I don’t believe in science
Scroll to see replies
Original post by MediMate
Just theories? You mean they are so well respected and undeniable that they are called THEORIES. Theory of gravity. Pythagoras' Theorem. Number Theory. General theory of relativity. People are really not understanding what a scientific theory is. A theory is not a hypothesis - it HAS TO BE proven through repeated observation and experiment OTHERWISE IT IS NOT A SCIENTIFIC THEORY.
You can come up with your own ideas but they are NOT SCIENTIFIC THEORY. They would be just ideas. A scientific theory isn't something you can pull out of your ass, it has to be repeatedly observed through experiment.
"Theories surrounding evolution". There is only one theory of evolution (there arent theories), and it is the only SCIENTIFIC THEORY which has repeatedly been observed to be the mechanism which gives rise to new species. We can see it in our labs. It is undeniable!
You can come up with your own ideas but they are NOT SCIENTIFIC THEORY. They would be just ideas. A scientific theory isn't something you can pull out of your ass, it has to be repeatedly observed through experiment.
"Theories surrounding evolution". There is only one theory of evolution (there arent theories), and it is the only SCIENTIFIC THEORY which has repeatedly been observed to be the mechanism which gives rise to new species. We can see it in our labs. It is undeniable!
It doesn't matter. A theory is not fact. Some theories are of course widely and universally accepted as very likely to hold true based on evidence. There is not undeniable evidence for evolution or the Big Bang. It's an idea that's rejected by as many people as those who use any shred of potential evidence as supposed proof that the theories are correct (confirmation bias at its finest).
And to think that caused all this ruckus by refusing to believe in science! It’s not a mandatory requirement to believe in science, we all view the world differently and this is his view. Let it be.
Original post by MediMate
Science will never be able to give the full perspective but it is definitely a model which aims to describe and make predictions about the universe to our best current understanding. Religion, on the other hand, makes no testable predictions at all.
To make any scientific prediction we make a premise of time. There was nothing before the big bang because space and time didn't exist. How can something exist before time if the word "before" requires time as a premise?
If God does exist, I believe that God invented logic, because for mathematics to exist (the fundamental language in which physics describes the universe) there has to be a reason as to why math makes sense at all. Why is it that 2+2 is undeniably 4?
The thing that fascinates me is that in order for us to even be aware that the universe exists, there has to be consciousness. Without our awareness, the universe doesn't exist for us at all - there is no reality.
Scientists are trying to get to the bottom of what consciousness actually is by looking at our brains. We know our brain is the key towards consciousness and we know they are made of neurons. A signal made by a neuron is simply an electrical impulse - the movement of Na+ and K+ ions, powered by a concentration gradient formed by the Na+/K+ pump. We know it is the charge on the ions that causes them to move. Electrons are responsible for charge. Maybe it is simply a dynamic pattern of the movement of electrons that causes consciousness to arise? Under the quantum field theory - the most complete and reliable theory to date - electrons are just simply an excitation of the quantum field. The quantum field is what encompasses all of our universe. Even in a perfect vacuum, there exists a quantum field with particles constantly coming in and out of existence.
In reality there is no such thing as atoms, electrons, as a matter of fact, ANY PARTICLES AT ALL. Everything is simply an excitation in a quantum field. This is fact. The quantum field is divided into subfields, such as the electromagnetic field, the higgs field and so on. It follows that all our reality really is is just an excitation in the quantum field.
To make any scientific prediction we make a premise of time. There was nothing before the big bang because space and time didn't exist. How can something exist before time if the word "before" requires time as a premise?
If God does exist, I believe that God invented logic, because for mathematics to exist (the fundamental language in which physics describes the universe) there has to be a reason as to why math makes sense at all. Why is it that 2+2 is undeniably 4?
The thing that fascinates me is that in order for us to even be aware that the universe exists, there has to be consciousness. Without our awareness, the universe doesn't exist for us at all - there is no reality.
Scientists are trying to get to the bottom of what consciousness actually is by looking at our brains. We know our brain is the key towards consciousness and we know they are made of neurons. A signal made by a neuron is simply an electrical impulse - the movement of Na+ and K+ ions, powered by a concentration gradient formed by the Na+/K+ pump. We know it is the charge on the ions that causes them to move. Electrons are responsible for charge. Maybe it is simply a dynamic pattern of the movement of electrons that causes consciousness to arise? Under the quantum field theory - the most complete and reliable theory to date - electrons are just simply an excitation of the quantum field. The quantum field is what encompasses all of our universe. Even in a perfect vacuum, there exists a quantum field with particles constantly coming in and out of existence.
In reality there is no such thing as atoms, electrons, as a matter of fact, ANY PARTICLES AT ALL. Everything is simply an excitation in a quantum field. This is fact. The quantum field is divided into subfields, such as the electromagnetic field, the higgs field and so on. It follows that all our reality really is is just an excitation in the quantum field.
Yes, you are indeed correct...
I understand that it is a perfectly understandable, and well supported interpretation.
However, since the Quran and Islam itself manages to answer all the questions necessary for me to know what I'm doing and to me personally makes as much sense as your argument when understood in depth, i can't choose a half arsed explanation with evidence, over a complete explanation with sufficient evidence.
Also, till now I haven't managed to find a single time where Islam has not been able to answer for a question that a philosopher or and atheist has thrown at the religion. On the contrary, I find multiple plot holes with other beliefs such as atheism, nihilism and other monotheistic beliefs.
idk, but when it comes to an evaluation it tends to be down to whichever side has more reasonable and logical as well as complete explanations, and Islam has been able to fulfil that for me
Original post by Apex1302
Oh god not another of these idiotic threads...
You only think it is idiotic because you dismissed it without the slightest thought... kinda ignorant tbf
Original post by getmeoffmyphone
And to think that @The Night King caused all this ruckus by refusing to believe in science! It’s not a mandatory requirement to believe in science, we all view the world differently and this is his view. Let it be.
He was trolling. Very successfully, I hasten to add.
Original post by Apex1302
Oh god not another of these idiotic threads...
Take the hint from your user title, Ms Junior Member. Don't think you have the chevrons to disrespect the venerable participants in this thoughtful thread.
Original post by gjd800
He was trolling. Very successfully, I hasten to add.
I know he was trolling, but I was making a valid point regardless of the seriousness of the thread
Original post by getmeoffmyphone
I know he was trolling, but I was making a valid point regardless of the seriousness of the thread
Right. So it's not his view, then.
Original post by gjd800
He was trolling. Very successfully, I hasten to add.
In other words, he is completely devoid of a life. Understood.
Original post by Less(e/o)n
In other words, he is completely devoid of a life. Understood.
Well, that doesn't follow, but you can of course think what you like.
Original post by It's****ingWOODY
It doesn't matter. A theory is not fact. Some theories are of course widely and universally accepted as very likely to hold true based on evidence. There is not undeniable evidence for evolution or the Big Bang. It's an idea that's rejected by as many people as those who use any shred of potential evidence as supposed proof that the theories are correct (confirmation bias at its finest).
I don't think you understand how evolution actually works. It is basically undeniable at this point as it has occurred in labs and we see it constantly happening. We are too are 'evolving'. 'Evolution' doesn't necessarily mean smarter, more complex. In fact humans aren't any more evolved than reptiles.
Evolution is the shift in phenotype due to natural selection that allows organisms to be better adapted to their environment. Humans and reptiles are both suited towards their own environments.
If you believe that over time, organisms with a higher chance of death have a lower chance of producing offspring then you believe in evolution!
For example, a person with a genetic disease which makes them mentally handicapped will have a less chance of finding a partner, therefore they are less likely to have children, therefore their genes are not passed on.
Analogous to this would be an E. coli bacterium developing a genetic mutation which causes the active site of a previous enzyme to also bind to ampicillin (an antibiotic), breaking it up and disabling it. The remaining E. coli without the mutation will die in the presence of ampicillin, leaving only the mutated ones behind which can still reproduce and therefore produce offspring. THIS IS EVOLUTION - THE OFFSPRING HAVE A PHENOTYPE WHICH INCREASES THEIR LIKELIHOOD OF SURVIVAL. THERE IS NOW A GREATER GENE FREQUENCY OF THIS MUTATED GENE.
By the way, many religious people will argue that there is no mutation which can increase the amount of DNA in our cells. THIS IS ALSO FALSE! It happens all the time - its called polyploidy (most of the time its bad, but can sometimes actually be useful, an example is the wheat crop). Polyploidy can actually occur in humans too and the result if it happens to chromosome 21 is Down's syndrome.
(edited 6 years ago)
No surprise the mods banned me for standing up to the idiot that OP is. F*** this guy
Do you believe that a species who have the reached most advanced levels of a Kardshev civilisation model must be aware of everything in the universe all the time? 
Original post by It's****ingWOODY
There is not undeniable evidence for evolution
You are joking, aren't you? Both DNA evidence and radiometric dating and identification of ancestral, fossilised remains are clear, evidential examples of evolution being inherently omnipresent within nature, and thus a scientific FACT.
There are plenty of prominent religious leaders in Britain alone who have seen the scientific evidence and consider evolution to be factual, and it's only the most dim-witted of creationists who refuse to be persuaded by such evidence. I doubt very much that you are a creationist, though, which is what seriously puzzles me about your post.
Well I understand what u mean. for me I don't believe in everything science says I also believe that some stuff are fake. But I still believe that God gave humans the power to think about stuff and create stuff to help humanity as society changes such as technology and medicine.
But when u said that u believe earth is flat I kinda think your trolling lol cuz like it's clearly round if you look into the horizon and I THINK it is said in holy books (I'm not sure gonna search it up)
But when u said that u believe earth is flat I kinda think your trolling lol cuz like it's clearly round if you look into the horizon and I THINK it is said in holy books (I'm not sure gonna search it up)
(edited 6 years ago)
judging by your word choices in the thread’s title (‘believe’), i’m pretty much sure that you dont know what you’re talking about.. u don’t ‘believe’ in science as you do with religion, science is based on justifiable proofs and not faith.
please read some books before you come to TSR and humiliate urself like this.
PS. I’m (or was) a Christian
please read some books before you come to TSR and humiliate urself like this.
PS. I’m (or was) a Christian
(edited 6 years ago)
Original post by Zahra_2001
Well I understand what u mean. for me I don't believe in everything science says I also believe that some stuff are fake. But I still believe that God gave humans the power to think about stuff and create stuff to help humanity as society changes such as technology and medicine.
But when u said that u believe earth is flat I kinda think your trolling lol cuz like it's clearly round if you look into the horizon and I THINK it is said in holy books (I'm not sure gonna search it up)
But when u said that u believe earth is flat I kinda think your trolling lol cuz like it's clearly round if you look into the horizon and I THINK it is said in holy books (I'm not sure gonna search it up)
searched it up I'm rly confused right now sometimes I used to also kinda have that feeling that what if earth is actually flat because of watching too much YouTube videos about it. But now although I'm a Muslim I do believe in the bible and found some verses that say that earth is round and I couldn't rly in the quran cuz they could be interpreted differently (either round or flat) but Its believed it's round.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- SQE2
- Paramedic Science
- SQE2 prep course ULaw vs Barbri for SQE2 April 2023
- Should I drop out of A-Levels this year?
- FANB1984's GCSE (YR 11) GYG
- Anyone goes to Brampton? i need help whether the college will accept me or not..
- Chances of getting into UCL/KCL
- The honest truth about Pharmacy.
- can you do architecture using a biomedical science degree
- vapordave's resit diaries
- Just got a 5-6 in science and a 5 in maths mock papers.
- Do you think A-levels should be structured differently?
- Nervous About Starting at Oxford (Computer Science)
- Population Health Sciences UCL 2024
- History Or Psychology A-level?
- What uni should I go if want russell group but not math heavy
- Is THIS form of “magic” actually magic/haram?
- How good is Birkbeck, University of London?
- Cambridge Demystified
- Applied medical sciences course at Swansea university
Latest
Trending
Last reply 4 days ago
If you could instantly become fluent in any foreign language which one would it be?Last reply 3 months ago
About the NCUK IFY Program for university Studies in the UKTrending
Last reply 4 days ago
If you could instantly become fluent in any foreign language which one would it be?Last reply 3 months ago
About the NCUK IFY Program for university Studies in the UK
