[Hazaanko]

The same things that can go wrong with faith go wrong with science.  And they do all the time.

The main difference being, faith-based ideas are much harder to change since they effect a person's everyday decisions and lifestyle.  When science runs into that area as well, people are much slower to change.  (Pluto losing its status as a planet... vs. someone telling you for the first time that those cigarettes you're smoking are extremely bad for your health).

[TrashMan]

I'm going to have to be picky and argue your first statement.  Hipparchus, for example, accurately calculated the distances and sizes of the moon and sun before 100BC, so there was good science even in those days.
My point is that at any given time, there are things in nature that we can't explain because we either don't have an adequate model or theory for it, or we don't have the technology to make collect data on it.

If you went back to the day of Hipparchus and said "Hey, I know out how old the universe is!!11", not a soul on earth would take you seriously because back then nobody had the slightest idea of how you could determine such a thing.  Quite literally it was impossible with the known technology and reasoning.  Similarly in todays world we can't figure out what happened in the very first moments after the Big Bang, but I don't believe one can say for certain that a discovery wont be made sometime in the future which can allow us to do so. 

True, you musn't forget that humanity has fallen into "dark ages" a few times, where a LOT of the knowledge and methods have been forgotten and later discovered.

But al lthis time we have been moving along. The really true and tried and universally accepted scientific method is a relativly young construct.

As you said yourself, if you had a claim in those time, nobody woudl belive you. Today it's not the case. They'd think about it, make tests and such. That's the advantage of out time...and yes, we are indeed advanced enough to be able to claim SOME things with allmsot absolute precision. If we can't, then what's the use of science?

and think about your last statement a bit. You'll see that reason, logic and everything we currently know say it is impossible.

------
@Bobbau - as much as I find that picture insulting, I can't help but chuckle at it.
Still, I find it balantly wrong.

[Bobboau]

well at least the humor isn't lost on you

but if you have a better flow chart for faith, give it a shot.

[Hazaanko]

Flow chart for science ------> same flow chart for faith.

You could even swap their titles and it could still be accurate.  It all depends on the individual.  Global warming is a great example (oh SNAP I went there). 

[Mefustae]

You could even swap their titles and it could still be accurate.  It all depends on the individual.  Global warming is a great example (oh SNAP I went there). 

How do you figure? There's still quite a bit of debate and most retain an open mind about it. It's only the people who vehemently support or oppose the theory that really fall into that "faith" flow-chart, and 99% of those people are most certainly not scientists.

[Bobboau]

I've read a lot of information on global warming, I'm not convinced it's caused by human activity. it's prety clear it's happening, but aside from that we've been comeing out of an ice age for the last few thousand years, just because the rise of human civilization happens to coenside with rising temperatures does not mean humans caused higher temperatures, it could very easily be the other way around. now I'm sure many of my contemporarys will disagree with me, but that just goes to show we follow the evidence not the dogma, unlike faith based beleife systems were you would be called heretic and excommunicated for taking such a position.

[TrashMan]

well at least the humor isn't lost on you

but if you have a better flow chart for faith, give it a shot.

I havn't made one, but the thing with faith is, that there's really not much to question about it. Faith in general (and Christianity more than any other religion) has been probed and question and attacked from every possible angle and every possibel weapon in the arsenal.

the most important question about religion cannot be answered by science. Sure, there's allways some ...shall we say too enthusiastic or impressionable individuals (..yes lets) who don't question any aspect of faith/religion, not even some that just balantly don't make sense.

Examples include:
- taking EVERYTHING literary
- ignoring everything science sez
- going against one's own logic (God is love. God loves all! Kill for God!)

But then again, you can find people like that everywhere, religious or not. Religion only gives them anoother outlet for their stupidity or another thing to get lost into.

On another note, I had to make a report/seminar/essay on Global Warming and after checing a LOT of sources and wadiug trough half the friggin internet, my conclusion is that it is allmsot certain we caused it. I'd say 80-90% probability and I'm being generous here....

[Bobboau]

the thing with faith is, that there's really not much to question about it. Faith in general (and Christianity more than any other religion) has been probed and question and attacked from every possible angle and every possibel weapon in the arsenal.

so, in other words, you get your faith, don't question it, and keep your faith forever.

[TrashMan]

the thing with faith is, that there's really not much to question about it. Faith in general (and Christianity more than any other religion) has been probed and question and attacked from every possible angle and every possibel weapon in the arsenal.

so, in other words, you get your faith, don't question it, and keep your faith forever.

It has withstood all question I threw at it... and a whorde of question others threw...so I'm keeping it.

[Agent_Koopa]

the thing with faith is, that there's really not much to question about it. Faith in general (and Christianity more than any other religion) has been probed and question and attacked from every possible angle and every possibel weapon in the arsenal.

so, in other words, you get your faith, don't question it, and keep your faith forever.

Protestant Reformation, Christianity, Buddhism, and a slew of other religions say hi.

[Bobboau]

hey, I was just going by what he was saying.

[Agent_Koopa]

hey, I was just going by what he was saying.

From what I was reading, no you weren't. You were using a sarcastic rebuttal. So yes, my post was valid.

[Bobboau]

I wasn't saying that was my position I was saying that is what he was saying.

but anyway if your so antsy why don't you come up with a better flow chart?

[Agent_Koopa]

I wasn't saying that was my position I was saying that is what he was saying.

but anyway if your so antsy why don't you come up with a better flow chart?

Trashman said that his religion has withstood every question put to it. You said that just means he doesn't question his own faith and that he keeps it forever. I responded with evidence that in history people haven't done that.

Well, we're both wrong here. I didn't take the time to figure out what was being said, and responded with a totally irrelevant comment. You were wrong because you misinterpreted what he said. So, let's pretend the whole thing never happened. Here's a better response from me.

He already said he questioned his faith, and it withstood the test. Your response was that he keeps his faith and never questions it. He's already questioned it enough. You seem to be saying that if his faith hasn't broken, he clearly hasn't questioned it enough. I'm not entirely sure what his faith is, but don't assume your own conclusions.

[Bobboau]

this is the quote I was working with.

but the thing with faith is, that there's really not much to question about it. Faith in general has been probed and question and attacked from every possible angle and every possibel weapon in the arsenal.

the second part he is not saying he has questioned his faith, but that faith in general has been questioned, not by him, because for him there isn't anything to question.

in response he said he did question it some. perhaps clarifying what he said earlier, or simply contradicting it.

[jr2]

or simply contradicting it.

There is enough tension here that there is no need for n00bishness.    *wishes he could make an extra long tongue to stick out* 

[Kosh]

On a note related to science and religion, I found a very interesting article on why science is faltering in the Islamic world. Before anyone starts jumping to conclusions, the author is the head of the physics department of Quaid-i-Azam University in Pakistan, so I think he would know better than us what it is really like there. Definately worth a look.

http://ptonline.aip.org/journals/doc/PHTOAD-ft/vol_60/iss_8/49_1.shtml

[karajorma]

Flow chart for science ------> same flow chart for faith.

You could even swap their titles and it could still be accurate.  It all depends on the individual. 

I can point to several places in science where there have been major upheavals in the way something is understood because the old theory has been proved false or a new theory has been proved correct. Epigenetics, the big bang theory replacing steady state, quantum mechanics replacing Newtonian physics. The list goes on.

Show me a change in any major faith as big as that one and then you might have a point. And I don't mean a fork where half the people keep believing what they used to believe and you end up with a new religion. I mean a change where the entire faith has changed position and anyone who continues to believe in the old version is regarded as a crackpot.

[karajorma]

I think they're currently two, fairly civil debates going on. One of which was always about religion right from the start. So I don't know what you're complaining about.

And if the 75% who are leaving were only interested in jawing on hard light then how are they active?

[TrashMan]

this is the quote I was working with.

but the thing with faith is, that there's really not much to question about it. Faith in general has been probed and question and attacked from every possible angle and every possibel weapon in the arsenal.

the second part he is not saying he has questioned his faith, but that faith in general has been questioned, not by him, because for him there isn't anything to question.

in response he said he did question it some. perhaps clarifying what he said earlier, or simply contradicting it.

Maby I should have wrote - there's really not much to question LEFT.

Yes, it has been questioned by thousands of people trought history. Some question were asked again and again, and answered again and again. I came to the same answers to those questions and they satisfy me.
To the few question that weren't asked before (to my knowledge) I have allso found more than satisfactory answers.