What differs a theory that can't be proven from a religion? Using a mathematical formula to prove anythingis the same as using any of the holy books to prove anything.
The only difference is that while religion is studied from a critical point of view physics is considered to be thruth from the begining.
33 comments
"What differs a theory that can't be proven from a religion?"
False argument. A theory is proven by the evidence that supports it. Religion is not based on evidence and often has strong evidence against it e.g. 4 legged insects.
"Using a mathematical formula to prove anythingis the same as using any of the holy books to prove anything."
Blatantly false. Math is a tool used along with evidence to support a theory, religion as noted above is not based on evidence.
[Using a mathematical formula to prove anythingis the same as using any of the holy books to prove anything.]
I've just counted the legs on an insect (an ant). There were 6 of them.
Please provide proof of this using only the bible. Cite the chapter and verse, please.
The only difference is that while religion is studied from a critical point of view physics is considered to be thruth from the begining.
Wrong, it is exactly the other way round.
It is science where you find a critical point of view. Scientists don´t have anything to win by covering up failures in other scientists theories. Quite the contrary, if a scientist discovers faults in another scientists theory his best choice would be to develope a paper of his own in which he disproves the theory and maybe also replaces it with a theory of hiw own.
I say after reading this, there needs to be a new law put into place ASAP. If your IQ is so low we question how you can breathe, I say we should put a sign around your neck saying "I'm Mentally Challenged" and make it illegal for you to operate a computer and vote.
Yeth! The holy thruths of phythics, as pothtulated by Ithaac Newthon, Albert Einthein, Macth Planck, Werner von Heithenberg, Thteven Hawking, Neil de Grathh Tython and tho many otherth! All of whom thpeak through the mouthpieth of Thylvether the Cat.
If you ask anybody in the world, "what is 2 + 2?" you should get the same answer, but Christians can't even agree on the works-vs-faith question.
Physics explains why two solid objects can not occupy the same space at the same time.
Um, Luthiliuth, do you need a fresh drool bib?
Using a mathematical formula to prove anything is the same as using any of the holy books to prove anything.
No, using holy books is called the "appeal to authority" fallacy. Mathematics doesn't appeal to authority. One may look to a teacher to learn it, because it's a complicated subject; but in theory, someone who is smart enough could figure it out themselves from scratch. Russell and Whitehead showed how to do it for simple arithmetic.
Comparing mathematics, probably the most cut and dry of all disciplines, to any holy book, which relies on esoteric interpretations based on personal opinion is very, very stupid, even for fundie standards.
"Using a mathematical formula to prove anythingis the same as using any of the holy books to prove anything."
No, because mathematical formulas can be proven, and make sense.
"The only difference is that while religion is studied from a critical point of view physics is considered to be thruth from the begining."
Oh.. for fuck's.. Here, let me just...
"The only difference is that while SCIENCE is studied from a critical point of view RELIGION is considered to be thruth from the begining."
There ya go, stupid.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
