inference of a multiverse more plausible now: dark flow (The limitations of science)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Saturday, January 01, 2011, 22:25 (4856 days ago) @ Balance_Maintained

I think you hit the nail on the head a few posts back. There is really no concern as far as *proof*, and recent science has offered us a wealth of things that are, in effect, unprovable, much like the religions they disdain. (Ironically, I just recently read an article linking an ancient religious symbol to modern particle physics. I will see I can find it again.) Anyway, the point being that as long as science can steer people away from anything that even remotely hints at any sorty of metaphysical explanation, they will, and they will tout it as cannon law and the greatest find since the discovery since those little creme sandwich cookies....mmmmmm...coookies. And no, I am not suggesting that there is a scientific conspiracy, but there are enough scientists our there like our beloved Dawkins that are very open and honest about their agenda.-Well, as long as we remember that science isn't about 'proving' but model building, we'll avoid the pitfalls associated with 'proof.' -As for Dawkins, considering that science has dispelled nearly all supernatural explanations, he's got a reason to be cocky. While I sometimes wish I could be religious, it's important to note that overall, science has made life visibly better for everyone. (For the record I've never read one of his books, though I'm familiar with his ideas and attitudes.)

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"