|
Post by Pilgrim on May 2, 2005 20:55:03 GMT -5
Here is another interesting quote from squid: "In science there is no absolutes. Why do you insist on bringing up Haeckel's work which hasn't been considered in many years? "
So then, scientists should be warned that water may not really consist of 2 atoms of hydrogen and one of oxygen. Maybe the formulae for nuclear energy are incorrect after all,despite the fact that we have nuclear energy. Or did you mean that the 'science' of evolution has no absolutes?
|
|
|
Post by solidsquid on May 2, 2005 21:15:04 GMT -5
Here is another interesting quote from squid: "In science there is no absolutes. Why do you insist on bringing up Haeckel's work which hasn't been considered in many years? " So then, scientists should be warned that water may not really consist of 2 atoms of hydrogen and one of oxygen. Maybe the formulae for nuclear energy are incorrect after all,despite the fact that we have nuclear energy. Or did you mean that the 'science' of evolution has no absolutes? There are no absolutes. To assume such would require omnipotence. The probability can only go to 99%. To deal in absolutes would be dogmatic and contrary to scientific inquiry. To say absolutely that water is always H20 would negate the ability of heavy water 2H20 to exist. To put to the test even established theories happens all the time especially with evolutionary theory. Even Einstein's theories are still being tested. What does this have to do with the validity of the ToE?
|
|
thehack
Maverick's Chew Toy
Posts: 16
|
Post by thehack on May 9, 2005 17:45:40 GMT -5
If you mean atheist as a faith, as in how we have come to accept certain "facts" as believed by society to be true, same as how the existence of god is the same acceptance of perceived facts by a society (Christian society) as true, then yes, in that definition atheism is a "faith".
To a theist, y'all have accepted the existance of god and his words as "Truth." We atheist call that the leap of faith. I've chosen to believe the sea of data that support the bible as man's creation to use the Judao-Christian concept of god to control the masses, and what I accept as fact and truth, to a theist, it's a leap of "faith."
In the end, we believe what we believe.
|
|
|
Post by Pilgrim on May 9, 2005 18:54:53 GMT -5
Solidsquid, Water and heavy water are two different chemicals. The water that we drink is always H20. That is absolute.
Secondly, you should know that the statement, 'there are no absolutes' is self-refuting.'
|
|
|
Post by droskey on May 9, 2005 20:03:42 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by solidsquid on May 9, 2005 23:45:49 GMT -5
Solidsquid, Water and heavy water are two different chemicals. The water that we drink is always H20. That is absolute. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy_waterwww.heavywaterboard.org/docs/faq.htmIt's chemical properties are the same as water - it has the same properties such as freezing to make ice and so forth. You could drink it and not know the difference. You're crossing semantical boundaries there Pilgrim. Within science, no theory or hypothesis is considered 100% whether you like it or not.
|
|
|
Post by Pilgrim on May 10, 2005 19:41:50 GMT -5
Solidsquid, Your discussion on water etc. did not begin to satisfy the argument relating to absolutes. You had said that in science there are no absolutes. Oxygen exists. Oxygen combines with hydrogen. These are absolutes. Or do you mean that the discovery of elements do not fall within the realm of science?
Cross semantical nothing! When someone makes a statement such as there are no absolutes, that person absolutely makes makes himself an absolute authority by stating his personal absolute. It is a statement of faith!
"You're crossing semantical boundaries there Pilgrim. Within science, no theory or hypothesis is considered 100% whether you like it or not".
The above is also a statement of faith: Nothing can be known beyond science. Since science knows nothing absolutely, neither can truth be known or discovered.
Solid: "Heavy Water has great similarity in its physical and chemical properties to ordinary water."
You said "similarity", not exact! They are absolutely not the same and absolutely similar.
|
|
|
Post by solidsquid on May 10, 2005 20:53:48 GMT -5
Solidsquid, Your discussion on water etc. did not begin to satisfy the argument relating to absolutes. You had said that in science there are no absolutes. Oxygen exists. Oxygen combines with hydrogen. These are absolutes. Or do you mean that the discovery of elements do not fall within the realm of science? There is never a 100%. That would require complete knowledge, this is impossible. That is why it is relegated to probability. There may be up to a 99.9% probability but there will never be 100%. Absolute is unchanging, static. For instance, the relevant definition: This does not work in science. Questioning and doubting such as skepticism is what makes for critical inquiry which leads to research which lead to more questions. To make ideas immutable, absolute, would not be science. Crossing semantical contexts Pilgrim. There cannot be conversation without arbitrary absolute statements. Absolute logical statements is a different story. No one points out the fallacies in a friendly conversation, that's the wrong context. *sigh* You're trying to utilize faith in two contexts, attempting to correlate a statement in conversational speech with the "faith" of believing without evidence. You're categories are blurred. If this could not happen there would be no such thing as equivocation. That is the definition of faith in the colloquial usage of the term. The definition you are trying to equate with the other. Now how can it be that this word has several different definitions? Is the word that dynamic that we just have to figure out which one it is? No, the context in which it is used will determine this. Understand? You're the one asserting absolutes, not me.
|
|