[js1138]

Some do lie. Many cherry pick data to support their pet theory. And some are delusional.

The difference between science and religion is that liars in science are eventually overtaken by events, revealed by further research.

There are major religions founded on prophecies that are way overdue. There's always some excuse.

[theFIRMbss]

>The difference between science and religion is that liars in science are eventually overtaken by events, revealed by further research

Everybody "knew"
Leibniz's calculus was
solid even though

it was built around
infinitesimals. But
that didn't prevent

Bishop Berkeley from
attacking it built around
religious problems.

And mainstream science
(well, mathematics) bought
into the attacks.

Hundreds of years on
we are still stuck with limits
although Robinson

clear up the loose ends
of infinitesimals
back in '66.

It's not always clear
science is "self-correcting"
or that "corrections"

make a difference
once the damage has been done.
Some things don't clean up.

[Donald Rumsfeld Fan]

The difference between science and religion is that liars in science are eventually overtaken by events, revealed by further research.

Eventually. But some theories die hard.

But religion is based on faith and the supernatural. And as such is nearly impossible to disprove.

There are major religions founded on prophecies that are way overdue. There's always some excuse.

Why am I thinking of Hal Lindsey?