because science revels in expanding it's knowledge without being dogmatic in the face of new knowledge
which is better
(1)learn new things
(2)hold on to primitive beliefs because you fear change?
for "Schneb" below,the number of thumbs down you're getting doesn't necessarily mean that you made an intelligent statement! lol
2007-05-26 05:48:05
·
answer #1
·
answered by nicky 3
·
10⤊
1⤋
I heard a very credible scientist argue that global warning would melt the Artic Ocean, and raise the sea level. Test that theory. Put an ice-cube in a glass, and fill the glass to the brim with water. Watch the ice melt. Watch the water level remain constant. I understand the Antartic is different. I think you should really test the scientist, as well as the science.
Test the difference between gravity, and inertia. Let me know what tool you use. According to most scientists, we should all hit the speed of light at about the age of 30, if you consider acceleration. Much of what you hear as science, is patent protecting disinformation. How many crop circles have you heard of, since the patent expired on genetically matched herbicides made by Monsanto? And Pfizer?
2007-05-26 12:58:03
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Science doesn't claim instant omniscience. Of course, since science is inherently supposed to be constantly questioned, when someone is wrong, then things are altered to fit with what reality is, rather than what someone else thinks reality should be.
The Pope did proclaim that everything in the universe revolved around the Earth in the middle of the Dark Ages. Galileo was arrested for heresy because he dared to say that the universe revolved around the sun, instead. This century, with all the new tools we've acquired and the knew things we've learned about the universe, we've figured out that the universe doesn't revovle around anything, it just expands. Instead, the earth revolves around the sun which revolves are the center of the galaxy.
Why has it changed its "view point" because new information is added and we find the old "views" weren't quite right, so we altered what we know. Unlike religion, which usually claims instant omniscience and then denies any new information that doesn't fit its world view.
2007-05-26 12:57:14
·
answer #3
·
answered by Muffie 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
Science is knowledge, pure and simple. For science to not change would imply either that we know everything that can be known or that we've stopped looking for new information. Clearly if you've got some doctrine that's been closed to new content for over a thousand years you would maybe be predisposed to not appreciate new things but many of us are not so predisposed. I like modern medicine, I like computers, I like the myriad things science does for me on a daily basis.
And Schneb, your thumbs down come from the fact that you've expressed a particularly unpopular opinion. The thumbs do not connote truth, only agreement or disagreement.
2007-05-26 13:21:12
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The field of study we humans call "science" is a manmade view of discovery of how things operate and exist and grow and live, their perameters, their components, etc. It is a noble endeavor, but without the truth and wisdom of God it goes nowhere. True science, as science is defined, comes from the supernatural realm and was made existent in what we call the "time, space, matter, energy and force" realm. Men without the "mind of Christ", without minds endued with God's wisdom does futile thinking and never answers their own questions. The answers aren't mysterious or impossible to know; they are unknown YET from those who will not acknowledge God as the origin of all life and mind.
Those five areas that I mentioned above, that scientists are forever delving into, are all explained in this one statement: "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the Earth".
Man's viewpoint continues to change as long as he continues to look in the wrong places for the answers.., the reality is GOD and He will give you the correct answers every time. Have you ever discovered or read the statements of Albert Einstein. The more he truly discovered, including the theory of relativity, the more he was convinced that ONLY an outside omnipotent, omniscient supernatural being (whom he called God) could have created, designed and structured this enormous and wonderful universe. His discoveries are still relavent and he was a believer.
That's about it, science not based on God's eternal perspective is about as reality based yesterday's newpaper.
2007-05-26 13:05:07
·
answer #5
·
answered by gg28 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
Funny you want to ask about changing view points cause the bible flips more times than a fish out of water. (an eye for an eye no you can just turn the other cheek.) Science changes as we find out things and we get evidence to support the findings. Can some one show Noah's Ark, how about the rocks from the ten commandments and hey, why didn't god just piece it all back together?, Gee, in speaking of God has anyone seen him? Oh, yeah he can be felt sorta like having gas but even then what is moving could be gas or could be sh*t you won't know until it shows up.
2007-05-26 12:52:36
·
answer #6
·
answered by calmlikeatimebomb 6
·
2⤊
1⤋
That's actually the good thing about science. Science has the ability to be flexible when more evidence is found. Unlike some other institutions that like to pretend they've been exactly the same since the beginning of time.
2007-05-26 12:59:31
·
answer #7
·
answered by Aaron 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Because science is constantly learning, pushing out the frontiers of our knowledge, accumulating new data, and so on. It offers the best answers possible on the basis of available information, but as new information becomes available, it has to be explained.
How could a scientific view of the world take into account quantum mechanics before we were able to study subatomic particles, for instance?
2007-05-26 12:54:54
·
answer #8
·
answered by jamesfrankmcgrath 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because many scientists don't research honestly. A lot of them spend their time trying to confirm their pre-conceived ideas with their research. It doesn't work well that way. Having a theory is okay, but if the facts don't fit the theory, they reject the facts. Science does understandably change as new discoveries come to light, but honest researchers should follow the rules of evidence, and then make their conclusions.
2007-05-26 12:53:25
·
answer #9
·
answered by singwritelaugh 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
Science is a continually evolving discipline.....that is, new knowlege is constantly being uncovered, day by day and hour by hour. Often, new knowlege uncovers new facts that requires the replacing of old ideas and beliefs. Science is wonderful in this regard, it's the rigorous practice in search of truth by using the scientific method, a method that demands total honesty.......
2007-05-26 12:57:18
·
answer #10
·
answered by Joline 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Science is based on observation. It has to change because we are always learning new things.
2007-05-26 12:50:34
·
answer #11
·
answered by peacetimewarror 4
·
1⤊
0⤋