Post by Radrook Admin on Jul 7, 2022 22:47:30 GMT -5
Science and cogent reasoning
There is this very widespread albeit erroneous notion that as long as conclusions are claimed to be backed by the scientific method, they are genuinely scientifically justified conclusions. Well, as the famous saying goes, nothing could be farther from the truth. Why? Simple, because very often such conclusions have NEVER been verified by the scientific method. In fact, the failure of the scientific method to verify them s fact offers a justifiable reason to reject the as bogus. In such a case, placing such ideas under the science label is merely a deception.
Lets consider abiogenesis as an example. Now, despite the seemingly unshakable certitude that atheists display, abiogenesis is a phenomenon that has never been observed to have happened in nature, since in nature life always comes from previous life.
Even more significantly, all efforts at inducing abiogenesis to occur under controlled lab conditions have failed miserably. Yet, whenever astronomers discuss the probability of live existing somewhere besides our earth, they always express their unshakable belief in the reality of that phenomenon. A little water, a goldilocks zone, and sooner or later- life!
Now, please note, that wishful thinking and ignoring of what observations indicate and what laboratory results always reveal, is not science. In fact, it is the exact antithesis of what science involves, the confirmation of an idea or hypothesis via a systematic observation and a lab replication proving that our conclusions are true via replication of the phenomenon in a lab.
Abiogenesis fails to provide a confirmation of its validity via all of all these tests. For that reason anyone putting it forth as undeniable fact is either ignorant of the exigencies of the scientific method or else is aware of the requirements but doesn't care and is striving to deceive.
Since the ones treating abioegenesis as if it were an undeniable proven fact are scientists trained to be scrupulously strict in their methodology, ignorance cannot be the reason why they propagate such an unproven idea in that way. The reason must be theophobia, the extreme pathological aversion to all things having to do with a creator.
Lets consider abiogenesis as an example. Now, despite the seemingly unshakable certitude that atheists display, abiogenesis is a phenomenon that has never been observed to have happened in nature, since in nature life always comes from previous life.
Even more significantly, all efforts at inducing abiogenesis to occur under controlled lab conditions have failed miserably. Yet, whenever astronomers discuss the probability of live existing somewhere besides our earth, they always express their unshakable belief in the reality of that phenomenon. A little water, a goldilocks zone, and sooner or later- life!
Now, please note, that wishful thinking and ignoring of what observations indicate and what laboratory results always reveal, is not science. In fact, it is the exact antithesis of what science involves, the confirmation of an idea or hypothesis via a systematic observation and a lab replication proving that our conclusions are true via replication of the phenomenon in a lab.
Abiogenesis fails to provide a confirmation of its validity via all of all these tests. For that reason anyone putting it forth as undeniable fact is either ignorant of the exigencies of the scientific method or else is aware of the requirements but doesn't care and is striving to deceive.
Since the ones treating abioegenesis as if it were an undeniable proven fact are scientists trained to be scrupulously strict in their methodology, ignorance cannot be the reason why they propagate such an unproven idea in that way. The reason must be theophobia, the extreme pathological aversion to all things having to do with a creator.