Who is more likely to 'make things up' or be deceitful?

Question

Intelligent scientists from different countries backing each other's theories up independently OR religious leaders who were 'hell bent' on recruiting people to their doctrine or religion thousands of years ago? Did any scientists ever try to do a crusade and push theories onto anyone or use any scare tactics to explain molecular activity? Answer this honestly please.

qwid_pro-I think you raise a very good point there. Science has nothing to hide and I agree that scientists would not hide evidence as they are interested in the truth.

Answer 1

Anyone who is jealous of some one else's attention. Any individual for any reason can make up some rubbish and it will spread like wildfire. Some times it works in their favor and discredits the victim, other tiles it backfires, and give the victim free publicity, and they end up milking the attention for all it's worth.

Answer 2

The Crusades weren't about religion; they were about land and control. During the crusade period, the Roman Catholic church outlawed the Bible being printed in a readable language, so the common person would have to trust them for everything. The rulers of the church were hungry for power, so was the royal family, so they used religion to tell the common person to go to war against Middle Eastern nations.

Notice in history that crusadors didn't go with Bibles, they didn't go to help build schools, they didn't even go to tell people about Jesus. They went to make the inhabitants believe that the only way to heaven was to do whatever the Pope told them to, and the Pope did what the king wanted. Whoever resisted was tortured and killed.

This is what happens when people try to have corruptable people as the absolute authority.


Ok, now science. While I don't believe that they would want to knowingly lie to the general public, researchers get paid to come up with explosive news. Remember when eggs were said to be the most unhealthy and fattening food? That wasn't religion, that was science. Remember when Red Meat was healthy compared to brown meat? Science. Remember back in the 30's when CO2 emmisions were going to put the Earth in a second ice-age? You get the picture. Science gets half the picture, and run with it like they were on fire.

Answer 3

Scientists are trying to apply their LOGIC and are trying to substantiate their independent theories; however, a theory is subject to change in the presence of new evidence and/or new or well founded ideas. In addition the interpretation is one sided and you can either accept it or disprove it henceforth providing a new line of belief.

However, the religious leader are "hell bent" or pushing their own ideas, not opening room for interpretation, and not employing logic. In my OPINION the religious leaders are more deceitful than any honest scientist trying to search for an answer to explain something that is unexplainable and dynamic hence the constantly changing theories. Well until they are laws or something.

Answer 4

Is very funny that you make this question in this moment where is an international campaign for the global warming that is more than proved is because of high solar activity.

Tony Blair last year went to 11 reunions about the global warming...in his on air plane. hahaha...

So, yes scientific people do the same...what about the drugs to treat AIDS, for 10 years had been costing 500 dollars A DAY, and the generic now after the 10 years exception cost...500 dollars A YEAR...

Conspiracies, histories of power and manipulation, lies and money... anything related to men my friend, every single field.

Answer 5

How about you ask a question honestly. You really ask a fair and balanced question there.....

If you are referring to the debate between Creationists and Evolutionists, then you are discussing a matter that does actually involve a little bit of biased interpretation both ways. You see most scientists have been raised in the school of thought that God did not do it. Not because there is evidence that it did it by itself, but because it is not "scientific" to say something was designed or created. So they are forced to search for other explanations. Most theories about our origins are completely untestable, therefore in themselves unscientific. Ask yourself this, how many scientists have independently been able to verify that life can spontaneously form? What was that? None? Oh. You see, no matter how unsupported or faith based a theory may be, as long as it does not include God, it is fair game. So you start with a bad foundation that life started on its own, completely unsupported and baseless(other than the fact life exists) and then you use that assumption to formulate more theories. I don't want to go into this too much more since I am going outside to play golf, but you must realize that both at their core, are based on beliefs and unsupported assumptions. Some might tell you science is not a belief, I agree, but then again, origins can't be science.

Answer 6

The Bush Administration.......

Scientists have less to gain by being deceitful because it slows progress.

Some religious leaders fear losing power and fear that the truth will allow them less control, or that if they don't know the answer, then they'll seem flawed and less reliable. They use deceit and false reasoning to avoid more questions more research.

I'm a Christian and don't see science as a threat, just another tool to help us understand.

Answer 7

I'll say this ... if a Scientist found evidence of God, or proof of something in the bible, they would release the evidence and discuss it ... to a scientist, either answer is interesting and worth investigating


... If a Religious official found evidence that there was no God, he would hide it ... for his livelihood depends on their being a God ... To a Religious person, there is only one answer that's acceptable to find

Answer 8

Some scientists get grants from certain parties to study things. Think the scientists have to produce the expected results? There are plenty of whore scientists in the world.

Answer 9

Well there is a different "Crusade" for science. It is called funding. Anyone one that doesn't back Evolution and the "Church" of Humanism will lose funding. It is a quite choke hold on the scientific community.

Answer 10

Piltdown man, Neanderthal man, cloned sheep in Korea, examples of backing each other's theories up...

Google those names, use the image search, see the phony evidence with your eyes...