The_vagabond7 said:
I think the big problem with this reasoning is absolutes, or rather the assumption of absolutes. Dark Energy doesn't require faith because it is the current hypothesis, not a "fact", it is not absolute. It's not a dogma that must be strictly adhered to, and nobody is forcing the belief of it in the scientific community under threat of ex-communication or fiery pit. When it comes to something like higgs particles and Dark Energy scientists would be "higgs Agnostic" leaning towards higgs. I believe in the scientific method, and have great interest in science. But I don't put "faith" in it, I don't follow the explanations "hell or high water" But talking about possible explanations for observed phenomenon, and discussing how it can hopefully be tested in the future is considerably different from "faith". Because Faith is "The assured expectation of things hoped for, of realities though not beheld" (Hebrews...11:something I think). With Gravitons and dark energy it isn't the assured expectation, it's the possible explanation. With Religion faith is believing things are fact with little or nothing to back it up. In science they just believe it's the best explanation for the observed phenomenon at the moment, they don't believe it is a fact. There is no "faith" in dark energy. It's an idea. |
Oh i totally disagree. They are absolutely treated as facts.
If you don't adhere to the current hypothisis you are most definitly excommunicated from the scientific community, it's nearly impossible to pubish anything and make a living... you won't catch on anywhere etc. If you don't believe in Higgs or Dark Energy... colleges aren't going to hire you and nobody is going to fund your research.
The only exceptions are if the work is highly controversial outside of science such as global warming... and even then your shunned by the scientific community but at least you can still make a living and "preach from the outside" mutch how Lutherians and other preached outside of the Catholic Church.








