God and Science

[SilasCole]

I think many who uphold science forget first that science is extremely fickle and in constant flux. seriously, a published article written five years ago may be 'dated' information now, ten years maybe on the general track, 20 years, it's backwards or embarrassing 50 or more, the information is laughable or absurd. Look at a science book from the renaissance and compare the information with what we have today.

Second, the notion of science is purely objective field is a recent development, probably less than 400 yrs in practice, which is very short time in terms of world history. Even in 1687 Harvard university was still teaching Aristotle's work in physics, Ptolemy in astronomy, and Galen in medicine and likely continued well into the 1770s when fluency in Greek and Latin were the mark of an educated person.

[Philip]

Silas, welcome to the forum!

Not sure what your point is? The scientific METHOD is not fickle - it is consistent. But do the findings of scientific research and understandings, over time, can definitely reveal that theories once held to not be validated by subsequent data? Of course. And there ARE limits to what science is capable of showing us - because it's tools are unable to examine beyond the physical / observable.

[SilasCole]

I think many who uphold science forget first that science is extremely fickle and in constant flux. seriously, a published article written five years ago may be 'dated' information now, ten years maybe on the general track, 20 years, it's backwards or embarrassing 50 or more, the information is laughable or absurd. Look at a science book from the renaissance and appvalley tutuapp tweakbox compare the information with what we have today.

Second, the notion of science is purely objective field is a recent development, probably less than 400 yrs in practice, which is very short time in terms of world history. Even in 1687 Harvard university was still teaching Aristotle's work in physics, Ptolemy in astronomy, and Galen in medicine and likely continued well into the 1770s when fluency in Greek and Latin were the mark of an educated person.

it's backwards or embarrassing 50 or more, thankyou !

[pladium]

I think many who uphold science forget first that science is extremely fickle and in constant flux. seriously, a published article written five years ago may be 'dated' information now, ten years maybe on the general track, 20 years, it's backwards or embarrassing 50 or more, the information is laughable or absurd. Look at a science book from the renaissance and compare the information with what we have today.

Second, the notion of science is purely objective field is a recent development, probably less than 400 yrs in practice, which is very short time in terms of world history. Even in 1687 Harvard university was still teaching Aristotle's work in physics, Ptolemy in astronomy, and Galen in medicine and likely continued well into the 1770s when fluency in Greek and Latin were the mark of an educated person.

Science is a rational human explanation for the world apart from God.

God created the universe and gave humans the intelligence to understand the universe- therefore creating the study of science.

[Challenger007]

Silas, welcome to the forum!

Not sure what your point is? The scientific METHOD is not fickle - it is consistent. But do the findings of scientific research and understandings, over time, can definitely reveal that theories once held to not be validated by subsequent data? Of course. And there ARE limits to what science is capable of showing us - because it's tools are unable to examine beyond the physical / observable.

As for me, science is limited by technical possibilities, while religion is limited by medieval stereotypes and obsolete rules. Not so long ago, we had no idea at all that there could be a wireless connection, but today each of us has a smartphone. Not so long ago, only learned men could observe celestial bodies, and today anyone can buy a telescope and do astronomy for their own pleasure. I am no exception, when I was reading this article, I decided to buy my own home telescope, which you can take with you outside the city. So, everyone can be his own scientist. Science is limitless.

[Philip]

From the same paragraph:

Challenger: As for me, science is limited by technical possibilities...

Challenger: Science is limitless.

I'm confused - so, which is it?

[RickD]

From the same paragraph:

Challenger: As for me, science is limited by technical possibilities...

Challenger: Science is limitless.

I'm confused - so, which is it?

Neither. He just wants you to click on the link in his post. He does this from time to time with his posts.

[Challenger007]

From the same paragraph:

Challenger: As for me, science is limited by technical possibilities...

Challenger: Science is limitless.

I'm confused - so, which is it?

Science is developing very quickly, expanding opportunities. I meant that the existing restrictions are only temporary. Could we send satellites to Mars 20 years ago? And now it is already possible for us. And in 10 years the possibilities will be even greater. The development of science expands the boundaries of knowledge. That is, the existing boundaries are temporary, but where are the permanent boundaries that no one can overcome? I will not name them, because more and more incredible things are becoming everyday.

[pladium]

From the same paragraph:

Challenger: As for me, science is limited by technical possibilities...

Challenger: Science is limitless.

I'm confused - so, which is it?

Neither. He just wants you to click on the whatsapp plus apk link in his post. He does this from time to time with his posts.

Yes I think you are absolutely right about this.