Science Is/As A Religion

[sangha]

Soooo...the scientist who said "...But there are LOTS of reasons to believe in Dark Matter..." doesn't count?

You're a retard.

No because the same scientist said that dark matter is unproven

But he said there are reasons to believe in it.

So you think that means he doesn't believe in it?

Well...you are you, after all, so, yeah, you probably do.

Proof that wingnuts don't know the difference between "evidence" and "proof"

An example - There are reasons to believe that sexual orientation is genetically determined. However, there are also reasons to believe that sexual orientation is NOT genetically determined.

So do you think that sexual orientation is AND is not genetically determined?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

No because the same scientist said that dark matter is unproven

But he said there are reasons to believe in it.

So you think that means he doesn't believe in it?

Well...you are you, after all, so, yeah, you probably do.

Proof that wingnuts don't know the difference between "evidence" and "proof"

An example - There are reasons to believe that sexual orientation is genetically determined. However, there are also reasons to believe that sexual orientation is NOT genetically determined.

So do you think that sexual orientation is AND is not genetically determined?

Since the scientist who believes dark matter exists probably understands the difference between evidence and proof better than you his statement that he believes, instead of knows, that dark matter exists says something about his personal beliefs. It does not, however, justify you twisting what he said to prove how stupid you are.

 

[daveman]

No because the same scientist said that dark matter is unproven

But he said there are reasons to believe in it.

So you think that means he doesn't believe in it?

Well...you are you, after all, so, yeah, you probably do.

Proof that wingnuts don't know the difference between "evidence" and "proof"

An example - There are reasons to believe that sexual orientation is genetically determined. However, there are also reasons to believe that sexual orientation is NOT genetically determined.

So do you think that sexual orientation is AND is not genetically determined?

Your childish foot-stamping aside, it's obvious the scientist I linked believes in dark matter.

 

[sangha]

But he said there are reasons to believe in it.

So you think that means he doesn't believe in it?

Well...you are you, after all, so, yeah, you probably do.

Proof that wingnuts don't know the difference between "evidence" and "proof"

An example - There are reasons to believe that sexual orientation is genetically determined. However, there are also reasons to believe that sexual orientation is NOT genetically determined.

So do you think that sexual orientation is AND is not genetically determined?

Since the scientist who believes dark matter exists probably understands the difference between evidence and proof better than you his statement that he believes, instead of knows, that dark matter exists says something about his personal beliefs. It does not, however, justify you twisting what he said to prove how stupid you are.

QW is getting pwned for conflating evidence with proof, so now he's going lie about what the scientist said. He didn't say he believes dark matter exists.

 

[sangha]

But he said there are reasons to believe in it.

So you think that means he doesn't believe in it?

Well...you are you, after all, so, yeah, you probably do.

Proof that wingnuts don't know the difference between "evidence" and "proof"

An example - There are reasons to believe that sexual orientation is genetically determined. However, there are also reasons to believe that sexual orientation is NOT genetically determined.

So do you think that sexual orientation is AND is not genetically determined?

Your childish foot-stamping aside, it's obvious the scientist I linked believes in dark matter.

The scientists never says he believes dark matter exists.

This has already been discussed ad nauseum in this thread, and you still can't get it. The scientist points out that something is affecting the measurements and so therefore, the scientists believes that there is SOMETHING affecting the measurements. He does not say that he believes it is dark matter. He says, as you have pointed out, that there are "reasons to believe" dark matter exists. He does not say that he believes it exists.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Proof that wingnuts don't know the difference between "evidence" and "proof"

An example - There are reasons to believe that sexual orientation is genetically determined. However, there are also reasons to believe that sexual orientation is NOT genetically determined.

So do you think that sexual orientation is AND is not genetically determined?

Since the scientist who believes dark matter exists probably understands the difference between evidence and proof better than you his statement that he believes, instead of knows, that dark matter exists says something about his personal beliefs. It does not, however, justify you twisting what he said to prove how stupid you are.

QW is getting pwned for conflating evidence with proof, so now he's going lie about what the scientist said. He didn't say he believes dark matter exists.

It amazes me how you could think you are intelligent enough to debate rdean.

The amount of matter that astronomers can detect with their instruments doesn't seem to be nearly enough to explain why some of the big-ticket items in the cosmos behave the way they do. Spiral galaxies spin faster than they should, and clusters of galaxies stick together even though the velocities of their constituent galaxies suggest they should be flying apart. The standard solution to the problem posits the existence of some hidden mass in the universe—often called dark matter (sometimes abbreviated DM)—that's holding everything together by the force of gravity. Most astronomers believe that dark matter exists—even though it has never been seen, and no one knows what it might be.

Dark-Matter Heretic » American Scientist

Not to worry though, no one believes it because Sangha says they don't.

 

[sangha]

Since the scientist who believes dark matter exists probably understands the difference between evidence and proof better than you his statement that he believes, instead of knows, that dark matter exists says something about his personal beliefs. It does not, however, justify you twisting what he said to prove how stupid you are.

QW is getting pwned for conflating evidence with proof, so now he's going lie about what the scientist said. He didn't say he believes dark matter exists.

It amazes me how you could think you are intelligent enough to debate rdean.

The amount of matter that astronomers can detect with their instruments doesn't seem to be nearly enough to explain why some of the big-ticket items in the cosmos behave the way they do. Spiral galaxies spin faster than they should, and clusters of galaxies stick together even though the velocities of their constituent galaxies suggest they should be flying apart. The standard solution to the problem posits the existence of some hidden mass in the universe—often called dark matter (sometimes abbreviated DM)—that's holding everything together by the force of gravity. Most astronomers believe that dark matter exists—even though it has never been seen, and no one knows what it might be.

Dark-Matter Heretic » American Scientist

Not to worry though, no one believes it because Sangha says they don't.

The author doesn't say that he believes in dark matter. Like I said, you lied when you claimed that he did

All you have is the unnamed "most astronomers"

Most unnamed sources are full of shiite

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You really are incredibly ignorant and arrogant, aren't you?

Why I Believe (In Dark Matter)

Ask A Physicist: Why Believe In Dark Matter?

Dark Matter in the Bullet Cluster | The n-Category Café

Martin White: Dark Matter

I can literally keep this up all year without repeating myself once. Just give up, or run away with your tail between your legs.

 

[sangha]

You really are incredibly ignorant and arrogant, aren't you?

Why I Believe (In Dark Matter)

Ask A Physicist: Why Believe In Dark Matter?

Dark Matter in the Bullet Cluster | The n-Category Café

Martin White: Dark Matter

I can literally keep this up all year without repeating myself once. Just give up, or run away with your tail between your legs.

Your links don't say what you claim they say. I guess that's why you didn't quote them saying they believe that dark mtter exists

From the first link

, if they fail to detect dark matter particles with the Large Hadron Collider within the next 10 years, then the theory should be reexamined. Until then, it’s pretty likely.

"Pretty likely" does NOT mean "I believe it's true"

From the 2nd link

Still, at least one of you is likely to write in with something about whether Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND, for short) could explain away the need for Dark Matter. Basically, you're asking, what if Einstein was wrong? He could have been, of course

Again, saying that it could be wrong is not the same as saying "It's true"
Your other links also fail to back your claim

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You really are incredibly ignorant and arrogant, aren't you?

Why I Believe (In Dark Matter)

Ask A Physicist: Why Believe In Dark Matter?

Dark Matter in the Bullet Cluster | The n-Category Café

Martin White: Dark Matter

I can literally keep this up all year without repeating myself once. Just give up, or run away with your tail between your legs.

Your links don't say what you claim they say. I guess that's why you didn't quote them saying they believe that dark mtter exists

From the first link

, if they fail to detect dark matter particles with the Large Hadron Collider within the next 10 years, then the theory should be reexamined. Until then, it’s pretty likely.

"Pretty likely" does NOT mean "I believe it's true"

From the 2nd link

Still, at least one of you is likely to write in with something about whether Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND, for short) could explain away the need for Dark Matter. Basically, you're asking, what if Einstein was wrong? He could have been, of course

Again, saying that it could be wrong is not the same as saying "It's true"
Your other links also fail to back your claim

You are actually telling me that a scientist wants me to believe in dark matter, but does not believe in it himself.

 

[daveman]

Proof that wingnuts don't know the difference between "evidence" and "proof"

An example - There are reasons to believe that sexual orientation is genetically determined. However, there are also reasons to believe that sexual orientation is NOT genetically determined.

So do you think that sexual orientation is AND is not genetically determined?

Your childish foot-stamping aside, it's obvious the scientist I linked believes in dark matter.

The scientists never says he believes dark matter exists.

This has already been discussed ad nauseum in this thread, and you still can't get it. The scientist points out that something is affecting the measurements and so therefore, the scientists believes that there is SOMETHING affecting the measurements. He does not say that he believes it is dark matter. He says, as you have pointed out, that there are "reasons to believe" dark matter exists. He does not say that he believes it exists.

 

[amrchaos]

I have a simple question

Why is it that people believe Science is attacking religion?

If anything, not science aid religion, well not in terms of its mythology, bu in terms of the religions mission--aid to man, better security, preserving and multiplying the harvest, longer life, et cetera et cetera?

I guess in my view of the science versus religion question, I don't see the problem. And I am one of the people that claim that science and religion are focused on distinct goals.

It is like a Psychiatrist arguing with a Blacksmith on on how he strikes his iron rods.

 

[SmarterThanHick]

All good ideas, except religion is easily and often threatened by science. Religion relies on the ideas of blind belief and anecdotal interactions. Science inherently dismisses such things and demands higher standards of evidence and reasoning. It's not that science attacks religion any more than an elephant cares to "attack" an ant, but religious people can still be threatened. Ants will still swarm.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

All good ideas, except religion is easily and often threatened by science. Religion relies on the ideas of blind belief and anecdotal interactions. Science inherently dismisses such things and demands higher standards of evidence and reasoning. It's not that science attacks religion any more than an elephant cares to "attack" an ant, but religious people can still be threatened. Ants will still swarm.

And we all know that scientists, not being human, never do this.

 

[SmarterThanHick]

You never elaborated, Quantum Windbag. What part of the youtube clip you posted has anything to do with religion? It's foolish that you are still incapable of distinguishing between religious and political fanaticism. Do you need me to post the definitions of "religion" again for you?

 

[sangha]

You really are incredibly ignorant and arrogant, aren't you?

Why I Believe (In Dark Matter)

Ask A Physicist: Why Believe In Dark Matter?

Dark Matter in the Bullet Cluster | The n-Category Café

Martin White: Dark Matter

I can literally keep this up all year without repeating myself once. Just give up, or run away with your tail between your legs.

Your links don't say what you claim they say. I guess that's why you didn't quote them saying they believe that dark mtter exists

From the first link
"Pretty likely" does NOT mean "I believe it's true"

From the 2nd link

Still, at least one of you is likely to write in with something about whether Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND, for short) could explain away the need for Dark Matter. Basically, you're asking, what if Einstein was wrong? He could have been, of course

Again, saying that it could be wrong is not the same as saying "It's true"
Your other links also fail to back your claim

You are actually telling me that a scientist wants me to believe in dark matter, but does not believe in it himself.

I never said that. I think it was probably one of the many voices in your head

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You never elaborated, Quantum Windbag. What part of the youtube clip you posted has anything to do with religion? It's foolish that you are still incapable of distinguishing between religious and political fanaticism. Do you need me to post the definitions of "religion" again for you?

Are you trying to say that YouTube clip is not the work of fanatics?

 

[sangha]

You never elaborated, Quantum Windbag. What part of the youtube clip you posted has anything to do with religion? It's foolish that you are still incapable of distinguishing between religious and political fanaticism. Do you need me to post the definitions of "religion" again for you?

Are you trying to say that YouTube clip is not the work of fanatics?

I can't speak for STH, but it seems pretty clear that he thinks its the work of fanatics, but he doesn't think it has anything to do with religion. Why is this so hard for you to understand?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You never elaborated, Quantum Windbag. What part of the youtube clip you posted has anything to do with religion? It's foolish that you are still incapable of distinguishing between religious and political fanaticism. Do you need me to post the definitions of "religion" again for you?

Are you trying to say that YouTube clip is not the work of fanatics?

I can't speak for STH, but it seems pretty clear that he thinks its the work of fanatics, but he doesn't think it has anything to do with religion. Why is this so hard for you to understand?

You can't even speak for yourself, yet you never have any problem trying to put words into other peoples mouths. Do you think that might be a sign of schizophrenia or some other delusional mental illness?

 

[sangha]

Are you trying to say that YouTube clip is not the work of fanatics?

I can't speak for STH, but it seems pretty clear that he thinks its the work of fanatics, but he doesn't think it has anything to do with religion. Why is this so hard for you to understand?

You can't even speak for yourself, yet you never have any problem trying to put words into other peoples mouths. Do you think that might be a sign of schizophrenia or some other delusional mental illness?

I see you're still trying to avoid the question.