Science

Out of context: Reply #139

  • Started 12 years ago
  • Last post 3 months ago
  • 1,014 Responses
  • Morning_star0

    I watched that ^ video. I heard lots of different theories about 'nothing' and the start of the universe; some based on quantum physics, some based on multiple universes, some philosophical explanations, some based in traditional physics. The five scientists on the panel cold not agree on anything let alone a consistent demonstrable solution. Yet each of the scientists had faith in the validity of their particular theory even though it would contradict other explanations.

    If you replaced each of the scientists with a representative from different faiths and asked them a similar question there would be an almost identical clash of ideas but from a theological perspective.

    Given this particular scientific question all the answers were based on nothing more than belief.

    • Just say that you want to believe in ghosts and magic and be done with it, please, you're killing this threadhereswhatidid
    • < you got lots of main stream mombo jumbo stereotypes about magicyurimon
    • fuck off with your "mainstream" bullshit, yurihereswhatidid
    • Hey hereswhatidid, what do you think of that video? You know what an opinion is don't you?Morning_star
    • My opinion is that you are completely incorrect in your definition of belief and how that relates to scientific knowledge.hereswhatidid
    • None of those people have "faith" in their ideas. They have reached conclusions based on their own research. Faith is blindly believing something regardless of evidencehereswhatidid
    • blindly believing in something regardless of the evidence for or against it.hereswhatidid
    • Belief in a god creator is exactly the same as believing in a purely material explanation for the 'first cause'. Just because the belief falls under a science heading doesn't make it any more plausible.Morning_star

View thread