What makes you a science denier?

I don't believe in that intelligent design crap, does that count

I believe you're a fricking idiot.

De dernier denier destiny deigns destroys dubious didacticism.

quote:

---

Evolution and the big bang theory have more holes than the Titanic. Science believers can't buy that God could create the world out of nothing, but yet they can believe that life and rocks could erupt out of nothing with no help.

One big problem with science is that it's created by man, who is extremely imperfect and always has a self serving agenda. Science has perpetually proved itself wrong.

---

Wow that is so edgy man. Are you an atheist?

No, just cognizant of the fact that organized religion has impeded scientific progress for centuries. Your ancestors were the dumbasses of years past who believed the universe was centered around the earth, etc

I believe I have a pretty good grasp on science with 2 engineering degrees. I believe in the big bang, evolution and all that good stuff.

I believe that catastrophic global warming caused by human CO2 emissions is a complete and total farce. I believe that CO2 is a very poor green house gas, and I believe that warming of the earth has to do with solar cycles... much more so than a shitty greenhouse gas like CO2.

I am a man of science. I deny nothing that can be proved.

quote:

---

Science has perpetually proved itself wrong.

---

Well, that's kind of the point. Science is fluid. People are always learning and figuring things out. When you were a child did you start out with knowing everything or did you gradually learn some things and make a bunch of mistakes along the way? You learn something rudimentary then you refine your learning of the thing. You didn't just understand the entire field of arithmetic in one day. You understood one concept. You had misunderstandings about other concepts. Then you ironed them out as you went.

Science starts off with the premise (the correct premise by the way) that only the most basic things can be known and everything is uncertain unless a great deal of testing can be done and even then you need to leave open growth and learning because a man's understanding will always be flawed. Compare this with religion's static stance that man already knows everything and nothing is open to growth and learning and hand waives away any times that it is wrong with post facto hand waving.

Sorry for going there, but it takes a person with unfathomably bad critical reasoning skills to take your position, and it's not just that point. It's your other points in that post that I don't have the energy to get into right now. They don't pass a rudimentary test of ration or logic. But you know, like the Always Sunny boys say, "Sometimes Science is wrong..." therefore it all has to be bullshite.