(January 29, 2013 at 3:17 pm)AtlasS Wrote: In many scientific books, you'll find that sometimes, theories are pushed as if they were true facts which we hold with our hands.
Gravity is a mere theory, yet a lot of applications are built on it, so would we simply demolish those applications, because (the makers assumed that gravity is a true fact) ?
It's laughable that you are trying to refute science, yet you have no idea what science is. Nor do you understand what a theory is in the context of science.
Theories don't 'grow up' to be facts. In science, theories are the pinnacle of achievement. Facts are very easy to come by, all it takes is observation. Theories explain a set of observed facts.
Gravity is an observed fact, The theory of gravity is an explanation for the observed facts.
Maybe you should read a book on basic scientific method, then come on back.
Quote:Darwin also, built all his research upon a theory of his own creation. So would we demolish everything he did, because it was built on (what darwin assumed to be true) ?
No he didn't. He based the theory of evolution on OBSERVED FACTS. He wasn't the first to observe these facts, he was the first to come up with a theory that explained them.
Quote:Because the context here is "an islamic section", contains "muslims who truly believe in the Quran being right".
Thus, from this perspective, I presented a theory based on a religious book, which I formally believe in as true.
You didn't present a theory. You presented conjecture.
One does not start with a conclusion, then try to fit the facts into it.
When one does that, they fail...well...sort of like you've been doing on this thread.
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
