Science!! Fucking magnets, how do they work?

Burnem Wizfyre

Burnem Wizfyre

Log Wizard
11,814
19,674
Palum_sl said:
Explain to me why reading something in a book and taking as fact because you trust the source is not faith. That is what both students did in my example.
Click to expand...
It's not faith to trust something that has shown itself to be right time and time again. It is however faith to believe something that has been proven wrong at every turn and step and has things in it that just violate every known physical laws in the universe. Everything else that the science book was right about up to and past that single inconsistency you pointed out builds a trust, a trust with a solid foundation in science that is falsifiable and in a lot of cases able to be verified by yourself if so inclined. You are basically equating two people arguing over the inconsistency of the boiling point of water in a text book by a tenth of a degree and this bible verse below.

and the stars in the sky fell to earth, as figs drop from a fig tree when shaken by a strong wind.
Click to expand...
TLDR It's not faith its confidence based upon evidence of past experience, unlike faith when our confidence is met with inconsistencies we have a self correcting mechanism that allows for the truth to be obtained.
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
Draegan_sl said:
Hey guys shut the fuck up and give hodj a chance to take his meds.
Click to expand...
See this shit?

This is why no one respects you or thinks anything you have to say is of any value in any conversation on this forum you pay to run.

Fucking retard.

Palum_sl said:
Explain to me why reading something in a book and taking as fact because you trust the source is not faith. That is what both students did in my example.
Click to expand...
Have you ever tried to compare a religious text to basically any other type of book out there?

You should maybe try doing that. Try comparing the claims of the Bible to the claims of a Biology textbook sometime.

I think you'll be surprised.
 
T

Troll_sl

shitlord
1,703
6
Jesus fucking christ.

That something in a science text CAN be tested removes it from the realm of faith. It doesn't matter if two texts are off slightly. They will both be testable to a certain margin of error.

It's not that hard to understand.
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
Troll_sl said:
Jesus fucking christ.

That something in a science text CAN be tested removes it from the realm of faith. It doesn't matter if two texts are off slightly. They will both be testable to a certain margin of error.

It's not that hard to understand.
Click to expand...
And the claims of the religious text are explicitly untestable, or, even worse, when tested and found wanting, the religious just shift the goal posts and now what was once undeniable fact about reality becomes "metaphors", thus insulating them from any testing or criticism whatsoever.

Its a completely dishonest position to try and compare someone trusting science to provide results, and thereby believing something that it turns out is false, and then accepting that and changing their position, to someone who reads a 2000 year old holy book, believes it, and when that is proven wrong, just moves the goal posts, makes up some ad hoc justification for why they were really right all along, then pretends that this new position is the position they held this whole time.

ZyyzYzzy_sl said:
Why is hodj so mad in this thread? Did someone bring up the fact that he was abusing his mod powers?
Click to expand...
Your time away has caused your trolling skills to decay significantly.
 
khalid

khalid

Unelected Mod
14,071
6,775
Troll_sl said:
That something in a science text CAN be tested removes it from the realm of faith. It doesn't matter if two texts are off slightly. They will both be testable to a certain margin of error.
Click to expand...
Exactly.

Palum is trolling right?
 
BrotherWu

BrotherWu

MAGA
<Silver Donator>
3,050
5,835
So, generalizing Palum's argument, any time someone tells you something and you choose to believe them, it's the same thing as having faith that Jesus will cure your cancer, right?
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
Right. One side is making claims that may or may not be true, but we know from experience that the methodology of rational inquiry can give us a substantial answer as to the rightness or wrongness of the claim.

The other side goes "Doesnt matter! Magic sky man dun did it!" With absolutely no way to verify the validity of their claims., by outright admission.

And those people who hold to any belief as absolute without any room for changing that belief when confronted with better evidence are irrational regardless what they believe (see anti vaxxers) and their failure to practice proper skepticism does not mean that reasonable trust with reserved skepticism to scientific claims we encounter in our daily lives is somehow equivalent with the sort of faith people pretend to have in their holy books.
 
Tuco

Tuco

I got Tuco'd!
<Gold Donor>
45,424
73,489
Hodj, succinctly, what is the argument here?



Let me assume for a moment it's the semantics debate of the word faith + the difference between religious belief and scientific understanding. Under that assumption let me add my two cents:
1. If I tell you I drove a Honda this morning, you can take it as a matter of trust that it's true. It's a provable fact, but one you did not personally verify.
2. If I tell you that I measured gravity at 9.8044462268413 in an accelerometer recording I'm looking at, you can take it as a matter of trust that it's true. It's a provable fact, but one you did not personally verify.
3. If I tell you that JC is your lord and savior, you take it as a matter of faith. It's not a provable fact, and you can't personally verify it.
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
Pretty much.

Palum claims the trust in the first two is the same as the trust in the final one, and that is demonstrably untrue because, as youve pointed out, the former two claims are relatively mundane, and testable relatively easily, even if the person accepting the claim as true doesnt verify them him pself directly, and the latter claim is entirely faith based. You can only believe it based on faith.
 
Tuco

Tuco

I got Tuco'd!
<Gold Donor>
45,424
73,489
I probably should have stretched the example. Hodj, quick, give me a good, recent scientific breakthrough in anthropology or whatever you study that I'd have no way to verify or even understand.
 
BrutulTM

BrutulTM

Good, bad, I'm the guy with the gun.
<Silver Donator>
14,435
2,220
Hodj posts like 50,000 words a day on Rerolled. He can't be doing that much science.
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
Im actually in one of my final physiology lectures of the semester talking bout hormone control and adrenal glands and hypothalamuses and shit.

Its awful.

Cell biology was also mind numbing last semester.
 
Abefroman

Abefroman

Naxxramas 1.0 Raider
12,587
11,901
I feel like I'm part of a science experiment having to read these fucking derails. I have faith it will stop.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.