Is your trust in science based on faith or based on science?

What I mean is this: how much do you actually know about the science most atheists parrot? Most atheists know as little science as most Christians know as little theology. Just as a Christian trusts his priest to tell him what he believes, an atheist trusts scientists with a Ph.D. tacked to their name to tell them what they believe. But how many times have the scientists turned out to be wrong? I only ask this because it seems this is central to the problem that most atheists have. They are repulsed by the phrase “believe” – they are addicted instead to the phrase “know”. But honestly, do you really know, or are you just believing what you’re told? I would like to remind you that in the 1970′s the scientists of the day were seriously concerned that we were about to enter an ice age, and less than 30 years later they are now convinced Earth is about to turn into a desert.

Unless you’ve observed something yourself, or observed and interpreted the evidence yourself and drew your own conclusions, you are just as guilty as faith as any religious person.

Views: 5590

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Hmm,  I had him with a Scottish accent.

If only my accent was that cool.

@Dave - are you one of those who turns 1-syllable words into two: yea-yus, Ji-yum, etc?

Thankfully, no. My accent is mostly non-existent, due to being a blend of multiple places. Ohio, Georgia, Kansas, Panama, multiple Army bases, and now Hawaii. I do say y'all now and then, however. A souvenir from my time in Georgia.

In your comment to Strega: "If only my accent was that cool," I took it to mean that it was something abysmal.

y'all is a very useful term and there is no other which does the job.  I picked it up in Raleigh NC.  My speech is a strange mish-mash of all kinds of influences. 

In England - Liverpool - they say you's which I don't like as much. 

Well, the photo was taken at Adventure World in Disney. Which is also where I got the hat.

BUT - you got the hat --

I didn't say it is a conspiracy. I said it is corruption resulting from the influence of religion.

The problem is that there's no evidence for that theory, other than that you want to believe it to be true.   Are you believing in doG again?  Rejecting reality and substituting your own?

It was the evil religious who kept themselves from being mandatory reporters... no wait!  "Clergy have been on the list all along!".  No wait!  Clergy get special status!

No, wait!  It is corruption resulting from the influence of sports that must be keeping coaches and karate instructors off the mandatory reporter list!  Because surely only corruption could result in somebody not being required to report on their neighbors when they have suspicions! 

No wait!  Only religious people, because I don't like them.

Too funny.

Much as I would like to further your education in citizenship and legal theory, somehow I suspect that even if I went through state by state with a detailed explanation you would write 20 paragraphs about how I was wrong because #11 on some random website you googled said so.

Just do me one favor.  If you or anyone you know ever find yourself in a position where this matters, consult with a competent attorney in your state.

No wait!  Only religious people, because I don't like them.

Too funny.

More humor.

You see, Bob, this is exactly what I mean - this man has obviously spent a great deal of his time putting together facts and sources in an effort to debate you (and I suspect, to prove you wrong) - I won't do that, simply because your opinion will never be changed by any facts that do not agree with your own perceptions. I've done my research, I have every reason to believe it's accurate, so why would I waste the time that Gallup has, banging my head against a wall of indifference? Knowing that, lowers your status on my list of priorities to a point somewhere between clipping my toenails and dislodging navel lint, neither of which are to be found on my list of favorite things.

You see, Bob, this is exactly what I mean - this man has obviously spent a great deal of his time putting together facts and sources in an effort to debate you (and I suspect, to prove you wrong)

Obvious because he's longwinded?  OK, OK, I typed out a longwinded reply to him.  Feel better now?

I don't mind if you choose not to engage, @arch, in favor of clipping your toenails or any other thing you prefer.  Know that I'm not indifferent, and I'll drop by occasionally to continue the conversation in case you get to the point where you want to engage with the views of a real-life intellectual theist instead of the made-up straw men and odd fringe views that are so common here. 

RSS

Events

Services we love!

© 2015   Created by umar.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service