Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

Why is Science and Math so infallible?

Name: Anonymous 2008-03-24 12:48

Discuss

Name: Anonymous 2008-03-24 12:59

Because there's a finite amount of information, and since we as a species have an eternity to work with, we can eventually piece together absolutely everything, just like a jigsaw puzzle.

Name: Anonymous 2008-03-24 14:19

Infallible? Not even close.

Name: RedCream 2008-03-24 19:35

>>3
Science and math are a FUCK of a lot closer to infallibility than the alternative, which is the opinion of a largely drug-and sex-addled elder who believes in an imaginary friend.

However, your message is apt.  We should not load up science and math with too much responsibility, lest we have a collapse.

Name: Anonymous 2008-03-24 22:19

Philosophy > science and math.

Name: Anonymous 2008-03-24 23:42

>>5
A University Physics department chair, tired of hearing non-stop requests for laboratory equipment, calls all of the department's professors into an office. He says to them, "We simply don't have enough funding for all of this expensive equipment. You need to be more like the math professors; all they need is pens, paper, and wastebaskets. Or better yet, the philosophy professors! They just need the pens and paper."

Name: Anonymous 2008-03-25 5:02

>>6
o lawd

Name: Anonymous 2008-03-25 6:20

Science/math is just the breaking down of things into a simplified abstraction of reality; a model of the real world. Well actually, math doesn't even pretend to exist in the real world anymore. Scientists still arrogantly claim their models are reality though.

Name: Anonymous 2008-03-25 7:08

define reality. thread over.

Name: Anonymous 2008-03-25 14:05

"god does not play dice with the universe"

Name: Anonymous 2008-03-25 16:05

>>10
Proven wrong!

Name: Anonymous 2008-03-25 20:44

he must be playing Craps

Name: RedCream 2008-03-26 1:05

Listen carefully, fucktards.

Before you can propose dice are thrown, you have to have a dice-tosser.

There is ZERO evidence of this dice-tosser you laughingly refer to as "god".

Establish this "god", and then we can talk like adults.  Until then, you're just making farting noises with your mouth.

Name: Anonymous 2008-03-26 11:54

>>13
Einstein was using it metaphorically. He was either an atheist or a pantheist, though his pantheism was such that most religious people wouldn't recognise it as religion.
Too hard for you to understand? You're exactly as insightful as the theotards you oppose.

Name: Anonymous 2008-03-26 13:29

>>1-15
is going to hell.

Name: Anonymous 2008-03-26 13:55

Einstein also said that he believed in God.

WHAT NOW, CUNTS!!!!

Name: Anonymous 2008-03-26 14:25

>>14
Einstein said that the more he discovered the secrets of the universe the more he was convinced there was an intelligence behind it all.

WHAT NOW?! CUNTS!!!

Name: Anonymous 2008-03-26 14:48

>>16,17
"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."
-- Albert Einstein

Einstein's God was Spinoza's God; that is to say, barely a god at all. He was a pantheist if anything.

Name: Anonymous 2008-03-26 14:55

Who gives a fuck what Einstein believed?

Name: Anonymous 2008-03-26 15:10

>>19
YEAH WHO CARES ABOUT THAT SHIT. Did you see the game last night dawg?

Name: Anonymous 2008-03-26 15:27

>>18
I don't give a fuck if he liked Panthera or not, the fact is he believed in an intelligent designer.

Name: Anonymous 2008-03-26 15:27

>>20
Einstein believed/didn't believe X, ergo X is true/false? GET A BRAIN MORAN!

Name: Anonymous 2008-03-26 15:43

>>22
GET A BRIAN, MORON!

Name: Anonymous 2008-03-26 16:44

Seems like all the sciTards are pretty silent on this....AAAAAAHHHAHAHAAHAAHAAHAAHAH!


niggers.

Name: Anonymous 2008-03-26 17:07

>>21
Making shit up doesn't make them true, faggot. Einstein did not believe in your god.

>>22
This isn't about that, it's about his reputation, which these christfags are trying to shit all over.

Name: Anonymous 2008-03-26 18:44

>>25
How do you know what god I believe in, or if I believe in any god, asscheese?

Are you willing to admit that Einstein believed in "A God?"
Because if you're not, you're intellectually dishonest and should be banned for life. And sodomized.

Name: Anonymous 2008-03-26 19:52

>>26
What Einstein calls "God" is not something common godfags would call "God". Do you even have the slightest clue what "pantheism" means?

Name: RedCream 2008-03-26 19:54

What some smart guy believed before he died in 1955 is IRRELEVANT.

What is relevant is EVIDENCE.

Cite all this evidence for the existence of this "god" or ADMIT that it doesn't exist.

Because, baby, this "god" thing looked pretty damned evidence-producing in all those stupid Bible stories.  So where's a burning bush we can take video of?  Oops!  Where's the voice from on high we can capture on audio tape?  Oops!  NO FUCKING EVIDENCE, SUDDENLY?

The only logical answer is that there's NO GOD.  And if you disagree, you STILL can't produce any fucking evidence.  Evidence is key, and you just DON'T FUCKING HAVE ANY.

Time to GROW UP, you religitards.

Name: Anonymous 2008-03-26 19:59

>>28

God only appears to chosen prophets. 

Name: 4tran 2008-03-26 20:18

>>16
Newton believed in God and alchemy.  Does that make either of them right?

>>29
Find me a prophet.  Oh right, they don't exist either.

Name: Anonymous 2008-03-26 21:52

ITT Butthurt sciTards hate that the people they worship believed in God.

AAAAAAAAAAHAHHHAHHHAAAAHAHA!!  HAHA!  HA!

WHAT NOW?!, SCI-CUNTS!!!

Name: Anonymous 2008-03-26 21:55

>>31
Troll score: 0/10

Name: Anonymous 2008-03-27 8:41

>>28
You are the one that needs to grow up, don't you realize you constantly get trolled?

Name: Anonymous 2008-03-27 15:23

Since this thread is questioning the fallibility of Math and Science, any arguement that utilizes the logical style of Math and Science is not valid.

Name: Anonymous 2008-03-27 15:34

>>34
Your argument uses logic so it's not valid.

PARADOX

Name: 4tran 2008-03-27 20:49

>>33
But I have to ask you, who is the troll?  RedCream, or his provokers?

Name: RedCream 2008-03-28 2:22

>>33
Trolled or not, my message stands.  Prove the existence of this "god" or STFU as a babybrained fool.

>>36
You're talking waaaaaay over the heads of those kinds of people.  They think that trolls are based upon fiction, when any rational examination of the facts would conclude that they are based upon real concerns to some degree.

In a similar fashion, all myths are based upon grains of truth.  Those true items may be tiny, but they're still there.  The "trolls" talking up religion are still basing their efforts upon ideas, which are still adopted by most of the populace.  Too many people believe in this religious shitcrap.  Troll-recognized or not, those beliefs a threat to rationality everywhere, and if Humanity is to truly advance as an intelligent civilization, we have to finally get rid of the religious stupidity.

Name: Anonymous 2008-03-28 8:39

I am the troll.

Pleased to meet ya'.....

AHHHAHHHAHAAHAHAHAAHAAHAA!

Name: Anonymous 2008-03-30 23:31

>>35

Your argument also uses logic so it's not valid.

Mine also uses logic so it, too, isn't valid.

Name: Anonymous 2008-03-31 6:47

>>37
>if Humanity is to truly advance as an intelligent civilization, we have to finally get rid of the religious stupidity.

Why not just get rid of stupid and genetically weak people? we could achieve 100,000 years of genetic progress in 200 or so years. HAIL HITLER!!

Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List