Atheism->Deism->Theism

by sabastious 114 Replies latest jw friends

EntirelyPossible

The flaw in the scientific method is in it's peer review process.
Only if by "flaw" you mean "the thing that makes it 100 billion times more accurate and useful than Jesus ever said on everything single thing".
No matter what we will inject our bias without being completely aware which taints the results.
As per the normal, you get science wrong, again, every single time, all the time. Learn what you are babbling about before you babble.
The purpose of this thread is show the benign differences between believers and unbelievers. It's supposed to put them into one pot and call them all humans who are trying to make the best of their situations here on this planet.
In that sense, it was an utter and abject failure, full of wrong, full of fail, full of you having no idea what you were going on about from the very start. \
EntirelyPossible

We live in a greedy, capitalistic world - and science cannot be trusted.
You are utterly mixing up corporations with science.
I could just as easily (and just as truthfully) written that we live in a greedy, capitalistic world - and religion cannot be trusted.
Ten years -- where were the peer reviews? the FACTS were being covered up - with greedy scientists' complicity exposed for all the world to see.
Again, you are mixing corporations with science. Corporations are out to make money, as you aptly said (just as churches are). Just like churches, they covered up the truth to their own ends. They were practicing science purely for profit.
Pharma and tobacco and Monsanto do NOT represent science, in any way. They represent their companies and shareholders, that is all.
Phizzy

One rogue male does not make all elephants bad. Yes, there are corrupt and dishonest scientists, doctors, even refuse collectors, nothing new there.
But science has in recent years particularly made controls more stringent, even those who profit from science, Big Pharma, the GSK's of this world, have become more transparent.
The scientific method has in the last 150 years told us more about the real world and how it works than all the religious offerings in all the previous millenia.
The vast majority of scientisits are impartial seekers after fact, "truth" if you like, and open transparent sharers of their findings, opening up the opportunity for peer review, which is stringent.
Do not reject the whole of "Science" because of a few problems at the edges, that would be like a JW I know who dismissed the S.A D's as not preaching what is true because he knew a few SAD (7th day Adv's) members who were adulterers. ( not that I support the S.A.D's in any way)
rather be in hades

yes really
there's a difference between published fact and published theory. this is a very important distinction. just because something is published doesn't make it fact.
on top of that, when someone publishes corrupted data and someone else tries to replicate the results of that data and fails, guess what happens...
the truth comes to the surface. as you showed, doctors were bribed, data was hidden, the truth came out despite all of that.
when the data is exposed, the truth is exposed. when data is uncovered, the truth is uncovered.
ultimately, this isn't like religion where you can make stuff up as you go along and call it fact. it's ironic to science called a fairytale when there's books like the bible that speaks of miracles
or talk about corruption in science when there's people like:
or
in science, as i've stated numerous times, everyone can replicate the experiments to verify for themselves. EVERYONE. everyone on this discussion forum included. in lab, you can actually extract dna (link so that anyone can extract dna with a blender, meat tenderizer and rbbing alcohol), you can actually verify what equilibrium is (anyone who has owned a pool and balanced the chemicals has done this), you can see how everything you read in the textbooks works in reality.
very far cry from religion.
"there's a god!"
"seer stones"
"governing body"
"the bible says"
"i am the pope"
ok...where's the proof? how can i verify for myself? so far, we still have no evidence for verifying anything miraculous any religion says.
science:
"evolution" - genetics, fossil records
"big bang" - cosmic background radiation, universal expansion, math
all of this stuff can be studied and understood by anyone and everyone. all it takes is effort.
so is there corruption? there's corruption in everything. thankfully, corruption in science gets weeded out when people perform the experiments and collect data to verify the theory. or that the drug is actually working. it's unfortunate that people die because of the greed in pharmaceuticals. that doesn't take away from the fact that the theories and postulates put forth were fabricated.
the math didn't lie.the data was hidden so as to "prove" something that was OBVIOUSLY not true, like the safety of the drug
now please, show us the data and empirical evidence so that we can verify for ourselves that:
people go to heaven or hell
or that there will be a ressurection
or that there are angels
or that there are other lifes, etc
sabastious

I personally don't see much difference between a group of men saying they are in connection with God and people who defend science no matter what. We as a species should not allow good deeds to somehow cover up bad deeds. Science has shown itself to be totally corruptible, not because it's a flawed formula, but that the formula CANNOT be wielded by man, which the scientific community has proven, just as spirituality CANNOT be weilded by man, which religion has proven. Simply put both lead to corruption BECAUSE they are tied to money. If you could suddenly untie Religion and Science from money both would stablolize into incorruptible formulas that work soley for the betterment of mankind. Gene Roddenberry and the Bible were right, it's money that's the issue which is why both their visions for the future do not have money.
-Sab
EntirelyPossible

I personally don't see much difference between a group of men saying they are in connection with God and people who defend science no matter what.
That's because you fail to see the fundamental difference between "science shows..." and "God says....".
Science has shown itself to be totally corruptible, not because it's a flawed formula, but that the formula CANNOT be wielded by man
1) Science is a process and a methodology. People, being what they are, is the corruptible factor. Else, you wouldn't have men of your God raping children.
2)Clearly it can since you are using a computer and the internet, both created by science, to post your idea that science cannot be weilded. It's not a scord, it's a methodology and process. As usual, you know exactly nothing about what you are talking about when it comes to science.
which the scientific community has proven, just as spirituality CANNOT be weilded by man, which religion has proven
1) The community is built, by definition, on weeding out bias, lies and falsehoods.
2) Religion, by definition, accepts evil. You yourself said slavey was good because it was in the bible. As the saying goes, good people do good things and bad people do bad things, but to get a good person to do bad things? That takes religion.
Simply put both lead to corruption BECAUSE they are tied to money.
You are confusing science with business. Religion IS a business. Science is used by a business, but ALSO by many other people.
If you could suddenly untie Religion and Science from money both would stablolize into incorruptible formulas that work soley for the betterment of mankind.
Religion was wrong long before money existed. And science has already done that.
Gene Roddenberry and the Bible were right, it's money that's the issue which is why both their visions for the future do not have money.
The bible doesn't really say money will not exists in the future. Funny, you like to say that the bible says all kinds of things that it never actually says. I wonder, do you *actually* know what it says?
rather be in hades

this goes back to the whole learn about it thing. no one is defending science at all costs. it just is.
there's no, "well it feels good to me so it is", either it adds up or it doesn't.
look, we can believe anything we want to believe, but projecting all the problems of religion onto science in an effort to uphold religion is just wrong and holding scientific advancement back as a whole.
most of the people who don't believe in evolution don't believe in it because they know nothing about it.plain and simple. they haven't bothered to learn the chemistry, math, anthropology and biology behind the proofs.
to put it bluntly, proverbs 3:5 is bs. "do not lean upon your own understanding"
well that's wise advice for sheepherders a few thousand years ago.
nowadays, we can all learn and verify for OURSELVES every single thing that is published. if the results don't add up, then the author was obviously wrong.
all it takes is a little effort, if you don't want to bother, so be it, but that doesn't take away from the reality of the proofs and the reality that anyone can prove it for themselves.
the proofs in science are all around you, in every barnes and noble, library and college bookstore near you.
the proofs in religion are...?
THAT is the fundamental difference between religion and science.
cofty

I personally don't see much difference between a group of men saying they are in connection with God and people who defend science no matter what - Sab
Science is nothing more than a method for discovering facts about the world. When it goes wrong its only because people aren't being scientific enough.
So you really think that deluded men and women who listen to voices in their heads and who read self-serving meanings into an Iron Age book have just as much to tell us as the fruits of science do you?
sabastious

Science is nothing more than a method for discovering facts about the world. When it goes wrong its only becasue people aren't being scientific enough.
Sciences are just methods, Science, with a capital S, is NOT just a method it's a community of scientists made up of corruptible people. It's interesting that you say that when Science goes wrong, Science was not being used. That means Science is NEVER actually wrong which is a fallacy, nothing can never be wrong, you call that God. Science =/= God. The same flawed argument is used by the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses. They say that there '70 step' process for spiritual food is the best the world has to offer and if it doesn't appear that way, then that just means the steps are not being applied correctly. Such is a licence for corruption!
So you really think that deluded men and women who listen to voices in their heads and who read self-serving meanings into an Iron Age book have just as much to tell us as the fruits of science do you?
People hearing voices was early science. They tested them with critical thinking just like Science tests their data today, but the people hearing voices were subject to the same corruption that Science is and therefore what we have today is a decayed entity of Religion AND a decayed entity of Science. In reality they are exactly the same kind of thinking at different stages of human development. Attaching money to these frameworks just expedites their corruption.
-Sab
rather be in hades

again, you're mixing the "science" of back then with the science of today.
two COMPLETELY different things.
the science back then mixed religion and philosophy
science today has nothing to do with either one of those.
this goes back to learning about science and why people say that. you are arguing about something that has nothing to do with science.
you literally don't understand it and that's why you think there is some sort of logical fallacy.
there are strict rules to science. there are strict boundaries between theory and law. there is, as was pointed out, a difference between science and business.
People hearing voices was early science. They tested them with critical thinking just like Science tests their data today, but the people hearing voices were subject to the same corruption that Science is and therefore what we have today is a decayed entity of Religion AND a decayed entity of Science. In reality they are exactly the same kind of thinking at different stages of human development. Attaching money to these frameworks just expedites their corruption.

Atheism->Deism->Theism

Share this