Jump to content
The mkiv Supra Owners Club

Science vs Faith


sdavies

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Anybody with an ounce of sense wouldn't take offense at this stuff. If they were confident and secure in their faith and views they would discard it as internet tat anyway. Not like this stuff "Un-converts" people, and it is far from obscene :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that first science thing is so wrong! sceince is all about trying to disprove things, so there is no doubt that the theory is true. If youget what i mean, the first block is almost religios too! anyone like the religious side can prove anything if they want.

 

It should read something like:

 

Try every eventuality to disprove you theory...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that first science thing is so wrong! sceince is all about trying to disprove things, so there is no doubt that the theory is true. If youget what i mean, the first block is almost religios too! anyone like the religious side can prove anything if they want.

 

It should read something like:

 

Try every eventuality to disprove you theory...

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

 

:)

 

p.s. which branch of science do you study mate? ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not this again!!

 

:blink: Ooer, which bit of that thread is pertinent? Do I have to read it all :( Seems I missed it first time around :D Blimeys 40% that participated claim to be atheist :D Figures ;)

 

ANyhoo - was never meant to be serious, just tongue in cheek views that people have that make me chuckle :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the correct version! ;)

 

a theory can only gain merit if it cant be disproved, thats what experiments are all about! take maths for example and equations. Just because a equation wrks for one number, it doesnt mean it wll work for all!

 

Personally I thought a theory gained merit with experimental proof and reproducibility. The point I think you are trying to make is that the theory has to suitably suggest an outcome/observation from a reproducible experiment. This experiment has to be open to the rest of the scientific community for objective analysis and reproduction. Until anybody comes up with something that disproves/shows holes in the theory for whatever reason, the theory remains in tact. I think the flow chart actually does take that into account (if not a little crudely). The difference being, truly objective scientists are willing to accept that something is wrong if a theory can be disproved, and strive to gain a further understanding where their model of the world has broken down and move towards better understanding of the subject matter (as opposed to religious dogma I meant to say - bloody internet baulked).

 

/shrug

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. You might also be interested in our Guidelines, Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.