Faith...

Hatter The Mad said:
No it isn't. Science assumes false until proven otherwise
Click to expand...


Rubbish. Science makes no assertions (True or False) until proven, and even then all proofs are considered fallible and subject to rigerous testing lest they should be proved wrong.


By your logic, the Higgs Boson absolutely definitely does not exist because it has not been found yet. Show me the 'scientists' making that claim.
 
Last edited:
Hatter The Mad said:
No it isn't. Science assumes false until proven otherwise, and the burden of proof is on the asserter when it comes to unfalsifiable claims like the existence of God.
Click to expand...


No it doesn't. Science doesn't assume anything to be false or true without evidence either way. effectively It reserves judgement.

Hatter The Mad said:
Or are you suggesting that you really won't call me nuts when I say that my tea pot orbits the moon, but you can't prove it because it is too small to be detected by a telescope? By your definition, you must treat my assertions with the same "Maybe there is" as you do with a God.
Click to expand...

What reasoning do you have to believe that there is a teapot orbiting the moon?

I may not accept your reasons, but that doesn't necessarily mean you are mad.

Of course, if you do not believe in the teapot, and are only inventing it then I have no more reason to accept that conjecture as you do not yourself.



Hatter The Mad said:
Do you go about life accepting everything you have been told as potentially going either way? You need to think critically.

I am as agnostic about God as I am about the fairy sat on your shoulder right now.
Click to expand...


I make judgements how I see fit, I do think critically. Unfortunately many atheists do not.
 
BunnyKillBot said:
Rubbish. Science makes no assertions (True or False) until proven, and even then all proofs are considered fallible and subject to rigerous testing lest they should be proved wrong.
Click to expand...
You are right, I worded it very simplistically and it is not a blanket rule - but if an assertion is unfalsifiable (which God is and the Boson is not) then yes, it is false until proven otherwise.
 
Hatter The Mad said:
You are right, I worded it very simplistically and it is not a blanket rule - but if an assertion is unfalsifiable (which God is and the Boson is not) then yes, it is false until proven otherwise.
Click to expand...

Lets hypothesise that after sifting through the unfathomable reems of data the experiments are CERN produce, after doing multiple analysis this way and that, they do not find what they were looking for, and the Boson is not proved to exist.

Does that, scientifically, mean that the Higgs Boson doesn't exist?
 
Hatter The Mad said:
Not if the claim is unfalsifiable.


Because I said so.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance
Click to expand...

I am not ignorant of either science nor religion.


for every atheistic scientist who supposes that science supports (or does not undermine) their atheism, there is a religiously inclined scientist who supposes that science supports (or does not undermine) their theism. Thus the atheist simplifies the very complicated and much contended question of the relationship between science and atheism/religion if they suppose that the evidence provided by the scientific study of the natural and social world unequivocally points to atheism. This is evident in each of the main branches of science, both natural and social, which have some relevance to the issue of the truth or falsity of atheism/religion.
Click to expand...

http://www.investigatingatheism.info/science.html
 
Castiel said:
What is the difference in falsifiability between God and the Higgs Boson?
Click to expand...
The Higgs boson of the standard model is falsifiable - if it exists it will be seen by the Large Hadron Collider. If it is seen, then it exists. If it is not seen, then it does not.

Evidence drawn from current, repeatable observations and experiment say it could be seen in this energy range.
 
BunnyKillBot said:
Lets hypothesise that after sifting through the unfathomable reems of data the experiments are CERN produce, after doing multiple analysis this way and that, they do not find what they were looking for, and the Boson is not proved to exist.

Does that, scientifically, mean that the Higgs Boson doesn't exist?
Click to expand...
Under the standard model, yes.
 
Hatter The Mad said:
The Higgs boson of the standard model is falsifiable - if it exists it will be seen by the Large Hadron Collider. If it is seen, then it exists. If it is not seen, then it does not.

Evidence drawn from current, repeatable observations and experiment say it could be seen in this energy range.
Click to expand...

So the variables are all accounted for? The maths is perfect and complete?
 
Hatter The Mad said:
I didn't say you were, but you are committing that logical fallacy ^
Click to expand...

I'm not because I am not making any claims from ignorance, you are.

as in your claims regarding God being unfalsifiable. You would first need to quantify God, and define the perimeters for study.

Just like you have with the higgs boson and the standard model.


Absence of Evidence is not Evidence of Absence.

"Absence of Evidence is a condition in which no valid conclusion can be inferred from the mere absence of detection, normally due to doubt in the detection method."

so you go away and devise a valid scientific test for God, and then we can see for ourselves.


Atheism comes to a specific conclusion that there is 'no God' based not on evidence of absence, but absence of evidence. That is scientifically an invalid position and thus a belief, much the same as a belief in God.

Agnostics and Science are of the opinion that no valid conclusion can be made either way and until a valid test can be made science makes no judgement.
 
Last edited:
I'm a Muslim and I do. 100% of the time I question my faith it comes to a conclusion that my faith is maintained, its because of scientific facts that is stated in the Quran and the Hadiths. Also the Bible contributes to the strengthening of my belief.
 
Hatter The Mad said:
Not if the claim is unfalsifiable.
Click to expand...

I don't think that if a claim is unfalsifiable that science immediately says it is false - it would seem more logical and consistent for science to say it cannot arrive at a conclusion either way about it. Alternatively and equally logically consistent is for science to declare the question irrelevant to science.
 
Castiel said:
How the militant atheists would love to co opt agnostics into their belief.

Its simply not true though. Atheists believe there is no God, agnostics simply do not know and await evidence either way.

Agnosticism is the only scientifically acceptable way to look at it objectively. Both Religion and Athiesm are based on an unprovable foundation.
Click to expand...

+1
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom