It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
OK, fair enough. I have learned that there is more to existence than just the physical world around us that we can sense with our five accepted senses. Once again, as previously mentioned, I made no claim that what I have learned through experience is factual alone is factual and can be proven factual. Very little is truly factual, elements of subjectivity exist in practically everything. Do you even read my posts before replying?
If the Christopher Columbus myth is not a belief of yours, why were you not certain of your view? Facts require no faith, yet you started with "It is my belief." Once again, as I've stated before, I agree that the acquirement of knowledge is important, but you seem to think the only way to attain knowledge is through science. I have been trying to turn the light on for you, but it seems you haven't paid your electricity bill. I am not in the dark, the sun is streaming through my front window.
As with many of the other points you have raised here, I have already covered them in previous posts. I see nothing new at the table that needs to be discussed, all of the answers you seek from me are in my previous posts.
Originally posted by mytym
It's time for science to come out of the closet and admit, "Hi my name is science, and I am just another religion."
Originally posted by mark ten
seriously, to those who claim that science is all knowing from both sides of the argument i always offer the example of Alfred Wegener whose career was nearly destroyed for proposing the theory of plate tectonics - something that is ingrained in our current view of the world.
He proposed this around 1912 but it was not accepted into the scientific mainstream until the late 1950s...but i bet you cant imagine it not to be 'true'.
cience typically disregards issues of faith such as synergy, moral conduct, and the afterlife.
Religion has to admit that it was obviously wrong about some things (like the christian view on the age of the earth)
but science has to recognize that it is always wrong, and will just continue to get more informed as time goes on.
People once thought you were nuts for thinking that the world was round.
Scientists are often wrong about things, just a little less wrong than they were in the past.
Here's a link to a recent article that may be of interest to those posting on this thread regarding scientific theories. It concerns the scientific 'comet theory'.
Originally posted by intrepid
That's too broad a brush to paint with imo. Mathematical science, physics and geometry, are proven. They are fact. Historical sciences and others like evolution require some belief.
Originally posted by mytym
I'm confused. You indicate that science already demonstrate that they are always wrong, yet you claim to know so much factual information as a result of the teachings of science. How can something that is always wrong teach you anything factual?