Wouldn’t consider this faith. Faith seems reserved for things that are impossible to test (what happens when you die). Not things that you personally haven’t tested.
Gravity (example in this thread) can be tested by anyone at any time, thus if you dont test it you trust scientists, you dont have faith in them.
Yes, science mostly makes testable predictions. Some (eg string theory) are not testable (at least now). These require faith and are more like religion.
>thinks constants are varying… >can’t look at the data himself?
Simply the fact that a person is standing in opposition to a large system doesn’t give their ideas any more or less credibility.
Religious belief: there's nothing special about the Earth. <----- falsify that with evidence, good luck.
Bc there are special things about the earth, eg only known place with life. & where all my memories are from.
Right, also earth is supposed to be in a random location in the universe. But that's an unprovable thesis until we find an outside edge of the universe. Until then it's a belief.
Something special is something set apart. It is far above average. It its the 1%. The 99% are not special. To say the earth is special is to place it in the 1%.
say you’ve arrive on earth & are walking along the street. you run into someone. you automatically assume they are the richest person on earth (ie special by some metric).
You know there are billions of other people on the earth but dont know anything about them. The person you meet is the richest person you know so all evidence is they
are the richest person on earth. Is it reasonable to assume you’ve randomly run into the richest person on earth? Why would you assume there is anything special about this person?
They can be special to you on a personal level (they’re the only person you know) but they are most likely average. Analogously, earth is the first planet we know.
It is the only planet we know that has life. That is the evidence we have that it is special. We also know there are many other planets out there. just like
it is ridiculous to assume the first person you meet is the richest (ie special) why should our default assumption be the earth is not average (ie earth is special)?
By “the earth isn’t special “ I assume you mean the earth is an average planet, with average composition, near an average star, in an average location in the universe?
sorry, **prove** it with good evidence.
That's not the argument he's making. He's saying there's foundational tenants to modern science that are untestable but believed to be true just like a religion.
You’re right, saw this argument in the YT comments. It often applies to fringe people in general. Just a random though about this talk. Dont think it should have been banned btw.
I mean the fact that it was banned tells me that the holy arbiters of truth consider this to be blasphemy. Banned Ted talks are the best Ted talks.
I dont agree but ehh, whatever.
Sheldrake was banned for talking about what the materialist/naturalist/determinist religion call "pseudoscience". But he's using the exact same scientific method that they are.
& people who have been banned who really were crazy (eg alchemists)
But just the fact he is banned is not evidence he is correct. There have been people who have been banned & been correct (eg galileo)
It's not weather he's "correct" or not(technically there is no such thing in science, only evidence). He was banned for questioning authority and asking forbidden questions.
Thoughts in no order: this is the issue with relying on gov money to pay for research (also an issue in Pharma & climate research).
ha, thanks. When I saw a yt link I expected this video, lol:
