but when I try to introduce my own skepticism I am written off because it is not the answer that is being sought after. Is this not what the podcast is about? Instead of simply dismissing me, would it not be better to address my concern?
That doesn’t seem fair.
You’ve been answered in a civil constructive manner, including straight-forward honesty. . . . . . . we’re all big kids, no offense intended.
Uncertainties do not make things wrong, they make them uncertain! This is all I am saying, We don’t know. Science doesn’t explain everything. Science like religion wants to pretend to have all the answers and in many cases can look foolish in the process.* There are countless “truths” that have later been found to be false.
*No it doesn’t!
Religion has a dogma that must be accepted… doubts to that dogma are not tolerated - instead replaced by the demand of faith, even when that faith requires
Willfully Ignoring the full spectrum of evidence… of life.
Science is build on the premise all knowledge is provisional, open to re-review., retesting. Of course science is also a human endeavor and there are examples of… accepted wisdom becoming too entrenched, much too much, beyond supportable underpinning. But, the science ethic itself comes to the rescue because within her is a set of ground-rules that enable new eyes to challenge and superimpose better understanding upon older, lessor understanding.
After all it is a pageant, not a machine.
Whereas seems to me all religion has to offer is endless repetition,
a horizon from which the beauty of discovery has been banished…
... actually thinking on it just now, sort of is like a machine
What is worse is when these “facts” are used to build other “facts.”
Where’s that dramatic flourish come from? Can you explain it? Support it?
Why not simply disseminate the information as current scientific beliefs?
What do you mean? Searching our scientific information and coming up to speed on the knowledge and debate of the moment, it’s not that tough to do. Keeping up with it once you’ve found it, that test is a bitch.
So tell us ‘scienceisreligion’ what information do you believe is not being disseminated?
List some of your “countless (banished) truths” ?
Can you offer details?
What specific part(s) of science is giving you a problem?
It’d be interesting looking into the rest of story.
Citizenschallange: I just don’t (see) why the scientific community needs to feel like everything they produce is fact.
Why are you saying I am misrepresenting science, I am not representing anything.
Look at what you write. You’re bias burns.
Your characterizations of science/scientists have nothing to do with what actual science is about.
I find it almost amusing that the scientific community would like to completely abolish the theory of God but at the same time would like to be God.
There you go again, projecting your obsesses and baggage into your own story.
Keep in mind simply because you misunderstand & misrepresent what “science is or believes” doesn’t make it so.
This forum is nothing but propaganda. pretending otherwise is simply fooling yourself.
Who’s fooling whom
What does that mean?
This is an open forum - there’s nothing here but individuals having a few discussions
We’re a gathering of totally disparate individuals.
We got one thing in common, we can talk/write about common interests in a convivial atmosphere;
That and all the participants are quite interesting folks in their own right.
This is a discussion community, one of high caliber at that, yet in your imagination you’ve morphed it into some “propaganda machine.”
Then you sound stunned when some take a swipe at you.
But, I like your posts, at least you’re having a discussion as opposed to pure rant.