Posts: 13392
Threads: 187
Joined: March 18, 2012
Reputation:
48
RE: pop morality
March 22, 2016 at 10:17 am
Posts: 13392
Threads: 187
Joined: March 18, 2012
Reputation:
48
RE: pop morality
March 22, 2016 at 10:19 am
(March 21, 2016 at 7:31 pm)KevinM1 Wrote: Something that's really kind of funny is how a lot of theists still view science as this weirdly nefarious, clandestine, dishonest thing that is basically a stand-in for religion, just with a different name. It's not. That would be Scientology, which is a particularly despicable form of woo.
No, science is a process. An incredibly simple and logical one. Observe. Question. Hypothesize. Experiment. Apply the results to reality. Do they match the hypothesis? If so, is there anything else that the results show? If not, why not? Hypothesize. Experiment. Etc.
We don't have faith in science. Science isn't a deity. We understand and trust in the process, but still realize that it's only as sound as its weakest links - the humans engaging in it. That's why peer review is a necessary step. We also realize that the answers science provide are merely the best explanation given the evidence we currently possess. Science never produces absolutes, which is something that seems to confound those that don't understand it. It's never "That's just the way it is, period" but rather "According to observation, experimentation, a lot of math, and peer review, this is our best explanation."
But, when you have people who don't understand science, who view it through the lens of religion (binary), and who are more than willing to swallow wholesale what people who have a similar distrust of science say (climate change deniers, Higgs deniers, anti-vaxers, etc.), ignorance perpetuates itself under the guise of 'free thinking' and society itself suffers.
Yeah.. whateves.. see the above post.
Posts: 13392
Threads: 187
Joined: March 18, 2012
Reputation:
48
RE: pop morality
March 22, 2016 at 10:22 am
(March 21, 2016 at 8:26 pm)Ryantology (╯°◊°)╯︵ ══╬ Wrote: Drich Wrote:Now again, to you is killing a baby a "positive" thing?
![[Image: perfect_fried_egg_recipe_hero_landscape_...tQ.S0Q.g--]](https://s.yimg.com/ea/img/-/140822/perfect_fried_egg_recipe_hero_landscape_19vd8ni-19vd8nv.jpg?x=656&sig=trDTwlFzVXeGDGtQ.S0Q.g--)
Depends. Is this fried chicken?
You do know that the chicken egg (yolk) is a single cell right?
Posts: 13392
Threads: 187
Joined: March 18, 2012
Reputation:
48
RE: pop morality
March 22, 2016 at 10:37 am
Posts: 13392
Threads: 187
Joined: March 18, 2012
Reputation:
48
RE: pop morality
March 22, 2016 at 11:07 am
Posts: 13392
Threads: 187
Joined: March 18, 2012
Reputation:
48
RE: pop morality
March 22, 2016 at 11:09 am
So how about it Kenobi???
Is Killing babies 'making a positive difference' to you???
Posts: 5598
Threads: 112
Joined: July 16, 2012
Reputation:
74
RE: pop morality
March 22, 2016 at 11:12 am
(March 22, 2016 at 10:22 am)Drich Wrote: You do know that the chicken egg (yolk) is a single cell right?
If it's unfertilized.
Posts: 13392
Threads: 187
Joined: March 18, 2012
Reputation:
48
RE: pop morality
March 22, 2016 at 12:04 pm
(March 21, 2016 at 7:31 pm)KevinM1 Wrote: Something that's really kind of funny is how a lot of theists still view science as this weirdly nefarious, clandestine, dishonest thing that is basically a stand-in for religion, just with a different name. It's not. That would be Scientology, which is a particularly despicable form of woo.
No, science is a process. An incredibly simple and logical one. Observe. Question. Hypothesize. Experiment. Apply the results to reality. Do they match the hypothesis? If so, is there anything else that the results show? If not, why not? Hypothesize. Experiment. Etc.
We don't have faith in science. Science isn't a deity. We understand and trust in the process, but still realize that it's only as sound as its weakest links - the humans engaging in it. That's why peer review is a necessary step. We also realize that the answers science provide are merely the best explanation given the evidence we currently possess. Science never produces absolutes, which is something that seems to confound those that don't understand it. It's never "That's just the way it is, period" but rather "According to observation, experimentation, a lot of math, and peer review, this is our best explanation."
But, when you have people who don't understand science, who view it through the lens of religion (binary), and who are more than willing to swallow wholesale what people who have a similar distrust of science say (climate change deniers, Higgs deniers, anti-vaxers, etc.), ignorance perpetuates itself under the guise of 'free thinking' and society itself suffers.
keep drinking the koolaide, that's right gulp it down. Ignore What I just showed you about how your faith in science is no different than a religious zealot's faith in his own religion is the exact same. (Your assumptions that black holes are scientific fact and not a theory.) Keep pretending that 'science' is always about demonstrable fact and does not ask for faith. That way when 'science' demands you believe in "X" what ever that maybe you will just hand your mind and faith right over without question. Just like those mindlessly following their own religions.. but different because the word 'God' and the Word 'Science' start with different letters and can't be the same even if the mindless adherence of it's followers is the same net result.
Posts: 5466
Threads: 36
Joined: November 10, 2014
Reputation:
53
RE: pop morality
March 22, 2016 at 12:12 pm
Gravity is a theory, you moron. The scientific meaning of the word is not the same as the layperson's. It doesn't mean guess or hunch or anything else without much substantiation.
"I was thirsty for everything, but blood wasn't my style" - Live, "Voodoo Lady"
Posts: 13392
Threads: 187
Joined: March 18, 2012
Reputation:
48
RE: pop morality
March 22, 2016 at 12:15 pm
|