Post by Athans on Dec 2, 2014 15:00:56 GMT -6
So just did this on Twitter...
@atheistarmy
Let me be real clear and explain myself. I am an atheist. I majored in History and I majored in Religious Studies. I took enough classes to major in the Evolution-Creationism controversy and the History and Philosophy of Science to include the design arguments. I respect and love science and Bertrand Russell’s Teapot is how I live my life.
The tweet I responded to was this…
“science isn't a lie. I'll stick with the truth. I'm not a mormon moron”
I pointed out that we once had scientific racism and eugenics. Your response was…
“are they sticking with it? No? Alright, Go fuck yourself.”
If you can imagine, those are not words people like to hear, so I took the liberty of putting you in your place and explaining science.
You suggest science is a truth. The “truth” of scientific racism and eugenics were certainly not truths. You admitted this by saying “are they sticking with it?” Essentially what you are saying is “science is truth until it isn’t truth!” That is a stupid argument. The correct argument would be to explain what science is and how it works. Nothing can be “proven.” The only person that can prove something is a mathematician. Science works on disproving things…that is what makes it science. The supernatural are not scientific questions because they cannot be disproven.
Science relies on being falsifiable because it fixes the problem of demarcation, which distinguishes science and non-science. You can read about it here…
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability
Things like falsifiability are the exact reason Intelligent Design, or creationism, are not science. We cannot disprove a supernatural creator of the universe (a god,) we can simply point out that we have no reason to believe in one.
Things in science, laws and theories, are facts, not truths. Truths are unchangeable. There is no reason for something to be a truth if it can change. In science we rely on facts, which can change. Evolution is a FACT that is unlikely to change but it is not a truth. You can provide me with the dictionary definition of “truth” but the fact that a truth can change lessens the meaning of the word.
The problem started because you called Mormons morons. Do I agree with their little fairytale? Of course not! But to imply someone is stupid for believing in a religion is ignorant, or stupid…Mormons are actually good scholars, for the most part. Evangelical Christians are the worst.
Many Mormons understand things, including science, better than you do, so to call them morons is not fair. And if you tell me to go fuck myself I am going to show you why you are an ignorant dick-head looking for a fight. You were arguing with a fucking atheist!
Stop being such an angry prick and maybe people will take you seriously.
@atheistarmy
Let me be real clear and explain myself. I am an atheist. I majored in History and I majored in Religious Studies. I took enough classes to major in the Evolution-Creationism controversy and the History and Philosophy of Science to include the design arguments. I respect and love science and Bertrand Russell’s Teapot is how I live my life.
The tweet I responded to was this…
“science isn't a lie. I'll stick with the truth. I'm not a mormon moron”
I pointed out that we once had scientific racism and eugenics. Your response was…
“are they sticking with it? No? Alright, Go fuck yourself.”
If you can imagine, those are not words people like to hear, so I took the liberty of putting you in your place and explaining science.
You suggest science is a truth. The “truth” of scientific racism and eugenics were certainly not truths. You admitted this by saying “are they sticking with it?” Essentially what you are saying is “science is truth until it isn’t truth!” That is a stupid argument. The correct argument would be to explain what science is and how it works. Nothing can be “proven.” The only person that can prove something is a mathematician. Science works on disproving things…that is what makes it science. The supernatural are not scientific questions because they cannot be disproven.
Science relies on being falsifiable because it fixes the problem of demarcation, which distinguishes science and non-science. You can read about it here…
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability
Things like falsifiability are the exact reason Intelligent Design, or creationism, are not science. We cannot disprove a supernatural creator of the universe (a god,) we can simply point out that we have no reason to believe in one.
Things in science, laws and theories, are facts, not truths. Truths are unchangeable. There is no reason for something to be a truth if it can change. In science we rely on facts, which can change. Evolution is a FACT that is unlikely to change but it is not a truth. You can provide me with the dictionary definition of “truth” but the fact that a truth can change lessens the meaning of the word.
The problem started because you called Mormons morons. Do I agree with their little fairytale? Of course not! But to imply someone is stupid for believing in a religion is ignorant, or stupid…Mormons are actually good scholars, for the most part. Evangelical Christians are the worst.
Many Mormons understand things, including science, better than you do, so to call them morons is not fair. And if you tell me to go fuck myself I am going to show you why you are an ignorant dick-head looking for a fight. You were arguing with a fucking atheist!
Stop being such an angry prick and maybe people will take you seriously.