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: 5924

Replies are closed for this discussion.

Replies to This Discussion

@G - Don't be a hypocrite, leave all the science you now use everyday, and you would be living in a cave. That is the thing with science, always questioned, always improved - and I need science to live my life, with great respect to all the Scientists also trying to improve people's lives, rather than lead my life, from a book of myth that has been plagiarized from many other myths.

So, you have to get off the internet, don't fly in a plane, get rid of your phone and TV, and don't go to the doctor - and that is just for starters.

Scientists are undoubtedly wrong about some things.  They'll be the first to admit it and the first to admit they'd love to know right now just what it is they are wrong about, so they can fix it.

They are undoubtedly right about a whole hell of a lot more than ANY of the fucked up bullshit religions that exist today every DREAMED of being.  And I don't even have to know what yours is to be 99.9999% sure it's on the list of religions wrong about more things than the scientists are.  And the scientists will become right about even more things.  Your religion won't, it's carved in stone, with its mistakes preserved in glorious technicolor, forever.

Science can fix its mistakes.  Religion can't.  Science started from nothing and built itself up.  Religion ASSUMES the truth was handed down from the sky on a silver platter, when in fact it's bullshit some ignorant bronze age dickweed made up.  There's no comparison whatsoever.  And you have the nerve to try to cast the two as equivalent somehow.  What a crock of stinking shit.

Should we build or make use of atomic weaponry?

Should we engage in human eugenics through forced sterilization and other approaches?

Is a person of African descent (or other physical attribute) inferior?

Please provide the 'religious' answer that trumps all scientific answers to each of those questions.

Should we build or make use of atomic weaponry?

We already have.

Should we engage in human eugenics through forced sterilization and other approaches?

We already do (use other approaches). For example, doctors warn couples when it's likely their children have an increased chance of being born with a birth defect or a tendency toward some disease. 

Is a person of African descent (or other physical attribute) inferior?

I'm sure some African is inferior to some non-African. I'm equally sure no African is inferior to all non-Africans. 

Oh, Robert, such poorly thought out questions. I will take on one of them.

Atomic weaponry, and the fear of national leaders that they might be used, has kept kept the peace in one very real way: for the first time in all of human history, people who profit from war know than in a general nuclear war they too will die.

However, people who believe in a future life might not fear their demise. Many such believers hang onto this life until their knuckles turn white from lack of blood, but true believers might want to enter that future life as soon as possible.

Robert, get thee to a shrink and ask to be tested for a condition widespread among Catholics: a low level infallibility first seen a few decades ago in the papacy.

I don't think you understand the meaning of 'faith'. Faith means belief WITHOUT evidence. If anyone were interested in gaining evidence for any scientific belief there is plenty of evidence available at our finger tips, we need only to look. It's not the same for religion as religion needs 'faith' - belief without any evidence.

This is not my discussion i find it in a blog and i totally surprised.And that's why i need some opinion.

@G - Do you follow a particular religion? This blog was written by an arrogant, rude, apologetic, which is why the writer is being put back into his religous box. Did you write this blog?

Atheism is not a religion, in any way, shape or form. I do not believe in god, or angels, or spirits or ghosts, or karma or dharma.  All man made constructs, from superstitious men, who had to have an explanation for nature. There are women who are being accused of beng witches, and either killed or run out of a village. That is what is happening, perpetrated by men in the name of religion and superstitious twaddle, with dire consequences.

Peoples can believe anything they want, it is all the other criminal activities that go with it, that I get cross.

I did not write this blog.

G, then do the polite and responsible thing; identify the author.

People like to be acknowledged.

Also, I would not have attributed to you the evidence I saw of Catholicism .


© 2018   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service