[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 185 KB, 601x4401, nopS8.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4698328 No.4698328 [Reply] [Original]

dat scientific method.

Christians: -10
Atheists: 3,14159...

>> No.4698342

If god isn't real, then how did flip floppity bip boppity gumbo chops?
Atheists: 0
Christians: 0
Bill Cosby: 1

>> No.4698354

can i save that pic? i like it.

>> No.4698357

>>4698354
you can, but then ill have a wormhole into your computer and can pretty much fuck your shit up...

>> No.4698363

>>4698354
Don't do it! OP encoded a virus and it'll turn your computer into a bomb that'll fondle you at night

>> No.4698371

"Theories" do not always make assumptions if they are 100% testable.

>> No.4698387

God controls everything in the world manually.
It follows all observations, and only has one assumption: There is a nigh-omnipotent (because omnipotence is a paradox) deity.

>> No.4698388

WAHH CHRISTIANS WAHH
go back to reddit and dawkins can suck my dick

also science is overrated you pop-sci reading faget

>> No.4698414

>>4698387

>because omnipotence is a paradox

Paradoxes mean nothing to omnipotence.

>> No.4698431

>>4698354
no it's copyrighted

>> No.4698444

So what does the picture have to do with religion

>> No.4698465

>>4698414

paradox = para doxa in latin, against the opinion.

A paradox is not something inevitably false.

>> No.4698479
File: 4 KB, 222x211, 1312839845564.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4698479

>>4698387

>because omnipotence is a paradox

If God made a rock so heavy even he couldn't lift it, couldn't he just make himself strong enough to lift it and then lift it?

>> No.4698490

>>4698479

It's not a paradox, it's juste ABSURD.

>> No.4698509

notice that that scientific method is in itself a theory, which hasn't been verified

there is no guarantee we are getting closer to 'the'/'a' truth, just that we're working out inconsistencies out of the system. Nowhere is it said that a set of empirical events S can't have equivalent explanatory theories T1 - Tn.

you could argue that the simplest solution is the true solution, but that argument has no value, other than calling on our usual emotional preference towards simplicity and minimalism.

>> No.4698516

>>4698509
noone cares about truth, we just want to predict things well and easily, and the scientific method is helping us do that quite well

>> No.4698528

Doesn't this picture mix up a hypothesis and a theory in the third step?

>> No.4698710

>>4698479
It's not a paradox. The supposed paradox involves a confusion of modalities, i.e. a modal fallacy.

http://www.sfu.ca/~swartz/modal_fallacy.htm#omnipotence

>> No.4698715

>>4698509
It isn't the simplest solution that gets accepted, it's the one that requires the fewest assumptions. Quantum mechanics is far from simple, it just makes fewer assumptions than other proposals. Get it right.

>> No.4698770

Occam created the razor because back then, "God did it" was the simplest answer.