Views: 18401

Albums: Science

Comment by Dienekes on January 28, 2012 at 6:01pm

What about E=MC^2?  That appears to have been the biggest break though of science to date.

Comment by Reg The Fronkey Farmer on January 28, 2012 at 7:44pm

True - but only after standing on the shoulders of previous giants. Once he knew about atoms he was able to conceive that light was made up of photons which I suppose pointed towards the quantum world. Chaim Weizman, the first Israeli president was on a ship with Einstein and said that “Einstein explained his theory to me every day and when we docked I knew he fully understood it himself” (paraphrasing).

Comment by Kilana Malakina on January 28, 2012 at 10:44pm

This is great!!!

Comment by Dienekes on July 22, 2012 at 12:28am

@Josh - Actually, I would have to disagree with you.  The evidence that the story would be most likely "gone forever" (which is obviously a figure of speech, but we all know what it really means) is that despite the occurence of serpent mythologies around the world, none are similar enough to the abrahamic fairy tale to justify saying that they are "the same story".  Since no other civilization has come up with a story about the creation of man and mankind "being punished for all time because a talking snake tried to help humanity by giving them free will and the ability to know right from wrong, while the supposed "good" creator wanted to keep humans ignorant and subservient", it is highly unlikely that this story would be replicated by other superstitious, delusional beings in the future.

As for science and the scientific method, these findings can be and have been replicated time and again, so it would not at all be surprising that we, as a species, would eventually come to the same understanding of reality, however long that took.

Lastly, where do you see anything that says this is a scientific empirical certainty? What I see in this OP is an OPINION of a person that is based on logic and reason, NOT a scientific premise.  We, as humans, all have opinions that are not based in scientific certainties. To do as you have done and claim that someone's opinion is completely invalid because of lack of scientific support is basically insisting that we all must act and think as robots.  This, by the way, is in direct opposition to the xian claim that their delusional superstition is valid *despite* the evidence against it.  Also, given enough (or really *any*) evidence to the contrary, I'm sure that whoever said this would admit to having an invalid opinion, vs the xian insistence that they are right and everyone else is wrong no matter how much evidence is presented to them.

So, did you just come here to start an argument and be abusive, or do you really *not* understand that you are taking the OP out of context and railing against it just for the sake of being an asshat?

Comment by Dienekes on July 22, 2012 at 12:36am

@Josh - and, in response to your post back on the 7th, yes, people would surely make up stupid, superstitious, fair tales to explain things until the scientific method was discovered again.  The OP doesn't say that isn't the way it would work.  The point is that we *WOULD* eventually mature, as a species, to the understanding of the scientific method and, therefore, re-learn all of the empirical truths that we currently understand.  But all of the superstitious fairy tales would be completely different.

Believe it or not, despite your confrontational tone, your statement actually agrees with the sentiment of the OP, rather than disputing it.

Comment by Dienekes on July 23, 2012 at 9:35pm

@Josh - Sorry, but again I disagree.  I think it is HIGHLY improbable that people would create a story about a "talking snake" or any other "bad guy" that is actually trying to save humanity from the cruelty of enslavement of ignorance by the supposed "hero" god of the story.  It's not just that the story is improbable because of the idiocy of the talking snake, you have to also combine that with the fact that the story claims that the "evil" character is actually helping humanity, whereas the "good" (actually, the best of all the good) character is actually damaging humanity.  Each of these makes the story implausible, but the combination of these 2 logical fallacies makes it nearly impossible to recreate.

The OP is not pointing out that delusional superstitions won't re-emerge, just that the human imagination is boundless, and will make up an unlimited number of possible fairy tales.  On the other hand, science is the process of finding out impassive, observable, empirical truths about reality. 

Even if, by some off the wall chance a story about a talking snake with so many logical holes you could drive a convoy through it did appear, it wouldn't be related to such a crazy superstition as xianity.  The evidence of this is that it hasn't happened twice in all of the worlds history. If it were at all likely, wouldn't it have happened at least 1 other time in the last 200,000 years?

Comment by Dienekes on July 23, 2012 at 9:47pm

I am very clear that the OP was *about* science vs. superstitious delusion.  But you seem to be saying that no one is ever allowed to have an "opinion" about the validity of "science"?  Again, that just doesn't make any sense.  That sort of argument seems to fall into the same category as the argument that we can't use the bible to disprove the bible because we don't believe in the bible.

I am a gnostic atheist and I love science.  But I have opinions about all sorts of things, even while at the same time knowing that I don't have every single bit of information about those things.  Because we are scientists (or just support the process of scientific discovery), we are not allowed to have opinions based on incomplete data?  Sorry, but, you are just flat out wrong.  Opinion is only invalid in the light of contrary evidence, so if you can't actually come up with any evidence to disprove the OP's statement, you have every right in the world to say you, personally disagree with the conclusion, but you don't really have the right to say the other person's opinion is wrong. Do you see the difference?

Comment by Dienekes on July 24, 2012 at 11:53am

They are only breaking "convention" if they are claiming it is a scientific certainty, which they are not.

Comment by Dienekes on July 24, 2012 at 12:08pm

@Josh - "...that must be a miracle from god." I would consider it more of a miracle (and evidence of god) if the story seemed to have stemmed from multiple cultures from disparate regions of earth.  As to your point about a similar story being imagined up by more than one nutcase in the hundreds of thousands of years of history, I do see your point.  But look at it this way: the basis of the OP is not necessarily that it won't be conceived by some lunatic (if you look at the intention of the quote, rather than focus specifically and only on its exact wording), but rather that it will be important enough to be part of our history.  I'm sure lots of crazy notions from uncounted cults have come and gone without a whisper in the annals of mankind, but few weather the test of time and fewer yet weather the test of science (read: reason and logic).

Regardless, we can only hope that eventually the various cults of abraham will disappear as the others have, forgotten by a society of rational, reasonable, compassionate humans who don't buy into any moronic delusional superstitions.

Comment by kOrsan on July 26, 2012 at 5:10pm

Hey Anthony.

It gives people the ability to answer questions when they don't really know the answer.

They're not fucking supposed to! That's the point.


You need to be a member of Think Atheist to add comments!

Join Think Atheist

© 2018   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service