I trust scientific proof much more than any sort of faith

I trust scientific proof much more than any sort of faith | WHAT IF I TOLD YOU THAT SCIENCE MAKES MUCH MORE SENSE THAN RELIGION | image tagged in memes,matrix morpheus | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
share
2,225 views, 37 upvotes, Made by One_Girl_Band 4 months ago memesmatrix morpheus
Matrix Morpheus memeRe-caption this meme
Add Meme
Post Comment
reply
11 ups, 6 replies
Condescending Spock | YOUR FAITH IN SCIENCE MAY BE ADMIRABLE BUT IT IS NOT BASED ON LOGICAL OR SCIENTIFIC PROOF | image tagged in condescending spock | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
That's an interesting kind of faith you have there. You say science makes much more sense than any kind of faith, but you have the faith as a starting point that one thing will make more sense than the other (which is not something you arrived at by scientifically proving it).

So basically you've just rejected other religions, but you've replaced them with your own kind of faith.
reply
3 ups
Well stated
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
Picard Wtf Meme | ACTUALLY, MY FAITH IN SCIENCE IS BASED ENTIRELY ON EVIDENCE AND SCIENTIFIC PROOF | image tagged in memes,picard wtf | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
reply
1 up, 1 reply
What have you proven?
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
If scientists are lying to us in their articles and journals, then fine- but through repeated experimentation I’ve seen in school, I’ve seen proof that at least some things scientists tell us are true.
reply
2 ups
Only accept what you have seen proven or have proved yourself. Even Einstein's relativity is a theory. Don't let theories stifle your beliefs or creativity.
reply
2 ups
sorry i was a dick before! when i seen your comment on "that" meme i took it as being condescending in tone, i don't doubt that that wasn't your intention..but us Scots can fly off the handle pretty quickly...anyhoos, I do apologise, i can be a dick sometimes.

as for this one, i only just realised it was your post when i came back to check a reply...don't want you to think that i'm carrying some kinda grudge or anything!!
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
I suppose I do have a faith in science- but only based on scientific facts presented with solid evidence. I have faith in something that is served with solid proof, while most religions are based entirely on faith with no presentable evidence.
reply
2 ups
reply
2 ups
I have to go with McCoy on this one.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
LOL wut?
reply
4 ups, 3 replies
If you don't prove it yourself, you're taking it on faith. When you go to school for a science like physics they make you do the fundamental proofs. Unless you're trained in a specific science, it's all faith.

One thing I've learned is a lot of it is bs. Only laws are true. Theories are just guesses that are accepted as truth. Biology is full of bs and guesses.
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
i.imgflip.com/2f8m2r.jpg (click to show)
reply
3 ups
Exactly. Just a bunch of bs.
reply
2 ups, 2 replies
Theories are guesses, but they are almost always back up with evidence coming from experimentation. Even without experiments, theories are based on ideas that are compatible with other scientific ideas. So they still have, in a way, evidence to back them up, even if we’re not totally sure the theory is true.
reply
1 up
A lot of the time they are presented as fillers so someone can publish some more bs to get prestige. Entire fields of science are dedicated to false beliefs. String Theory, for example.
reply
0 ups
Close, but not quite true. A theory explains a set of observed phenomena and has been repeatedly supported and confirmed by testing and experimentation. A theory is pretty much the highest level an idea can attain in science, since science doesn't deal with absolute fact like mathematics does. Theories are always capable of being overturned in light of new evidence, but once something reaches the level of theory, that is unlikely. Germ theory, cell theory, atomic theory, theory of relativity, theory of heliocentricity, and the theory of evolution have all held up under enormous scrutiny and testing. Too many people think that theory in science is the same as theory in everyday usage, i.e. it's just a guess or conjecture or speculation.
reply
2 ups
I wouldn't say I take it on "faith"..."trust", maybe. Faith doesn't require any evidence, but i trust that scientists can back up their claims with evidence and if i was so inclined i could study a subject myself and do my own proofs...none of that requires "faith"
reply
5 ups, 1 reply
This is a false dichotomy. Humans as a rule believe and trust in things beyond what we can test in the physical world. Bad news: placing "Science" on the altar (scientism) is still religion. But if you were trying to stir the pot, good job!
reply
5 ups, 1 reply
I’m not placing science on any sort of altar- I’m just saying that science, since it comes with presentable evidence and proof, is easier to believe in than any sort of deity.
reply
2 ups, 2 replies
"Easier to believe in"
At least you're being honest.

Science has massive limitations. It does a terrible job at explaining the mysteries of consciousness and experience. A mix of science and mysticism/ spirituality/ religion is the best way to go about it all.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
But with spirituality/religion, people are taking guesses at the values and principles created by deities, while with science, even science that we don’t understand, we try to find solid proof for theories and ideas. Religion truly is entirely man-made.
reply
0 ups
Science is also man made. It also has its flaws and limitations. It's also not incorruptible. It can also be used for the worst intentions as well as the best. It's a tool for understanding things but it has been placed on a pedestal and revered as an idol by those that either don't use or don't understand it.

Science is a good thing in responsible hands. It does not require one to replace God with it.

"It is the glory of God to conceal things, but the glory of kings to search things out." - Proverbs 25:2
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
Science used to have difficulty explaining germs and bacteria. At some point, science will have a perfectly valid explanation for consciousness and experience.

It's just a matter of time.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Unlikely. There are real limitations to the scientific method. For example, in order to measure a system it must be disturbed. This places a very real barrier to what can be ascertained through science. It's a major headache in physics.

There are also things like the Uncertainty Principle and problem of Schrodingers Cat.

Science is also incomplete. Go back a few hundred years and the earth was the center of the solar system. That was the truth of the time. There are still blotches in science that we aren't yet aware of.

Don't put all your eggs in the basket of science. It's best to spread them out.
reply
2 ups, 2 replies
That's what religion has said for centuries. Remember it was the church that insisted that the earth was the center of the universe and the church persecuted anyone who said otherwise.

If you're referring to the Copenhagen interpretation, bear in mind, it's an interpretation. When you look in the box, the cat is not going to be both alive and dead.

As for Heisenberg, at the end of the day, it's all about measurement. And several scientists have proved that he was a bit pessimistic.

So yes, science may be incomplete, but it's working on it. Faith? Not so much. What is there to work on except more blind faith?
reply
0 ups
Currently accepted scientific theory says that objects don't exist unless they are being observed. How do you like that for rational? https://www.sciencealert.com/reality-doesn-t-exist-until-we-measure-it-quantum-experiment-confirms Science does not always conform to rationality or logic. Some of it is as much "magic" as faith is.
reply
0 ups
"Proved he was pessimistic" I think you're doing that thing where science oversteps its boundaries.

You can't learn transcendental meditation from science. Science doesn't even acknowledge it's existence, at least not the last time I checked.

There's lots to learn from faith. If you don't play the game there's nothing I can say to explain it. Those that do, know.
reply
5 ups, 2 replies
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
reply
2 ups, 2 replies
THE ANSWER IS 42
reply
1 up
you probably know the answer to life, the universe and everything too! :p
reply
0 ups
XD
reply
3 ups
Why don't you tell me?
reply
4 ups, 3 replies
It's not equipped to explain the theological which comes through revelation. It can only offer theories of how things work by observation of repeatability which may or may not be the cause of the effect, only our perception of it and is subject to change as our understanding enhances as happens all the time. The two, while relatable, are not of the same study and therefore not at odds with each other.
I can't believe I got sucked into another clickbait argument on faith vs science where the poster doesn't even know that their premise is faulty.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Actually, a lot of science deals with what we can’t observe, such as outer space or consciousness studies.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
We can't observe outer space? are you serious? Even when we discover things we can't see it's because of other things we observed in space. I feel like for someone with such blind faith in science, you actually have been exposed to very little of it. I'm not even religious and I know science doesn't answer everything, and that science and religion aren't mutually exclusive. They don't even try to answer the same questions, for the most part.
reply
1 up
I’m talking about things that we truly can’t gain proof that our theories are true about, such as black holes. You are correct that many celestial bodies and other space objects are observed by observing other objects- but dark matter and dark energy are not physically observed by us yet. Dark energy drives everything apart, but we can’t physically record its presence- just its effects.
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
How is revelation a reliable source of truth?
reply
3 ups, 4 replies
Man does not have an omniscient vantage point. Therefore, it is arrogance to assume that every aspect of reality can be observed and explained by man.
God reveals truths that can never be gleaned from telescopes or spectrometers. You only have to prayerfully study His words, with an open heart, to find the solid foundation for faith.
Science scratches the surface on HOW the universe functions. True religion teaches us WHY the universe was organized, and by WHOM.
reply
3 ups, 2 replies
But there is no evidence to support the existence of any gods, which is why science seems much more comprehensible. Though we don’t know even have of true science, we know next to NOTHING of religion. People putting their faith into something humans made up in the first place just doesn’t seem logical to me.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Speaking specifically of Christianity, your premise that humans made it up Christianity makes it impossible for you to use logic to deduce whether or not it is true.

Regardless, simply because you don't have proof of something doesn't mean it isn't true.

If you're not afraid of Jesus, call on Him. Ask Him who he is. Ask Him to come into your life.
reply
0 ups
I’m not afraid of him. I just don’t believe in him as a living deity- I believe in him as a long dead but great philosopher.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Science can't disprove Gods either, and many of the worlds most famous and successful scientists were religious.
reply
0 ups
“Science can’t disprove gods”

But careful logic can put out strong ideas as to why there aren’t any.
reply
1 up
But god was something made up by people in the first place! As mentioned higher up in the comments, people use to think the earth was the center of the universe, which was a theory and belief spread by people. God is the same way- someone suggested the idea of this deity, and many just accepted it as truth.
It was a follower-leader situation. Other things made up by humans have also been accepted as truth, such as the fact that the earth’s core is solid iron. But there is no proof to go with that conjecture, not the conjecture of the deity theory. I accept the idea of a core as a possibility, because we have some evidence to go along with it, but I don’t accept it as absolute truth because we have no absolute proof. God was man made and we have NO evidence of his existence, so I do not accept the idea of a god as truth. I prefer to know what exactly I’m believing in before I choose to believe it.
reply
2 ups
I’m not saying that everything can be known and observed by man. Science still hides from us in many places, but for certain aspects of it, we have solid evidence to support our claims. The first religion, created just after the Neolithic revolution, was entirely made up by humans, showing that all the religions to follow were most likely made up by people. It’s observable that many deities and gods are humanoid or have human-like aspects.
reply
1 up
I don't know anyone who does claim that every aspect of reality can be observed and explained by man. Our ability to study and understand the universe definitely has its limits, and that's fine.

But revelation from a supposed deity is not reliable in any way, because there's no way to verify it's real. People from every part of the globe claim to have received revelation from a god, and those revelations are always in conflict and disagreement with each other. And there's no way to test them for accuracy. Joe Schmoe says that God told him such-and-such. How do we test whether or not that's true? You might say we compare it to the Bible. Well, how do we know the Bible is from a god?

And if we use the Bible to determine what is actually from god, what did people use before there was a Bible?
reply
1 up, 1 reply
where's the fault in the premise?
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
If you had actually read what I wrote you would see it, but instead you just want to troll everyone on this post.
reply
3 ups
reply
3 ups
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
By the way everyone- this is the most amount of upvotes I’ve ever had on a meme before. Thanks!
reply
1 up
:D
reply
3 ups
reply
3 ups
you rock!
reply
1 up, 2 replies
This comment is only to you One_Girl_Band. If you're truly in middle school, you're at a tough age in life where a lot of influences can have a lasting impact on your life. Science is awesome, it has so many mind blowing topics that are fascinating when they explain how our universe works. However, that doesn't mean that Jesus Christ wasn't a real person. It also doesn't mean that his claims aren't true. I admit, there is no "proof" that I can present to you in a comment section to prove that the the claims of Jesus Christ are real. There is cumulative evidence though that is difficult to ignore but is also difficult to present in a comment. Please keep an open mind and don't let your heart harden. I don't know what your experience has been with "religious" people, but sometimes "religious" people can do a bad job at representing Christ. Don't worry about "religion," instead be open to having faith in something that you might not yet be able to prove. Having faith in Jesus does not require science and it doesn't require religion. To simplify the message that the Bible claims: It teaches us that we are all sinners because of the original fall of man. It teaches that sin eternally separates us from God. It teaches that God sent us Jesus so that he can be sacrificed for our sins. It teaches that Jesus is the only way to reunite us with God and for our sins to be forgiven. I understand that many of these things can be confusing. If you have an open mind and you're not afraid of Jesus, I urge you to simply ask him to come into your life. Ask him to forgive you of your sins. Ask him to help you understand the things about him that confuse you. I will pray for you.
reply
2 ups
I do believe that if Jesus Christ was a real person, he was a great philosopher in his time, trying to bring people together. However, I’m simply saying that since science, at least what we know of it, at least comes with plausible evidence. Faith, however, comes with no evidence whatsoever- and I can’t bring myself to trust in or believe something we know nothing about. That would be like walking up to a very suspicious looking stranger and inviting them to your house.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
"Having faith in Jesus does not require science"

That's the problem. Many of the claims of Jesus are unfalsifiable. Science is falsifiable. If Jesus was actually a deity in human flesh, the evidence should be a lot more than just four documents written anonymously decades after he died, and which contain elements so bizarre and fantastic they scream mythology from start to finish.
reply
0 ups, 2 replies
My comment above was specifically for One_Girl_Band. I really don't want to get into details on here with you as there are endless claims you make that are difficult to discuss in a comment section. I've tried to help you a while back but it proved pointless. I'm done trying to help you. I politely ask that you leave this conversation between me and One_Girl_Band.

To One_Girl_Band: Please don't fall into the trap that everything has to be scientifically proven to be true. The supernatural cannot be proven by the natural. It's easy to get twisted up in the details that you can't see the obvious truth. Please just go back to want I originally posted to you. Start there and the details will eventually come.
reply
2 ups
reply
1 up, 1 reply
I don’t believe that everything has to be scientifically proven to be true. We know only the smallest fraction about the ways of the universe around us, yet the ways and laws that exist there that have not been observed by us are still true simply because they exist.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
If you don't need everything to be scientifically proven, why do you focus on the fact that science "at least comes with plausible evidence." I only assumed that you required scientific proof because you wanted "plausible evidence."

So if you don't believe that everything has to be scientifically proven to be true, can you give me an example of just one thing that you believe that hasn't been scientifically proven to you?
reply
1 up, 1 reply
The scientific ways that exist outside of the observable universe are true simply because they exist, but we so far haven’t observed anything outside of the observable. This, however, does not mean that the physics and patterns that occur there are not ‘true’.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
What is something that you believe is true that hasn't been scientifically proven to be true?
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
I believe that the center of the earth is a hot ball of solid iron. We’ve never been to this he center of the earth, so we don’t know this for an absolute fact, but I do believe it to be true.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
That's good that you can believe something to be true even without proof that it's true. In other words, there is enough evidence to allow you to come to a conclusion.

Am I understanding you correctly that you don't have enough evidence to believe that Christianity is true?

Please know, I'm not trying to prove you wrong or win any debate or anything.
reply
1 up
I have next to no evidence that Christianity is true. People claim that they have seen or heard a god, but this is not proof. There is no evidence of the existence of a god, so I choose not to believe in one.
reply
1 up
If you all like to debate about religion, which I do, you can do it some more here: imgflip.com/i/2f4tkm
reply
0 ups
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
Science is (supposed to be) what we know (not what we suspect or think, which is what passes for science these days).

Faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. For by it the men of old gained approval. By faith we understand that the worlds were prepared by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things which are visible. (Hebrews 11:1-3)

Ask yourself this: is the fact that 2+2=4 and time may or may not bend around a black hole going to answer any of your questions when you're lying on your death bed?

Faith is just the manifestation of some people bothering to ask the "where am I going" question before they come to that point. But we all ask that question eventually.
reply
0 ups
"is the fact that 2+2=4 and time may or may not bend around a black hole going to answer any of your questions when you're lying on your death bed?"

No, and neither will any religion, Christianity included, at least not in any way that can be verified to be true.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
I greatly enjoyed seeing you explain, support, and defend your thinking in this thread. did you know that middle school students are applying to university research labs in recent years for internships? it's a real option, although you might have to apply to several different labs to land an offer (not all professors are willing to take on the added responsibility). I accepted a local sophomore two years ago, and she did a splendid job of analyzing the detailed active-site geometry of HIV protease. you sound like you're ready to take on serious projects, and you can if you have a good scientific mindset. it will help you get into the college of your choice later on, as well as open other doors. think on it.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
I’m actually not thinking of going into a scientific profession- I am a serious musician. But I am interested in science as a hobby, so thanks.
reply
1 up
you're welcome!
reply
7 ups, 2 replies
reply
1 up, 1 reply
reply
1 up, 1 reply
He actually is a scientist.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
That’s precisely the point I’m trying to get across here.
reply
2 ups
:)
Flip Settings
Matrix Morpheus memeRe-caption this meme

Created with the Imgflip Meme Generator

IMAGE DESCRIPTION:
WHAT IF I TOLD YOU; THAT SCIENCE MAKES MUCH MORE SENSE THAN RELIGION
hotkeys: D = random, W = like, S = dislike, A = back
Feedback