What is your basis for accepting Science as truth?

Question

I've heard a lot of name calling/bible bashing on this site. The most prodominat I've seen is this idea that "Christianity has been falsified by science." I for one think this is rediculous as I see no aparent conflict between the big bang and disregard evolution as already proven like most real scientist do today.

But what if science ever did find a scientific theory that "proved" God doesn't exist? Would it really matter? Does science really have that high of a credibility.

I don't think people realize the degree of uncertainty that comes with science. Newton's three laws of motion have been systematically dismantled as an incomplete and incorrect view of the universe. Now Quantum physics reigns supreme, but for how long? Does it not scare you to put so much faith in something so uncertain?

Answer 1

pick up an apple.

drop it.

it will fall.

thats my first little bit of scientific information for you. how much more will you need?

Answer 2

The claim that science has disproved Christianity is false. However, ideas that were accepted by the Church have been disproven by science, like the heliocentric model of the universe, the idea that diseases are punishments for sin, and creationism.

However, science cannot disprove Christianity itself. Christianity deals with the supernatural world. Science deals with the natural world. Therefore, scientists cannot perform experiments proving or disproving God's existance.

I must ask you though, what makes you think that religion has more credibility than science. Science admits when it's wrong and it supports itself with evidence. Religion is so arrogant that it never admits to making mistakes and the only evidence supporting it comes from a book that may or may not be true. (The Bible has been used to justify slavery and the book I mentioned is obviously the Bible. I'm not saying that God likes slavery, but man has used religion to justify cruel treatment of different people. See White Man's Burden.)

Answer 3

I see no conflict between science and religions. Starting with Geneses (first book of the Bible) on to Sura CXIV (last of the Qur'an), science and the Holy writings compliment each other, and I think that science often explains what these writings are telling about.

Archeology (a science) has found proof of the existence of places mentioned, of things that really happened and are mentioned.

Big bang theory and on to evolution? Why not? No one can know how long a day was that is mentioned. I see no conflict.

Answer 4

No, I don't. You're confusing the development of science with the occasional dismantling of it.

Newton himself said of his work that he 'stood on the shoulders of Giants'. His work was based on the work of scientist before him, just like our work today is based on his. Newton's formulas are just as valid today as they were in his era, and they were precise enough to send man to the moon. They have not been dismantled, they are used every day because they are correct.

They are just not precise enough to calculate the movement of atomic particles travelling at close to the speed of light. This is a field that Newton was unable to investigate, therefore he could not have discovered the theory of Relativity.

In the future, we will have even better ways of examining the universe and we will find anomalies that are inconsistent with Einstein's formulas. They will still work for atomic particles, but we will then realize that they are just an approximation for an even more precise theory.

This is basically all you need to know: In science, the data is everything. If a theory can not account for all collected (and verified) data, it is useless. Any new theory will have to account for not only new data, but also the old. It will have to completely replace the old theory in every way, otherwise it will contain contradictions, and... it is useless.

Answer 5

I prefer science to religion precisely because relativity has replaced Newtonian mechanics, and because in the future, a new model will likely replace relativity. Science never claims 100% certainty. It merely suggests models which best fit the presently available evidence. If someone comes up with a better model, or some new evidence that shows flaws in the prevelant model, science adjusts, and our knowledge grows. This is the beauty of science.

Religion, on the other other hand, doesn't bother with the silly requirement of "evidence", insisting that 100% certainty can be achieved through faith or through personal, unverifiable revelation. This is dangerous arrogance, because no one can ever prove you wrong, and anyone who presents a competing theory threatens your entire world view.

So in summary, I do not put 100% faith in any single piece of scientific theory, but I do have 100% faith in the scientific process to steadily increase human understanding of the universe.

Answer 6

Newton's laws have not been shown false; we have simply been able to see that they only hold within certain range of practcal application. If you believed what you claim about Newton, you would not be able to live or work in any building (all engineered according to those laws). The certainty of science is defined by our inductive tools, but it is based on observation and coherence, and the best tool we have for understanding the universe. The Bible does not need science to show it false, it's own logical contraditictions are enough.

Answer 7

Let's go over this for the umpteenth time:
Logic 101 - you don't prove non-existence, you prove existence.

Also, science is rooted in testing ideas, revising hypotheses and testing over and over until something is proved beyond a shadow of a doubt. Bailing out of a difficult explanation by saying some mythological being caused it is pathetic.

Smart people accept the uncertainty in science BECAUSE they don't give up, they keep on searching until the uncertainty is gone.

Answer 8

The fact that science is willing to change based on new evidence is comforting to me. it shows it's willing to change because it learns.

Your point on Newton is incorrect, many of his findings are still in effect today, I don't see how you can say his laws of motion have been dismantled. His ideas of gravity have been modified due to new info and what's wrong with that?

Quantum Physics relates to subatomic particles and is irrelevant in our world. Einsteins theory of relativity rules ours, get your facts straight.

Science doesn't claim to have all the answers, it's the pursuit of answers as to how the world works, it's an ongoing process.

How can someone accept things written by goat herders thousands of years ago as fact? And they never accept new information. How can that make someone feel "certain"?

Answer 9

You have made a good point, probably half of the science of 100 years ago has been disproven as wrong.

The cool and useful thing about Science is that it grows , based on what get tested and fits with what is already known and stands up to repeated experiments.

Thats why its so powerful and useful, and why its right so often.

A good scientist tests and keeps or discards results depending on results.

Answer 10

God is your faith. Next is philosophy you talk. Then Religion and Sprituality is the sprit in you. Science is the facts of your life . Do not waste your precious
life in thinking, the truth is , you never gain the time but at least donot loose
this moment of life. keep faith in God, talk philosophy, have the sprit of religion and sprituality, accept the proven fact of Science . Finally the TRUTH
is enjoy present, this moment with the help of God, learn Philosophy of life
follow Religion and Sprituality accept the Science.

Answer 11

Gods are supernatural by deinition. Science only deals with the natural universe, and thus doesn't say anything about gods at all.

Christians in particular seem threatened by science and show a strong preference for scientific ignorance.