Part of reality, yes. Not explanations for... Which was my stated point. Or maybe I can't accept the fact that your comprehension is so poor.
I don't understand you, you are right. My point is you say science offers explanations of reality, but it doesn't really, it answers very few important elements. Would your life be greatly affected for the worse if you had no knowledge of science?
Science doesn't really offer explanations of reality? Where would we be without what we've had so far? Sitting round a fire wishing the snow would go? Watching our family and friends die at 40 years old? Knowing no more of the world than we could see in a few day's walk/ horse ride? Most definitely. I'd be unemployable in my current profession for a start.
That's my problem with many religious people, their kindness and happiness is fake and forced. They pretend to be good or pious (or straight) when they are really not. Can't God tell the difference?
It's not about how not having science would affect your life, I asked if having no knowledge of science would change your life(hypothetically speaking)? Fair enough, I can't argue with this Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
True, false people basically, but they tend to produce bad fruit in the end. And as Jesus said "Judge a person based on the fruit they produce" Something like that. And yes, god knows a mans heart.
In such a case I could end up as a deluded crackpot believer in ghosts, telepathy, UFOs, fortune-telling and other impossible fantasies. Like so many people who remain steadfastly ignorant of science. In short: a woo woo.
Maybe you're are the deluded one by putting all your eggs in one basket, a basket that is based purely on theories.
As opposed to things that don't give (real) answers? And maybe you don't know what the word "theory" means in a scientific context. It's not as nebulous as you seem to believe.
There is no such thing as a fact in science, it's honest like that. So your understanding of reality is a theory, and not a scientific theory at that. Are you a 16year old intellectual snob? I wonder why you visit the religion forum, because it isn't to learn, must be a ego trip.
Which I've already agreed is true. Wrong again. Theory (in a scientific context) means more than you seem to believe it does. Wrong again. On every point.
http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2348562&postcount=700 You: So is science. There are no facts in science. Me: No facts, granted. Oops, getting used to being wrong yet? How so? You seem to be under the impression that "theory" means a fairly nebulous concept (much as the word is used in every day life: in science a theory is far stronger than that). Prove it how? Come to that, why are you here?
Apologies. What give you that idea? Just because I said theory and not scientific theory you seem to assume it has less relevance. To learn mainly, I can't quote all the posts that prove this. Why are you here? Give me one post as evidence.
"a basket that is based purely on theories." "So your understanding of reality is a theory, and not a scientific theory at that." Seem to indicate to me that you consider "theory" to be a fairly unsubstantial thing. You can't prove it. I can demonstrate it: the questions I ask to obtain a deeper understanding, hmmm? Or maybe where I point out misconceptions and wait for clarification/ resolution?
Some people visit forums to witness. If was going to use a post to identify the reason Dave or Adstar or Lori7 were here, then I would have to say witness on behalf of their religion.
If one used my posts to conclude why I was here, then I say I'm here to contest the nonsense so that witnesses don't go unopposed.
I can see how you concluded what you did, but what I said isn't any less true is it? If you knew me personally you would know that I don't lie intentionally, but since you probably think I do lie then no I can't prove it, but I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. I suppose my questions mean less? This seems true.