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.
1+1.9999repeating is exactly the same as 1+2
How so? Smells like well aged bullshit to me.
Agreed. The math just does not add up. Simple.
G: 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.
GM: All I see is another crackpot-- [G] this time-- telling me what I believe instead of asking me.
GM, his telling you what you believe instead of asking you is a mental condition widespread among Catholics: the infallibility they contract from the pope. It's also known as crackpotism.
How do I know G is a Catholic?
He referred to xians trusting priests and omitted mention of people trusting ministers or rabbis.
Priests are better educated than many ministers, but G's omitting people as educated as rabbis indicates an advanced condition: 2nd degree crackpotism.
Oh damn, he's onto us guys. Atheism is just another religion.
We can't really know anything for ourselves, our opinion that the earth is round is just as much based on faith as their opinion of a flat one.
What do you mean by "Atheism is just another religion" ?
That's a well known joke around here, because some religionists claim that science and/or atheism are just a couple more religions, or beliefs, or faiths.
The second paragraph is supposed to be funny, too. We would still think that the earth is flat, had we not questioned and explored our world. I think it's reasonable to assume that the earth is round, even if it wasn't written that way in ancient religious dogma.
The world is flat. No, wait, correction please... the world is round. There is overwhelming evidence for it, now.
Hey, I just realized something! Doesn't it kind of make sense if I say that "I have faith in evidence"? That might seem like an oxymoron, but I think it sounds somewhat poetic. (But I'm a bit sleepy right now.)
The earth is an oblate spheroid.... just saying.
I assign trust where it is earned, science has made so many startling discoveries and has advanced us as a species so much further than any religion every has.
I don't know all of science, nor do I need to know "everything" to know that science has a value, I can see it all around me, and since science is something that is open to investigation anyone can dig into it and test assumptions, new and old.
We know only 1 thing for certain (Cogito Ergo Sum) that still does not mean that I exit my house through the 3rd floor window. Reasoned certainty is all that one requires, and that is what science can give us.
"I have faith in evidence"
I have trust in science because evidence is a good indicator of what constitutes reality.
Dr.Grixis, in a differential equations class long ago, the professor one day made himself memorable to me when he said that even mathematicians have faith.
I had freed myself from Catholicism and reflected on his words. What did he mean?
I was not then an accomplished mathematician and struggled with the problems he assigned. I came to see that I had faith in my ability to solve those problems. My final grade? B.
He's pulling your leg. Taking the piss. Having a joke at your expense.
As a scientist, I have absolutely no faith in science. Faith is a bad word to me because that indicates a choice of ignorance over knowledge - the anti-science. Science is not so much a set of facts and knowledge as a way of looking at the world and Universe around us. We question everything, even established facts if we see any evidence that might indicate a flaw in what we believe we've figured out. Science is self correcting. Rather than faith in science, we have a certain confidence in what we know based on the strength of the evidence about the subject in particular. When we send spacecraft to Pluto, we can predict to great precision exactly when and how far from Pluto our spacecraft will arrive at that destination. When New Horizons actually gets to Pluto, we'll almost certainly find the spacecraft very close to the predicted flyby circumstances - we couldn't do that if we didn't understand the laws of gravity (as well as all the other science that contributed to building and flying the spacecraft) extremely well. I am certain that we don't know everything about the Universe which is one reason I continue to study it. Religion on the other hand claims to have all the answers or that the unknowns are "God's mysterious ways." That is totally unsatisfying an answer. So to answer your original question: My trust in science is based on the scientific method.
There was a hypothesis in the 1970's that we could be in for another ice age but it was not highly or widely regarded. I only ever heard that "scientists were saying" that in Christian circles and didn't hear a thing about it from my grade school science teachers.
I don't have 'faith' in science - but I do 'trust' that the peer review system will continue to root out 'junk science' and misplaced ideas. I trust that it will because it has done so, repeatedly, and erroneous ideas are consistently discarded - unlike religion.
I know that science provides me with a better understanding of the world around me than religion provided my elders. I know this because I can confidently work with electricity under circumstances that I know are safe because science has told me how electricity works. I know this because I understand why, and under what conditions, I can siphon my home made wine from one container to the next. I know this because of a thousand things that my elders did not understand and could not predict that I can both understand and predict. The proof isn't in the pudding - it's in the proof.