It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
In regards to the subject being off-topic, you brought up the idea of religious faith not me, although I believe that science involving faith is very much core to this whole thread. Then again, what would I know, I only started the thread.
The only reason religion requires faith is because it has not been proven to be true. Once there is proof, faith is redundant. Agreed? If science doesn't require faith it must be true. Agreed? If this is the case, why does science always change with newer discoveries? The truth doesn't need to change. Face it, IT'S A RELIGION, that's why.
Just as a side note, it is not my responsibility to research your fanciful ideas of different varieties of faith, as I cannot research figments of your imagination. You brought it up, you do the research and present your findings here.
Originally posted by mytym
I often read that "this or that" cannot be scientifically proven, thus it isn't true or doesn't exist. A perfect example is the non-physical or spiritual world. Many dismiss it's existence simply because it cannot be scientifically proven. Science doesn't believe in the spiritual world, so the chances of it being able to prove it's existence are pretty slim. To make matters worse, it then uses this assumption as a basis for explaining other phenomena. If the assumption is wrong, everything based on it is unreliable. Despite this flaw, a hallmark of many religions, we continue to use science as the ONLY gospel of truth.
The religion of 'popular' science with its millions of passive believers as well as fanatical worshippers that simply take a given theory as gospel without challenge is directly comparable to the popular religions of the day.
Originally posted by mytym
You were right on the money with the narrow mindedness of science. However you seemed to get off track with the remainder of your post. I think my explanation is fairly easy to understand.
[edit on 24/4/06 by mytym]
Originally posted by mytym
It's not the method itself per se. It's the beliefs that limit the the choice of method adopted.