You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Modern Science Is A Religion! Prove Me Wrong...
For modern science not everything needs to be caused. The ontological causality is a dogma already disproved by science, which only uses the methodological causality.
So far science knows the following uncaused and spontaneous events: radioactive decay, Casimir effect, quantum entanglement, quantum tunneling, the quantum vacuum fluctuations, Hawking radiation, virtual particles.
Hi, thanks for your reply...
But what is their proof that these things are actually uncaused, versus the possibility that the mechanism is simply unknown?
There is none, and there can be none...
The null hypothesis states that is it impossible to prove an absence of something, such as cause.
So it's logically impossible for the things you mention to have been proven to be 'uncaused'... You are mistaken.
Causality cannot be 'disproven' by science, because proof requires causality...!!!
You have proven my point that modern science is a religion resting on faith and belief, and it's followers are unfamiliar with logic. Thank you.
Proof in science does not require causation, only requires experimentation. The radioactive decay for example, we abandoned causality for it, but it is proven, even without a cause. And the absence of cause is the explanation most accepted today. We have no reason to assume the ontological and absolute causality, without having how to prove this dogma, and I don't think that one day we will be able to prove that causality is always a necessity.
If radioactive decay is 'random', then how can we explain the fact that it varies during the course of a year?
https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/radioactive-decay-rates-vary-during-the-year.212315/
Radioactive decay is not random, it is probabilistic. They are different concepts. We can say what is the probability of decay happening, but we can not be sure that it will happen. The probability of the decay is determined, but the exact when the decay will happen is not.
It may seem counterintuitive to say that causality is not an absolute truth, but in reality it only exists in the macro world. When we go to the subatomic world, many of our intuitions are not worth anything.
There is a logical fallacy: "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance
Can you offer any proof that there is no underlying causality?
The example I just gave about decay rates strongly suggests there is a mechanism at work...
Absence of evidence is yes evidence of absence. Most things you do not believe in life is solely due to lack of evidence to support them. Otherwise we would have to be agnostic about almost everything in life.
Causality is a dogma
I want to be proven wrong ok let's start by saying science is not trying to eliminate God, but provides signs that go exist, check this out, u must watch this I have many more profs
Nothing personal, but the argument that Islam is the correct religion based on a "golden mean" figure has so many holes in it it's not even considerable as a smoking gun by any scientific or theological point of view.
Thank you for your reply I can give you other scientific facts to confirm Quran is the words of God, but that will only benefit u if u are truethful person, and a man of understanding I would also ask u to do ur own research on Islam and science u will be amazed. or check some of my blog post about science and Islam. @cryptosteem
Hi @cryptosteem,
How does having the death-sentence for apostasy encourage science?