One of the most ironic things about theists is that they demand from science absolute and definitive answers as to the origins of the universe and life. This demonstrates to me that they obviously don't understand the scientific method. Let me tell you what science is not. Science is not: absolute and it never makes such claims. Scientists are well aware that a theory is always subject to change or be discarded altogether due to the discovery of better evidence that explains whatever phenomenon they are trying to understand better.
The scientific method
The only step missing in the diagram above is the last and final step of submitting your work for peer review. Scientists are not only trying to prove their theories correct, during their research they are also trying to falsify their conclusions. Scientists understand fully that no matter how good a theory may sound it just might be incorrect. This brings me to my next point: the word theory for scientists does not have the same meaning that it does in every day parlance to the laymen. Let's look at both definitions so that we can tease out the difference.
: an idea that is suggested or presented as possibly true but that is not known or proven to be true
Scientific theory
:A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment.
The first one is the way most people define the word theory. Apologists love to use this definition in their arguments to deceive and obfuscate the masses of the facts. This is made most evident when you hear them say "it's only a theory" when referring to evolution in their pathetic counter arguments. This definition of a theory only amounts to nothing more than a best guess. Theists believe without a doubt that their theory of everything (God did it) is unassailable, irrefutable and absolute.
The second definition of the word is a far cry from what that same word means to the layman. Notice in the definition all of the words I have underlined for instance. The first thing to note is that it is based on a fact or series of facts that have been confirmed by peers in the field. It has been done through observation and experimentation. Finally, others have tried those tests and experiments with the goal of confirming or falsifying the theory.
Now here is the problem with the theists claim that God exists and most of all that he is the answer to every mystery in the universe. In order for a scientific theory to be valid it must be falsifiable in other words it must be subjected to scientific testing and scrutiny. God on the other hand cannot be falsified because his existence cannot be proven in a lab or put to scientific scrutiny. God is a theory as it is defined for the layman. He is accepted as truth but cannot be proven. Theists accept some of the most ridiculous claims contained in their so called holy texts as facts without evidence. If it's in the book then it has to be true. This reminds me of the famous fundamentalist Christian cliche' "God said it, I believe it, that settles it!"
This brings us to my final problem with theistic claims based on so called "holy texts." Everything that is in those texts are taken as absolute facts no matter how insane the claim. Talking snakes, donkey's, floating steel axes, flying fiery chariots, water coming forth from a rock, etc. If any of these claims were considered outside of a religious context you would think that the one making the claims was nothing more than a complete nut.
What are the three words that all theists hate to hear? The words are "I don't know." These three words are not acceptable to theists. They want certainty and they could only get that through the illusions created by their faith of preference. They can't accept the fact that their faith in ancient myths and superstitions are not based on facts. Their deities are the creations of men and are beyond the reach of scientific scrutiny and confirmation. Faith is the ultimate display of willful ignorance and the rejection of reason. Their mantra is "I know, because the Bible/Koran or any other holy texts I accept as truth tells me so.
Not all religious people fear the words "I don't know." One of the things I've experienced time and again when telling a theist "I don't know" is the "AHA!" response:
ReplyDelete"AHA--you admit you don't know, but I," says the godbot, "DO KNOW, because the bible says so! So there!"
Pretty goddamned annoying Paul. Claiming certainty about all of lifes mysteries based on faith in what ancient myths and legends state is the "truth."
DeleteAgreed. Especially on "theory." I get annoyed even when people use it like "well, I have a theory that..." I'd rather see it ONLY used in the scientific sense and use something like "idea" or "guess" instead. Using "theory" in that sense only helps to make the general public not know what one is - even though we were taught it in Jr High School Science. Of course most of the people who say "it's only a theory" are either stupid or intentionally misusing it in order to mislead.
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely Matt, "it's only a theory" demonstrates that the believer is either being purposely evasive by misusing the word or is just stupid and can't tell the difference.
DeleteThe "god did it" garbage doesn't even qualify as a hypothesis. Google "not even wrong."
ReplyDeleteI've always said that "God did it" is not even an option for me. First prove that God exists, then prove which god is the right one, then I might consider the possibilities.
DeleteWhat about the other 3 "God doesn't exist".
ReplyDeleteOkay its a contraction, but they still don't like them either ;)
You know the standard reply to "God doesn't exist" is prove it! They flip the burden of proof on you knowing full well that trying to prove a negative is irrational.
Delete