sigh...
We know anything only by imputation onto our senses, assimilation of those inputs and organization into understandble, intellectually "tactile", information.
We know almost all scientific "proofs" as truth because some other scientists have failed to disprove it and thus call it "true",or at least worthy of remaining an open question. Thus we put FAITH in those scientists, we put FAITH in their processes, we put FAITH in their motivations.
All scientists are political and human. All scientists are subject to political forces more powerful than them. (NAZIism is just one small discrete example, Global Warming another)
Such faith in scientists is profound and incredibily dangerous. You cannot go about proving all theories yourself, thus you are at the mercy of small numbers of scientists, and their biases.
Science and religion do not compete.
Sir Isaac Newton believed in the authenticity of the Bible and created the scientific process. He believed in the Bible because he had first hand knowledge of the Holy Spirit and was educated on the Bible.
The Holy Spirit is better proven to me than any scientific theory. I know it from direct experience. It is more real with more truth than any science.
Science cannot prove love exists either, but we accept that it is true because we either experience it personally or we see its effects on indiviuals. The very same is true for the Holy Spirit. [The Holy Spirit is not the same as love, it is different and even more profound. My Jewish wife, mathemetician, broke down in shuddering tears of joy the moment the Holy Spirit came within her upon asking Christ into her heart. A true epiphany)
Thousands of the worlds most brilliant scientists have also known the Holy Spirit to be true having the most profound effect on their lives. Once proven to them personally they never deny its reality again. Think about the profound nature of that!
More scientists cannot personally testify to the truth of the Holy Spirit than any other scientific theory. (even gravity, since we know so little about it)
Just because science cannot measure it does not make it non-existent. The universe would be non-existent were that so since we cannot measure sub-quantum structures upon which everything is built.
Someday, soon, some a new scientific understanding of the cosmos will appear and cause a revolution in the way we think about current science, making current theories mere small approximations limited by the infinitesimally minute imaginations of grunting little beings with a mere few pounds of putty like blobs of neurons which are used more to invent creative humping scenarios with other blobs of post-primordial goo.
We do not even know what we don't know. yet still some would place their faith in these barely existent lumps of goo, alive for only atto seconds relativey speaking.
These infinitesimally tiny volumes of entropy burps have somehow acquired for themselves some timeless truths about the nature of the cosmos? yeah, right...only if God gave them could it be so.
The primary product of science is untruth. When we can't call it untrue we keep working at it until we can.
I believe we do not even understand what God is, except that "He" represents a grand truth about all nature for which we do not have the brain power to begin to comprehend. That nature exists is true, because we can point a question at it. That we do not understand it is also true.
Yet because of our vast accumulation of scientific truths we can go ahead and rule out the existence of God?? really??
LOL.
Lets face it, men, scientists, are stupid. Most men spend almost all of their brainpower trying to maximize the quality or quantity of the 4 F's; Feeding, F__ck_ng, ego inFlating and Faith. In that order...perhaps
While there is definitely a spiritual motivator for scientists to pursue the truth of nature it can sure be subordinated to the 3F's at any given time.
I sure wouldn't put my faith in any animal so stupid and so easily corrupted. But go ahead and place your faith in scientists, they like it, it inFlates their egos, keeps them Fed, and if you bend over....
;^)
While there is definitely a spiritual motivator for scientists to pursue the truth of nature it can sure be subordinated to the 3F's at any given time.
I sure wouldn't put my faith in any animal so stupid and so easily corrupted. But go ahead and place your faith in scientists, they like it, it inFlates their egos, keeps them Fed, and if you bend over....
The title of this thread is Most Republicans Reject Evolution
But why stop there. We can follow your lead and reject all of science!
(What color did you paint your cave?)
I agree. It's quite possible to have faith and accept the conclusions of science, and understand they are two entirely different things. But when creationists attempt to diminish science by labeling it "faith", they lose.
>>Science and religion do not compete.<<
They may not inherently compete but they certainly have competed and they definitely are brought into competition for various purposes.