
We've had questions about lies and liars in the past, but this time we're asking about the sort of fantasist who constantly claims they've got a helicopter in the garden or was "second onto the balcony at the Iranian Embassy siege". Tell us about the cobblers you've been told, or the complete lies you've come out with.
Thanks to dozer for the suggestion
( , Thu 13 Jan 2011, 12:55)
« Go Back | See The Full Thread

Although it is amusing seeing people take such a...religious view of science. Especially in the rather controversial realm of climate science there is much talk of the Science being "settled" and facts being "unquestionable". Science doesn't work like that. The "Big Bang" is just a theory, and there is as much concrete evidence for it as there is for a big, beardy man in the sky. To blindly accept science is just as pointless as blindly accepting religion. Nothing is valid if it doesn't stand up to questioning.
( , Tue 18 Jan 2011, 11:48, 4 replies)

( , Tue 18 Jan 2011, 17:31, closed)

There's evidence for a Big Bang.
There's no evidence for a beardy man in the sky.
( , Tue 18 Jan 2011, 12:00, closed)

there was a Big Cigarette, a Big Shower, and a Big "Well, I guess I'd better head home then."
( , Tue 18 Jan 2011, 12:20, closed)

There's a fine but important distinction between "proof of" and "evidence of". There is no proof that either the Big Bang happened or of any beardy man in the sky. There is evidence for both.
Which evidence were you thinking of specifically?
( , Tue 18 Jan 2011, 12:37, closed)

Cosmic background radiation, discovered by Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson. Turn your TV to a dead channel, and 1% of the static you see is actually echoes of the Big Bang.
Beardy man evidence please?
( , Tue 18 Jan 2011, 13:24, closed)

How do I create a control, and turn on a TV outside the universe?
( , Tue 18 Jan 2011, 13:27, closed)

( , Tue 18 Jan 2011, 17:33, closed)

Science is not blindly accepting anything, nothing can be accepted as science without repeatable proof. Whereas the religious folk, with their "faith" want you to blindly accept whatever they tell you with no proof. They actually argue that no proof is better, because that means you have more faith. The circular argument that the bible(or insert whatever religious text), is the word of god, because god says so, is just a bit too far for me.
( , Tue 18 Jan 2011, 13:38, closed)

This is true, it's surprising, nay, unnerving how many sceintists are not open minded and it takes great resolve to convince them that their currently held beliefs are actually disprovable as in line with scientific method.
( , Tue 18 Jan 2011, 18:02, closed)
« Go Back | See The Full Thread