Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Al-Qamar)
    Why am i quoted on this???
    thought you would find it funny thats why:P
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MevMev)
    thought you would find it funny thats why:P
    was hilarious mate
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Al-Qamar)
    was hilarious mate
    you're welcome
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pvaz6965)
    By the way, that person is telling you all you need to know about most medical doctors. And that is that they have no familiarity whatsoever with the scientific method or ideas behind scientific inference. Good for prescribing aspirin and putting a broken arm in plaster but that's about it.
    They're stingy when it comes to spending NHS money and apparently stingy in offering up research and evidence in debate.

    I'm way ahead of this guy, for the past few years I've googled my own symptoms for the benefit of my doctor before I turn up for an appointment.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by leavingthecity)
    They're stingy when it comes to spending NHS money and apparently stingy in offering up research and evidence in debate.

    I'm way ahead of this guy, for the past few years I've googled my own symptoms for the benefit of my doctor before I turn up for an appointment.
    Your typical GP is someone with a Bachelors degree in a vocational subject - human physiology and anatomy. The only science they have ever done is maybe A level Chemistry and Biology and some rudimentary pharmacology and biochemistry at med school. They have no experience of research or utilising scientific methodology or inference. That is why you'll notice when the Creationist nutjobs trot out their so called scientists they are very frequently medical doctors or vets. i.e. not scientists at all.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by leavingthecity)
    Why Caitlyn Jenner made me laugh, it shouldn't have I guess.

    What I'd want is proof of intervention, proof that he sometimes has dealings with us, proof that he has a finger on some scale. I see nothing of the sort.
    Depends who your asking though doesn't it?

    Ask a mother who was told she has 0% chance of conceiving a baby, and even less than 0% chance of delivering a healthy baby, who now has a 10 year old son what she thinks, especially when all the doctors could not explain it, she may tell you that she believes its the work of God. And IF you CANNOT (under any circumstances) provide a scientific explanation, how could you (not you personally) or anyone else deny the presence of 'God'? Or that he does in-fact have some 'direct' dealings with us or his finger on SOME scale?

    There are many examples like this ^^, and while you may turn around and say they have nothing to do with God, someone else would say they are all CLEAR examples that he exists, what or who should decide who is right or wrong here? No one can decide, which is why i think this is a flawed argument

    People who generally don't believe in god will do all they can to prove he doesn't exist through science, and when science cannot explain it, they turn to 'Scientific Anomaly', which is a way to basically acknowledge that something extremely unordinary has happened, which cant be 'explained', but is clearly still somehow explainable through science (somehow)

    Someone who believes in god however, is happy to accept that both can (or do) exist, one doesnt have to dis-prove another, you can take your sick child to church and pray for them, while they are on the medicine that the doc has provided.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pvaz6965)
    Your typical GP is someone with a Bachelors degree in a vocational subject - human physiology and anatomy. The only science they have ever done is maybe A level Chemistry and Biology and some rudimentary pharmacology and biochemistry at med school. They have no experience of research or utilising scientific methodology or inference. That is why you'll notice when the Creationist nutjobs trot out their so called scientists they are very frequently medical doctors or vets. i.e. not scientists at all.
    Wherever and whatever he is studying, he is practically a finished product with that arrogance.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MevMev)
    you're welcome
    I was being sarcastic...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KungPooPanda)
    Depends who your asking though doesn't it?

    Ask a mother who was told she has 0% chance of conceiving a baby, and even less than 0% chance of delivering a healthy baby, who now has a 10 year old son what she thinks, especially when all the doctors could not explain it, she may tell you that she believes its the work of God. And IF you CANNOT (under any circumstances) provide a scientific explanation, how could you (not you personally) or anyone else deny the presence of 'God'? Or that he does in-fact have some 'direct' dealings with us or his finger on SOME scale?

    There are many examples like this ^^, and while you may turn around and say they have nothing to do with God, someone else would say they are all CLEAR examples that he exists, what or who should decide who is right or wrong here? No one can decide, which is why i think this is a flawed argument

    People who generally don't believe in god will do all they can to prove he doesn't exist through science, and when science cannot explain it, they turn to 'Scientific Anomaly', which is a way to basically acknowledge that something extremely unordinary has happened, which cant be 'explained', but is clearly still somehow explainable through science (somehow)

    Someone who believes in god however, is happy to accept that both can (or do) exist, one doesnt have to dis-prove another, you can take your sick child to church and pray for them, while they are on the medicine that the doc has provided.
    Personal anecdotes are worthless.

    Isn't it more far more likely the initial diagnosis was incomplete or in error? As opposed to appealing to an adult fairy tale with no evidence whatsoever?

    Also isn't it funny - you'll accept the science when it is in your story's favour (0% chance of this and that) - but reject the science when it is not in your story's favour. That's called bias by the way.

    Which is why personal anecdotes from lay people are utterly worthless.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    I think Einstein may have retained some sort of belief precisely because he couldn't find a scientific justification to eliminate God rather than because he had a scientific justification to believe in God. In other words, Einstein's luke warm belief was based on faith, just like everybody else's is. He was willing to stuff god into the gap of scientific knowledge. But let's not forget that Einstein was writing 100 years ago - were he alive today we might speculate that he would be less willing to do that.

    The Big Bang is a scientific theory. That means we can be a certain about the big bang as we can about germ theory, atomic theory, the theory of gravity, and so on. A scientific theory isn't a hypothesis - it's certain and demonstrable scientific fact. And for that reason you should accept it for what it is. I agree though that acceptance of the Big Bang as science would not necessarily affect a person's belief in god.
    No I think Einstein had a somewhat strong belief in some sort of superior being or force which he seems to outline is several quotes. He doesn't however believe in a personal God who accounts for morals but nonetheless he seems to believe in so sort of creator of higher intelligence. And of course he may have changed these views today but I highly doubt it due to new scientific equations, formulas and ideas BOTH going for and against the concept of God creating the universe.

    I do understand what you're saying about how a theory holds a grand. It must have a substantial amount of reliability, reasoning and evidence in order to be called a theory. Then again theories are always conflicting each other due to new ones being made every now and then. For example, the theories of light being a wave or a particle. Hence, there might yet be upcoming theories which go against the big bang. And these doubts in this theory allow us to have a choice on whether to accept it or not. I read about a couple of atheists who like to think of the universe being eternal and they have actually provided facts to back up their views.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pvaz6965)
    Personal anecdotes are worthless.

    Isn't it more far more likely the initial diagnosis was incomplete or in error? As opposed to appealing to an adult fairy tale with no evidence whatsoever?

    Also isn't it funny - you'll accept the science when it is in your story's favour (0% chance of this and that) - but reject the science when it is not in your story's favour. That's called bias by the way.

    Which is why personal anecdotes from lay people are utterly worthless.
    Yehhhh i'm not trying to be forum clever like you, i couldn't be bothered to gather and paste cases that science could not prove and is still yet to prove, most people with half a brain are well aware these cases exist

    Your trying to be clever for no reason, your picking apart an anecdote and purposely ignoring the message behind what was said, if i had given you documented causes, what would your response have been? There have been PLENTY of documented cases that science could not explain, i could have picked one out, i chose to give an anecdote that gives the same message as a real story i could have given you, get off your high horse pleaseee
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KungPooPanda)
    Depends who your asking though doesn't it?

    Ask a mother who was told she has 0% chance of conceiving a baby, and even less than 0% chance of delivering a healthy baby, who now has a 10 year old son what she thinks, especially when all the doctors could not explain it, she may tell you that she believes its the work of God. And IF you CANNOT (under any circumstances) provide a scientific explanation, how could you (not you personally) or anyone else deny the presence of 'God'? Or that he does in-fact have some 'direct' dealings with us or his finger on SOME scale?

    There are many examples like this ^^, and while you may turn around and say they have nothing to do with God, someone else would say they are all CLEAR examples that he exists, what or who should decide who is right or wrong here? No one can decide, which is why i think this is a flawed argument

    People who generally don't believe in god will do all they can to prove he doesn't exist through science, and when science cannot explain it, they turn to 'Scientific Anomaly', which is a way to basically acknowledge that something extremely unordinary has happened, which cant be 'explained', but is clearly still somehow explainable through science (somehow)

    Someone who believes in god however, is happy to accept that both can (or do) exist, one doesnt have to dis-prove another, you can take your sick child to church and pray for them, while they are on the medicine that the doc has provided.
    Hmm independent of what we have the freedom to believe is the non trivial nature of the world. He either does or does not exist. No, not many people would shout down a mother who had a difficult conception because... decency.

    No, there are no closed case 'scientific anomalies', firstly science doesn't work like that and secondly, its because there are many rigorous, curious, competitive people who are scientists that won't take unexplained for an answer. On the other hand, when something is a miraculous act of God, believers tend rebuff any examination, often because the subject, as in your example, is a sensitive one.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KungPooPanda)
    Yehhhh i'm not trying to be forum clever like you, i couldn't be bothered to gather and paste cases that science could not prove and is still yet to prove, most people with half a brain are well aware these cases exist

    Your trying to be clever for no reason, your picking apart an anecdote and purposely ignoring the message behind what was said, if i had given you documented causes, what would your response have been? There have been PLENTY of documented cases that science could not explain, i could have picked one out, i chose to give an anecdote that gives the same message as a real story i could have given you, get off your high horse pleaseee
    Rubbish. There is no message except the counterpoint I raised.

    You are confusing not explain with appeals to fantasy.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pvaz6965)
    Rubbish. There is no message except the counterpoint I raised.

    You are confusing not explain with appeals to fantasy.
    So explain then

    It CANT be anything to do with God because YOU say so, clearly

    it CANT be explained by science because the scientists say so themselves

    So..?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KungPooPanda)
    So explain then

    It CANT be anything to do with God because YOU say so, clearly

    it CANT be explained by science because the scientists say so themselves

    So..?
    What scientists? What can't be explained? And if you are going to characterise what I said then do me the courtesy of being accurate.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Someone has yet to put forward any scientific evidence that suggests a god as asked for by the OP

    Surprised that the cosmological constant hasn't been brought up... It may be worth some actual debate...

    Please only bring up if you are informed.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by leavingthecity)
    Hmm independent of what we have the freedom to believe is the non trivial nature of the world. He either does or does not exist. No, not many people would shout down a mother who had a difficult conception because... decency.

    No, there are no closed case 'scientific anomalies', firstly science doesn't work like that and secondly, its because there are many rigorous, curious, competitive people who are scientists that won't take unexplained for an answer. On the other hand, when something is a miraculous act of God, believers tend rebuff any examination, often because the subject, as in your example, is a sensitive one.
    Sensitive depending on who your asking and the case in question, not all things that science cant explain are sensitive ones that aren't open to discussion

    And is it because those people refuse to take 'unexplained' for an answer that there is a basis to say there must be science involved?
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pvaz6965)
    What scientists? What can't be explained? And if you are going to characterise what I said then do me the courtesy of being accurate.
    Oh, is this you saying that there have never been any scientists that have accepted or stated that something couldn't be explained? Or there have never been any 'cases' that could not be explained and quantified?

    Once again, trying to be clever for no reason, if you dont know that there are things out there that cant or haven't yet been explained by science, then your an idiot. If you do know that there are, then im confused as to what exactly your trying to say?

    Please, clarify yourself, make it very clear what it is exactly that you are trying to put across?
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by leavingthecity)
    Someone has yet to put forward any scientific evidence that suggests a god as asked for by the OP

    Surprised that the cosmological constant hasn't been brought up... It may be worth some actual debate...

    Please only bring up if you are informed.
    Well, who has brought forward any scientific proof that he DOESNT exist? If your going to ask one question, you may as-well ask it both ways

    If i made a thread asking this question, it would probably just mirror this thread

    Again, what proof are you seeking? You want pictures? An interview with him on BBC? Postcards to come through your door from him?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KungPooPanda)
    Oh, is this you saying that there have never been any scientists that have accepted or stated that something couldn't be explained? Or there have never been any 'cases' that could not be explained and quantified?

    Once again, trying to be clever for no reason, if you dont know that there are things out there that cant or haven't yet been explained by science, then your an idiot. If you do know that there are, then im confused as to what exactly your trying to say?

    Please, clarify yourself, make it very clear what it is exactly that you are trying to put across?
    You are going off on a confused tangent here. Go back and read the post of yours I replied to. And then try again.

    By the way, I am not some kid on here doing my GCSE's - I am a professional scientist. A real one, not a medical doctor or a psychologist.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: March 13, 2016
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brexit voters: Do you stand by your vote?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.