The quote of the article is manifestly trivial. This is what differentiates a scientific theory from a "manifestly bogus" one: testability. Some people say that science is only what produces testable theories or predictions. By this reasoning many serious minds still consider medicine an art rather than science. Concerning faith in science, one should distinguish between faith in the results one gets (we believe that they are true) and faith of the scientist in general that borders on or is directly related to God's will. The latter could be creationism from the Big Bang to life. Once we can explain the data or a theory by experiments, there is less and less God involved in science. The famous Laplace as you all know answered to Napoleon in this way:
Quote:
Laplace went in state to Napoleon to accept a copy of his work, and the following account of the interview is well authenticated, and so characteristic of all the parties concerned that I quote it in full. Someone had told Napoleon that the book contained no mention of the name of God; Napoleon, who was fond of putting embarrassing questions, received it with the remark, 'M. Laplace, they tell me you have written this large book on the system of the universe, and have never even mentioned its Creator.' Laplace, who, though the most supple of politicians, was as stiff as a martyr on every point of his philosophy, drew himself up and answered bluntly, 'Je n'avais pas besoin de cette hypothèse-là .' ("I had no need of that hypothesis.") Napoleon, greatly amused, told this reply to Lagrange, who exclaimed, 'Ah! c'est une belle hypothèse; ça explique beaucoup de choses.' ("Ah, it is a fine hypothesis; it explains many things.") from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre-Simon_Laplace
Last edited by macnerd10; 09/25/0906:29 PM.
Alex 3.1 GHz 13" MacBook Pro 2015, 8 GB RAM, OS 10.11.2, Office 2011, TimeWarner Cable 2.8 GHz Xeon Mac Pro 2010, 16 GB RAM, OS 10.11.2, Office 2011, LAN
