How we do know that scientific evidence is a fact?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
21-03-2017, 11:00 AM
RE: How we do know that scientific evidence is a fact?
(21-03-2017 09:54 AM)kim Wrote:  Religion stopped answering questions long ago.

Science has questions that may never be answered.
Religion has answers that may never be questioned.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 8 users Like unfogged's post
21-03-2017, 11:26 AM
RE: How we do know that scientific evidence is a fact?
At the end of it all, science produces moderately consistent real-world results. Religion may or may not produce results as a result of its influence on a believer, and it's a total crapshoot as to whether those results are good or bad. Therefore, it's eminently more reasonable to utilize science when something important needs to be done.

I'm sorry, but your beliefs are much too silly to take seriously. Got anything else we can discuss?
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Astreja's post
21-03-2017, 12:01 PM (This post was last modified: 21-03-2017 12:05 PM by Stevil.)
RE: How we do know that scientific evidence is a fact?
(20-03-2017 10:06 PM)Menji Wrote:  You believe in science, and despite you don't see the actual evidence, you just take the word from scientists. No different like us, the believer, take the word from priests."
"science" is a well defined method of discovery.
The scientific method is:
Transparent: in that the hypothesis, the evidence, the conclusion, the assumptions etc are documented for all to see.
Evidence based: It is not simply asserted, it is based on measurable evidence, not theology, not interpretation of ancient text, not presupposition of a perfect and good author/creator/authority.
Verifiable and objective: Given the transparent nature of the claim, along with evidence, conclusion etc. It is possible for others to recreate the same experiments and produce the same evidence/outcomes.
Falsifiable: The claims are realistically falsifiable, they could have just as easily been proven false as they are proven true.
Ever improving/correcting As time passes and new evidence/understandings come to light, old claims are re-evaluated.

I think it makes sense to have "faith" in the claims of the mainstream scientific community knowing that the scientific method is applied to their claims (see above), knowing that for every claim there is an organised and relentless attempt to prove the claims false (with use of the scientific method also).

Assertions made by priests are none of the above. "Faith" in terms of religious claims just amounts to acceptance of unverifiable assertions because you choose to put someone (a priest, a pope, or whomever) into a position of trusted authority. This person's assertions are just accepted as true, as there is no way to verify them.
Many of the claims of the Catholic church are asserted to be infallible, and un-challengable. This is a huge red flag. The scientific method does not allow for this disingenuous nonsense.


Everything you accept as true is a form of "belief".
Your beliefs belong on a scale of justification.
Those beliefs which meet a stringent set of criteria are considered to be "facts". They are both "beliefs" and "facts". Another term for them would be "justified true beliefs"
Other beliefs that don't meet this criteria simply remain as "beliefs". You choose to believe them but you recognise that those beliefs are unjustified with regards to your criteria for calling something a fact.

This criteria is called your "epistemology".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 7 users Like Stevil's post
21-03-2017, 03:32 PM
RE: How we do know that scientific evidence is a fact?
(20-03-2017 10:06 PM)Menji Wrote:  Okay. I have been an non-believer almost a year now. It's a long process and I cannot really pinpoint the reason of my deconversion. But surely, other than justice and the bible itself, science took a great part in my reasoning.

For the past year, I could explain my point of view and reasoning why I became an atheist when my friends ask about my deconversion. The hardest argument is about Pascal's Wager, but I could give my logical reasoning to explain. My problem is, a few weeks ago, one of my friends ask about my scientific evidence to support my disbelief. As I explained long enough, he strucked me with a question

"How do you really know that scientific evidence is a fact? Yes we know the earth is round, not flat. But how do you know? You just took the word from scientist or science books or even science teacher in your elementary school. But you, yourself, doesn't not see the real evidence. That's sounds like believing to me. You believe in science, and despite you don't see the actual evidence, you just take the word from scientists. No different like us, the believer, take the word from priests."

After he said that, I don't know what to say. And I came to my though that "yes, it's a very good argument." So, I just said to him that he had a very good point and I have no good answer for him.

The question lingers until now for me. He had a really good point. How do we know evolution is truly a fact when only the scientists who see the evidence (we didn't see the actual minerals ourselves)? not us. How even do we know the earth is 4.6 billion years old, when we only knew it because we read science books (it's like reading a bible, huh?) or see a seminar from a distinguished astrophysics? How do we know the universe is 13.7 billion years old, when we know because we see a documentary?

The evidence is not in our hand, it's on the scientists hand. Why we should believe them? I think we must admit that we really have never see the evidence ourselves.

I know that evolution is a fact, and other scientific evidence are factual. But I don't have the words nor reasoning to explain it to my friends question. (he also consider the scientific evidence are factual, he is a nice liberal Christian).

I wish some of you could give me some insights about this question. thank you!Thumbsup

From a layman's perspective, I really didn't take a scientists word for it when they said the Earth is round (or oblate spheroid to be pedantic). I understood what they said about Lunar Eclipses and saw one myself and how it transpired as it happened. It matched perfectly from what we would expect of a round Earth.

[Image: b06c8e00fd6d8cff111713d60ec356e2.jpg]

I then went on an airplane ride and out of curiosity looked closely at the horizon, there is a slight curvature that can be seen when in an airplane.

I realized that the time of day was different as they made live telecasts on New Years eve around the globe.

After all of that first-hand investigation, I surmised that when scientists say something, it's up to me to understand it before I bleat out ignorant conspiracy theories and if I think they are wrong, then maybe the fault is with my understanding and I should learn more about the subject.

Scientists are wrong about things all of the time, but do they have a huge blind spot for what an evangelical fundamentalist has figured out with their "common sense" and the scientists can't figure out?

So I proceed with the assumption that a scientist has a good chance of knowing what they are talking about and a fundamentalist doesn't. When I was curious enough to find out more information I could dive deep into the science and would indeed find the truth at the bottom of it.

When I dived deep into the apologetic excuses for why the world doesn't seem to match a biblical perspective, all I got were shallow evasions that melted into stupidity once I gained a better understanding.

The truth about Carbon 14 dating was one such subject that I realized, after investigating all of these creationist evasions about it, that some of these people were outright liars and others didn't understand the science.

After repeated instances of this, I'm not inclined to give apologists a whole lot of credibility.

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 7 users Like TheInquisition's post
21-03-2017, 04:53 PM
RE: How we do know that scientific evidence is a fact?
(21-03-2017 06:33 AM)unfogged Wrote:  
(21-03-2017 06:25 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  How do we know that the OP ain't a troll?

I'd actually bet that he/she is trolling but the question is common so it's good for lurkers to see how wrong it is.

Quote:My faith is weak. Big Grin

Good!
Thumbsup
HAH! I love you guys! Thanks for educating the lurkers and yes I am one Bowing
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like mustardseed's post
21-03-2017, 07:56 PM
RE: How we do know that scientific evidence is a fact?
(20-03-2017 10:06 PM)Menji Wrote:  My problem is, a few weeks ago, one of my friends ask about my scientific evidence to support my disbelief.
The request is illogical; you don't need evidence to "support disbelief". It's another way of asking you to prove an absolute negative. Can't be done, and it's shifting the burden of proof to you, from the person making the actual claim -- he/she needs to provide evidence to support their belief.
Have they? If not, you're done.

Or, if you want to keep things a little lighter, ask them what their scientific evidence is for their disbelief in Tinker Bell, or unicorns, or Santa Claus.

This assumes, of course, that they don't actually believe in Tinker Bell, unicorns, and Santa Claus ... Consider

--
Dr H

"So, I became an anarchist, and all I got was this lousy T-shirt."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like Dr H's post
22-03-2017, 01:17 AM
RE: How we do know that scientific evidence is a fact?
Absolutely. This idea that if the current scientific theories are wrong then "religion wins" is absurd. If they are wrong, then we look to improve them. We don't make up magical shit. If religions were able to form a proper hypothesis, test that hypothesis and demonstrate beyond reasonable doubt it is true (and show how anyone else could also test it) then religion would simply be science.

For one thing, even pretending "religion wins"... which religion? Just whichever one you prefer, I suppose.

I have a website here which discusses the issues and terminology surrounding religion and atheism. It's hopefully user friendly to all.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Robvalue's post
22-03-2017, 03:17 AM
RE: How we do know that scientific evidence is a fact?
(22-03-2017 01:17 AM)Robvalue Wrote:  For one thing, even pretending "religion wins"... which religion? Just whichever one you prefer, I suppose.

There's a line of bullshit that goes "something something respect all religions" etc. i.e. Christians and Muslims together are happy to bash anyone that says religion in general is wrong, and once that exercise in brotherly love and friendship is over they'll go back to niggling over the details of whether Allah or Jahweh is greater, and to what degree an ICBM is relevant to the discussion.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like morondog's post
22-03-2017, 12:26 PM
RE: How we do know that scientific evidence is a fact?
If you think Pascal's Wager is the "hardest argument"....then I'm not sure you can handle actual science.

Also, saying that makes me think you're a big 'ol troll, because nobody that can chew gum and walk at the same time thinks Pascal's Wager is anything but utterly ridiculous.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ResidentEvilFan's post
22-03-2017, 12:30 PM
RE: How we do know that scientific evidence is a fact?
Other than the OP, Menji hasn’t interacted. Consider

My trolldar is gently beeping.

While my guitar gently weeps



Prince at his best, makes all the others seem pedestrian players.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Full Circle's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: