Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Religion

edhopper

(37,381 posts)

22. " Cosmologists were certain that Ptolemy was right. And then they were certain Copernicus was right.

Reply to Thats my opinion (Original post)

Thu Apr 4, 2013, 09:20 AM

Apr 2013

Really? Which Cosmologist? What experiments and observations did they use? What peer review journals did they publish in? What part of the scientific method was used to reach their conclusion.
Tell us how before Galileo these Cosmologist arrived at their theories? (you do understand how his turning a telescope to the heavens revolutionized science?)
Are you saying the Copernican model of the solar system is not reality and might be overturned?
The problem is you don't understated the difference between modern science and theology.
This weak, absurd argument has been made may times, and has always been found woefully wanting.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

33 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Scientific fact vrs. religious faith? [View all] Thats my opinion Apr 2013 OP

A scientist can generally tell you what facts would change their mind about a theory. trotsky Apr 2013 #1

except humility in a scientific dispute is honored as proper ChairmanAgnostic Apr 2013 #2

As long as you keep identifying religion with fundamentalism Thats my opinion Apr 2013 #4

I think that's why he says "fundie religions" EvolveOrConvolve Apr 2013 #13

Scientific Theories are models of reality... Ron Obvious Apr 2013 #3

You last major paragraph is on target. Thats my opinion Apr 2013 #6

OK. Ron Obvious Apr 2013 #10

Science is NOT "simply a collection of unalterable facts." cleanhippie Apr 2013 #5

No really it is. They are all in The Big Book of Unalterable Science Facts. Warren Stupidity Apr 2013 #17

Few points... gcomeau Apr 2013 #7

Yours is a very helpful response. Thats my opinion Apr 2013 #9

I would just point out... gcomeau Apr 2013 #11

Now why are you complaining? skepticscott Apr 2013 #14

You made it through the first paragraph ok skepticscott Apr 2013 #8

I had forgotten about that gem. trotsky Apr 2013 #12

The debate between relativity and QM is "raging" you say? dimbear Apr 2013 #15

I'm just reporting how an outstanding subatomic scientist sees it. Thats my opinion Apr 2013 #18

Let me give you the best answer to another question your raise, one which may sound a little dimbear Apr 2013 #20

Ha Ha But scientists report that both are correct. nt. Thats my opinion Apr 2013 #24

You really, really need to read this link that skepticscott provided: trotsky Apr 2013 #25

What are the bets? skepticscott Apr 2013 #29

No chance he reads it. trotsky Apr 2013 #30

If you're going to Ha Ha, Charles skepticscott Apr 2013 #28

I suspect you misunderstood him. gcomeau Apr 2013 #23

OMG Charles skepticscott Apr 2013 #31

Faith is commitment to a position with no evidence Lordquinton Apr 2013 #32

I think "faith" is the wrong word to use goldent Apr 2013 #16

Science seems clear Thats my opinion Apr 2013 #19

Which is why fundamental scientific theories skepticscott Apr 2013 #21

" Cosmologists were certain that Ptolemy was right. And then they were certain Copernicus was right. edhopper Apr 2013 #22

Well, I know of no raging debate between QM and relativity. longship Apr 2013 #26

Sorry, Charles...there is no "raging debate" skepticscott Apr 2013 #27

It looks like your friend, the physicist, knew what he was talking about. Jim__ Apr 2013 #33