The conflict between science and religion

Discussion in 'Human Science' started by paddoboy, Mar 23, 2016.

  1. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,926
    You're the one insulting me based on my alleged level of education. I'm simply saying that science demands an uncritical acceptance of theories and conclusions based on the authority of what scientists tell you. A lab is only good for showing you evidence for things. The theory behind what those things do and how they operate is provided by esteemed researchers in that field that we believe have done all the math and experimentation to know what they're talking about. And this plays a huge role in how we think and form beliefs in this field. It's also the reason why anyone who questions the scientific orthodoxy is immediately ostracized and ridiculed as a crank. That they are immediately dismissed as kooks or dishonest insubordinates to the mainstream dogmas. The social power structure of science defends itself from heresy by attacking subversive theories and questions wherever they arise, even here in this pidly little forum.
     
    Last edited: Mar 24, 2016
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. brucep Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,098
    He should have paid attention in class. Maybe he wouldn't be such a scientific illiterate. Liked your experiments. Sounds like origin and son are having science fun.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Billy T Use Sugar Cane Alcohol car Fuel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,198
    The conflict is due to one basing its beliefs on experiments, that have the same results any where on Earth that they are done. The other is based on postulates about God (or Gods) and reaches very different results in different parts of the Earth.

    Interestingly the adherents of each of these conflicting different views, is certain theirs is the one and only correct POV about religion (with very few, if any exceptions).
     
    Last edited: Mar 24, 2016
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. brucep Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,098
    I'd say this Pope isn't a slave to dogma. I'd suspect he thinks very highly of Cardinal Wiseman. Thanks for writing it down. Fundamentalists are slave to dogma.
     
  8. river

    Messages:
    14,403
    I see your point pad ; but where is your critical thinking of the mainstream thinking ?
     
  9. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    25,464
    Well let's look at the two most recent confirmations: That of BH's and gravitational waves.
    Obviously I do not have access to aLIGO and/or the other detectors, so I absorb the information available, and the fact that there appears no other explanation.
    Or perhaps you could inform us of some alternative explanation that you believe does better than the incumbent model?
    Or do you still hold on to the Electric/Plasma Universe model?
    Please explain why you believe this.

    You see science and the scientific method is basically self correcting, [this was shown with the BICEP2 experiment] and the occasions when science does get it wrong, is in time modified by those same scientists.
    Critical thinking while desirable and necessary, is different then cynical and fanatical application brought on by anti mainstream science agendas and any false belief that any modification of existing theories will ever come about on science forums such as this. That, as you know, will not happen.
     
  10. river

    Messages:
    14,403
    Where is it ?
     
  11. brucep Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,098
    It's not like scientists can't find a correlation between scientific research, associated with natural phenomena, and their personal religious beliefs. Many Russian scientists despised the Soviet stance against organized religion during the cold war abuse of the Russian people.
     
  12. river

    Messages:
    14,403
    Mathematicians ; notorious god people . Oh god must be a mathematician .

    No the the numbers just over whelm you.
     
  13. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    25,464
    Where's your critical thinking about mainstream?
    I mean as distinct from baseless agenda laden cynical application.
     
  14. river

    Messages:
    14,403

    Where is it pad ?
     
  15. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    25,464
    deleted
     
  16. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    25,464

    these science sites are nothing more than cesspools--every single one of them. they do not pertain to the actual work in the science sectors. they do not contribute anything too actual science. they are simply places for the want-to-bes and the mentally disable to play at(while endlessly insulting actual scientist and science within the same moment), nothing more.
     
  17. river

    Messages:
    14,403
    I see ;

    Where is your critical thinking of mainstream science pad ?
     
  18. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    25,464
    Trolling again river?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Remember we do have a report button.



    The aspect that most cranks ignore is the fact that science experiments and observations are all repeatable.
    If one is sincere about any supposed doubts he has on any aspect of science, he can do that experiment himself: Or sit back and continue to make excuses and snipe, as has been evident this morning.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    The scientific method, has been tested countless times over the ions and as yet has never been falsified.

    But first and foremost, the cranks we have posting in this forum, are under the delusion that there inane claims and suggestions are in any way being taken seriously.
    They conveniently forget that they are making absolutely no difference to science and academia in general.
     
  19. river

    Messages:
    14,403
    My question remains pad ;

    Where is your critical thinking of mainstream science pad ?
     
  20. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    25,464
    I see George Lamaitre as a better example of how good scientists can also be religious as well. There need not be any conflict at all.
    As you say, it is the YEC's and other fundamentalists of all persuasions that cause rifts and silly conflicts. Fundamentalists and fanatics that cover political as well as religious and other aspects as is evident in this thread.
    How can any reasonable minded person apply critical thinking of mainstream science so arrogantly, when they themselves accept the existence of ghosts, goblins and such?
     
  21. river

    Messages:
    14,403
    Are you a reasonable person pad ?
     
  22. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    25,464
    Perhaps you are somewhat confused in your own lack of critical thinking that you have continuously shown throughout this forum, on such imaginary aspects as ghosts, goblins, UFO's of Alien origin, Bigfoot etc.
    And that obviously eats at your craw...Hence your continued trolling. BTW, how many forums are you banned from?


    http://www.opencolleges.edu.au/informed/features/teach-critical-thinking/

    Critical thinking is the study of clear and unclear thinking. A simple definition, maybe, but that’s how it should be. The term was popularised long ago–by John Dewey, in the 1930s–but in recent years it has become less of an actionable technique and more of a trendy educational buzzword.

    Our definition of “critical thinking” is sliding towards the obscure. Here’s the Australian Curriculum website’s take:

    “Critical thinking is at the core of most intellectual activity that involves students in learning to recognise or develop an argument, use evidence in support of that argument, draw reasoned conclusions, and use information to solve problems. Examples of thinking skills are interpreting, analysing, evaluating, explaining, sequencing, reasoning, comparing, questioning, inferring, hypothesising, appraising, testing and generalising.”

    Yikes.

    From the Common Core Standards website:

    “The Common Core asks students to read stories and literature, as well as more complex texts that provide facts and background knowledge in areas such as science and social studies. Students will be challenged and asked questions that push them to refer back to what they’ve read. This stresses critical-thinking, problem-solving, and analytical skills that are required for success in college, career, and life.”

    more.....
    """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""


    river most on this forum have you pegged as the troll and crank you so obviously are. My fault is of course engaging your trolling.
    So you continue on your merry way, and your delusions that you are affecting or changing anything at all.
    I have things to do and places to see for the next few hours.
    Let's hope that someone else can knock some sense into you.
     
  23. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,884
    If one would know GOD:
    Then one must learn and understand God's works, and for that:
    Science is an excellent tool.
     

Share This Page