Which, of course, is why I posted it in 'strange' here, and in 'Pseudoscience' on Phuks. I don't believe any of this stuff, but I enjoy reading as an occasional diversion from reality. The same is true of UFOs, Cryptozoology, etc, etc., just fun entertainment enjoyed by many, so I post from time to time.
Again, no slight was intended - I just figured I'd use it as a moment to talk about falsifiability, as it's often overlooked. It wasn't even specifically intended with you (the individual) as the target - but more the audience at large.
I find it equally disturbing when a scientist says that the science says there's no such thing as a god. No, there's no evidence to believe that there's a deity - but it's not falsifiable. As such, science has no position on the existence of a deity.
It's a pet peeve of mine and I find that a goodly amount of the younger generation (on all sides of the various debates and from generations that should have had a better science education than I was given in my early years) don't actually know this.
I'd have assumed that kids were being taught science better than they were when I was young. And, frankly, I'd have been wrong.
Yes, I'd have been very, very wrong.
Hell, when I was a kid, plate tectonics was still fairly new and not really settled. My earliest science textbooks said nothing about it. I don't think it was before high school were I had a textbook that included it. Not even our fairly modern encyclopedia set delved deep into it as anything more than a hypothesis.
Shit, I was already out of college when they got the first evidence for dark energy. I'd have thought the kids would know more about this than I do. And, again, I'd have been wrong.
(Yes, yes I am sometimes wrong.)
(post is archived)