Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: mlo
Nobody said anything about faith.

Believing that something exists without any objective proof requires faith.

Why should I believe that "primordial black holes" even exist if none have been observed? Even if all the "evidence" points to such things existing, we could say that there's a ton of evidence that Bigfoot exists as well, even though no one has seen Bigfoot.

This piece honestly reads like bad fiction. Perhaps these scientists should wait until they have observed something before they speculate as to whether or not it exists.

16 posted on 05/03/2011 12:42:03 PM PDT by pnh102 (Regarding liberalism, always attribute to malice what you think can be explained by stupidity. - Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]


To: pnh102

I don’t think they are asking you to believe. They are trying to decode a universe governed by mathematical properties and physical laws, not by magic. If science works properly this can either be proven as fact or thrown down the black hole.


35 posted on 05/03/2011 1:08:13 PM PDT by Sawdring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

To: pnh102
"Nobody said anything about faith."

"Believing that something exists without any objective proof requires faith."

Nobody is talking about belief. Read the headline again. "Some Black Holes May Pre-Date The Big Bang, Say Cosmologists"

"Why should I believe that "primordial black holes" even exist if none have been observed?"

Nobody in the article said what you should believe.

"Even if all the "evidence" points to such things existing, we could say that there's a ton of evidence that Bigfoot exists as well, even though no one has seen Bigfoot."

Saying it doesn't make it so. If you really did have a ton of evidence and no contrary evidence, then it would perfectly logical to think Bigfoot probably exists.

"This piece honestly reads like bad fiction. Perhaps these scientists should wait until they have observed something before they speculate as to whether or not it exists."

No it doesn't. You just have a too narrow definition of what scientists do. Coming up with creative ideas is part of the process. It's not just about measuring things. There's nothing wrong with a scientist saying something may have happened or might happen. The only thing wrong would be saying it did, without evidence. "Faith", as you said. But this article never suggests that they are doing that. Instead it is quite clear that this is speculation. Which is fine.

57 posted on 05/03/2011 7:39:24 PM PDT by mlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson