..when argueing agianst it?
Why all the false claims which are so easily countered?
Why the mental blinkers?
Stating something as fact which clearly isn't only makes them look incredibly foolish, naive, and ill informed.
What is the best way to rectify this misinformation problem?
2007-05-09 19:41:36 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Ok, a few examples might be:
The lask of transitional fossils..
a) No evidence for evolution..
b) It cant be seen..
Many/more 'scientists' believe in the "christian" god..
The lack of scientific proof that there is no god..
That science is an anti god fraternity..
That science does not have all the answers therefor the answers they do have must be dubious..
That humans come from 'monkeys'
..and many other psuedo scientific claims. We should all be familiar with them on here, I know some are intimately familiar with them..
2007-05-09 20:11:17 · update #1
Without an example that's a bit hard to answer. Sometimes it is not the facts that are questioned but the interpretation of those facts. The fossil record is a fact. What it means is subject to interpretation. Perhaps the two need to be better distinguished.
Cheers :-)
2007-05-09 19:55:15 · answer #1 · answered by chekeir 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Religion doesn't like science because its discoveries have proven some religious beliefs to be false, like the age of this planet. Religion hates Carbon Dating. The only time that religion likes science is when they have an illness and then the want the best treatment with the latest scientific advances.
2007-05-10 03:10:02 · answer #2 · answered by liberty11235 6 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Can you call it ‘misquoting’ when they do not know what science is?
In the fundamentalist Christian epistemology, knowledge and belief is the same thing; God is their source; and the Bible is arbiter of all things on earth. They do not acknowledge, are unaware of, and are uninterested in any real-world based philosophy of human knowledge that distinguishes what we know from what we believe (what we ‘think we know’), and seeks understanding of presumed natural laws and processes through the observation and analysis of empirical data, and to the exclusion of all things mystical, spiritual, and supernatural.
They cannot define science; describe the scientific method; or define its principle concepts. It is difficult to imagine any human group more incapable of objective thought than religious fundamentalists. Judging from their comments and arguments, one can only conclude that they have an, as yet, unnamed learning disability that makes it absolutely impossible for them to learn the definition and meaning of ‘scientific theory’.
In the fundamentalists’ belief system, a ‘scientific theory’ and ‘any goofy idea’ have the exact same meaning and ‘scientific’ validity. For them, everything outside of the Bible, or not supported by it, is just a thought or idea (a ‘theory’). Further, if there is such as thing as ‘science’, then it too must be Biblically based.
Hence, their determination to include, as part of our schools’ science instruction, the mythology and folktales of historically obscure semi-nomadic tribes of illiterate Semitic goat herders who lived thousands of years ago, and who thought that the earth was flat with air above and water below; and who had to appeal to their God for a ruling on the appropriateness of having sex with their livestock.
2007-05-10 03:21:48 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
This is only true for a small set of 'Christians'. The majority have no problem with science, they just see an invisible hand setting it up.
As for the small but vocal other set:
It's not to convince you that they are right and science is wrong.
It is to convince themselves.
They need constant self justification that their mighty deity is right. That deity is not the god of most Christians, but the Holy Bible itself, that is their golden calf, the idol that they worship.
To rectify the problem we need to ensure that our education system is kept true to the realities of the world. The fundie churches will wither and die.
2007-05-10 03:03:55 · answer #4 · answered by Simon T 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Probably for the same reason people take verses out of the Bible and misquote them. They are taking someone else's word for what is true and not checking out the information for themselves. Or they are looking for only things that appear to support their preconceived ideas. People on both sides are guilty of this.
2007-05-10 03:09:24 · answer #5 · answered by kaehya2003 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Admittedly many Christians are not well trained in scientific subjects and/or jargon. However that does not mean their beliefs are wrong.
Many pseudo-scientists tend to be very dogmatic and condescending using their jargon with the intent of intimidating others who do not have their educational expertise. While the origin of the SPECIES is evolutionary the origin of the Family and in the case of mammals the genus rarely proves to be.
2007-05-10 03:05:27 · answer #6 · answered by Bullfrog21 6 · 1⤊ 4⤋
Dude, I agree with you 100%, but the best way to rectify this misinformation problem is to not let it be a problem. I don't believe in God and all that happy horsepoop, but that's just my opinion and I don't need to go telling everyone what I think just to get people who do believe all riled up.
2007-05-10 02:51:51 · answer #7 · answered by purpledeucegirl06 5 · 2⤊ 4⤋
The same reason the always misquote the Holy Quran. Plain ignorance.
2007-05-10 03:19:17 · answer #8 · answered by Nanook~Maybe I need a longer Name?~ 6 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Science as a discipline and as a field of study is incredibly subtle and complex. Religion provides fourth grade answers to grad school questions.
Alternatively, it could just be the straw-man tendency.
2007-05-10 02:52:04 · answer #9 · answered by Doc Occam 7 · 3⤊ 4⤋
when you see a false claim, correct the person making
the claim and give sources.
2007-05-10 02:46:19 · answer #10 · answered by Tree Hugger 2 · 3⤊ 1⤋