Atheism->Deism->Theism (page 11)

cofty

The foundation of science is "methodological naturalism" - in other words, you can believe in a god if you must but your job is to find a naturalistic answer to questions.

It works astonishingly well.

Anything that breaks this rule isn't science.

EntirelyPossible

Science, with a capital S, is NOT just a method it's a community of scientists made up of corruptible people.

Oh? Where is the HQ? Who are the leaders? With whom in the community do I register a complaint?

That means Science is NEVER actually wrong which is a fallacy, nothing can never be wrong, you call that God

Agreed. God is wrong ALL the damn time. Science is a method and process related to discovering facts about the world around us. It doesn't say anything. How can it be wrong?

The same flawed argument is used by the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses.

Agreed, not knowing what you are talking about is a commonality between what you are saying and what they often say.

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.

To save time, I'll sum up. Wrong, wrong, wtong, wrong, wtong, wrong and wrong.

As usual.

tec

LOL tec...you got me thinking about spheres now......I found this if you're interested.

Are you trying to make my head explode?

;)

Peace,

tammy

Berengaria

"You know what I haven't had in awhile? Big League Chew."

No kiddin', huh?

still thinking

Are you trying to make my head explode?

LOL...I wanted to share the experience...

talesin

EP:

We live in a greedy, capitalistic world - and science cannot be trusted.

You are utterly mixing up corporations with science.

No, I am not. I am talking specificallyabout scientists who are the minions of corporations.

I could just as easily (and just as truthfully) written that we live in a greedy, capitalistic world - and religion cannot be trusted.

No, that is a generalization, and I was being specific, using proven facts in I repeat, SPECIFIC instances.

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.

You are twisting my words. I said that INDIVIDUAL SCIENTISTS who worked for those corporations lied. And you do not address the fact of peer reviews, the sacred cow that is being touted on this thread. Where were the peer reviews of this 'accepted' science about tobacco and deadly pharmaceuticals.

I LOVE science. I just think that blindly trusting everything we are told is STUPID because SOME SCIENTISTS lie to meet their own greedy ends, whether that end be money or the glory of being published and lauded by their peers.

That is a FACT.

Scientists produced those skewed tests on Paxil. Scientists wrote secret reports to the tobacco companies telling them to lie to the public.

Of course, the corporations are the ones who profited, but how in the fuck can you say that the SCIENTISTS WHO LIED AND FALSIFIED DATA were not complicit?

Get a grip.

As with everything else in life, we must always question, have a healthy dose of skepticism, and realize that science is always changing and evolving, and sometimes, what is initially presented to us as fact, is actually an illusion. Deny if you will, that corporations are trying (and in some instances) controlling scientific advances in today's world. But you are living in a fairy tale. Scientists need funding. Millions, billions of $$$. Some scientists are willing to fit the results of their research to suit the results desired by those funding them. I find it hard to believe that an extremely intelligent, educated person such as yourself, would be in denial about this.

No wonder the god-believers point to people like you and say "See? He worships science as if it were an infallible deity."

Balance, EP, is required in everything. True believers are either deluded, or not too bright. I would put you in the former category.

soft+gentle

I agree with talesin's comment above

ziddina

"...That's why I say it's a young interpretation because when the goddess framework ruled humanity was NOT AS OLD as we are now therefore our current understanding of God will be EVOLVED.

I can agree with this. Earlier in our existence, as a species, we thought of God as a woman. Well, not YOUR god, Sabby, no one had thought of a singular sadistic baby cock loving god that cruel yet, but you get where I am going with this. Later, goddess evolved into a man. Soon, we will realize that god is neither because it's just made up and it turns out the only people that had a hard on for baby foreskins was the Hebrews.

Evolution in action. Soon, God will be something we realized all along was a mere fiction and laugh at. Sab called it here first." EP, page #5, post #3464

HEY!!!

Just kidding, EP...

Excellent posts, by the way...

cofty

Talsesin - when science messes up its becasue individual scientists were not being scientific enough.

ziddina

Talesin, the error is on the part of certain scientists who accept "grants" that have "strings" attached... Which is especially rampant within the drug industry.

By controlling the money, certain industries - the tobacco industry, the pharmaceutical industry, and even industries affected by the EPA, can alter the clear-cut results that would come from influence-free, independent testing.

But with the above-mentioned industries, the accurate information eventually does surface.

Look at the struggle America had with the tobacco industry. For decades, the tobacco industry overwhelmed the accurate data coming from more independent laboratories, with their own PR-heavy propaganda.

Eventually, the facts won out, and most people now understand the connections between smoking and lung cancer, and heart disease.

The pharmaceutical industry touted "Thalidomide" as a "safe" drug AIMED AT pregnant women. Due to woefully inadequate testing [apparently hurried through the testing process by drug companies anxious to "cash in" on the spate of pregnancies in the 50s], the horrific side effects of Thalidomide weren't discovered until thousands of terribly-deformed infants were born.

In THAT case, the facts showed up in a most brutal fashion. That case SHOULD have served as a wake-up to all Americans - heck, to ANYONE using prescription drugs, WORLDWIDE. That case is ALSO an EXCELLENT example of the need for GREATER regulation of the pharmaceutical industry - something that would cut deeply into the pharmaceutical industry's PROFITS, so naturally, they fight regulation tooth-and-nail.

However, in BOTH of those situations, it WAS NOT THE SCIENCE that caused the problem!

Rather, it was the GREED of the CORPORATIONS who CHOSE TO IGNORE THE SCIENCE, that CAUSED THE PROBLEMS!

That is why "caveat emptor" - "let the buyer beware" - is ALWAYS the BEST advice!

Atheism->Deism->Theism

Share this