Sentences with phrase «not everything in science»

Not everything in the historical record is fiction, just as not everything in science is above criticism.

Of course, not everything in science is better the first time.

Not exact matches

Data science is used in everything from medical research to mortgage applications, yet it's not widely used when it comes to predicting outcomes for budding businesses.

Atheists: I know many there are many people that practice religion just by fanaticism, I've seen many people in my opinion stupid (excuse the word) praying to saints hopping to solve their problems by repeating pre-made sentences over and over, but there are others different, I don't think Religion and Science need to be opposites, I believe in God, I'm Catholic and I have many reasons to believe in him, I don't think however that we should pray instead of looking for the cause and applying a solution, Atheists think they are smart because they focus on Science and technology instead of putting their faith in a God, I don't think God will solve our problems, i think he gave us the means to solve them by ourselves that's were God is, also I think that God created everything but not as a Magical thing but stablishing certain rules like Physics and Quimics etc. he's not an idiot and he knew how to make it so everything was on balance, he's the Scientist of Scientist the Mathematic of Mathematics, the Physician of Physicians, from the tiny little fact that a mosquito, an insect species needs to feed from blood from a completely different species, who created the mosquitos that way?

Atheist align with science, which can not YET explain everything in the universe, but a great deal of it.

There are verses in all holy books that are «consistent» with science, but that doesn't mean that everything in the book is accurate or that the statements are scientific.

not faith in his existence) IM not going to base my whole life on science like some people do... science will fait... science does not say what Is moral and what is... so science can not be everything

Just as God in the mind of some, can't be proven to have created everything, (unless you are willing to take in account what was written in the bible) neither has evolution been proven by science.

Everything in science starts out as a hypothesis, not a theory but had you made it past grade 3 you might comprehend this.

Scientists may ultimately tell us how and when everything happened in ways not articulated in the biblical text, but science will never be able to tell us why.

The «my jaw dropped open» moment: Dawkins says he humbly admits that science does not know everything and Bill jumps in to claim that humility is after all a Christian trait.

Obviously, there are always new things proven by science that explain what people in the past have attributed to things super natural and they seem silly at this point, but that's not the case for everything.

When political science students were challenged about being Republicans, they were not thereby disenfranchised from voting; when economics students were challenged on the merits of capitalism, they were not thereby excluded from purchasing notebooks, But when students were told that everything they had learned about their religion before entering this class was wrong, did we know — or care — if their capacity to function religiously in a mature fashion was diminished?

This in turn creates a lifestyle of simply not thinking, not only about religion, but about everything that's around them: including differing viewpoints and so frequently, science.

In the meantime, until Science explains where everything came from, it is clueless, and believers can not be expected to prove the existence of God empirically!

science is not everything, the problem is when the critical and objective philosophy of science is accepted as absolute in reality.God is beyond logic at this point of our consciousness, The process of gods will manfistation is evolution which accepts all variables in the process, the input could be not what scienctists wants.Thats why faith or religion is part of reality.

Sure, science hasn't figured out everything... yet, but with each passing day the holes in our knowledge get smaller and smaller.

In His way, not the way of the internet atheists who imagine science is on their side and proves everything they need to know.

Don't believe everything you read in a science book.

In this day and age really... just want to put a point to you just because science has not proven everything that does not mean God has..

How would a person living in a desert know these things without actually someone telling him this?!!! And who is that someone?!!! No one at that time knew anything about big bang theory?!! The actual translation of the arabic word رتقا is it was like a fabric that got torn apart?!!! Isn't that big bang?!! And the other part that was proven too is that everything alive needs water to live?!!! How did they know that then?!!! Islam and science support each other and science only getting to prove things now which was mentioned 1500 years ago in the Quran!!!

why can't evolutionists feel the same passion based on their faith in science and technology to form the logical conclusion that evolution is a far greater possibility than a deity that has never been seen or spoken to having created everybody and everything??

Science is not bad in itself but we honor it too much today as if everything would depend on science — we give it too high Science is not bad in itself but we honor it too much today as if everything would depend on science — we give it too high science — we give it too high a rank.

I appreciate that St Thomas didn't get everything right - no mere human being ever could; I also agree that a theological synthesis in the light of modern science is desirable.

I CHOOSE to believe in science and know that science can not explain everything, rather than believe in human mythology.

Science and metaphysics too, providing the latter is viewed as a natural mode of cognition and is not unconsciously supplemented by theological knowledge about God's saving action in the history of redemption, can each from their own angle quite well think of God as the transcendent ground of all reality, of its existence and of its becoming, as the primordial reality comprising everything, supporting everything, but precisely for that reason can not regard him as a partial factor and component in the reality with which we are confronted, nor as a member of its causal series.

be honest, just fall in love then you will know Science does not yet have answers to everything...» - No, I use logic and reason to make my decision.

They do not know that at this very moment scientific thinkers have abandoned that older mechanical picture of nature and have come to see, even to insist, that science does not exhaustively describe the whole range of experience nor everything in the world of nature.

Satan attacks me in my thoughts day and night and he makesit so i can barely eat i pray to the lord and he consoles me god is REAL i used to e a drug dealer the most violent and disruptive of men and one night i came under attack from satan and felt like satan was makeing me into someone im not putting thoughts in my head of death suicide and sexual immorality then i read the wqordof god and everything felt better when i read the Book «The Advocate» spiritual warfare is real and god can save you from satans tourment do nt let Satan claim the rights to your soul i had trouble believing in god for years my mind worked in science and fact but the fact is that God is real and living and when you leave this earth you Will face Judgement

jarhead333 I don't like all of his opinions, but the science in every Dawkins book I've ever read checked out, and 10 years ago when I first became skeptical I checked EVERYTHING with a fine - toothed comb.

Finally, note that Whitehead's three major metaphysical books — Science and the Modern World, Process and Reality, and Adventures of Ideas — do not, even when taken together, succeed in communicating everything that Whitehead was trying to convey in his Harvard lectures.

Vico's fantasia abhors partial vision, and the great mathematician and astronomer Henri Poincare is on his side when he observes in his Last Essays that in questions of ethics science alone can not suffice because it «can see only one part of man, or, if you prefer, it sees everything but it sees everything from the same angle.»

WORLD: Sorry once again, but science does not know everything or the quantum part would be figured out in finite terms rather than probabilities that's sound like we spent millions of dollars to get answers like «but teacher I was almost right, let me try some more»... and pre-big bang theories would be figured out and not quite as fantastical and humorous as they sound to average person.

And further, the so - called laws of science are at best nothing but a statement of the observed general sequences of behavior in those areas of the Creation with which they are concerned; they are, so to say, «statistical averages,» and they do not cover everything.

Science questions everything but by its nature dogma is not to be questioned, and if a dogma is in place that is contradicted by science, the dogma is usually taken as correct and the scienceScience questions everything but by its nature dogma is not to be questioned, and if a dogma is in place that is contradicted by science, the dogma is usually taken as correct and the sciencescience, the dogma is usually taken as correct and the sciencescience wrong.

When those using science to understand the universe sketch an outline of the history of everything, it is not a guess; it is based in empirical evidence.

It must also be the expectation of Science, for everything in the universe is held within the Unity - Law of Control and Direction... The being of man comes just as rigidly under the Law of relativity unto finality, but man is not relative only to matter, man is relative to God.

Science does not explain everything yet — so a smart man would not make statements in absolutes when the shining principle of his logic requires the measurement of absolutes, facts, and figures that are yet far from complete.

The question was «science can explain» not «science can explain everything» 1) We will never know the position of every bit of matter so knowing everything is not possible — the current theories match observations well enough for the answer to be yes 2) Again knowing everything about every individual step in the creation of life is not possible but current theories match... 3) here do know pretty much everything.

From everything that has been said it should be clear that theology so considered as a pure science does not have as its object God in isolation.

Even a Grand Theory of Everything will not be the last word in science and the need for representing the faith in synthesis with the knowledge of the day will always be with us.

Investigate the evidence yourself, there is nothing at all that truly suggests that the Big Bang happened, the only thing they have used in order to come up with the theory is that in their observances, the Universe appears to be expanding from a central point, it doesn't prove that a Big bang occurred, we know so little about the universe, that we don't even know everything about our own world, and you really believe that our science has figured out the riddle to the beginning of the Universe?

Scientists are people, they are flawed, and I'm pretty sure God did not provide us with the mental ability to fully understand how he pulled everything off, but either way, In General science spends it's time trying to figure out how God did it... not why... you want to know why... I propose to you, as you suggested I open another book and learn, i propose you open a Bible and learn why God Created you.

The speculation that it was in a «section on preaching to the «half breeds» / Samaritans» might be some handy way someone sections off that section of the book, but to assume every incident within a certain part of scripture is there like a Science book identifying the phylum and genus of an animal, that is, that everything mentioned under the Raccoon Family is in the Raccoon Family (the ring - tail cat, kinkajou, coatimundi... three other members of the raccoon family), is an assumption that does not seem to apply to the Bible and how it is written... it is more human, and living, and not sterile, everything in its tight little unmovable section, etc..

In an e-mail she sent to the entire school staff, Heaps wrote: «When I started teaching nutrition a la language arts / science, I realized everything I was teaching did not go along with what is happening at our school when it comes to eating healthy.

On the issue of Republicans and Democrats in New York State hiding behind the old «waiting for the science to come in» line that politicians have used to not answer questions on everything from climate change to Pebble Mine, Hawkins did give the Democrats a bit of a pass... «The Republicans want to repeal the enlightenment — the Democrats just want to repeal the New Deal.»

Not to mention, in this day and age you can get everything from the internet by reading free articles by expert science writers who know what they are talking about.

«This surprising finding may be an important clue to understanding those mysterious parts of the universe that make up 95 percent of everything and don't emit light, such as dark energy, dark matter, and dark radiation,» said study leader and Nobel Laureate Adam Riess of the Space Telescope Science Institute and The Johns Hopkins University, both in Baltimore, Maryland.

«The people who have learned English and don't have it as a native tongue» nonetheless have access to everything in the scientific literature that native speakers do, Montgomery tells Science Careers in an interview — and in addition, they have access to the materials written in the other languages that they speak.

There's obvious appeal in what - ifs, and they aren't confined to science fiction: they feature in everything from romcoms (Sliding Doors) to thrillers (Fatherland).