Scientists

S

Strider

Guest
One hour left of work on Friday, so I rant...

Fact: In general scientists are paid to come to a conclusion.

If a scientist is hired to find a cure to a disease and is not producing results their contract is not renewed ie they are fired. Therefore "fudging" data often saves your job and believe me happens a lot.
If I said that aliens visited and thus contaminated the evolutionary chain creating the platypus. Prove me wrong. You can theororize that is more possible that something else lead to the platypus but you cant prove my statment wrong. Now if I were to propose something less rediculous, but just as improbable, and happened to be a proffessor or scientist my ideas would be in text books and would influence many people. Look at crop circles, lockness monster and the like. Millions believe in these exposed hoaxes to this day and have so called "Scientific Backing". If I came up with absolute proff that evolution was false, How many people would be out of work? How much funding would universities lose? How many books, some peoples life work, would be worthless? Therefore how much resistance would I Meet if I had a different Theory?
Some scientists tell us Dinosaurs died out 6mil. years ago but we have unfossilized dinosaur bones and cave drawings and ancient literature that have accurate pictures of dinosaurs (before they were descovered) yet its still taught as Fact. Creationist are no better. For example the "canopy" flood theory is nothing more than a theory but many teach it as if it came from the mouth of God.

The Point: Scientists are humans, falable, greedy and arrogant, full of bios and motive. Yet I read discussions with both sides quoting scientists like their words are fact.

I have faith that God created the Universe. How he did it? I don't know. I have yet to see actual evidence that contradicts a Creator. The bible, I believe, is a gift to help guide us to our Creater to have a relationship with Him not explain why there is platypie.

Peace†
 
That, or maybe you're just mad that you don't have an ounce of logic in your entire body, boyo.

Scientists who "fudge data" are not scientists. They are charlatans trying to save their azzes.

Science deserves respect because, unlike religion, it doesn't rely on the herding instinct (BAAA-BAAA-BAAA!) to progress.

You've as much right to bash science as a sheep has the right to bash sentience.
 
I have a degree in Computer Science so I am, by degree, a Scientist. I'm saying your bent if you beleive they hold themselves to some super human moral standard.
And as someone who has been on the "inside" I know that many, not all, deserve NO respect.

P.S. I did some archeology in University and when you want something dated the first thing the lab asks is "How old do you think it is?". Then the results usually are close to what you tell them. "Now thats science!"
 
Actually the scientists who get paid the most for hard conclusions are the ones who work on the less theoretical stuff for research companies. Not much tolerance for fairytales there, I'd imagine, they're looking for people who can produce the sort of science that leads to hydrogen power, cold fusion or a brand new cure for Cancer/Aids/Ebola/Anthrax.

There are, without doubt, some scientists who fudge data, but what you're suggesting is a massive conspiracy of silence, lies and incompetence. All that and STILL we manage to keep airplanes and space stations up in the sky, eh?

Eon
 
Politics is the primary driving force in science.

Keeping airplanes and space stations operational is the job or Engineers not scientists. Scientists may come up with the initial theories but its the engineers in these cases who have to make them work.
And I agree the scientists who produce, actually make a cure or discover an actual law are usefull. Enstien, and a large group of others, for example had atomic theories and with trial and error some theories were dismissed others turned out right and we had a A-Bomb. My beef is mainly with theoredical scientists where there is no trial and error to practically test the theories.  

Although things like global warming where these are not theoredical scientists and for every pro scientist there is another con is kind of fustrating.  Escpecially when you find out that public opinion on the subject is based mostly on the type of TV and radio shows they listen to.
 
Geez guys let's bash the entire technological world while we're at it.
Damar, you have to get some stuff that's more based than calling Christians Sheep...my father's a nurse and he's a Christian. I suppose it's by blind faith that he manages to do his job well, keep it for many years, and actually help people out with their miserable, sickly lives...all by being a sheep, right?
You are pathetic when you bash like that.
You know what religion is? It's belief. The opposite of science. Science is theory, applying theory to practice for an answer, and then penning the theory into fact if it is proven to be true and tossing it out the window if not. Get a brain.
Ahem, also, if you knew anything, I think you might want to take a look at a common biology highschool textbook and flip to the area of australopithecus man and all our other evolutionary ancestors. Then I want you to tell me if the book actually tells you, as it will at the museum, that australopithecus's entire skull and body was reconstructed from 300 portions of bone...will you find that? No. They won't tell you that, either, in the textbooks.
Metallica in the background...sorry.
Will they tell you hat Lucy's body parts was found over 1.5 miles apart and 300 feet difference in the ground? By evolution's famed Dr. Leaky? No.
PEking man. Some bashed in skulls around a 23-foot ashpit proves apeman theory. Well, guess what people in Orient did for monkeys sometimes? Monkeymeat sucks to eat, so they bash open their skulls and fry their brains. Good eatin'! So, once again evolution disproved for the apeman links...every single one of them.
That's science? My science can't even discover a single truth in over a century of funding from the government and from different countries, and creationism does more for itself with funding from creationists alone? So to sum up the organic sciences, which have to be based on an origin, creationism or evolution, they are nil.
Evolution is empty. It is disproved by itself, time and time again, and great evolutionists scoff at it when "truths" are presented in favor of evolution. The actual truth of science makes great discoveries such as in Nebraska in 1922 by the great Osborn. A tooth was found, and the tooth was used to recreate an entire evolutionary ancestor, but when that was totally disproved, guess what? It turns out it belongs to an extinct pig! And then that extinct pig is found to be thriving in South America! That is SCIENCE?! I spurn science! I will turn to bowing before the bearded man in the sky any day over evolution if that is the best they can offer, a screwed-up chronology, a screwed-up basis of facts, a screwed-up proving method: dating fossils by the ground and the ground by the fossils?!
May the sheep bash on!
 
Global warming has to do with the carbon dioxide equilibrium in the atmosphere. Basically, the Earth naturally deals with carbon dioxide, but now there is too much being input into the atmosphere. You would be correct in saying that most people are clueless on the matter.  They realize that cars and industry pollute the air, although how it affects the atmosphere they really don't know.  I personally believe that newer can cleaner technologies should be GRADUALLY phased in to correct the problem and companies given time to adapt in order to protect people's jobs and the economy.  Anyways, that's another discussion heh.

As for scientists making things up, I don't think so dude.  If they're making a theory without testing it than they're not following the scientific method anyways, but I'd have to see a large number of cases where we have scientists making things up before I agree.  As of now, I disagree with you, because I find that scientists are pretty well on the mark, and they have evidence to back their claims.
 
Also nobody is paying scientists to find out the secrets of evolution, there is no profit from it. The research is mostly done by college proffessors who get their money teaching and have acces to research facilities at their universities. They really have no motivation to fudge their research in the studying of things like that.
 
Damar, you have been asked repeatedly to stop using profanity on our boards. You cannot even seem to follow this simple request. You bring very little weight to your arguements when you cannot even follow a simple rule such as this.

Cory
 
I think he already expressed his oppinions on that elsewhere.
Ehh, no. Evolutionists get funding for their research from universities, and also from certain governmental departments, not strictly US.
They have no motivation to fudge their findings, eh? What say you to to the great hoax of the fossilized bird-dino found? Everyone spazzed about it, thinking it proved birds evolved from dinos. Then, it turns out to be a total bogus hoax.
What about Lucy? 1.5 miles, 300 feet? I would say a tad fudging was going on there with Leaky...
 
There have been a lot of revealed hoaxes on evolution, but when it comes to general R&D I don't think there is any...
 
Evolution is a 19th century theory disproved by 21th centruy science. Most scientists KNOW that evoltion is false, but they teach it becuase they have a fear of not being tenured, of not getting research grants, of not being published and of not being accepted by their associates.

wink.gif
 
Wow.. that's quite a sweeping generalization considering you didn't provide a single point of data to back it up.
 
In University I was dissapointed by how political and non scientific a lot of the studies were therefore, hopefully, my point was to get people to realise every thing we hear from scientists isn't necessarily the truth, even in Universities it money driven.
I knew there would be angry replies. To those who get angry when people attack science, realize that science is your religion. Thats where your faith lies and when I attack scientists its like you attacking someones Pastor or Priest. Many follow scientists with blind faith, never seeing with their own eyes the evidence, yet will attack Christians on the basis of "Blind Faith".
 
The minute a Pastor provides real evidence to back up Christianity it'll be the same.

I do not have blind faith in Science, but I am surrounded by the effects of science every waking day. I see it at work around me.

Of course the same could be said of religion - do we not still have discrimination, hatred, conflict and opression?

Eon
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Mr_Eon @ Feb. 23 2003,9:39)]Of course the same could be said of religion - do we not still have discrimination, hatred, conflict and opression?

Eon
Click to expand...
Defineatly. Pastors, Priests Etc. are just people too and now one should follow an Idea because a Pastor said so. Religion has its corruption, lies etc. too, so why is science any different.

What is the motivation for honesty in science? How many drugs have been released causing horrible damages? Were they released because the scientits felt the product was 100% or was there finacial and political pressure to release?
 
Well, if Pastors etc are just human, then Scientists are doubly so...

And seeing as you Christians are at the forefront of making medical testing harder, I don't think you can come over all holier than thou about drugs that go wrong!

Eon
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]The minute a Pastor provides real evidence to back up Christianity it'll be the same.
Click to expand...

Eon still hasn't studied archeology and history.  I'll leave you to do so and report back when you've finished.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]I do not have blind faith in Science, but I am surrounded by the effects of science every waking day. I see it at work around me.
Click to expand...

Do you fully understand the REASONS for those effects though?  I understand the reasons for a lot of them, being an enthusiast in the subject, but for things beyond the scope of my current knowledge I too must rely on those who are more knowledgable than I am, blindly if need be.  Afterall, do you understand all of the terminology and theory associated with quantum mechanics?

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Of course the same could be said of religion - do we not still have discrimination, hatred, conflict and opression?
Click to expand...

We would have it anyway.  Don't atheists exhibit the same behaviour?

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]And seeing as you Christians are at the forefront of making medical testing harder, I don't think you can come over all holier than thou about drugs that go wrong!
Click to expand...

Was thalydemide the fault of Christians?  We all know the story behind that.  It was tested and the facts were known, but it was still marketed as a safe drug.  You know the unfortunate result.
 
Oh right... So that's one example to stack next to the cures for smallpox the improvement of hygiene, flight, communications... Nice example...

Eon
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Oh right... So that's one example to stack next to the cures for smallpox the improvement of hygiene, flight, communications...  Nice example...
Click to expand...

Cures for smallpox?  Improvement of hygiene? Flight?  Communications?  Explain.  The last three don't even have anything to do with medical research.  And, if Christians are so dedicated to stopping scientiffic development, than why were many of the greatest scientists of all time Christians?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top