Why do atheists trust science?

[Feck]

this thread needed more pretty and less idiot .

I love Liz Viscious!

[orpheus]

More popcorn for all!

[JimC]

My problem is, I can't resist any thread where the word "distillers" occurs...

[Valden]

My problem is, I can't resist any thread where the word "distillers" occurs...

It's like that annoying piece of plastic that sticks to your fingers and just wont let go no matter how many times you try flicking it off.

[Randydeluxe]

The subject of this thread is a strange question. I think if you rigorously define the word "trust", you reach a telling conclusion.

[JimC]

The subject of this thread is a strange question. I think if you rigorously define the word "trust", you reach a telling conclusion.

It certainly hinges on that word, usually applied to subjective interactions between people, a bit wooly for the purpose it was attempting to carry in the OP...

[Bolero]

It does seem a lot safer to live assuming that the laws of physics will be able to hang in there for another day or two.

It would be quite a fucker if you were worried about gravity reversing itself and kicking you off into space.

Virphen, I hope you wouldn't think it inappropriate if I say I fucken love you.

[Clinton Huxley]

Phew! We're all still here. I couldn't sleep last night for wondering whether the parameters of the weak nuclear force might change, with disastrous consequences.

[Rum]

One thing that has not so far been said is that the question is irrelevant to atheism. Just because there isn't any evidence for the existence of a god, doesn't mean one automatically trusts science. Most here probably do, but the two issues are not connected.

Incidentally wasn't it god who turned walking sticks into snakes, parted the Red Sea, turned Lot's wife into a pillar of salt, fed the five thousand with a handful of fish? Hardly predictable! What next/ Angels on flaming chariots coming to found god's earthly kingdom?

Get a life.

[Tigger]

One thing that has not so far been said is that the question is irrelevant to atheism. Just because there isn't any evidence for the existence of a god, doesn't mean one automatically trusts science. Most here probably do, but the two issues are not connected.

Incidentally wasn't it god who turned walking sticks into snakes, parted the Red Sea, turned Lot's wife into a pillar of salt, fed the five thousand with a handful of fish? Hardly predictable! What next/ Angels on flaming chariots coming to found god's earthly kingdom?

Get a life.

The trouble is that "they", the theists already have a life, it's the only one they get, and they waste the fucker musing over fairy tales and associated shit. One thing that will be a constant source of disappointment to me is that when "they" die, they won't know they're wrong. They'll just be dead. And still wrong.

[CookieJon]

I'd have thought the reasons why atheists trust science are exactly the same as the reasons why theists trust science.

I expect thedistillers trusted the internet to get his question across, otherwise why bother posting it?

It's a no-brainer.

[CJ]

My problem is, I can't resist any thread where the word "distillers" occurs...

It's like that annoying piece of plastic that sticks to your fingers and just wont let go no matter how many times you try flicking it off.

What a perfectly wonderful description.

It's like having a really painful hangnail that hurts every time you touch it but you just keep squeezing because you have to see the pus!

[CJ]

I'd have thought the reasons why atheists trust science are exactly the same as the reasons why theists trust science.

I expect thedistillers trusted the internet to get his question across, otherwise why bother posting it?

It's a no-brainer.

It is a no-brainer, so the implication is?

[Clinton Huxley]

Concur with Rum. The Universe is as it is. In the absence of a celestial software engineer, there is no reason to suppose that it will start behaving differently. It's only if you posit an omnipotent force governing the galaxy and able to change parameters on a whim that prediction becomes impossible. Thedistillers argument is 180 degrees wrong.

Are we done now?

[CJ]

Concur with Rum. The Universe is as it is. In the absence of a celestial software engineer, there is no reason to suppose that it will start behaving differently. It's only if you posit an omnipotent force governing the galaxy and able to change parameters on a whim that prediction becomes impossible. Thedistillers argument is 180 degrees wrong.

Are we done now?

We are, unfortunately delusion knows no bounds.