do you think science may be wrong about everything.

We take what science tells us as fact because enough observations have been proven over and over for us to believe it. What is commonly known is believed to be the truth, though it is not necessarily the truth.

Look at what Socrates said in his test for truth: "Find the exception and make it irrefutable". Most scientific facts are irrefutable in today's world because we experience these facts in the physical world with its (apparent) fixed physical laws and thus we accept it as truth.

Verify, gather evidence, present your statements and evaluate. We have been told Carbon-14 measures the age of things - I don't know myself how the earth's age has been measured.

Let's not forget there are possible other multiverses out there that have different physical laws in which facts are different.

Mhmmm, Cartesian philosophy. Question everything that exists.
Cogito ergo sum.

Reply 4

TheOtherSide.

Original post by AshEntropy

Someone please explain to me why this is in the relationships section.. ?

Anon feels like the only way he/she can post their question is by posting it anonymously. Which is really stupid. :sigh:

Reply 5

Luke7456

Original post by AshEntropy

Someone please explain to me why this is in the relationships section.. ?

If he can debunk main stream science most notably evolution, then creationist girls will fall at his feet.

Reply 6

Asolare

Oh dear either you're religious or you're a postmodernist, either way, pretty stupid.

Reply 7

Chemicals

2

Original post by Anonymous

Why do we take what science tells us as fact, for all we know they could be lying. Like evolution or the fact that the world is billions of years old instead of a thousand years old.

Because scientific theory and discovery is generally peer reviewed (by people that are way more intelligent than you) many times before even being considered as "fact". That and it's not a 2,000 year old game of chinese whispers, with no basis of proof, that is translated and changed to fit moral standards of any given time period.

Reply 8

Original post by Chemicals

Because scientific theory and discovery is generally peer reviewed (by people that are way more intelligent than you) many times before even being considered as "fact". That and it's not a 2,000 year old game of chinese whispers, with no basis of proof, that is translated and changed to fit moral standards of any given time period.

Why do you assume those scientists are way more intelligent than the person posting this thread? Do you know him? No. Have you measured him? No. Well then, don't make such statements.

Reply 9

skunkboy

11

Lots of scientists are obviously materialists. So their theories are based on materialism. They can simply explain the physical phenomena.

But they can't tell you what causes greed, grudge or conceit . And they don't even know how to destroy them. That's a reason why their theories are not perfect. And of course thousands of problems in the world can't be solved.

Scientists are not smarter than you. Definitely they're not Mr. Know-it-all. :-)

Reply 10

Notch

3

Original post by skunkboy

Lots of scientists are obviously materialists. So their theories are based on materialism. They can simply explain the physical phenomena.

But they can't tell you what causes greed, grudge or conceit . And they don't even know how to destroy them. That's a reason why their theories are not perfect. And of course thousands of problems in the world can't be solved.

Scientists are not smarter than you. Definitely they're not Mr. Know-it-all. :-)

What do you mean by "lots of scientists are obviously materialists"? How is this relevant to the work they do... science is not concerned with human behaviour (other than areas of psychology and possibly biology). Scientists are the driving factor of progress and the creation of knowledge. There will always be problems that are not yet solved, but this is why science exists - to push boundaries and make an effort to solve them.

I believe the Dunning Kruger effect applies here:

Reply 11

Original post by skunkboy

But they can't tell you what causes greed, grudge or conceit . And they don't even know how to destroy them.

Mate, if you don't know that science already analyses and solves these problems, you are far behind in evolution. It's time to update yourself with today's knowledge.

Reply 12

Chemicals

2

Original post by 571122

Why do you assume those scientists are way more intelligent than the person posting this thread? Do you know him? No. Have you measured him? No. Well then, don't make such statements.

Posting this question in the Relationships forum does not suggest that he'll be up for a Nobel prize anytime soon, IMHO.

Reply 13

the bear

tbh we are now in the Post Factual era... just make your own reality :h:

Reply 14

username2763536

15

Original post by Anonymous

Why do we take what science tells us as fact, for all we know they could be lying. Like evolution or the fact that the world is billions of years old instead of a thousand years old.

OK say they are lying.Next time you get Ill instead of taking antibiotics why don't you try praying or flagellating yourself see if that works? Or how about when you want to travel on holiday?If scientists are wrong then why do planes fly? How will you get to the airport without using GPS since physics is obviously wrong? In fact how will you even reply to this post seeing as computers are made using scientific principles? The thing is if you really wanted to you could study science and see the evidence for yourself.You don't have to take others word for it.Thats the whole point.

Reply 15

Original post by Chemicals

Posting this question in the Relationships forum does not suggest that he'll be up for a Nobel prize anytime soon, IMHO.

Not seeing what relationship this post has to relationships does not suggest that you'll be up for a Nobel prize any time soon. Insight, my boy, insight. Multi-lateral thinking, divergent thinking. They teach you this at uni.

Reply 16

Original post by Robby2312

OK say they are lying.Next time you get Ill instead of taking antibiotics why don't you try praying or flagellating yourself see if that works? Or how about when you want to travel on holiday?If scientists are wrong then why do planes fly? How will you get to the airport without using GPS since physics is obviously wrong? In fact how will you even reply to this post seeing as computers are made using scientific principles? The thing is if you really wanted to you could study science and see the evidence for yourself.You don't have to take others word for it.Thats the whole point.

Hey genius, I never took meds in my entire life and I got flu and fever. It's all about motivation and strength.

Again, you lack vision. You only see the laws that overlap in the sea of randomness. You live in your little box.

Reply 17

username2763536

15

Original post by 571122

Hey genius, I never took meds in my entire life and I got flu and fever. It's all about motivation and strength.

Again, you lack vision. You only see the laws that overlap in the sea of randomness. You live in your little box.

Motivation and strength alone won't help you beat a serious illness like cancer for instance,only the best medical science will.How exactly do I lack vision? I think you will find its you who lacks vision.

Reply 18

the bear

scientists think they are so clever with their test tubes and bunsen burners.

:shakecane:

Reply 19

skunkboy

11

Original post by Notch

What do you mean by "lots of scientists are obviously materialists"? How is this relevant to the work they do... science is not concerned with human behaviour (other than areas of psychology and possibly biology). Scientists are the driving factor of progress and the creation of knowledge. There will always be problems that are not yet solved, but this is why science exists - to push boundaries and make an effort to solve them.

I believe the Dunning Kruger effect applies here:

These are the factors of progress or the creations of knowledge? Scientists are so proud of them? The masterpiece? Those victims were just human guinea pigs? That's scientists' moral code?

Attachment not found