How do you scientifically refute a philosophical belief?
posted on January 19, 2013 05:38AM GMT
I am not a creationist.
I believe the world is 14 billion years old and that man evolved in the last 500 million years along with the tuna fish.
It has come to my attention that people who call themselves scientists are saying that it is a fact that God does not exist. I am puzzled by this.
Scientifically speaking, the universe is finite and expanding, eventually expanding faster than the speed of light and leaving our tiny galaxy all alone in the night sky.
Philosophically speaking, there may be more than just our universe. Unfortunately, at the present time, we have not come up with a way to travel to the edge of our universe and measure what is beyond it. If we can't measure it, observe it, or predict it, it is certainly not scientific to think anything exists beyond our universe, even though our universe is expanding into something. However, the philosophical argument that something may exist beyond our universe is logical.
My challenge to all "scientists" who say there is absolutely no God.
In the book Flatland, a sphere passed through a plane. A square on that plane saw a point appear from nowhere, it grew into a circle, shrunk down to a point, then disappeared. The square did not take irrefutable measurements of the occurrence while it was happening. After the occurrence, the square no longer had the ability to measure the sphere, because the sphere left the square's plane/universe.
How can the square, who is the only witness to the event, scientifically prove the existence of the sphere?
Better yet, how can a triangle on the same plane as the square prove the square is nuts and there is no such a thing as a sphere?
This is a simple thought experiment, not to change your beliefs, but to emphasize the difference between philosophical belief and scientific fact and how philosophy might drive science to expand its thinking.
[this article is posted in its entirety]