Why Mainstream Science is a Religion

a reply to: LittleByLittle

WHAT A WONDERFUL VIDEO! THANKS.

I watched the whole thing. I even understood the main points! LOL.

I do suspect that it's unlikely that more than one in a few hundred or even one in a thousand of the general population would likely watch the whole thing. LOL.

I had never thought of quantum mechanics and biology before. It was quite fascinating to hear how PRECISELY SPECIFIC some of the quantum factors had to be for the biological organism to survive, function, produce.

Of course, all that must have happened because the ghost of a meteor went crashing through a cosmic junkyard yielding such a finely tuned process and organism many times more complex than a Swiss watch. But I digress./sarc

a reply to: chr0naut

Im horrible at math. But how many numbers are between 1 and 2?

a reply to: jbowenh

Infinite

a reply to: BO XIAN

Mainstream science is NOT a religion. Even if flawed, non-mainstream science is not a religion either. A lot of us are here to debumk pieces of mainstream science, but not all of it.

Scientists still use experiments, not just math. I do like the Tesla quote, his ideas and discoveries were criminally covered up.

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: BO XIAN

Mainstream science is NOT a religion.

Do you believe in the big bang? evolution? These are theories that require faith. Sure there may be evidence that could be said to support these notions, but there is also evidence to support the notion of Jesus's life. Both require belief beyond empirical evidence.

Good thread. Science has become completely politicized and is dictated by who is providing the funding. The results are of course biased by this. The medical sciences are some of the worst offenders since there are billions of Big Pharma dollars at stake with it's conclusions. This is how we ended up with forced medical procedures like vaccines, with a rather dubious safety record.

Physics is also a big offender. In the case of physics I believe there are active attempts to suppress the advancement of science to protect state military secrets.

It has become a religious cult in the sense that just a handful of anointed practitioners dictate the allocation of vast resources for the benefit of the few cult leaders, at the expense of it's brainwashed followers.

originally posted by: jbowenh
a reply to: chr0naut

Im horrible at math. But how many numbers are between 1 and 2?

Limitless.

(Infinity isn't a number).

a reply to: chr0naut
Only if you go all irrational and stuff.

originally posted by: BO XIAN
a reply to: staple

Isaac Newton was more a student and scholar of The Bible

than he was of science.

He postulated that there were codes buried in the Bible and worked toward revealing such. I don't recall how far he got toward that goal.

IIRC, He was a fairly fierce Christian regardless of his contrary dabblings.

And yet there are three scientific "laws" he is accredited to. Point is he used Science to disprove religion.

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: BO XIAN

Mainstream science is NOT a religion. Even if flawed, non-mainstream science is not a religion either. A lot of us are here to debumk pieces of mainstream science, but not all of it.

Scientists still use experiments, not just math. I do like the Tesla quote, his ideas and discoveries were criminally covered up.

Agreed 100%.

Religious extremists just have this strong need to validate their faith and PRETEND that it's as valid as science. But instead of justifying their faith through benevolent words and actions, they attack science and paint it as a religion to bring it down to their level. It's a common deception to make you think a belief system is on equal footing with empirical evidence and repeatable experiments.

Unfortunately, it's not even close. One is pure dogma and the other is a method of research. They are not even remotely comparable. Sure there are plenty of hypotheses out there that haven't been proven yet. But it's not blind belief in absolutism like most religions. The knowledge gained via scientific method gets updated as new information is learned.

Sure, corporations and governments pick and choose which research to fund, but that doesn't make it a religion.

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: TzarChasm
What are the ten commandments of science, may I ask? And is there a creation story

Yeah. This is is laymen's terms for the acolytes: matter/energy exploded out of nothing somehow. This chaos turned into planets which, in an organized fashion, managed to acquire a homeostatic orbit around big balls of fire that also came from chaos. One of these planets luckily was in the "goldilocks zone" and stayed there for a long time somehow. Oh yeah, physical laws and intelligible mathematics are a given - don't think this is a sign of intelligence, it is just an accident. Then, lightning struck pond scum and an elaborate cell spawned that was able to replicate, make energy, transcribe rna, translate proteins, create a protein scaffolding, encapsulate itself from the environment and establish a general homeostasis (all requirements for a viable cell). From here, randomness ultimately culminated the immensely complex human body - that's right, your great great ancestors were microbes. But this all took 14 billion years; an amount of time that you cannot fathom, so sure, it has to be possible. If you don't believe this you're excommunicated.

Does science have a messiah?

Darwin, Dawkins, degrasse tyson, idk, the priesthood is still voting.

Sounds like a morons understanding of astrophysics and biochemistry. And I mean moron as in someone with a four year olds understanding. Degrasse Tyson is up for vote as the messiah of science? I didn't realize he recognized a god. ...nope, that hasn't changed. You must be mistaken. And who is this priesthood? I would love to support the indoctrination of our nation into the ways of reason and methods of rationality.

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
Science isn't a religion.

Religions deal with your "soul" and absolve you of "sins" in order for you to not have a crappy "afterlife". Religion exploits the natural fear, shame, and guilt humans feel in a primitive and authoritarian way to control large groups of people.

AKA:

"I absolve you of that bad stuff you did, don't worry you won't suffer for eternity after you die - just do whatever, pray to whomever, and endlessly follow this path to salvation I have created for you"

Yeah, science doesn't do that. Science could care less about your "soul" or absolving you of "sin".

Are there some similarities? Sure, but it's a real annoying stretch to continually see religious people make the false equivalence in some desperate attempt to project their own misgivings about their own religious beliefs.

*headache*

isn't that exactly what carbon taxes are?

The thing "all scientists support".

originally posted by: pyramid head

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
Science isn't a religion.

Religions deal with your "soul" and absolve you of "sins" in order for you to not have a crappy "afterlife". Religion exploits the natural fear, shame, and guilt humans feel in a primitive and authoritarian way to control large groups of people.

AKA:

"I absolve you of that bad stuff you did, don't worry you won't suffer for eternity after you die - just do whatever, pray to whomever, and endlessly follow this path to salvation I have created for you"

Yeah, science doesn't do that. Science could care less about your "soul" or absolving you of "sin".

Are there some similarities? Sure, but it's a real annoying stretch to continually see religious people make the false equivalence in some desperate attempt to project their own misgivings about their own religious beliefs.

*headache*

isn't that exactly what carbon taxes are?

The thing "all scientists support".

That would be some politicians, not all, and certainly not all scientists.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: chr0naut
Only if you go all irrational and stuff.

As one does!

originally posted by: Phage

originally posted by: pyramid head

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
Science isn't a religion.

Religions deal with your "soul" and absolve you of "sins" in order for you to not have a crappy "afterlife". Religion exploits the natural fear, shame, and guilt humans feel in a primitive and authoritarian way to control large groups of people.

AKA:

"I absolve you of that bad stuff you did, don't worry you won't suffer for eternity after you die - just do whatever, pray to whomever, and endlessly follow this path to salvation I have created for you"

Yeah, science doesn't do that. Science could care less about your "soul" or absolving you of "sin".

Are there some similarities? Sure, but it's a real annoying stretch to continually see religious people make the false equivalence in some desperate attempt to project their own misgivings about their own religious beliefs.

*headache*

isn't that exactly what carbon taxes are?

The thing "all scientists support".

That would be some politicians, not all, and certainly not all scientists.

This is going to be another 50 page debacle held for the amusement of idle users who think it's funny to watch forum warriors do their song and dance. It may go on the list of threads I'm putting together as an index - or maybe album is a better word, given the broken record nature of it all. Round and round we go...

a reply to: BO XIAN

Wake me up next time even 80% of the peer reviewed articles are truly objectively reviewed without any Religion of Scientism biases influencing their review.

You are a very generous person. I would be surprised if this ratio ever reach 50% !!!

a reply to: TzarChasm

You mean challenging unsupported claims.
You mean denying ignorance?

Sure, why not?

Science is a religion in a sense that it also tries to give People a view or a imagination of how science will shape our future.

And that future is always made to be so much better than the one we have at present time. The Irony is that at the end of the day. God and religion are the one who gets the blaim were we fail.

a reply to: jbowenh

en.wikipedia.org...

In mathematics, the 'size' of that set is called Aleph-1, and has a concrete and definable meaning within certain axioms of set theory.

There are different degrees of "infniity".

a reply to: chr0naut

That is true, it is limitless, and infinities are not numbers, but there is a way to answer "how many" that can deal with questions of infinity and limitless sets.