Why I Don't Want To Be An Atheist

[Angrboda]

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

Citation needed.

http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2014/11/...415399496/
The story identifies the claim from cern that the H/B was discovered, then they also put forth several competing theory that state the H/B was not found, but rather the decay rates that point to the H/B (which again if you watch the video is what they initally had) which accoding to this paper lends it self to at least two different competing theories:
http://journals.aps.org/prd/abstract/10.....90.035012

That's an alternative theory set with very little support.  It's basically all the same theory.  They propose a new fundamental force that nobody has ever caught wind of.  That's weak, Drich.  That some yahoos have a fringe theory which also accounts for the data does not deserve the words fraud or debunked.  And I don't give a damn how the Higgs researchers dealt with their funding, it's your word as a science ignoramus that it impacted the results.

Where's your evidence that the Higgs discovery was debunked?  I see a lot of ranting with no actual support.

You didn't do your due dillegence did you. You of all people should know not to ask me a question you are not 1000% sure that you know the answer of.

[article snipped]

You keep quoting this one story from this one group of scientists like it's going to make your claims.  It doesn't.  They've got an alternative theory of what the CERN team discovered.  Well whoopity doo, theories are like opinions, everybody's got one.  Simply having an alternative, poorly supported theory does not 'debunk' the CERN data.  I did my due diligence, you're the one who failed.  You see what the scientists have done through your own particular lense but you've failed to actually document that there was anything wrong with what they did.  And this single point theory of yours doesn't wash either because there were two separate experiments conducted at CERN, by different teams of people, and they agreed on the final result.

As stated, you're ranting, making bold claims about corruption in science, but when asked for the evidence, it doesn't live up to your hype.

Again, the Nobel committee was fooled into handing out what is arguably the highest achievement/award one can receive for scientific discovery, Based on what the cern scientist discovered. Which it took over a year for anyone to challenge the findings/to break through the red tape/scientific beucracy to openly challenge the statement that what was found is proof to the H/B throey.

Again that is what is being discussed. The corruption in science and the faith one has to have to blindly accept it as the Nobel Committee did.

Whether or not the Nobel committee erred in giving out the prize is a matter of opinion.  The one person qualified to comment on that has already weighed in against you.  Regardless, that still would not justify your claims.  The CERN discovery is supported by the standard model of physics, the most supported theory in physics.  That isn't corruption, that's basing one discovery upon prior discoveries.  That's the way it works.  None of this shows corruption in scientific discoveries or that science is a religion.  Science isn't an object of worship by the masses.  It's an object of respect, respect that has been earned, by producing the goods.  Perhaps the cutting edge stuff is more speculative than you'd like, but that's the nature of the beast.  It doesn't impugn the reputation of science in the way you think it does.