what is the definition of science?

[Authentic Nouveau]

Atheists toss around the word science and pretend it is a property which they own.

They have used political manipulations to make us distrust climate scientists
They cheat and manipulate biology and pretend evolution.

 

[bigthinker]

Numerous atheists here keep throwing around the word- science--- as though it's a religious idea to be worshiped, and idolized.
It's gotten really old, and is embarrassing.

Science is not a religion. At least, it shouldn't be. If it's your religion, you're embarrassing yourself.


According to the Science Council, science is defined as

Our definition of science - The Science Council ~

Science is the pursuit and application of knowledge and understanding of the natural and social world following a systematic methodology based on evidence.

sciencecouncil.org

Science is the pursuit and application of knowledge and understanding of the natural and social world following a systematic methodology based on evidence.​

Scientific methodology includes the following:

• Objective observation: Measurement and data (possibly although not necessarily using mathematics as a tool)
• Evidence
• Experiment and/or observation as benchmarks for testing hypotheses
• Induction: reasoning to establish general rules or conclusions drawn from facts or examples
• Repetition
• Critical analysis
• Verification and testing: critical exposure to scrutiny, peer review and assessment

So..... stop.
Just stop treating science as though it's a religious belief. Science is not the end all, be all of knowledge.
It's the pursuit and application of knowledge, and understanding of the natural world.

Right, but it isn't atheists who are promoting the idea; it is believers using a strawman.

 

[SteveB]

Right, but it isn't atheists who are promoting the idea; it is believers using a strawman.

Really?
Because I provided the actual definition of science, and the source by which to verify it for yourself.
So, wanna try again?

In fact, let me provide you the link again, so you can read for yourself.

Our definition of science - The Science Council ~

Science is the pursuit and application of knowledge and understanding of the natural and social world following a systematic methodology based on evidence.

sciencecouncil.org

This time, pay close attention to the definition, and tell me how this differs from your idea of science.

 

[Diogenes]

A few weeks ago a former atheist, who runs a christian Facebook page on science, pointing out all the great discoveries of the scientific world, posted a picture of DeGrasse-Tyson, and Sam Harris.
View attachment 3

That is funny as it's rather annoying when people cite Tyson, Hawking, or Harris. Both sides would in in error by appealing to any of the men as authoritative on the issue of the existence of God.

 

[Nouveau]

Really?
Because I provided the actual definition of science, and the source by which to verify it for yourself.
So, wanna try again?

The definition is fine. That's not the strawman. The strawman is your claim that atheists here are treating science as a religion, which is a claim you have yet to support with any evidence or examples.

 

[bigthinker]

Really?
Because I provided the actual definition of science, and the source by which to verify it for yourself.
So, wanna try again?

In fact, let me provide you the link again, so you can read for yourself.

Our definition of science - The Science Council ~

Science is the pursuit and application of knowledge and understanding of the natural and social world following a systematic methodology based on evidence.

sciencecouncil.org

This time, pay close attention to the definition, and tell me how this differs from your idea of science.

What do you mean "this time". Likely you don't mean to but your words read in kind of a condescending jerky way -surely that isn't your intention. I don't think I've "spoken" to you in that way.

The strawman isn't about the definition of science, the strawman is about the atheist position.

 

[bigthinker]

The definition is fine. That's not the strawman. The strawman is your claim that atheists here are treating science as a religion, which is a claim you have yet to support with any evidence or examples.

Exactly.

 

[SteveB]

That is funny as it's rather annoying when people cite Tyson, Hawking, or Harris. Both sides would in in error by appealing to any of the men as authoritative on the issue of the existence of God.

That's what I thought too, which is why I posted it.
Yet, the only thing they're really doing is replacing God, with "science" as though it's a god, and somehow has qualities that match God's, and then stating their idolatry in a smug-sounding manner.

 

[SteveB]

The definition is fine. That's not the strawman. The strawman is your claim that atheists here are treating science as a religion, which is a claim you have yet to support with any evidence or examples.

This just shows your lack of awareness, understanding, and perspective.
Or are you the final arbiter of what actually is?

 

[SteveB]

What do you mean "this time". Likely you don't mean to but your words read in kind of a condescending jerky way -surely that isn't your intention. I don't think I've "spoken" to you in that way.

Just because you don't like how it's stated, that makes it false?
Sounds to me that you have a lot of bias.

The strawman isn't about the definition of science, the strawman is about the atheist position.

Then lose your straw, and start doing what Jesus said.

 

[bigthinker]

Just because you don't like how it's stated, that makes it false?

Sounds to me that you have a lot of bias.


Then lose your straw, and start doing what Jesus said.

Poor Steve.

 

[Nouveau]

That's what I thought too, which is why I posted it.
Yet, the only thing they're really doing is replacing God, with "science" as though it's a god, and somehow has qualities that match God's, and then stating their idolatry in a smug-sounding manner.

You've yet to quote anything at all from Tyson, Hawking, or Harris in support of this claim.

 

[Nouveau]

This just shows your lack of awareness, understanding, and perspective.
Or are you the final arbiter of what actually is?

I'm not claiming to be any kind of 'final arbiter'. Are you?

How does your complete lack of supporting examples say anything about my alleged lack of awareness?

It seems you're just launching into ad hominem attacks to make up for your inability to support your case.

 

[SteveB]

Poor Steve.

Perhaps I am.
It's a rather curious thing that my Father is the Creator of the cosmos, and has made me wealthy beyond your wildest ability to perceive.

Eph 1:18 NKJV - the eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that you may know what is the hope of His calling, what are the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints,
Eph 2:7 NKJV - that in the ages to come He might show the exceeding riches of His grace in [His] kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.
Eph 3:8 NKJV - To me, who am less than the least of all the saints, this grace was given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ,

Col 1:27 NKJV - To them God willed to make known what are the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles: which is Christ in you, the hope of glory.
Col 2:2 NKJV - that their hearts may be encouraged, being knit together in love, and [attaining] to all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the knowledge of the mystery of God, both of the Father and of Christ,

1Ti 6:17 NKJV - Command those who are rich in this present age not to be haughty, nor to trust in uncertain riches but in the living God, who gives us richly all things to enjoy.

Heb 11:26 NKJV - esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures in Egypt; for he looked to the reward.

So, whatever you view as poverty, God sees as greater wealth than you could perceive.

Has God not chosen the poor of this world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which He promised to those who love Him?

 

[bigthinker]

Perhaps I am.
It's a rather curious thing that my Father is the Creator of the cosmos, and has made me wealthy beyond your wildest ability to perceive.

Yep. It sure is.

Eph 1:18 NKJV - the eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that you may know what is the hope of His calling, what are the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints,
Eph 2:7 NKJV - that in the ages to come He might show the exceeding riches of His grace in [His] kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.
Eph 3:8 NKJV - To me, who am less than the least of all the saints, this grace was given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ,

Col 1:27 NKJV - To them God willed to make known what are the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles: which is Christ in you, the hope of glory.
Col 2:2 NKJV - that their hearts may be encouraged, being knit together in love, and [attaining] to all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the knowledge of the mystery of God, both of the Father and of Christ,

1Ti 6:17 NKJV - Command those who are rich in this present age not to be haughty, nor to trust in uncertain riches but in the living God, who gives us richly all things to enjoy.

Heb 11:26 NKJV - esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures in Egypt; for he looked to the reward.

So, whatever you view as poverty, God sees as greater wealth than you could perceive.

Has God not chosen the poor of this world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which He promised to those who love Him?

lol.

 

[SteveB]

You've yet to quote anything at all from Tyson, Hawking, or Harris in support of this claim.

Since you obviously believe that you have the high ground, why don't you provide evidence to the contrary?

 

[SteveB]

I'm not claiming to be any kind of 'final arbiter'. Are you?

How does your complete lack of supporting examples say anything about my alleged lack of awareness?

It seems you're just launching into ad hominem attacks to make up for your inability to support your case.

Actually, you are.
You keep telling me hat I'm wrong, but offer nothing from which I'm supposed to believe you.

 

[SteveB]

Yep. It sure is.

What's even more curious is that he's chosen such a poor person to show you what a fool you really are.

26 For you see your calling, brethren, that not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called. 27 But God has chosen the foolish things of the world to put to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to put to shame the things which are mighty; 28 and the base things of the world and the things which are despised God has chosen, and the things which are not, to bring to nothing the things that are,​

So, what do you think you're going to achieve by refusing to learn the truth, and keep passing the buck off to others?

 

[Nouveau]

Actually, you are.
You keep telling me hat I'm wrong, but offer nothing from which I'm supposed to believe you.

Strawman. I'm telling you that we have no reason to believe you when you fail to produce any supporting examples.

 

[SteveB]

Strawman. I'm telling you that we have no reason to believe you when you fail to produce any supporting examples.

I'm still waiting.