re: #340 Dragonwolf

When does science=religion?
If science=ideas based on observable fact
&
religion=ideas that must be taken on faith
then
Where does a system that tells me that I must accept that they know the temperature at the center of the sun, the mass of the universe, even the exact rotational speed of the core of the earth without any direct observation of these items? Would that not be a religion with ‘scientists’ as its priests?

Now, I believe 99% of what scientists say, but I also know how many research dollars are at stake when it comes to maintaining the current paradigm of reality, even in biology.

Should creationism be taught, NO WAY. But should science be regarded as separate and better than religion? Let me ask you this…Wasn’t it the scientists who said the world was flat until they had more evidence? Isn’t science merely the religion of current beliefs until new evidence comes to light?

Where do we draw the line between what we can and cannot question in science. I don’t know. But I’d rather deal with the silly debates like creationism than quash all questioning of the current paradigm.

Let there be scientific heretics, aren’t they usually the ones who make the greatest discoveries?

Miss the point, much?

No one says you have to “believe” what scientists say. And other scientists are always out there checking on their colleagues.

Does this guarantee that they’re always right? Not hardly. Do some scientists say what their paymasters want to hear? Sure - the pharmaceuticals industry springs to mind. That’s why there are independent peer reviews. Don’t take a drug that hasn’t had ‘em.

As for the whole “flat earth” canard - the Greeks and Babylonians and others postulated a globe, and the idea never died, not even in the much-maligned Middle Ages. One of the Latin expressions for “the world” is orbis terrarum - the globe of earth.

Yes, let there be heretics. You don’t need to wish for them, however - if you define “heretic” as one who questions scientific data and explanations, science is and was and always will be full of them. So you needn’t fear a “science religion” with scientists as “priests” - except in one sense.

If we teach your unscientific definition of science and allow our kids to believe that anything called a “theory” is based on no more than an “idea” - then we’ll end up with a generation of dummies who will be entirely dependent on others when faced with any scientific information. They will be pig-ignorant and might as well believe that medicine is magic and astronomy = astrology.

See the point?