Ah, yes, “real science” (coupled with a condescending and derisive digression):
Science, so called, is practiced by human beings: fallible and, I argue, fallen. The Scientific Method is merely a tool, not a lord. It is often misused or, worse, abused. (See Trofim Lysenko.) To paraphrase Spock on computers, The Scientific Method makes an excellent and efficient servant; but I have no wish to serve under it.
The Evolutionary Theory, for example, is not a theory; it is a veritable patchwork quilt of unverifiable and non-replicable hypotheses, and every time it fails the test, they just sew in a new patch. (See the Coelacanth.) It will never be subjected to the same rigorous treatment many real theories are, for the sake of its social, political, and spiritual presuppositions and implications.
My favorite recollection of such is my first Biology instructor at university, who repeatedly said, “Given time and chance, we are confident that...” [evolutionary thinking would be validated someday, someway]. Those happen to be the words of faith, not the words of fact.
Global Cooling/Global Warming/Climate Change adherents are “constantly refining” their “models” too - and for the sake of some of the same presuppositions and implications that the evolutionary fanatics do.
Regardless, the model never equals the reality - never!
People like you may give lip service to that idea, but I suggest (since you were directly or indirectly being insulting to my kind first) that you really, truly do not adhere to that:
You think that there is a scientific Holy Grail out there, just waiting to be found. I am not looking for a UFT because, even if one is found, it will still be just a model: God already made the Real Thing. If they find one, and it is of some pragmatic use, fine. But I do not worship a mathematical equation.
Science is not God; God is God.
By the bye: I will match my scientific and mathematical awards, my theological experience, and my certified intelligence quotient, against any of yours.
(Yes, I speak as a fool - as Saul cum Paul would say: Sometimes gratuitously obnoxious intellectual elitists affect me that way.)
Here is a hint to all three of you: Do not start out with the assumption that because another person disagrees with your position, it is because that other person does not understand “real science”: That is not only arrogant, it is fallacious.
Science is not God; God is God.
I never said otherwise, nor does my reply imply that Science is God.
“Here is a hint to all three of you: Do not start out with the assumption that because another person disagrees with your position, it is because that other person does not understand “real science”: That is not only arrogant, it is fallacious.”
Consider your own advise.
Whereas 7 days of Creation, now that’s a FACT, no B.S. “theories” for you, just cold hard reality. I like it! Good going.