WILL SCIENCE DISPROVE GOD? [Spirituality & Religion]

@MarmeeMarch ...what?

@BlueMetalChick Pay him no mind. 🙄

@MarmeeMarch Absolutely right! God is evident everywhere. In science too!

@Carazaa When your only pseudo-explanation is ‘goddidit’ then your only choice is to apply that pseudo-explanation everywhere and to everything, even though it explains nothing (not even itself)

@Carazaa
Don’t take her serious. She doesn’t know much above secondary science when tested.

@Aliveshock 😂😂Is that one below primary science, is it? 😂😂

@Carazaa Look, you can believe in whatever you want to. Go believe in God and enjoy it. But please stay out of science. People who conduct science don't need you trying to corrupt what we do by ramming god goddy godgod in our work.

@newjaninev2
Please go on and show your intelligence.
It is easy to demonstrate you are one not to be taken seriously.

@Aliveshock you say it’s easy... yet you fail to do it.

Are you lazy... or merely incompetent?

@newjaninev2
Keep going...you are doing plenty to demonstrate your emotional immaturity for someone over 70.

@BlueMetalChick Evolution? More like devilution!!!

@MrBlueGuy Fucking everyone dunked on him, even intellectual lightweights were scoring points. It was funny in a sad kind of way.

@BlueMetalChick Wow! What an excellent example of a creationist! A paragon of the group

@MrBlueGuy
Evolution is another push button belief.
There is no proof unless you are going to go back to the woman ape Lucille! 🙄

@Aliveshock [quote]There is no proof[/quote]

Nor does science seek any proof...

Time to advance your understanding...

We look at the world, and we notice things. Many of these things seem to be related, and so we try to come up with an explanation as to how they’re related. This explanation is called a Theory… we can think of these as ‘Big T’ Theories, because they are based on demonstrable evidence and they have wide explanatory power. Scientists then test the Theory in order to prove that it is wrong. This is an important point, and it seems to constantly confuse non-scientists. Science doesn’t try to prove that a Theory is correct. Science tries to prove that the Theory is wrong, and the Theory is accepted only so long as we are unable to show that it is wrong.


Contrast this with our everyday ‘theories’ (my neighbour is probably cheating on her taxes… my friend is having an affair), which are simply vague hunches or convenient fictions - we can think of those as small-t theories. Usually we go looking for evidence to support these ‘theories’, and it is common for us to ignore evidence that contradicts them. It seems to me that it's these vague hunches or convenient fictions that people have in mind when they say that evolution is ‘just a theory’.

Would you like to discuss some of the evidence from which the Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection is drawn?

@newjaninev2
Would you quit your copy and paste. I am not wasting my time.

@Aliveshock What I just posted is my own work

I have more... but apparently you're too afraid of it to even read it.

@newjaninev2
Your favorite activity is to flatter your own knowledge. Get your theories and terms in line and it comes across much more impressive. It doesn’t hurt to be honest also.

@Aliveshock you’re sticking with evasion and allusion, I see. Probably wise for a one-book wonder.

@newjaninev2
The repulsion is mutual. Your incorrect use of scientific terms and misunderstandings do make this humorous though. Keep up the comedy pumpkin!

@Aliveshock It may well surprise you to earn that Eric Lerner is neither authoritative nor correct in Big Bang matters. In fact, he’s a long-standing joke

Let’s discuss why that is so

@newjaninev2
Are you trying to understand the big bang and what you term incorrectly as the “expansion theory”. That had to be embarrassing when you used the incorrect scientific terms.

@Aliveshock Tell me, what do you mean by 'expansion theory' and why do you keep talking about it?

@newjaninev2
Why don’t you tell me. That was your term to explain Guth’s Inflation theory and multiverses which you know nothing about.