I want to highlight out a misnomer that I have come across a few times. It is often caused by the presence of christards, and a normal rational person is suckered into their way of thinking.
Science is a means of asking questions. We look for inconsistencies, and in the light of that refine the questions. It is not about dogma. when arguing with a cristard a scientific approach tends to give its adherent a better connection to reality than an untested assertion in an old book. Consequently we point to this or that bit of information that is not consistent with their dogma and the christard jumps through all sorts of tautologies, trying to show their dogma is in some way related to our experience of the world.
There is a problem though, and that is in the argument being two sided, those with a scientific approach can tend to see their current state of knowledge as proven fact and treat it as dogma. When that happens in a way the christards have won they have reduced the argument to one assertion verse another. In doing that they are killing science. Science was not disproved when Newton posited gravity as a driving force of the solar system. Nor did science die when relativity further refined our questions. Science will not die if this or that theory is proven or dis-proven, or further refined. In fact that is the life blood of science, it is why the greatest prizes are for those that overturn what we thought was solid structure.
Science is a means of asking questions. We look for inconsistencies, and in the light of that refine the questions. It is not about dogma. when arguing with a cristard a scientific approach tends to give its adherent a better connection to reality than an untested assertion in an old book. Consequently we point to this or that bit of information that is not consistent with their dogma and the christard jumps through all sorts of tautologies, trying to show their dogma is in some way related to our experience of the world.
There is a problem though, and that is in the argument being two sided, those with a scientific approach can tend to see their current state of knowledge as proven fact and treat it as dogma. When that happens in a way the christards have won they have reduced the argument to one assertion verse another. In doing that they are killing science. Science was not disproved when Newton posited gravity as a driving force of the solar system. Nor did science die when relativity further refined our questions. Science will not die if this or that theory is proven or dis-proven, or further refined. In fact that is the life blood of science, it is why the greatest prizes are for those that overturn what we thought was solid structure.
