Run Ben Run!

You don't understand science any more than others understand God, WormRaper. Explain quantum physics. How many dimensions are there? Is string theory true? What new particles will the Large Hadron Collider discover when it fires up later this year? How will it change science? What I'd dark matter? Did it exist before we knew it was there?

You're a fucking arrogant phony. Go away. Nobody likes you.

You don't understand science any more than others understand God, WormRaper. Explain quantum physics. How many dimensions are there? Is string theory true? What new particles will the Large Hadron Collider discover when it fires up later this year? How will it change science? What I'd dark matter? Did it exist before we knew it was there?

You're a fucking arrogant phony. Go away. Nobody likes you. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

COG, you can bet he KNOWS about DARK MATTER from having so much of it slammed into his holes down at Talleywackers. woomby / undercunt / balloon knot is a typical pretentious lying liberal !

Scientific Theory are proven wrong over time. That is why they are called Theories.

But the belief in a God is not even a scientific theory....just like a belief in the Tooth fairy is not a scientific theory.

I do not mock little kids that believe in the Tooth fairy or adults that believe in God. But it is just that....do not confuse that with science. Originally Posted by WTF

This is not correct. Theory, as it's used in science, and theory as it's used in modern language, do not mean the same thing. A scientific theory is defined as something that has so much evidence behind it, due to repeated testing and further confirmation through observation, that it would be foolish to think otherwise.

Little kids believing in the tooth fairy is not anything remotely like a grown person believing in the same tooth fairy. One doesn't know any better, one definitely should.

You don't understand science any more than others understand God, WormRaper. Explain quantum physics. How many dimensions are there? Is string theory true? What new particles will the Large Hadron Collider discover when it fires up later this year? How will it change science? What I'd dark matter? Did it exist before we knew it was there?

You're a fucking arrogant phony. Go away. Nobody likes you. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

I don't know how the intricacies of an internal combustion engine either, but my car started up this morning and I drove it. At some point in your life, you must defer to someone who knows more than you. In the case of my car, it's a mechanic. In the case of science, it's scientists.

As for dimensions, it depends on what you're referring to. A point, a plane, a line, what? If you referring to the univers, String theory says there are 10 plus time, so 11, but we only experience 3. Why? I don't know. People smarter than you or I are looking into it and they're who I'll listen to about it, not some idiot on a hooker board.

Quantum physics is the branch of physics that deals with things on a very small scale. It also deals with chemical bonding, but past that I'm fuzzy.

We don't know what dark matter is, but they know it comprises a large part of the universe and it doesn't interact with light, only gravity. The LHC has already been fired up, just the other day, actually. They basically smash pairs of protons together and that creates energy, but it also converts part of the energy to mass, so they're hoping to find out exactly what dark matter is and what role it played in the formation of the universe.

You can continue to taunt me, but you won't succeed. As I said, you will get tired of typing it long before I will get tired of reading it.

This is not correct. Theory, as it's used in science, and theory as it's used in modern language, do not mean the same thing. A scientific theory is defined as something that has so much evidence behind it, due to repeated testing and further confirmation through observation, that it would be foolish to think otherwise.

Little kids believing in the tooth fairy is not anything remotely like a grown person believing in the same tooth fairy. One doesn't know any better, one definitely should. Originally Posted by WombRaider

I should have said Theories are refined over time but science is always open to the idea of new discoveries disproving itself.

God or religion is a belief not based on science at all.

They are two different fields that folks waste time convoluting. IMHO of course.

I should have said Theories are refined over time but science is always open to the idea of new discoveries disproving itself.
Originally Posted by WTF

Science doesn't seem to be open to disproving global warming, since it is "settled science," my racist friend.

This statement is false. Newtons theory of motion is just as true today for baseballs and cannon balls as it was 400 years ago. It has been supplanted by quantum theory with the very small and theory of relativity with the large and fast, but it was not proven false. Originally Posted by WombRaider

Don't cherry pick, the entire sentence is predicated on the possibility that the science can change, hence the words may and many.

"I never said science didn't exist. But the science of today as history has shown may not be the science of tomorrow. Many scientific beliefs have changed, what is believed today is proven false years later. "

Never said all, so you are correct about newtons theory.

No one of any education or note ever truly thought the earth was flat, that's a myth. Science NEVER said this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_Flat_Earth Originally Posted by WombRaider

Seriously, your using Wiki as a source.

Scientific Theory are proven wrong over time. That is why they are called Theories.

But the belief in a God is not even a scientific theory....just like a belief in the Tooth fairy is not a scientific theory.

I do not mock little kids that believe in the Tooth fairy or adults that believe in God. But it is just that....do not confuse that with science. Originally Posted by WTF

I don't confuse science with god, nothing I said could even be, in any small measure construed as a statement that science is god. I am glad you don't mock adults who believe in god, but many liberals are unable to refrain from doing so.

Seriously, your using Wiki as a source. Originally Posted by dirty dog

Go check the individual citations if you don't believe it. It's been accepted among scholars, for at least 2500 years or so, that the earth was a sphere.

Don't cherry pick, the entire sentence is predicated on the possibility that the science can change, hence the words may and many.

"I never said science didn't exist. But the science of today as history has shown may not be the science of tomorrow. Many scientific beliefs have changed, what is believed today is proven false years later. "

Never said all, so you are correct about newtons theory. Originally Posted by dirty dog

The problem with your statement is that the science didn't change and it was not proven false. Newton's theory still holds true for macroscopic objects. You have to look at scientific theories as a tool. Each tool has a job. You don't use a hammer to screw in a bolt. For things on a very small scale, you need quantum mechanics. For large objects, you need general relativity. Neither supplanted Newton's Laws of Motion. It's simply a different tool.

I don't confuse science with god, nothing I said could even be, in any small measure construed as a statement that science is god. I am glad you don't mock adults who believe in god, but many liberals are unable to refrain from doing so. Originally Posted by dirty dog

I think you misunderstood his statement. He was saying, I think, don't confuse believing in a god with science. Science has proof to back itself up, believing in god has no empirical data to support the contention.

Go check the individual citations if you don't believe it. It's been accepted among scholars, for at least 2500 years or so, that the earth was a sphere. Originally Posted by WombRaider

Reading your Wiki link, it appears that it says that draper and white and their claims the flat earth theory was a fable used to impugn pre civilization and creationism and latched onto and rallied around by the agnostic and atheist communities has been discredited "Draper and White had propagated more fantasy than fact in their efforts to prove that science and religion are locked in eternal conflict " So you support your position by giving me a link that in fact states that what you claim is false.

I think you misunderstood his statement. He was saying, I think, don't confuse believing in a god with science. Science has proof to back itself up, believing in god has no empirical data to support the contention. Originally Posted by WombRaider

Nor should it have since it is a book based on faith.

Reading your Wiki link, it appears that it says that draper and white and their claims the flat earth theory was a fable used to impugn pre civilization and creationism and latched onto and rallied around by the agnostic and atheist communities has been discredited "Draper and White had propagated more fantasy than fact in their efforts to prove that science and religion are locked in eternal conflict " So you support your position by giving me a link that in fact states that what you claim is false. Originally Posted by dirty dog

As far back as Aristotle, scholars thought the world was a sphere. Two people don't make that false. Go read up on it. Here, I even provided a link to a religious website that says exactly what I'm saying.

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c034.html
http://www.todayifoundout.com/index....orld-was-flat/