I highly recommend this article.
It’s not all that coherent, but it seems well informed.
Post all of it if you want people to read it.
It all boils down to one thing - that we have forgotten that we are all made in the Image of God.
Actually, the link between modern science and religion goes even further. During the Protestant Renewal the Bible was viewed very literally.
Adam was thought to have possessed a perfect knowledge of all sciences, a knowledge lost to posterity when he fell from grace and was expelled from the Garden of Eden. The goal of 17th century scientists such as Francis Bacon and his successors in the Royal Society of London was to regain the scientific knowledge of the first man. Indeed, for these individuals, the whole scientific enterprise was an integral part of a redemptive enterprise that, along with the Christian religion, was to help restore the original race to its original perfection. The biblical account of the creation thus provided these scientists with an important source of motivation, and in an age still thoroughly committed to traditional Christianity, the new science was to gain social legitimacy on account of these religious associations.
Errr, actually “Yes”. We should stop automatically giving “science” a bye; it is not the world of rational observation, truth and logic it is purported to be.
“Science”, or merely an old language word meaning nothing more than “knowledge, as in a body of knowledge, a topic” has been inserted into our vocabulary as a false and misleading synonym for “scientific method” which is a rather rigorously tested method devised to prove or disprove things.
So, yes, science of today, a religious conviction held by untold million around the world to be the “be all and end all’ of knowledge or truth ( can you spell “god” ?) is a mislabeled perversion of the once honorable profession of a high and lofty manner of describing what one rationally, intentionally and critically observes, not what one feels or is persuaded.
Once, there used to be an argument regarding whether the “social sciences” were even qualified to be considered as “science” since the could not use the scientific method in most cases, but rather subjective responses from subject. Now, all we see is a subjective manner of “proving” whether a topic or premise is actually “true”- based on consensus or agreeable outcomes. Most scientists of today would be in the “flat world” camp compared to those who by repeatable observation based on a validated test method would conclude
the world is actually not flat; the political powers of the day notwithstanding.
Science is not rational nor logical as long as someone demands a certain outcome. Certainly, like statistics, one can manipulate the observed data and or devise a test methodology that proves a desired outcome. But that is not true science, “scientific method”, it is a manner of religion- an intentionally devised manner of putting certain things together to prove a point- not “analysis”, a manner of taking things apart to see the whole.
In real”science”, your results may not vary if the theorem is true. If the results vary based on the same test methodology, then the theorem is false- not true. You cannot change the test method nor the data and still call it “science”. It then becomes an “art” form- purely subjective and no longer deserving to be called science whatsoever.
The entire educational system in the US has been turned into nothing but an indoctrination and recruiting machine for a small, wealthy, Fascist Globalist minority.
Global Warming - Climate Change world biggest hoax and scam.
Just like Obama causing Global Flooding by pissing in the ocean.
That much can humans contribute.
Elaborate scam to screw off taxpayers off their money!
Earth climate and changes are dependent on Suns and Sunspots activity supplying 99.99% of energy. Humans can do schit about it.
Volcano eruptions can produce much more distractions to climate than all humans and SUVs farting together.
CO2 is not poison, it is food for plants, which in turn produce Oxygen, that we need to breathe.
STOP the scam, jail all the scammers!!!
God bless and protect Mr. Trump!
We should not “equate” science with truth. Science is a procedure for learning the truth about certain things. That is all. Some truth can be learned by the scientific method, but not all truth.
“The truth,” as they say, “is out there.” What we learn through the scientific method is more like “our best approximation of the truth, so far.”
>> Should We Stop Equating Science With Truth?
No, but we should stop equating P.C. B.S. with science.
The problem is the tendency to try to use science, rational and proven rules, to justify and back up political ideologies and religion.
The social sciences are hijacked by social justice, and they are routinely using the social sciences to attempt to prove and justify social justice and liberal political demands.
Science explains why something tastes the way it does or why people react instinctively. Morality and ideology attempts to assign values, whether the priorities for a given society or what we should prefer based on our beliefs.
The social sciences are also being used to reinforce liberal status in society akin to Lysenkoism gaining favor for saying communism is inherent in biology or labeling dissidents as suffering from sluggish schizophrenia, so liberals today calling conservatives crazy isn’t new and has been much more systematically abused in other nations.
The big review paper on the lack of political diversity in social psychology
Survey shocker: Liberal profs admit theyd discriminate against conservatives in hiring, advancement
Even as an engineer, I never equated science with truth.
To me, truth is associated with wisdom.
I’d say there is no truth in science, however, there is logic, which involves concepts like true/false, correct/incorrect.
That a big diff. This is why science has never threatened any concept I have of faith or religion.
You can coopt humans and human institutions with a political agenda, including scientists and scientific organizations (cf. the National Academy of Science).
But science itself is a philosophy with the aim of explaining the natural world based upon repeatable observation of phenomenon. That the agenda of say the National Academy of Sciences has been coopted by a political agenda can be demonstrated scientifically by examining the behavior of its membership, and the politically biased outcomes of its studies to accord with the political agenda of say the reigning democratic party.
Science may be truth as we know it, but not the way science is practiced today.
If science is truth,
then hunting is a deer.
In the PC age this point might be moot,
but hungry they stay who skip the Pursuit.
The Scientific Method is a useful tool, but a terrible master.
As Spock said of the computer (M-5), I have no wish to serve it.
I was a science major, and received awards. It is precisely for that reason that I am not awed by “science”: It is used by fallible, finite human beings with agendas.
I quote myself: “Science requires objectivity, but does not guarantee it.”
Just by what you choose to test, you are skewing the results, no matter how well the experiment is designed.
Leftist media decide what news will be covered and how. Leftist scientists decide what will be studied and how.
Distrust and verify.
But with climate,for example,their claim to be able to predict the weather 30 years from now is laughable when one considers the joke told about weather forecasters: "I just finished shoveling 6 inches of partly cloudy from my driveway".