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.
originally posted by: kennyb72
a reply to: Woodcarver
Do you understand that mr cleese is making fun of people like you?
Your general comprehension is also lacking, he is poking fun at you and your dogma's
Well, let's just say i have never heard of any Scientists burning people at the stake for questioning their system of belief.
i don’t think you know what the meaning of the word obvious is.
originally posted by: kennyb72
a reply to: Woodcarver
So, i just have to believe claims that nonmaterial “things” exist? Why should i believe that?
It’s perfectly obvious that non material things exist. There is information everywhere outside of our senses and we need receivers to detect them.
Do you seriously believe there is nothing else? something that we are yet unable to detect.
You surely must believe in Quantum Physics, a science that deals entirely with the non physical, you do know that we are all energy don't you? or, that the receivers for certain frequencies are part of our own physical makeup, our own consciousness.
For some people, that reception is much stronger than others. For those of you that do not receive the affirmation of the existence of a greater intelligence beyond the physical, I have to say that you are greatly disadvantaged and perhaps you should do a little work looking inwards for a while, to regain balance.
Do you understand that mr cleese is making fun of people like you?
Your general comprehension is also lacking, he is poking fun at you and your dogma's
He is pretending to be the scientist that you imagine all scientists are like.
originally posted by: ClovenSky
originally posted by: kennyb72
a reply to: Woodcarver
Do you understand that mr cleese is making fun of people like you?
Your general comprehension is also lacking, he is poking fun at you and your dogma's
I am still trying to wrap my head around this one. We really do see what we want to. I thought the skit was making fun of the scientists and others think it was proving their point. Very very interesting....
what is an atheist rule?
originally posted by: TheTruthRocks
And no modern atheists have ever cut off a person's head for breaking some atheist rule
My point is that we mostly make up knowledge, then build it up, rather than discovering it. I think that the scientific method is unreliable, it relies more on observations and less on personal experience.
And the problem I want to point out, is that a lot of people treat it like religion. They bring up science in conversations to back up their arguments like the science is settled and can never be proven wrong.
Yep. That is how science works. Old ideas get updated when new discoveries are made.
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: Woodcarver
Yes.... we know all to well that text book makers have no idea what belongs in text books. That is not a problem with science. That is a political problem when public money is given to companies that knowingly print bad info to be taught in school.
originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: bogdan9310
I have 10 year old textbooks that have stuff that is now known to be just wrong.
Science is like fashion. What's 'in' this year will be 'out' the next.
How can that be truth?
Otherwise, we know very well that private interests offer big money to anyone with a phd if they will smudge some numbers or even bend results to have a study point in a certain direction.
Neither of these issues can be blamed on science. Bad science, biased science, and paying for the answers you want, are not good science.
No, the information in the textbooks was once up to date but it goes out of date all the time on high rotation.
That is what every new academic paper is these days, a pulling down of the facade that preceded it, with revised data and new discoveries.
As such, even real accurate cutting-edge science will continue to be cycled out by new, real accurate science. Always.
The process of science that reveals its inadequacy as being acceptable as immutable truth.
originally posted by: chr0naut
The process of science that reveals its inadequacy as being acceptable as immutable truth.
originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
originally posted by: chr0naut
The process of science that reveals its inadequacy as being acceptable as immutable truth.
If there are people (non-scientists) out there inaccurately portraying science as immutable truth, don’t blame science or scientists. Any scientist worth anything would know better than to say that.
originally posted by: TheTruthRocks
And no modern atheists have ever cut off a person's head for breaking some atheist rule