/sci/ - Science & Math

dat Chick tract

holy shit I think I have that tract somewhere.

i have that pic pinned to my office door

My eyes now see.

I must fight the demons.

>>4483821
No, John. You are the demons.

What is that Jew doing in there.

set my body free
set my spirit free
set my mind free

truly I know see the light.

thank you for this thread, and image. I am now a christian.

Jesus gave his hair back. That gives me a lot to think about.

>>4483831
>4483831
Sister-brother Anon, we must fight these heathens with our words; beat them at their own game.

Together forever cause we're never alone.

anyone have the non-troll response to that?

Anyone have the non-troll response to that picture?

>>4483846
...
You seriously think there's a need to respond?

THIS IMAGE HAS COMPLETELY CONVINCED ME TO BELIEVE IN A MAGICAL SKY FAIRY AND HIS SON WHO IS SOMEHOW HIS OWN FATHER.

So many rule violations today on /sci/. Poor mod is gonna have a lot of work to do.

>>4483890
time travel ftw

I'm the only God im this multiverse. We'll just see about this Mr. Jesus.

>>4483917
Ribs are delicious.

Just what are you implying?

Oh look a Chick tract, HAW HAW HAW, very funny.

>>4483942
Nice adaptation of that quote. I hadn't seen it before.
But the guy dumping images sure is mad.

lol jesus is the string nuclear force. poor rustle attempt OP

>>4483942
i love you anon

>>4483804
It's funny, because when you think about it science is accepted purely on faith. /sci/ hates this.

>>4483958
>Purely in faith
Yeah ignoring all the empirical evidence, i mean who needs that? how the fuck is that related to science?

>>4483961
What reason do you have that empirical evidence means anything, that is not also based in empirical evidence?

If the bible cannot be true simply by saying that it is true, The scientific method cannot be true simply because it claims it is scientific either.

>>4483804
this is hilarious because someone was actually serious enough to make this image. lmao.

>>4483966
Evidence: Science works. Bible doesn't.

>>4483958
>>4483966

You do not understand what logic is.

If you want to truly abandon all pretenses of "faith", then the only option available to you is Solipsism.

Now shoo, solipsist, there's logic to be done here.

>>4483966
>>4483958
I demand you stop disgracing the noble IUPAC nomenclature. Either cease your idiocy or change your tag tripfag.

>>4483970
Science works according to scientific measurements of work. Why do you believe something works?

>>4483973
Solipsism presumes that I exist.

>>4483975
I'm pretty sure the IUPAC understand what an axiom is and what implications accepting something on axioms has. I can switch to something ISO derived instead though, if you prefer.

>>4483969
Kent Hovind is crazy. He belives that the earth was surrounded by a sphere of ice that was melted by a meteor and that is how we got our oceans. I think he is in jail for tax fraud now.

>>4483979
Science works on empirical obvservational evidence, do airplanes fly?

>>4483979
Switch to something not chemistry related. You're shaming my field.

>>4483981
Explain to me why you think a plane flies, and I will use your example to show that you are taking something you build that notion on on faith.

>>4483983
>cannot
>into
>skepticism

>>4483989
Someone failed to read hegel for babies.

>>4484012
Someone can't make an argument

Tell me why you believe you are objectively- even subjectively to any degree- correct in asserting that a plane can fly,

>>4484021
I obvserve it, i proccess it, i understand it, i don't care if it is real or not, to me it's therefore it works.
'Reality' is an outdated term.

>>4484026
>i don't care if it is real or not

ok, so you take on faith that it is correct independent of your interpretation. That would be a faith based belief.

>>4484033
No i don't take it on faith, i just expect to keep it working beacause it does, science itself doesn't care about reality care abut usefulness, that's the inductive reasoning, not faith, usefulness.

>>4484044
>i just expect to keep it working beacause it does

And your base for that assertion is, wait for it, that you objectively know that your memory is correct? right?

Inductive reasoning and faith are one and the same. Both are useful by their own criteria

>>4484044
Faith doesn't work, faith is blind and faith have usefulness only in terms of human psychology. You don't need to have an 'objective view' but you expect for it to keep working... and wait for it... it does! and you count on that, every human nowdays does, and none should care a bit about reallity to do that.

>>4484065
Your criteria for evaluating the usefulness of your idea of empiricism are still baseless.

I could literally say that faith is better because the word has more vowels than "science" and I would be no less wrong

>>4483804

>"isnt loosing something opposite to evolution"
>mfw

The God Delusion was such a good book rite guyz xD If only the religious sheep could open their minds. 4 hoursemen of atheism FTW! Living rationally is so much better! RIP George Carlin

>>4483804

> implying loosing something is opposite to evolution.
> implying Gluons are made up dreams.
>fucker doesnt know about fundamental forces in the atom
> implying Jesus holds the protons and neutrons
>implying Evolution of stars is believed by faith and not empirical evidence
>implying the 212 millions years old fossil found by richard leakey wasnt contamined with older volcanic rocks,and its classifed as a Homo Genus
>implying they only use bones to see correlation between species
>implying the tree problem hasnt been explained thousands of times using the Yellowstone ones as the most common example.
>implying the recapitulation theory is still widely accepted
>etc
>mfw

>>4484092


exactly :)