It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why Mainstream Science is a Religion

page: 21
59
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 05:50 AM
link   
for anyone interested into how big conspiracy about steering scientific development goes, i am sharing this video.

the title is "how big oil conquered the world"

in it, it is explained how science was bought by richest man in the world at the time. How you may ask?
he started with influencing medical universities and educations and then just went further.

medicine, gmo, monsanto, oil, food, health, media...everything seems very controlled and nothing seems natural at all.
I don't know how much power today such man or corporations behind them have, but it seems not less than before, only more...



if information in video is true, and it seem very likely that a lot of it is, than ask yourself...how much of modern science is pure and how much of it is based on wrong principles from the start.

just wanted to pitch in quickly to add, since it is related

...carry on... : )
edit on 1464865163659June596593016 by UniFinity because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 06:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: Talorc

originally posted by: Gryphon66

The claims made by science are factual, reproducible, and measurable. If they aren't, we aren't talking about science.


Science makes claims? I thought that people make claims.

There was another poster who said something along the lines of "science allows me to build my destiny."

Science allows, science makes claims..... very interesting choices of words. It's been noted.


Argue gross semantics somewhere else.

Also "it's been noted"??? LOL. Too bad it hasn't been understood.



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 06:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: syrinx high priest
wake me up the next time a religious text is submitted for peer review, lol


This.

/thread



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 08:27 AM
link   
Why is this not in the LOL forum?



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 09:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: BO XIAN


When it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, lays eggs like a duck, swims like a duck, poops like a duck, looks like a duck . . .


Does a religion begin with observation of natural phenomena?
Does a religion form an hypothesis to explain these phenomena?
Does a religion devise a means of falsifying that hypothesis under controlled circumstances?
Does a religion reject that hypothesis if it is falsified by these experiments?
Does a religion insist that all such experiments and observations be repeatable?
Does a religion reason from the specific to the general?
Does a religion modify its body of knowledge based upon new information?
Does a religion encourage everyone to apply these methods in order to solve problems in their daily life?

If the answer to all of these is "yes," then yes, science is a religion.

Quack.


This. Long live the scientific method.



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 09:25 AM
link   
a reply to: UniFinity

*gasp*

You mean the moneyed and powerful can misuse anything to their own interests?

Great point ... that NEVER happens with "religion" does it?




posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 09:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: TzarChasm
Why is this not in the LOL forum?


Is that where anything goes that defies the dogma of the scientism priesthood? A common tactic - laugh at anything that threatens the validity of your beliefs.



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 09:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: TzarChasm
Why is this not in the LOL forum?


Is that where anything goes that defies the dogma of the scientism priesthood? A common tactic - laugh at anything that threatens the validity of your beliefs.


>dogma

>scientism

>priesthood

>threatens validity of beliefs

Says the scientifically illiterate young earth creationist.



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 09:37 AM
link   
Does a religion begin with observation of natural phenomena?
-Yes, the miraculous life of the prophets and Jesus, for example

Does a religion form an hypothesis to explain these phenomena?
-Yes, the gospel, and the Word from these prophets.

Does a religion devise a means of falsifying that hypothesis under controlled circumstances?
-Constantly is rooting out false prophets - you will know them by their fruits.

Does a religion reject that hypothesis if it is falsified by these experiments?
-Yes, false prophets are ejected (ideally), although recently many wolves have snuck into the sheep pen. The Old Covenant was also fulfilled by a more fitting "Hypothesis"; the New Covenant.

Does a religion insist that all such experiments and observations be repeatable?
-Yes, He said many can be like Him if they follow his Path; this is an experiment capable of being repeated by anyone

Does a religion reason from the specific to the general?
-Yes, it addresses the world as a whole and then people on an individual level

Does a religion modify its body of knowledge based upon new information?
-Yes, particularly the New Covenant established by Jesus.

Does a religion encourage everyone to apply these methods in order to solve problems in their daily life?
-Yes. It is a moral compass leading towards Life. Of all questions, this should be the most obvious.



originally posted by: DJW001

If the answer to all of these is "yes," then yes, science is a religion.


then science is a religion.
edit on 2-6-2016 by cooperton because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 09:43 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

*facepalm*

yeah...okey
nice way of deflection, btw.

also you don't seem to realize the gravity of what is mentioned in documentary, did you even watch it or are you just saying that based on my comment alone or are you saying it is okay because religion also does it? hah

although I don't mind but either way,
since you have posted yourself a nice point, that science is very much like religion in this way.

thank you!
but I don't realize why some of posters, even though they know that - like you, think that science is not corrupted and bought and a lot of it is established on false principles...like we have been talking for 20 pages.

: )

edit on 1464878799646June466463016 by UniFinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 09:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: cooperton
Does a religion begin with observation of natural phenomena?
-Yes, the miraculous life of the prophets and Jesus, for example

Does a religion form an hypothesis to explain these phenomena?
-Yes, the gospel, and the Word from these prophets.

Does a religion devise a means of falsifying that hypothesis under controlled circumstances?
-Constantly is rooting out false prophets.

Does a religion reject that hypothesis if it is falsified by these experiments?
-Yes, false prophets are ejected (ideally), although recently many wolves have snuck into the sheep pen. The Old Covenant was also fulfilled by a more fitting "Hypothesis"; the New Covenant.

Does a religion insist that all such experiments and observations be repeatable?
-Yes, He said many can be like Him if they follow his Path; this is an experiment capable of being repeated by anyone

Does a religion reason from the specific to the general?
-Yes, it addresses the world as a whole and then people on an individual level

Does a religion modify its body of knowledge based upon new information?
-Yes, particularly the New Covenant established by Jesus.

Does a religion encourage everyone to apply these methods in order to solve problems in their daily life?
-Yes. It is a moral compass leading towards Life. Of all questions, this should be the most obvious.



originally posted by: DJW001

If the answer to all of these is "yes," then yes, science is a religion.


then science is a religion.


Thanks for validating my question regarding why this isn't in the LOL forum. Because that is definitely LOL worthy. There are no prophets or gods or holy authorities or divine sacraments or messiahs or judgment days in science. There is only the scientific method and those who dedicate their lives to mastering it in pursuit of various fields of study. The results speak for themselves.
edit on 2-6-2016 by TzarChasm because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 09:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: GetHyped

Says the scientifically illiterate young earth creationist.


THIS is EXACTLY the problem - anyone who questions the contemporary mainstream scientific dogma is immediately labeled "scienfically illiterate". This is an immense hindrance to scientific knowledge, and is all too common in mainstream science. Just like the church body at one time was a hindrance to scientific advancement, now the scientific field itself is a hindrance to scientific advancement. They stick to old theories and hold them dear as infallible dogma, disallowing a dissection of the plethora of new empirical evidence demonstrating the old theories as invalid.


originally posted by: TzarChasm
Thanks for validating my question regarding why this isn't in the LOL forum. Because that is definitely LOL worthy.


Classic deflection. Rather than addressing anything, you resort to mocking. Some offer level-headed responses, but you are consistently defecating in these forums with no content whatsoever. You blindly mock anything that doesn't adhere to your set belief system.
edit on 2-6-2016 by cooperton because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 09:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: UniFinity
a reply to: Gryphon66

*facepalm*

yeah...okey
nice way of deflection, btw.

also you don't seem to realize the gravity of what is mentioned in documentary, did you even watch it or are you just saying that based on my comment alone or are you saying it is okay because religion also does it? hah

although I don't mind but either way,
since you have posted yourself a nice point, that science is very much like religion.

thank you!

: )


"Deflection" ... another word used when you can't respond to an argument.


Address the point: has religion ever been misused by the rich and powerful? As well as any other cultural force?

And spare us the logical equivalent of "I know you are but what am I? Nyah."

You posted a claim that science is a religion because it has been misused by some. That claim is nonsense.



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 09:51 AM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

That was helpful. Thanks for expanding my understanding.

You must make an awesome teacher/prof.



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 09:54 AM
link   
AGREED.

Though in terms of observations . . . nothing is 100% objective . . . even the measurement of length . . . as I understand it . . . given quantum factors. LOL.

Essentially, you are right on such scores. At least for most practical purposes.

Thanks.


originally posted by: PeterMcFly
a reply to: BO XIAN



INDEED. That's what I've been trying to say from the beginning. THAT'S the topic of the thread--the morphing of science into a religion by the corrupt etc. practitioners of 'science.'


It is what I think too. Science is not the problem, science by itself is completely neutral and without subjectivity. The problem is all those high priests wrapping themself inside the white clothing of science and using their hightly developed rhetoric skill to subdue less "skilled in the art" peoples only for personal profits, often just for ego gratification.

Science is an incredible value adding option for anyone being "photogenic" with the white coat and capable of sustaining a conversation at the level of a simple physics high school teacher. Long gone are the time when choosing a career in science was a lifelong vow of poverty...



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 09:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: GetHyped

Says the scientifically illiterate young earth creationist.


THIS is EXACTLY the problem - anyone who questions the contemporary mainstream scientific dogma is immediately labeled "scienfically illiterate". This is an immense hindrance to scientific knowledge, and is all too common in mainstream science. Just like the church body at one time was a hindrance to scientific advancement, now the scientific field itself is a hindrance to scientific advancement. They stick to old theories and hold them dear as infallible dogma, disallowing a dissection of the plethora of new empirical evidence demonstrating the old theories as invalid.


originally posted by: TzarChasm
Thanks for validating my question regarding why this isn't in the LOL forum. Because that is definitely LOL worthy.


Classic deflection. Rather than addressing anything, you resort to mocking. Some offer level-headed responses, but you are consistently defecating in these forums with no content whatsoever. You blindly mock anything that doesn't adhere to your set belief system.


That's because you are only criticizing science out of spite. This whole thread is a show of defiance. You are tired of being corrected and now you want to make the experts look bad... on a conspiracy forum. Social media justice ftw?
edit on 2-6-2016 by TzarChasm because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 09:56 AM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

True enough.

However, I don't think a lot of the withheld stuff is to protect the planet as much as to protect the goals and wealth of the oligarchy.

imho, If they were truly interested in protecting the planet, they'd ship themselves to Alpha Centauri or some such.



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 09:57 AM
link   
a reply to: PeterMcFly

True . . . though there was that High School kid way back that designed a very workable nuke bomb.

People took his design very seriously very fast. LOL.



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 10:00 AM
link   
a reply to: UniFinity

EXACTLY.

THANKS.

And the religious fervor about such issues and at such levels can get intense, as well.



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 10:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: BO XIAN
a reply to: UniFinity

EXACTLY.

THANKS.

And the religious fervor about such issues and at such levels can get intense, as well.


Who cares if you think science is a religion?

You have yet to answer this question. So far, i see a handful of conspiracy nuts and bored internet dabblers answering your virtual challenge. Not much of a turn out if publicity is what you are after. 99.9% of the world doesn't even know you exist.



new topics

top topics



 
59
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join