Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Show:   Top Rated Controversial Best Lowest Rated Newest Per page:
Order:
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #48 - mutzaki (01/31/2013) [-]
An asshole doesn't try to prove **** .
An asshole tries to to keep **** in, and a few times a day, let it out.
User avatar #40 - goodadventures (01/31/2013) [-]
Science doesn't give a **** about your personal beliefs, it seeks answers and truth through evidence and tests.
User avatar #29 - scottsselfdefense (01/31/2013) [-]
science doesnt actually prove or disprove anything. everything is theory. a theory cannot be proven or dis-proven. thats why when you hear someone say "its scientifically proven..." theyre full of **** . its not scientists i have a problem with its douchebags who dont wanna let me and other theists be. they say we start all the **** but i rarely ever see anyone outside the WBC starting anything, and WBC isnt a church in my opinion. theyre a bunch of high powered lawyers who want others to attack them physically so they can sue
#87 to #29 - anonymous (01/31/2013) [-]
That moment when you realize that there are other religions besides Christianity, and that people still use them for their own personal gain.

Feel bad, son?
User avatar #65 to #29 - themastertroller (01/31/2013) [-]
>a theory cannot be proven or dis-proven

the **** man
User avatar #41 to #29 - goodadventures (01/31/2013) [-]
You're right, gravity is just a theory, let's hope you wake up and float the **** away.
User avatar #51 to #41 - cloudstrifeownsall (01/31/2013) [-]
Tim minchin reference.... Funny..but still kind of a jerk thing to say lol... And gravity is a theory... the fact that something is there keeping us down is obvious but the theory is how it works..not what it is
#35 to #29 - deadlyambitions (01/31/2013) [-]
actually a theory can be proven wrong or right its just a generalization for what we think happens then they try to prove that. most stuff can be proven but there are those that cant be proven due to certain circumstances, but ur either still in school or a drop out so u didnt have much in science class.
User avatar #37 to #35 - scottsselfdefense (01/31/2013) [-]
im a senior in highschool. i klnow all i need to know about theories for what my line of work is going to be. lol next time i use a scientific theory in a culinary setting ill let you know. and no how are you going to tell all of the teachers ive had in my 12 years of school theyre wrong? jack ass. try not to come off like a douche and you wont get hostility
User avatar #43 to #37 - alexineko (01/31/2013) [-]
>try not to come off like a douche and you wont get hostility

First, you're on the internet. How are you being hostile? What are you going to do? Caps lock him?

Second, when scientists say something is "scientifically proven", they mean that, according to standing theories of science, something works as predicted. It is scientifically proven that if you don't breathe, you die. Am I full of **** ?

Thirdly, don't act like you know all about a subject just to go on to say you don't even need to know it. Then you're no better than religious extremists saying that they're right no matter what is proven or dis-proven.
User avatar #24 - supamonkey (01/31/2013) [-]
A true scientist doesn't try to prove or disprove anything.
He merely looks at the evidence and uses logic and understanding to come to an unbiased conclusion.
User avatar #31 to #24 - defeats (01/31/2013) [-]
Sorry to say, but theories aren't conclusions.
User avatar #32 to #31 - supamonkey (01/31/2013) [-]
Yes they are.
Look up the meaning of "scientific theory".
User avatar #34 to #32 - defeats (01/31/2013) [-]
Did I say "scientific theories" or "theories"? They mean different things.

There are more "theories" (hypotheses) than there are proven "scientific theories".

I said "theories" because not everyone will know the difference, because on this comment section I'm speaking to everyone from a non scientific standing point.
User avatar #36 to #34 - supamonkey (01/31/2013) [-]
But I never said "theory" in my original comment...
User avatar #39 to #36 - defeats (01/31/2013) [-]
My point was only that nothing in science is concluded.
User avatar #47 to #39 - techketzer (01/31/2013) [-]
Wrong.
All of science is conclusion.
User avatar #50 to #47 - defeats (01/31/2013) [-]
All scientific knowledge is tentative and provisional, and nothing is final. The currently accepted theory of a phenomenon is simply the best explanation for it among all available alternatives.
Its status as the accepted theory is contingent on what other theories are available and might suddenly change tomorrow if there appears a better theory or new evidence that might challenge the accepted theory.
User avatar #53 to #50 - techketzer (01/31/2013) [-]
Exactly.
It appears you mixed up "concluded" with "conclusive".
User avatar #54 to #53 - defeats (01/31/2013) [-]
Concluded in the "brought to an end" "finalised" sense. Nothing in science is final.
User avatar #62 to #54 - techketzer (01/31/2013) [-]
That is conclusive.
Concluded means derived from observation via means of logic.
User avatar #25 to #24 - techketzer (01/31/2013) [-]
An essential part of the scientific method is the falsification principle, though.
User avatar #23 - ireallylikepotatoe (01/31/2013) [-]
It's funny because there is such a thing as a religious scientist.

a low percent but there still are some.
User avatar #30 to #23 - scottsselfdefense (01/31/2013) [-]
yeah. the vatican has scientists
User avatar #26 to #23 - techketzer (01/31/2013) [-]
Yeah, no one's perfect.
#22 - Scottyjthecoolj (01/31/2013) [-]
It's like when the doctor gives you a month to live and you end up being 100.
#21 - infamoustrapper (01/31/2013) [-]
This image has expired
fixed.
User avatar #16 - sketchE (01/31/2013) [-]
faith is the belief and trust that something, in this case gods existence, is true. the moment someone demands proof for their faith they have lost the argument
#17 to #16 - anonymous (01/31/2013) [-]
only if they belief in it they have lost. otherwise they win
User avatar #20 to #17 - sketchE (01/31/2013) [-]
im agnostic just to clarify its just strange to see people demanding proof for something they are supposed to have faith in
#13 - freduardo (01/31/2013) [-]
no
no
User avatar #12 - thatguywhohasbacon (01/31/2013) [-]
Then get the **** off of the internet and never visit a hospital or doctor ever again.
User avatar #4 - azroth (01/31/2013) [-]
In the nice words of Neil Degrasse; The great thing about science is that it is true whether you believe in it or not
User avatar #45 to #4 - itrooztrooperdown (01/31/2013) [-]
See, I don't understand why such a smart man as Dr. Tyson would say something like this. Science, unlike religion, is not dogmatic. Its goal is to find the ultimate truth, but science in itself is not a truth. At least not at the moment. An example: nobody has seen atoms, but there is evidence of their existence. Is it true that atmos exit because science says so? No! If somebody proves that atoms do not exist, and the answer to everything was something else, true scientist will agree with that. And even better scientist will work on finding counter-arguments to that new theory. Science is a path, not a truth.
User avatar #7 to #4 - allamericandude (01/31/2013) [-]
Hate to disagree with Mr. Tyson, but that quote isn't really that great.

If science was always true, then the Earth would still be flat and everything in the universe would be rotating around it. Those were perfectly valid scientific (not religious) theories at one point.

If scientists were correct about everything, there'd be no need for science. Science is a journey, not a destination. It's not a set of correct answers, it's the process of finding those answers. That's what makes it great.
#14 to #7 - adamks (01/31/2013) [-]
So what you are trying to say, is that back the day, scientists prooved that the earth was flat? It was not just an assumption?
User avatar #105 to #14 - allamericandude (01/31/2013) [-]
It was the best theory they could make with the evidence they had. They hadn't yet done the experiments and measurements to prove otherwise.

Granted, the flat earth theory was debunked thousands of years ago by ancient Greek sailors, and by the middle ages we had a pretty good estimate of the Earth's size (although the differences in those estimations helped lead to the whole Christopher Columbus debacle.)
User avatar #9 to #7 - saddestofbreads (01/31/2013) [-]
Theories. Science has always and will always be true, Theories such as the flat earth one was never proven and so it was always just a theory while the truth is that it is a sphere, which we know by scientific theories backed up by evidence.
User avatar #106 to #9 - allamericandude (01/31/2013) [-]
What I'm trying to say is that science is not a set of correct answers. Science is the process of finding those answers. The thing is, we're never going to know if the answers we have are absolutely correct. That's why we need science to either prove our answers correct or find new ones.
#78 to #9 - anonymous (01/31/2013) [-]
If there weren't correct observations and proofs, it was never a theory. The saying "just a theory" is ridiculously ignorant. The reason they're called theories and not truths is because nothing is absolute. NOTHING! If something is a theory (not some ******** one with incorrect or no evidence) you can treat it like a fact. The flat earth claim didn't have other proof than their own intuition. Nowadays theories are never based on intuition.

/rant

User avatar #10 to #9 - MrMustacho (01/31/2013) [-]
science is a process, so science itself isn't right or wrong, the answers it gets us are and when we have limited information science often gives us the wrong answer (though probably a better one than blind speculation)
User avatar #11 to #10 - thatguywhohasbacon (01/31/2013) [-]
With enough testing you can get a correct answer though to any problem using science, such as the earth being round(ish), that is scientific fact established using testing and observation(Satellites).
User avatar #8 to #7 - desuforeverlulz (01/31/2013) [-]
Depends on the way you're defining science.

"Science" is always true.

Science is always true, but somehow not all the answers are there yet.
User avatar #6 to #4 - manter (01/31/2013) [-]
except when we find something that disproves science with other science. Like how we recently found out that atoms can go below absolute zero degrees.
User avatar #18 to #6 - darkjacky (01/31/2013) [-]
prove or it didn't happen.. thats science so show your prove! since absolute 0 is the point where atoms don't move relative to each other(close to it).
#1 - pokemonstheshiz ONLINE (01/30/2013) [-]
Science doesn't try to prove or disprove God, they record observations about our universe and make inferences about those findings. A deity is not something you can test for, it's up to your personal interpretation of these findings to apply them to the metaphysical. Or you can disbelieve the findings, no one cares.
User avatar #97 to #1 - rmoran (01/31/2013) [-]
>A deity is not something you can test for
Only if you're getting your definition from one of those squishy "I believe because I believe" theists. Otherwise you'll get a heaping helping of the ways god(s) manifest in reality (Creation, miracles, healing, prayer, etc). All of which are testable by the scientific method.
#79 to #1 - anonymous (01/31/2013) [-]
True, but if so many atheists didn't wrongly use science to try and disprove God then we wouldn't have this problem. Again it's down to humans interpreting things wrongly and atheists are just as guilty of this as religious people are. Still wrong to blame science though.
User avatar #3 to #1 - retris (01/31/2013) [-]
consequently many aspects of god which were once widely believed in are no longer even aknowledged
User avatar #2 to #1 - stultum (01/30/2013) [-]
you sir, are completely right.
 Friends (0)