Originally posted by MrXYZ
reply to post by TheIrvy
But science CAN proof or disprove certain things with absolute certainty!! Take planet X for example. There's NO WAY planet X exists and is arriving
in 2012! Why not? Simple really: For planet X to be hear in 2012, you'd have to see it by the naked eye by now.
No it doesn't, because that makes assumptions. We know that there's stuff out there with mass that we cannot see. We know that there are forces on
Earth that are very real, but also cannot be seen. We do not know if some force is preventing us from seeing something that's out there. What we do
know is that something out there is preturbing the orbits of the outer planets, and that all of the planets are currently entering a stage of global
We also know that NASA used to very openly believe in another body in our system that wasn't visible by conventional means. They sent an infra red
telescope up (anything emitting only infra red light cannot be seen by the naked eye no matter how close it is), looked at the results and said
"Nope, nothing out there at all, and anyone who says there is is a crank". Since then several other groups have set up infra red telescopes, all
pointed in the same direction.
We can only see things in the visible portion of the light spectrum. That leaves a lot of room for things emitting other kinds of light to remain
invisible. That's arrogance, assuming that if we can't see it, it's not there.
According to your logic, science is useless...because it's always wrong. That's a very dumb statement, sorry. We have plenty of scientific facts
that have been proven beyond any doubt. Take medicine for example. Without science, we couldn't do kidney transplants, or fix broken legs. Or take
astronomy. Science knows for a fact the composition of the moon. We can figure out how fast asteroids go.
Another fallacy. Science is a process of learning, and is therefore anything but useless. According to my logic, anyone who clings to a set of
beliefs they personally cannot prove is building their house on sand. Doesn't matter if you believe the man claiming that God made everything with a
single word, or if you believe the man claiming that everything just popped into existence out of nothing, it's still taking someone else's word for
it without verifying it for yourself.
And yes, we have some great medical techniques. But, you know what would be better? Our bodies already heal themselves. what if we learned how to
stimulate and speed that process ourselves, without needing to slice and dice our bodies? We can stick someone else's kidney into a patient with a
diseased or otherwise broken kidney, but we can't heal a kidney, they still have to spend the rest of their life on anti rejection drugs and
essentially suppress their own immune system. We don't fix broken bones, we just wrap them in plaster and leave them for 6 weeks. We've had
absolutely no scientific advance on bones ever, we just allow it to heal themselves, just as they've always done.
We "know" about the composition of the moon. We know that it rings like a bell every time we land something on it, and scientists agree that it's
likely that the moon is hollow. Makes you wonder what the purpose of that "failure" of a missile hit was all about last year - were they trying to
penetrate the skin of the moon and get to the juicy centre?
We can observe, and make suggestions based on those observations, but every once in a while, something comes along that disproves our theory. Have a
look at dark matter and you'll see what I mean. Oh, you can't take a look at it, it's another one of those things that we just can't see even
though it's there.
So there's plenty of scientific facts we have proven beyond any reasonable doubt. Same goes for evolution, in 150 years the theory hasn't been
Oh dear, back of the class, thank you for trying. The theory of evolution is just that, a theory, and it has many many detractors, and many many
problems. It's a theory that fits a hypothesis, but it makes a lot of assumptions. Darwin himself said that if we ever found an organ of the body
that was irreducibly complex, evolution would be out the window and could not be valid. With our modern microscopes, we have found plenty of the key
building blocks of how we exist to be irreducibly complex. Evolution as adaptation is grand, we observe that and can see it. But we've never ever
seen a fish give birth to a frog. Just doesn't happen, no matter how many million years you wait. Fish give birth to fish, and frogs always come
from frog spawn, which comes from other frogs. Not fish.
[edit on 2-9-2010 by TheIrvy]