This Saturday is the March for Science and there is a good reason to put science first. Science is the study of Reality the way it really is. Faith is a decision to believe whatever you want regardless of if it’s real.

Although it is true that people of faith also believe in a lot of things that are real, faith allows one to ignore Reality and choose to believe regardless of the evidence. In the world of science when what you believe is determined to be wrong then you are expected to change your mind and go with what the evidence supports.

In the world of science it is assumed that Reality is something that exists and we learn from the universe through discovery. In the faith based world they choose to believe something with the expectation that Reality will magically transform to match what they believe. But, as they say, you can’t serve two masters, and if you choose to put your personal beliefs ahead of Reality then your understanding of the universe stops. It also causes brain damage because you lose the ability to distinguish what is real from what isn’t. The concept of Truth goes away because proof relies on evidence which are concepts from the science based world.

Ultimately we have to learn how to live in harmony with Reality or else Reality will kick us out of existence. People who have turned their backs to Reality put all of humanity at risk. Although believing in invisible friends is protected by the Constitution, it’s a sin against the universe. And we could all be punished with extinction.



  1. NewFormatSux says:

    >Science is the study of Reality the way it really is.

    Except for the calendar, or they would call it April for Science.

    The people involved are not about science, it is just more leftism masquerading as science. They had Bill Nye as honorary leader, then they started complaining that he was a white man. They should have complained he is not a scientist, but that’s not too important for them.

    • pedro says:

      Is Perkel and his church of reality. You know, the new religion for the gullible.

      Did you expect any different from his blog?

    • bobbo, we think with words and flower with ideas says:

      What is it about “honorary leader” that escapes your reality?

  2. Really? REALLY?! says:

    It’s pretty clear that “God” must love stupid people. “He” sure made a lot of them. (They’re EVERYWHERE!)

    Here’s the deal: It doesn’t matter what side of religion you stand on — faith based bullshit or your “reality” based one. Science is NOT about “reality” quite the way you seem to “believe.”

    Very simply, science is about INVESTIGATION! And where “science” is concerned, the scientific “method” is used to discover how and/or why something works (or is) the way it does (or is). Science is NOT about challenging “reality” though that does seem to be the end result in quite a few cases. And I have to admit that science is also used to prove or disprove the occasional hypothesis that all too often a challenges on one’s perception of reality.

    But no matter how you look at it, science is NOT a religion! So please stop holding “science” up as some kind of deity who challenges your perception of reality. I don’t know about anyone else, but a “church” of “reality” really makes my skin crawl.

    • pedro says:

      Don’t waste your time on him.

    • bobbo, we think with words and flower with ideas says:

      You are responding to a lot of what Marc did not say.

      Scrub his earlier posts on his Church of Reality which he did not mention in this post. goes in that direction, gets a bit too anthropomorphic for my druthers, but basically: exactly right.

      got anything substantive?

  3. NewFormatSux says:

    Should Larry Summers have been fired for suggesting women are less interested than men in STEM fields?

    Studies have found that Head Start offers no educational benefit. Should it be studied more, and if verified should funding be eliminated?

    Should we study if there is a racial difference in intelligence?

    • bobbo, we think with words and flower with ideas says:

      Should Larry Summers have been fired for suggesting women are less interested than men in STEM fields? /// No. It should have been the START of a conversation/change in policy…. not the end.

      Studies have found that Head Start offers no educational benefit. Should it be studied more, and if verified should funding be eliminated? /// No. Head Start provides much more than just academic superiority as measured 3 years later. IE==daycare for hard working parents.

      Should we study if there is a racial difference in intelligence? /// Its beyond dispute that there is. POINT IS: the difference is so minor as to make no difference when applied to any other subject.

      Mind the gap.

      • NewFormatSux says:

        Well, your answers are reasonable, though not the ones that most liberals accept. Your last one is wrong, but still correct enough that you would be in trouble at many universities, where suggesting there is a difference is fighting words.
        It is a big difference. About half a standard deviation for some Asians and Jews, one standard deviation lower for blacks.
        70% are within one standard deviation of the mean, 15% on each side.
        This puts 15% of blacks above the average white, 15% of whites below the average black.
        2 standard deviations is 2.5% on each side. So 2.5% of whites vs 15% of blacks on the low end, vs 2.5% of blacks vs 15% of whites at the high end. Coupled with fewer blacks to begin with, and you have colleges fighting to fill their quotas.
        The half standard deviation for some Asians explains why they are dominating so many disciplines.

        • bobbo, we think with words and flower with ideas says:

          Lets say your numbers are correct. What difference would/should/could it make?

          POINT IS: the valid group statistics do not apply to INDIVIDUALS standing in front of you.

          EG: men are taller than women. Will the next woman thru the door be taller or shorter than the next man? You can make a bet and win over the long term……but it simply does not apply to the next two individuals that walk thru the door.

          Same with intelligence……..or any other group statistic.

          …………..aka………its why racists are so stupid.

          • NewFormatSux says:

            Sure, but policy doesn’t come from focusing on individuals. A person with SAT 1000 might do as well as someone with SAT 1400, but I’m sure Harvard would think that as a group they’d rather have the 1400s. People who say SATs are not meaningful are thinking about the former while ignoring the latter.

          • ± says:

            His numbers ARE correct and you like a typical fucking liberal change the subject when confronted with a truth with which you can’t abide. No one except you started talking about individuals. Everything up until your non sequitur was about the aggregate.

            Stop acting like a fucking drunken flyspeck. You make it too easy for everyone.

          • NewFormatSux says:

            Your point may be valid, but your example is horrible. It absolutely applies to the next two people that walk thru the door. You have a substantial chance one is taller than the other. With the other cases, you have a disparity in one factor IQ, being used as a proxy for other characteristics. The effect is not as strong, while height is 100% correlated to height.

  4. NewFormatSux says:

    More science vs religion. Science finds that minimum wage kills jobs. For too many it is a matter of faith.

    https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2951110

  5. NewFormatSux says:

    Why no title?

    • NewFormatSux says:

      Looking at the silhouettes, science has taken a hit on the shoulder, and can deliver a series of big punches in the gut and ribs. Meanwhile, religion can earn a KO with a clean shot to the head.

  6. NewFormatSux says:

    Adam Sieminski, the former administrator of the Energy Department’s Energy Information Administration, told Axios on the sidelines of a Brookings Institution event that the pipeline should have been constructed.

    “One opinion I don’t have to stifle anymore is that I think the Keystone XL pipeline should have been built,” Sieminski told the news outlet.

    Sounds like it wasn’t science that was ruling but religion.

  7. The Chin says:

    Science can pose, “We’re probably living in a simulation.”

    We can’t teach intelligent design because it’s too close to that faith thing.

    Faith says, “Simulation? Sure…we’ve been saying this all along. We call the creator of this simulation God.” Somehow this is magical, mystical nonsense absolutely rejected by science…..but we’re probably living in a simulation.

  8. Daniel Middleman says:

    “Although it is true that people of faith also believe in a lot of things that are real, faith allows one to ignore Reality and choose to believe regardless of the evidence.” This is a total crock in my opinion. People can believe a lot of thing. How many atheists do you think are out there that believe in every crazy 9/11 conspiracy? I would suggest that you see the movie or read the book “The Case For Christ” before attacking people for believing in things that aren’t “real” when in fact there is more evidence than you might imagine to support their beliefs.


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 4803 access attempts in the last 7 days.