There are many things that are testable, not proven, yet
science keeps believing and looking for them, i.e. dark matter, the Higgs boson, etc..
Not exact matches
So long as any scientist
keeps his present research consistent with the methods that
science has established, he can
believe the universe began with the mating of two extra-dimensional antelopes and the results will be no different.
I also agree that it is not a book of
science, the way I see it, the Bible is a way for us to learn about God and one of the ways He uses to talk to us, and to be honest, I don't really pay attention to the evolution theory or any other theories, if it really happened or not (or if it
keeps on happening), is fine by me, I respect those who
believe them to be true.
There will always be someone trying to prove the Bible is not true, but for those of us who have seen the work of God, who truly
believe in him, it doesn't really matter what
science says, or what they can «prove» to be false about God or the Bible, what God has done in my life and
keeps on doing is proof enough to know He exists.
That would be like a
Science teacher saying they no longer
believed that the earth was round etc and expecting to still
keep their job.
Leave
science to those who value reason over dogma and leave religion to those who want to
keep believing what they were taught to
believe regardless of any evidence to the contrary.
You do not understand
science - you simply want to
keep believing nonsense and try to square it with irrefutable scientific facts and discoveries.
Believe in whatever gods you'd like, but
keep it out of OUR government and don't interfere with
science and medicine.
Be a good little christard and
keep off of the Atheist invented machine or maybe register for a grade 5
science class - an education outside of the out dated 2000 year old debunked crap you
believe in, would do you good... maybe watch some COSMOS - short and easy to comprehend if you have an open - mind.
Its 2013: if you insisit on
believing weird religious crap in spite of the vast amount of
science and common sense that surrounds you, then *
keep it at home * — where it belongs.
The one was open to new discoveries in
science,
believing that more truth was to be disclosed; the other either closed his mind to all discoveries that seemed to contradict the truth that he knew, or sought to
keep science and theology wholly separate.
I would like to
believe Deepak, but I'm not sure he's not just another dream weaver, no offense to Dr. Chopra, as I say I would like to
believe what he's proposing, we don't know though, so we need to
keep scientifically ethical, it it can't be disproved, it's metaphysical, and therefore not
science.
I'm no longer going to
keep quiet that I meditate, love
science and
believe there is no conflict between creation and evolution.
I personally do not prescribe to that, because if I did prescribe to that you are right I would not be circumcising my son if I felt that way or if I
believed the, because the thing is that
science in the lifetime I have been in
keep changing because one minute you are supposed to do something as a Mom and the next minute you are supposed to do something else.
Senior director, Don Mays, from consumer
sciences and product safety for Consumer Reports
believes that the crib must be
kept bare.
I also
believe that great efforts have to be put into the communication of
science to a broad audience, and I fully intend to
keep doing so myself.
If you don't
keep anchored in the
science, you'll get lost,» Sayce and Williams
believe.
«I definitely
believe that
science in general is more effective the more open people are,» says evolutionary biologist Jonathan Eisen of the University of California (UC), Davis, who
keeps much of his research open.
But the 66 - year - old physical oceanographer
believes that a lifetime spent first doing, and then managing,
science is valuable training for running an organization dedicated to helping its 60,000 members
keep up with a rapidly changing field.
I
believe that the profession of patent agency is one of the best -
kept secrets in the world of
science.
I
believe it has the potential to transform the
science that we do, and continue to
keep Keck Observatory right at the forefront of astronomical research.»
He
believes that it is important to
keep science rigorous and religion religious.
Some people snack because they
believe that it
keeps their metabolism going, but
science has shown that there is no direct relationship between meal frequency and weight loss / metabolism.
Let's just ignore
science and
keep believing in the opinions of doctors who preach diets that are completely against what the research shows.
I
believe this has to do with focusing on
keeping content short, fun, and valuable to my
science fiction / fantasy reader base.
We also know that
Science Diet
believes that feeding lots of carbohydrates are the way to
keep dogs feeling full while controlling weight.
Steingraber said she
believes Hill's paper should be peer reviewed, but also feels
science is having a tough time
keeping up with the rush to get new fracking measures in place.
There are the usual claims of indisputable numbers based on unsound
science and non-validated computer models, and we skeptics are supposed to
keep our mouths shut, and
believe the opinion fo the experts.
So my interest in the
science of climate change is fundamentally a practical one: I want to
keep poor quality
science from being used to justify public policies which I
believe are both counterproductive and immoral.
How can it be that a bunch of people mostly with a good
science education (see the denizens thread) academics, engineers, industry scientists, IT guys etc etc and mostly with a great deal of experience on those fields and others just
keep on not
believing the climatologists?
I
believe climate
science a new
science does definitely have a role to play but the Scientists need to be 100 % truthful in this fashion (as marcott original Thesis was) yes you probably can
keep your jobs etc most likely dealing with an impending Maunder minimum type event!
Like the tobacco industry, climate change deniers devote great time and energy to
keeping the «debate» alive hoping that the general public will
believe that the
science is unsettled, thereby minimising public support for taking action to address greenhouse gas emissions.
FALSE PROPHETS, a biblical test would be that if what they say and prophesy comes to pass regard what they say but if it doesn't then don't listen to them.This seems to me the obvious approach to climate
science and in fact all
science and self evident as the way in which most people react.Crying wolf even if the wolf was there but
keeps disappearing will lose the present scientific comunity credibility.Credibility in
science is more important than risky prophesy which may give people a warning and may not, so that when scientists are reasonably sure [as in beyond reasonable doubt] they will be
believed and their warnings acted upon.Better be an honest scientist than a lucky guesser.