Science wins.
#HandsDown
Damn, you came to play this week huh?
#theclassroomisthenewchurch
I think you’re missing the point.
Science acknowledges reason, empiricism and evidence – while religion is based upon revelation, sacredness and blind faith.
#NoteTheDifference
The kids went through a “Dinosaur Train” phase a couple of years ago, so “I have a hypothesis” is permanently burned into my brain.
Science- Doesn’t claim to have all of the answers. Makes assumptions then tests those assumptions using a logical method to reach an observable outcome that can be reproduced to reach the same conclusion.
Religion- Claims to have all of the answers. Tells you not to questions what you are told.
You’re still missing the point. It’s not religion vs. science.
Not missing the point at all, higgmond. Just pointing out the obvious difference between “blindly following” religion vs. science.
#FYI
Lol, I’m not trying to trash on science, but this is a moronic meme. It perfectly sums up the glib short sightedness of the faux science fan club that WYG is referring to. It’s basically what happens when a generation of mental midgets raised on 140 characters try to oversimplify the complexity of actual scientific thought. Just to add to it, I don’t think OP meant to compare them w/r/t which of these two completely different things is “better”, he’s simply saying that morons parroting findings they don’t even understand for themselves is not wholly unlike what gave religion a bad rap. Yet somehow the obvious response is a science vs religion debate.
As far as the meme goes it starts off by equating Christianity with all religion (strike 1) and conflates some Sunday school naive understanding of science with the perverse government grant and corporate funded whoredom it is today:
Both are taught to both adults and children.
Evidence is often overturned, misleading and often outright misrepesented.
Scientists are often discouraged from doubting established doctrine and face a huge uphill battle in doing so (many great illustrations of this, including Einstein’s path to developing relativity).
Bullet point about hell could have just as easily said Heaven and been a non-point.
No, scientist supposedly fall in line to those credible parameters all while leaving absent any alternative motives, the masses just take it at face value and adhere to their godly intellect.
#prayforhashtag
Except the vast majority of people blindly follow what science tells them.
The filing, made late Friday by plaintiff’s attorneys, includes what the attorneys represent to be correspondence from a 30-year career EPA scientist accusing top-ranking EPA official Jess Rowland of playing “your political conniving games with the science” to favor pesticide manufacturers such as Monsanto. Rowland oversaw the EPA’s cancer assessment for glyphosate, the key ingredient in Monsanto’s weed-killing products, and was a key author of a report finding glyphosate was not likely to be carcinogenic. But in the correspondence, longtime EPA toxicologist Marion Copley cites evidence from animal studies and writes: “It is essentially certain that glyphosate causes cancer.”
According to the article Jess Rowland, a former deputy division director at the EPA, told Monsanto executive Dan Jenkins in a 2015 email “If I can kill this, I should get a medal.” Rowland was referring to the Department of Health and Human Service’s pending review of glyphosate and its possible carcinogenic effects, a review that never took place.
The records also suggested that ghostwritten research had been commissioned by Monsanto that was later attributed to academics as part of the effort to derail and ultimately sabotage the review process.
The files were unsealed by Vince Chhabria, the judge presiding over a lawsuit brought by multiple plaintiffs claiming to have developed non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma as a result of exposure to glyphosate, the active chemical in Monsanto’s Roundup weedkiller.
According to the World Health Organization’s ruling in 2015, glyphosate is a “probable human carcinogen;” the ruling is what led to the aforementioned lawsuit that led to the unsealed documents.
#SCIENCE
I love the blind reliance of feeble minds on corporate funded “research” they don’t grasp. Kind of like when early Bibles were only written in Latin so the population had to rely on clergy for interpretation. But yeah, it’s totally different because we have faith in the inherent good of our righteous scientists PBUH.
Science: the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.
Religion: the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.
*************************************************************************************************
Think we have a different idea as to what “blindly following” something actually means. If there is empirical evidence to back up a scientific statement – even if I haven’t taken the time to actually run the experiment myself – then I will accept it as the truth until/unless someone else can disprove it. The fact that science is being labeled as a type of religion is utter nonsense.
#ThatsMe
Science: blind adherence by simpletons to the word of others as it pertains to their well being and worldview. Specifically stemming from things they can neither observe nor understand.
Religion: same
*************************************************************************************************
Again, this is completely naive Sunday school shit. Who funds your science? You think it’s all Neil Degrasse Tysons sitting around for free working on pet projects so they can make a new meme? You think data doesn’t get overturned, fiercely debated or tossed aside because it disagrees with their paid agenda every day? Like any quant professional, they control the data they present.
It’s hilarious that you think there’s some sort of defined consensus on most of the stuff that gets thrown out there. Not to mention the recent EPA story listed above in my last post which is a perfect example.
A corporation can back anything and mouth breathing twitter users will retweet it without even stopping to understand how well it’s been accepted, what was actually proven and how concrete the evidence is.
#ThatsYou
You literally have leading government “SCIENTISTS” on record in court colluding with the companies whose products they’re supposed to be skeptically testing to suppress toxicity studies and the evidence isn’t enough for you to question the institution.
You’re a 1980’s mark on the phone with your broker pumping you up on the latest sure thing.
ah sh*t you done fucked up now hashtag. You awoke the sleeping Swan beast.
I can’t wait to hear about all the empirical and observational data they’ve been using in 11 dimensional string theory.