up with at NASA's deep space exploration facility... None of those things can be question or reviewed objectively as all info comes in through a singular point of time and relative space. So at best all data will be heavily scewed with a singular slant. There are only a hand full of people who have access to the equipment and the knowledge or expertise to decipher the raw data they see. It is next to impossible to support something not already accepted. Or can you tell me what the cetera theory is without googling it?

That is why it was over a year later that the higgs boson discovery was debunked.