By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
0D0 said:
Ganoncrotch said:

Just to get this right.... your dig at Science is that it challenges the results to ensure the beliefs of science can be proven rather than just believing tales about someone with wine for blood passed on by illiterate people 2000 years ago and never changing any views regardless of how obviously flawed those views are?

This cleared it up for me, Science is awesome.

The point of my post is, yes, science is awesome, I agree, even though it didn't know that bacteria did exist and even though it was wrong a lot of times.

There's a limit to what science can see. They can see today a lot of things that they couldn't in the past. They still can't see God though.

Science do can be wrong and needs to correct itself all the time.

There is as much chance that Science invents some form of telescope that can see a man chilling out in the clouds in a robe as there is of them inventing a ray gun that fires one long stream of ginger kittens. You're hoping science fiction might find the man in the clouds someday, nothing else.

This logic leap though from "they were incorrect about X being good for you because they didn't know it could increase the chances of Y" is sort of like suggesting that a Kid corrected himself after getting ABC's wrong so at some stage in his life he might discover how to flap his arms and fly because he currently cannot and he has corrected shortcomings before.



Why not check me out on youtube and help me on the way to 2k subs over at www.youtube.com/stormcloudlive