re: #783 HoosierHoops

I also wish to apologize. And to thank you for forcing me to rethink how to state my original thesis.

Everyone was defending science against what they viewed as my slight against it by comparing it to religion. That is not what I intended. I don’t feel they are equal. Religion doesn’t explain the workings of the universe in a comprehensible and repeatable way. Science does. That was never my issue.

Having grown up in a religious family and going on to study theology, I’ve spoken to many theologians who aren’t sure, but still present the ‘We have the way’ doctrine to the public. So when I come across posts where those from the scientific side say, ‘These are the facts’ I get twitchy. That is where the comparison is for me. The presentation to the laity.

I don’t doubt for a moment that scientists are within a few degrees when they predict the temp at the core of the sun. It’s when that rational, reasonable application of scientific principle is presented in a way that makes it sound like a hard proven fact that I have a problem. i.e. a textbook in a college level (maybe even high school, though younger than that there are other issues involved) states that the core temp of the sun is…instead of saying ‘based on all observable data and all accepted scientific knowledge, the temperature at the core of the sun would have to be…

Does that make more sense?
‘