Comment by Keith Pinster 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 Dylan Martin on January 28, 2012 at 10:44pm

This is great!!!

Comment by josh sapinoso on June 7, 2012 at 10:40am

"The story about the talking snake" would probably be gone forever in this hypothetical scenario, but the concept of religion and deities would be there long before people would begin to understand science, much like it has happened in real life.

I'm pretty sure most indigenous tribes(what I assume would be the closest thing to humans had modern day knowledge or technology been wiped out) explain things with spirits and gods rather than science.

There haven't been many cultures/civilizations that are inherently atheist. The belief in imaginary beings seems like a more natural thought process amongst humans than science does.

Comment by josh sapinoso on July 22, 2012 at 12:26am

This post is pretty ironic/hypocritical. It's funny how it praises science but manages to slap it in the face at the same time.

First of all, what this picture is trying to suggest doesn't even meet the minimum standard for the scientific method. There's no way to test this hypothesis. With no evidence(let alone a method to even gather evidence...) to support or a refute this claim, this is just spotty speculation and pulling conclusions from your asshole, something science doesn't do.

Secondly, a hypothesis is never proven using the scientific method- rather alternative hypotheses are refuted. So saying that you can assure something, also show a lack of understanding of the scientific method.

I failed fuckin 10th grade chemistry, and yet it still looks like I have a better appreciation for science than whoever wrote this does.  

This post doesn't set out to accomplish anything other than to give something for some dipshit atheists to toot their dicks to (titling it "Science Always Wins!" further suggests this). Tooting your dick is pretty annoying, but managing to drag science and attempting to drag a religion through the dirt at the same time is just plain wrong

Comment by josh sapinoso on July 22, 2012 at 12:26am

Furthermore, to humor this speculation, seeing as how "The serpent is one of the oldest and most widespread mythological symbols" (quoted from wikipedia, [dont give a fuck]) a story about a  talking snake (not the story) would probably pop up long before efforts to consciously advance science become mainstream. And who know, maybe out of a bunch of these stories one could resemble the story of the talking snake.

Comment by Keith Pinster 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 Keith Pinster 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 josh sapinoso on July 23, 2012 at 3:20pm

@Keith The op pertains to science, praises science, predicts what would happen to science, and the title of it is called Science Always Wins!... is it wrong to expect that it should follow the most basic conventions of science?

Comment by josh sapinoso on July 23, 2012 at 3:57pm

@Keith In regards to the snake story, given enough repeated trials of someone telling a story about a talking snake, Its not entirely improbable that one could closely resemble the story in the bible. Whether it gets as popular as it has in this world would be another story. 

My point is, with all the mentions of science within the post, it looked to me like the op was trying to pass off speculation as science.

Comment

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next ›
• Page