Faith in science?

[paarsurrey]

Don't tell me that "science is in faith" or "faith is in science", please?
Next time one will tell me " Belief in Science" or "Religion in Science". Is it so, please?

Regards

 

[rational experiences]

Humans are aware.

Know.

Science invention gained reaction proved a human acutely aware. By that circumstance. A human equal natural thinks.

Science conjured the evil spirit. By design virtually as an anti self in gases that have no condition owned in bio life.

We got attacked witnessing it. It gets studied as a scientfic observation. Spirits. Presence. Interactive attacks or changes to self life.

And humans claim God came from the eternal as God because God was the inherited condition change.

O mass.
O God body as mass.
Historic God as mass change.

Science infers O to do maths for change as a model of thought change to force change.

How it was taught. God O the change came from the eternal. Became mass converted.

We came from an eternal place where a previous living spirit as eternal exists.

Not explainable.

Who now owns a God space hole in its body. Eternal on other side of space. We crossed from eternal as gases filled back in space.

Not any unrealistic thinking.

We hope by investigation of space that enough space gained as bodies self consume energy and the sludge falls to the pit. Space the evil history gained the eternal might force it's losses in space shut.

As simple it is. Evil act would be finished. If only says the suffering human...why we ask.

God we said was formed O which was the change in eternal. To a spirit body.

For that history to be real....what existed before each a O god mass burst exploded and burnt was the eternal God removed as mass with a living spirit eternal within it.

That spirit burnt changed. Manifests when God seal is removed.

Eternal still exists in its owned eternal presence owning the loss as God. O masses of angels that fell as the gods.

We are now living a burnt cooled copy of what real spirit is. Gas that cooled. We got released by eternal like God mass had but unlike God are not mass...never converted in hell...came direct out of the spirit. ........entered the atmosphere as all pre formed pre owned spirit beings.

Converted in water oxygen one mass heaven state......owning pre owned diverse spirit bodies. Science just humans thinking want to argue for status science.

How it is explained NOT for science to own to destroy by conversion. Yet you want to copy God history by O maths not mass.

Makes no sense whatsoever. What science says.

Why we say your mind is destroyer satanic. Our God knowledge natural history. The argument.

The argument. Real.

Today you think our parents human evil as you gain conscious adult memory as a baby self from heavenly living lived life recording.

First parent life now a recording. A lived record. A living heavenly recorded message. Seen multi times.

Seeing is observation. Science.

Only because you encoded invented image recording by machine transmitting that you falsify natural information yourselves. Gave self an extra intelligence. Named it Ai.

All said due to human experience.

And you brother baby ignore relevant scientific natural fact. Such as sperm is not a human being as a human. Nor is an ovary. A baby is not an adult human living in one same atmosphere.

No string theory for bio presence.

Holy wAter oxygen. Our heavens. We said we live in a world. The world of science not ours.

You scientist are the only wrong human in a human assesment.

 

[paarsurrey]

Faith in science?

Has one seen "science" to have faith in it, please?

Regards

 

[Brian2]

That only a god- explanation could be true
is a bias that should be made clear?

Actually, in science, there is no " truth ",
no certainty the way there is (thought to be )
in religions.

As an atheist I don't believe in God.
I don't believe there are living passenger pigeons. But, show me one and, I will believe.

The certainties in Christian beliefs of the past have given way to science, even though reluctantly at times.
Many of the things that we thought were certain have changed Christian belief because of the changes in scientific discoveries.
The idea that only natural forces did it all should be made clear however. The theory part of evolution, the how it happened, cannot be tested.
I could show you a God in the Bible but I have this notion that this God has been tested and found wanting by you.

There is no science that can be used against religion.

However- sometimes a person may make a positive claim about some particular aspect or belief within their chosen religion,

Say, that Noah's ark was real, there was a world wide flood, etc.

All known relevant data from many fields of
science can be compared to the story, and,
the story just doesn't work.

It is really ignorant to think there was a flood.

Educated Christians may or may not speak against flood -belief, but they know its just a story, could not be true.

Its a poor faith that in any way that is threatened by facts!

Do you find fault in this kind of challenge to
ignorant religious beliefs?

It the data shows that one world wide flood did not happen then I have no problem with it. That and evolution give some Christians reason to understand the Bible in different ways to those of the past. This has happened with other things that science has discovered and which looked to be against what the Bible said.

 

[Audie]

The certainties in Christian beliefs of the past have given way to science, even though reluctantly at times.
Many of the things that we thought were certain have changed Christian belief because of the changes in scientific discoveries.
The idea that only natural forces did it all should be made clear however. The theory part of evolution, the how it happened, cannot be tested.
I could show you a God in the Bible but I have this notion that this God has been tested and found wanting by you.



It the data shows that one world wide flood did not happen then I have no problem with it. That and evolution give some Christians reason to understand the Bible in different ways to those of the past. This has happened with other things that science has discovered and which looked to be against what the Bible said.

Why do you say " the how " cannot be tested

 

[Brian2]

Why do you say " the how " cannot be tested

Because all science can do is theorise on it using the scientific processes that could possibly have produced a certain result.

 

[Audie]

Because all science can do is theorise on it using the scientific processes that could possibly have produced a certain result.

That is so vague I've no idescwhat you are thinking about.

 

[Brian2]

That is so vague I've no idescwhat you are thinking about.

An example might be theorizing on how spiders evolved web building. How is it possible to check that? It starts with the assumption that this evolved and that somehow the knowledge of it was able to be stored in the genes of the spider to be passed on to little baby spiders.

 

[Audie]

An example might be theorizing on how spiders evolved web building. How is it possible to check that? It starts with the assumption that this evolved and that somehow the knowledge of it was able to be stored in the genes of the spider to be passed on to little baby spiders.

I hope this isn't just another God of the gaps
argument.

The hows and what's of evolution
Is very thoroughly dmonstructed in
some instances, in others, it's much
more difficult.
Does it mean the theory is correct
for this, but not for that?

There is no other explanation besides
evolution that has any explanatory value,
at all.

In the case of spiders, investigating
web evolution requires no assumptions
other than that there might be some
value in investigating.

The wonderful geometric web, would someone think there was a first spider who did that,
first try?

Do you know of any intermediate steps
that can be observed in living organism,
that would show that the evolution of
geometric web from simpler origins is
plausible and corresponds with the theory?