Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Leaps Of Faith Vs. Hops Of Faith, Jumping To Conclusions

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Mario Dovalina on February 2, 2001 21:58:57 UTC

That's just semantics.

I can see your point in saying science involves a certain amount of faith (i.e. you can't see a proton but it is thought to be there.) There is an enourmous gap in logic in your posts, however. Protons exist. They have been proven to exist. No, we can't see them. Yes, our systems of measuring such "invisible" things is inherently somewhat innacurate. Yes, our current theories of such things are not as refined as reality truly may be.

Okay... but then you use this as a defense for religion? Science may be a bit innacurate, therefore you can believe whatever you want and it's true? If you expect people to buy that, you're more arrogant than your posts suggest. Faith is not a blanket term used to describe any amount of guesswork. You can't use scientists and fundamentalists in the same sentence, it's ludicrous. (Yes, I just did, don't bother pointing that out.)

I'll post more on this later, but I have to go now, see you later tonight.

Follow Ups:

    Login to Post
    Additional Information
    About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
    Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2023 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
    Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
    "dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
    are trademarks of John Huggins