11 Jul 12
1 edit
Originally posted by humyUnburden yourself my son and I will hear your confessions, but to excuse yourself withit was hard for Humy to
confess to the crimes of science,
science is scientific method and knowledge gained from scientific method ( anything else said to be science is false science ) . So can you answer just these three questions:
1, How can scientific method itself commit crimes rather than the crimes involving people committing crime ...[text shortened]... ple of a 'crime of science' that was NOT committed by people!........ANY example would do.....
rhetorical arguments and debates over semantics is not good, now when you are
ready. . . . .
11 Jul 12
3 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYour unwillingness to just answer the three simple questions is telling -You must know you are wrong.
Unburden yourself my son and I will hear your confessions, but to excuse yourself with
rhetorical arguments and debates over semantics is not good, now when you are
ready. . . . .
11 Jul 12
Originally posted by humyequations? lol, now i know i am dealing with a borg, half organic and half machine,
Your unwillingness to just answer the three simple equations is telling -You must know you are wrong.
equations, not questions! Oh dear Humy shall i light a candle for the God of science,
shall we offer up incense to its momentous achievements, heralded by the new
materialistic clinical vision of progress without morality? If your God is able to offer
any type of security, happiness and prosperity shall i ask it a question and will it
answer? Why are half the world starving because of lack of lifes necessities while the
other half are consuming a disproportionate amount of the earth's resources? science
has all the answers is the claim, and yet, there is an eerie silence.
11 Jul 12
2 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobie
equations? lol, now i know i am dealing with a borg, half organic and half machine,
equations, not questions! Oh dear Humy shall i light a candle for the God of science,
shall we offer up incense to its momentous achievements, heralded by the new
materialistic clinical vision of progress without morality? If your God is able to offer
any ty ...[text shortened]... th's resources? science
has all the answers is the claim, and yet, there is an eerie silence.
equations?
that was a spelling mistake that my spell corrector corrected to the wrong word. If you look, you see I have corrected the spelling to “questions”.
You have not answered my three questions.
11 Jul 12
3 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobie
The God of science is dead, we have no more need of its hollow promises of happiness,
prosperity and fulfilment. We are human.
The God of science
there is no God and never was. There is no God of anything.
We are human.
and we humans need science.
we have no more need of its hollow promises of happiness,
prosperity and fulfilment.
science is a tool that can and, whether you like it or not, has already and will continue to be used for the benefit humanity by those with compassion.
Science has already saved many lives.
The very highest estimate of how many people have died as a result of warfare since the industrial revolution is around 260 million ( see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_and_anthropogenic_disasters_by_death_toll ) .
A very conservative estimate of the number of lives saved via medicine since industrial revolution is at least around 400 million if one takes into account that modern medicine includes immunisation ( http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0017/84302/Seven_Key_Reasons.pdf
“...Immunization saves more than 3 million lives worldwide each year, and it saves millions more
from suffering illness and lifelong disability (WHO estimate, 2009)....” ) and antibiotics which includes penicillin ( “...It is estimated that penicillin has saved at least 200 million lives since its first use as a medicine in 1942. ...” )
-well, you do the maths if you don't believe me!
So, by any reasonable estimation, since the since industrial revolution, much more people have been saved by medicine than have died from warfare -An excellent demonstration that it IS possible for science to be use to do more good than harm. But what barrier would make this impossible anyway?
Of course, even if science is overall used to do more harm than good, that is not the fault of science but rather what people choose to use it for.
If, since the industrial revolution, everyone thought like me and some people on this forum that do not reject science and also the likes of Albert Einstein then science would have been used to save at least 400 million and used to kill 0.