Help Me Sci

Help Me Sci

Science means admitting you are wrong, from time to time.

Religion means always believing you are right.

Science is based upon the repeatable, observable, measurable, empirical natural phenomena. Religion is based on whatever lel.

Most of religion is based on hearsay

Whatever you say lel.

Religion is based on faithful or accepting that which cannot be confirmed or disproved.

Science is based on developing predictive models themselves based on persistent results.

>because most people who cite scientific studies try to reproduce them first

rofl

science tries to describe what we can observe using a method. It is based on falsification.

religion is a way of living and is based on faith. It is NOT trying to describe how the universe works.

Science: Trying to discredit your views. If you fail, you're golden

Religion: Trying to support your views. If you fail, you're apparently not trying hard enough.

Religion is purely based on emotion

Science is purely based on logic (until topics such as free will, determinism, and race come up)

So there isn't too much of a difference at all, actually.

science is based on inference that is not logical in a mathematical sense

>t. 13 year old

>repeatable

How do astrophysicists make supernova repeat? How do atmospheric scientists make hurricanes repeat?

Most of history too.

Science is based on developing predictive models that which cannot be confirmed or disproved.

>falsification

I wish this stupid popsci meme would die.

>Religion is purely based on emotion

No. Atheism, OTOH, is based purely on emotion.

Do you mean anti-theism?

Christian detected.

>Science is based on developing predictive models that which cannot be confirmed or disproved.

So about that whole requirement for scientific hypothesis' that they be testable...

I suppose we just aren't counting the core tenets of science. Why would we want to include those?

...

please read the board rules - and then fuck off and die

>Science is based on developing predictive models that which cannot be confirmed or disproved.
a predictive model by definition can be disproved (by disproving its predictions)

>So about that whole requirement for scientific hypothesis' that they be testable...

Popsci buzzwords.

>tests for string theory where? tests for MW interpretation where?

All our models are wrong. By how much and where is the real question.

if you can't disprove it locally then it might as well be right.

>Popsci buzzwords
He's using simple language to be clear and concise with your brainlet mind. That doesn't mean he's wrong.
>>tests for string theory where? tests for MW interpretation where?
No actual scientist believes in these. You're choosing the two most underdeveloped scientific hypotheses there are, these do not represent science as a whole. You're a fucking troll.

>All our models are wrong. By how much and where is the real question.
That has nothing to do with what that user said. He never claimed that any model is "right", in fact he said that every model is able to be proven wrong. This is what makes it different from religion; not the fact that the model is wrong but the fact that it can be proven wrong.

>proven wrong

Nothing is ever proven wrong. We don't throw out models because they are "wrong". Otherwise there would be no mechanics, no GR, E&M, no quantum theory, etc.

>can be proven

The only things that are ever proven one way or another is mathematics.

>All our models are wrong. By how much and where is the real question.
Real Science QFT
>if you can't disprove it locally then it might as well be basically meaningless
FTFY

>Nothing is ever proven wrong.
I have a theory: I don't shit. Oh look at that, while you were posting that nothing is ever proven wrong, I was disproving my theory by induction.
>We don't throw out models because they are "wrong"
Tell that to Copernicus
>Otherwise there would be no mechanics, no GR, E&M, no quantum theory, etc.
These are the theories that have not been proven wrong. They are the ones that are left over after rigorous testing. You're implying that each of these theories is wrong in some way, why don't you elaborate? I guarantee you that modern GR, E&M, and quantum mechanics have no inconsistencies with any measured data.
>The only things that are ever proven one way or another is mathematics.
For someone calling out people on using popsci buzzwords you sure do post a lot of memes.

Religion you believe blindly, while science is based on an empirical and self correcting system. Pretty huge different.

>self correcting system

How many papers have you peer reviewed today?

Objection, relevance?

At an objective level science depends on logic while religion doesn't, but if we're talking about which offers the correct perspective of our existence then obviously they're equal.

>depends on logic while religion doesn't

Learn some theology.

It can't be self correcting if there is nothing to correct it nor any way to know if you're not missing something.

Science is an objective, measurable test of surrounding conditions in order to understand the world.

Religion is a subjective, ambiguous way of affirming the surrounding conditions in order to understand the world.

An important difference to note is that science has the answers only for what can be measured with instruments independent of the human body. Religion on the other hand only has answers for finding meaning in life. Science does not find or care for meaning.

Religion looks inward to find answers

Science looks outward to find answers

>nothing to correct it
What?
It is self evident that people philosophize, experiment, build knowledge, apply it to making tools and gain experience. They pass what they can down to the next generation who refine methods further and come up with new things.
This is how we have things like 3D printers.

We're talking about science, not engineering.

religion takes advantage of the irrational side of the human mind, while science takes advantage of the rational. both lead to ruin.

Science makes falsifiable predictions.

>implying science is not intimately connected to its applications and reliant on them for testing a purposes
Honestly I'm not sure where you're going with this conversation. You want an answer but you don't want to think about anything.

>irrational side

There's nothing irrational about religion. This is a forced meme from /r/atheism.

>placing value in things that don't have utility
>rational

>Your parents are sick
>They no longer have utility
>Go ahead and kill them, I'm waiting

What a convoluted scenario. Are you out of your mind?

>everlasting life
>not worth it

I beat the ever loving fuck out of your moms everlasting cunt last night

The Nazis did it. Welcome to the Utilitarian world.

I'm not a fedora guy, but to be fair most religion IS pretty much invented