Confusing Opinions with Facts (page 3)

cofty

People should not say "it is a fact that god created the universe". All they can say is "it is a fact that I choose to believe that god created the universe". - Simon

If even occasionally a theist would say "I believe in the god of the bible and here are is the evidence ...."

Calling an opinion religious does not earn it any special status.

If somebody said that they believed because of faith despite the evidence that would at least be consistent. It's pretending to base beliefs of evidence but never allowing the evidence to be held up to scrutiny that is dishonest.

Simon

Yes, I have no trouble with people believing whatever claptrap they want. It's when they try to justify it as the logical choice and supported by science that you think "wait a minute now ...".

There is no evidence for faith. If there was it wouldn't be called faith, it would be knowledge.

The dishonest approach to the science is ironic considering how many think their god hates lies and dishonesty. Yet it's all his followers ever seem to want to do.

notsurewheretogo

I respect anyone's right to believe in anything (as long it it doesn't harm others) but equally I expect them to respect my right in that I think they are nuts for believing in something and dictating their life on something with zero evidence...

scary21

It's like years ago a man could say I'm not the father of that child. Today DNA could PROVE that he is the father.

So today with all we know about evolution, DNA included , It would be like a man today refusing to believe he is the father even thou all the DNA evidence says that he is the father.

We would think wow that guy is in denial big time. That's how I think of people who will not except the FACT of evolution.

And one more thing, my husband believes in God and evolution. If you believe in God than picture him waving his magic wand once instead of 1,000,000,000 times. Way less time and a lot easier on the arm.

sparky1

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Giordano

"In science, a "fact" typically refers to an observation, measurement, or other form of evidence that can be expected to occur the same way under similar circumstances. However, scientists also use the term "fact" to refer to a scientific explanation that has been tested and confirmed so many times that there is no longer a compelling reason to keep testing it or looking for additional examples. In that respect, the past and continuing occurrence of evolution is a scientific fact. Because the evidence supporting it is so strong, scientists no longer question whether biological evolution has occurred and is continuing to occur. Instead, they investigate the mechanisms of evolution, how rapidly evolution can take place, and related."

questions. http://www.nas.edu/evolution/TheoryOrFact.html

Fisherman

So, in a discussion where the subject matter is science, for example:the topic of gravity in the field of physics, scientific facts, and interpretations (opinions) of facts ( for example Einsteins theory of gravity) should be considered as the only variables in the discussion such as in solving for one of the variables in the posted equation. But when God is invoked in any discussion, the realm of evidence is not limited to scientific fact and scientific realism and that is because there exists a difference between science and truth.

Also, there exists a difference between scientific fact (to be distinguished from pseudo science such as Krausses philosophy of science) and plain old fact which need not be qualified by scientific, for example, an event in history, or if a person witnesses something that happened and is asked to testify in Court about what that person knows is a true or fact-which is not an opinion, the existence of Jehovah for instance.

But, in a scientific Court room sort of speak, only scientific facts and interpretations matter and such continue scientifically valid until falsified only with verifiable and objective evidence (which is the definition of scientific fact)

I will point out this flaw: While there exists an inherent mechanism in living organisms that is observable, and predictable causing physiological change, such process is not evidence that humans evolved from simpler life forms although such scientific opinion considers it to be fact by a majority,

THis thread is not about discussing evolution, that is what cofty's other related posts are all about. This thread is about the confusion between scientific fact (verifiable objective evidence) and opinion (not scientific interpretations- or "explanations" as sheepless puts it- such as evolution)

Scientific laws, Newton's law of Universal gravitation for example are indisputable while scientific explanations such as evolution is. My question to those that equate the theory of gravity with the theory of evolution is how and why are they equal in terms of probability?

Sorry for any error, trying to be open minded, sometimes it is late here 3 am or jsut mentally exxausted, It is evident that I do not cut and paste and I do not emulate the ideas of others. Sometimes by views correspond with existing facts and sometimes I need to be "enlightened" with facts but I try to be opened minded.

Vidqun

Cofty, does it not have a lot to do with the interpretation of the facts? You believe in evolution because that is how you interpret the facts. I believe in creation, because that is how I interpret the facts.

konceptual99

It might be fairly easy for one to chose to interpret the facts as supporting creation however where does that reasoning go with other events portrayed in the bible?

For example, a global flood 4,400 years ago? Given that nothing uncovered by science supports the proposition what should one be prepared to accept?

The more the bible is undermined so too is the narrative about the purpose and meaning of God. Belief in creation is critical if you want to try and frame all the other events in the bible, not so once you debunk them.

Simon

I believe in creation, because that is how I interpret the facts.

No, you ignore the facts. There are no facts supporting creation. Your bible beliefs contradict known facts.

Admit it - you choose to believe in something and it's completely irrational. You have faith. You have no supporting facts to base it on other than an old book.

Let me guess ... you'll tell me it's a fact that it's the word of god because the book says it is.

Confusing Opinions with Facts

Share this