Why do millennials question religion but not science?

Why do millennials question religion but not science?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=C9SiRNibD14
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

muh intelligents

Science has evidence to back it up that can be researched freely. So people don't have to question it as much. Religion is just random stories that people think actually legitimately happened despite no proof to back any of them up.

Friendly reminder that the religion you personally believe in isn't real and if you were born into another religion, you would follow that one instead

That's a perfect example of a genetic fallacy.

I hope you don't consider yourself intelligent.

Anyone who doesn't constantly question science doesn't understand what science is, this goes double for new hypotheses or discoveries. The whole point of science is to keep eliminating what is wrong until you are left with a more accurate understanding of objective reality, it will probably never be perfect but it is meant to be self correcting. Part of that self-correction is that new hypothesis are constantly challenged on their validity until they can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are correct.

Many millennials don't read many actual scientific papers, or examine data directly from sources, and they haven't been educated on how to properly analyze data they do examine. A lot of "science" they get is popsci or stripped down explanations of complex theories or discoveries from science communicators who purposefully dumb it down for laymen. Popsci is often overexadurated and hyperbolic because it's mean to entertain, not educate, and science communicators are not a replacement for teachers.

TLDR: Most people don't understand the scientific method, what science is, how science works, or any of the conclusions that science makes. Their knowledge of science is often an inaccurate stereotype, thus they feel safer just accepting what popsci or their particular legacy media propaganda mill shits out.

>scientific results are are always accurate
>scientific results are never altered to fit an agenda
Science is good, but you put waaaay too much faith in science and technology.

james really fucked her up

Because science is hard.

Millenials will do anything as long as it's easy

I agree so hard. Nothing pisses me off more then when liberals say "this scientist said it, so it must be true" or "peer-review is infallible", as if they are so smugly sure that an "official" declaration cuts any and all arguments until the end of time. They literally do treat science like a religion, they don't approach it with the skepticism required.

>this fucking cunt
why do people keep posting pictures of her

That is not a genetic fallacy. I think you are confused on the definition of genetic fallacy.

Why do people keep posting this person? It has the most soulless eyes and smile out of any creature I've ever witnessed. Also, how are there so many pictures of it?

dota 2 i guess

Because /pol is filled with bandwagon faggots who can't get laid

Yep. Also they don't consider who funds what projects, and how those that provide the money could request specific results. The less ethical ones will take the work because they care about getting paid and don't mind cherry-picking data or fudging results if it brings in money and publications.

>science communicators who purposefully dumb it down for laymen.

>muh god particle

Good point.

You see liberal talk shows bring in scientists like Neil Degrass Tyson.

Isn't the whole point of science to question science?

>muh spontaneous creation of a universe

Dota 2 related. /d2g/ are ourguys.

so why the fuck do I see so many swedish islamist converts nowadays?

This is the dumbest fucking thread I've ever fucking seen, why do you guys even bother arguing with OP

Actually, science operates off of theories, assumptions, and beliefs immensely. Beyond this governments, lobbyists, ext. have a firm grasp on research, what's published, what's not, ext.

Science told us marijuana is bad and has addictive qualities yet you have droves of liberals claiming "bias", "outdated" research.

There's a LOT of "scientific research" that's completely ignored or skewed to fit agendas. Otherwise we'd have a very, VERY different society in regards to drugs, murder, abortion, ext.

Progressives tend towards collectivist behavior and value consensus over disagreement, even if the consensus in particular is incorrect. Just look at Creationism or the current Anthropic Global Warming scaremongers, both are excellent examples of majority scientific consensus coming to an incorrect conclusion. Collectivists will agree with them even if they're wrong because they view scientists as authority figures and would rather just agree with them than challenge their conclusions.

she used to be so qt

/thread

Many people convert religions, so your second point is utter shit.

As imperfect as religion is, science is also imperfect. In the grand scheme of things, our comprehension is fairly limited by our egos, and many scientists are more interested and being correct than actually carrying out the scientific method properly. For example: global warming.

Literally who? Is this some leaf that we're not privy to?

I hate the term "settled science". There is no such thing. Gravity is not "settled science". According to our most advanced understanding of gravity, the universe only contains 20% of the matter that it "should" given the phenomena we observe; thus the hypothesis of dark matter. In reality nobody has a fucking clue how it works, but we're pretty fucking sure that it works. But it's technically possible that quantum weirdness could change that at any time. Hardly a settled issue. When we can't even get the most basic rules of how the universe works nailed down, calling anything "settled science" seems like quite a stretch.

>>scientific results are are always accurate
>>scientific results are never altered to fit an agenda

That's not what he said?

>Science has evidence to back it up that can be researched freely.

>that can be researched freely.

He's not saying it's always accurate, he's just saying that generally steps are taken (e.g. peer review) to ensure it's accuracy and even then you don't have to believe it, you can view and consider the apparent evidence yourself.

Because it is the accepted religion of the day.

This is basically bait. People question results published in scientific literature all the time. For many people though, they don't have a strong enough background in a field of research to adequately analyze the results and propose any counter arguments. So instead, they assume (often correctly) that peer-reviewed literature has been and continues to be analyzed by experts in the field who are capable of adequately questioning the published results.

Your real question is why do people question the principles of religion, but not the principles of science. The answer is simple: the principles of science always end up involving verifiable hypotheses, while religion lacks verifiable hypotheses.

i wish we could be friends in rl

>i have no idea what science is

imbecile

This makes me so sad, why would she ruin her hair and body with tattoos ;_;

I would assume that to physicists it's only "settled" in the sense that at the scale we are currently working in, it works consistently and predictably. To a layperson "settled" means "people who know more about it than me pretty much understand everything that's going on".

I would suspect that a lot of misunderstandings occur because what something means to scientists in a particular field doesn't translate properly to people outside of that field.

>Actually, science operates off of theories, assumptions, and beliefs immensely.

>"It's just a theory!"

Are you baiting or are you really using the laymans meaning of "theory" in this context?

Science is always questioned, the best science is put to the test. How do you put religion to the test besides dying?

Science is their religion.

>scientific results are are always accurate
>scientific results are never altered to fit an agenda
Literally nobody claimed this to be true. However, scientists actually get to repeatedly perform experiments and compare results to discern accuracy and any potential tampering of results. Religion lacks this process.

its rare. societies hold onto their cultural affinity for their religions. Most indians are hindu, most arabs are mooslim, most euros are christian. Well maybe before mama merkel changed the definition of 'european' but still

You have the intelligence of a small cockroach.
Actual science is a process of scrutiny and reasoning. Scientific stances are based upon lines of reasoning, which can be faulty. This is why new theories are not immediately accepted.
When communicating "science" to institutions and the public, it is easy to manipulate the "logical outcome".
For example, cancer studies in rodents where the tumours were cut from the rodents, and scientists published that the chemical did not cause tumour development, as there "were no tumours in the rodents."
Another example, the Jew who invented gender, Money. He used faulty reasoning to gain funding and test subjects in order to manipulate the masses via the media's communication of his "research".
>"Gender" was invented by a pedophile.
Go suck Bill Nye (the fake scientist guy)'s cock while you watch Little Einsteins.

Because she broke up with her bf.

why do you make these threads every six hours?

Why do millennials dress like anime by not normal people?

Why do millennials rent but not own?

Why do millennials claim to be liberal but Trump won?

>Arguing about semantics opposed to the overall point

>overexadurated

Anzu is /ourgirl/

Fuck off.

Is this some copypasta I'm not aware of? Wtf are you replying to?

>Why do millennials claim to be liberal but Trump won?

Why do people claim to be healthy but die anyway?

This is the second thread I made today as the other was the median wage. I don't know why people assume I make every millennial thread.

Because politicized science is the religion of the left.

>Friendly reminder that the religion you personally believe in isn't real and if you were born into another religion, you would follow that one instead
Yup

Truth hurts theistcucks

Science is always questioned. That's the whole point of science. Religion is never questioned. To do so makes you a heretic. Religion is for the brainwashed.

They actually DO question science, but not in the way you want them to. Talk to the everyday feminist/anti-racist and you'll see what I mean.

youtube.com/watch?v=C9SiRNibD14

Probably because she's kinda cute.

Every time I see pictures of this dumb blizzard bitch she gets more tattoos.
Cant wait for Gen Zyklon B to put a stop to these shitty trends.

/thread

>
>Arguing about semantics opposed to the overall point

Which is what exactly?

That evil gubmints and coorporations are controlling all the science? Obviously there are very politicized fields, and much research is done in bad faith, but the vast vast vast majority of the actual science that goes on in the world is so niche and relatively insignificant that it has nothing to do with any sort of overarching agenda.

Also

>Otherwise we'd have a very, VERY different society in regards to drugs, murder, abortion, ext.

I get with drugs, but why murder?

why does this girl take so many angled selfies

>Wages.
What do you think of Basic Income? Personally it sounds like it would be the death sentence for any country that instituted it, as it would result in a spiral of joblessness and increasing costs for goods until the country in question ran out of money and collapsed.

It seems like the ultimate socialist suicide plan.

I converted to Christianity. Explain that.

Because 'science' has become their religion.

The rigorous application of philosophy and empirical science escapes them.

This new pasta is my gift to you.

Science doesnt always know shit. Just last week they conclusively proved that dinosaurs werent lizards like SCIENCE always thought, but are birds with feather plumage.

You have the intelligence of a small cockroach.
Actual science is a process of scrutiny and reasoning. Scientific stances are based upon lines of reasoning, which can be faulty. This is why new theories are not immediately accepted.
When communicating "science" to institutions and the public, it is easy to manipulate the "logical outcome".
For example, cancer studies in rodents where the tumours were cut from the rodents, and scientists published that the chemical did not cause tumour development, as there "were no tumours in the rodents."
Another example, the Jew who invented gender, Money. He used faulty reasoning to gain funding and test subjects in order to manipulate the masses via the media's communication of his "research".
>"Gender" was invented by a pedophile.
Go suck Bill Nye (the fake scientist guy)'s cock while you watch Little Einsteins.

better than your degenerated shit

that stupid sleeve ruined her.

stop posting soe every week ffs

there is science and (((science))), examples of science are round earth and gravity. Examples of (((science))) are "all humans are one species because they can breed fertile offspring" meanwhile thousands if not millions of separate species can produce viable offspring yet are classified completely different. Just because you can produce a hybrid doesn't mean you aren't different (and throwing away the benefits of your species)

Christianity is right.
It's been questioned and the people who questioned it were wrong. By questioning it yourself you have proven yourself wrong.
We stop you from doing it the same reason we prevent people from killing themselves.
SOME people are too stupid to take care of themselves and endanger the lives of others.
They need to be put down like the rabid dogs they are.

>Christianity is right.

Lol.

>Science is their religion
This. Modern science may offer us a more "accurate" interpretation of the happenings of our surroundings...but in all reality, it could be fundamentally in error.

Can you not post this dike blizzcuck on Sup Forums please I already have to deal with it on /d2g/.

Not to mention the fact that
JESUS HIMSELF WAS AGAINST RELIGION.
He wanted us to think for ourselves. Jesus would be disappointed with the place of Christianity and churches today.

Because they believe anything that mainstream ((media)), feeds them. Science is making a hypothesis, an educated guess, upon the nature of certain phenomena within our world, and thus requires a fair deal of skepticism in most procedures. But liberals and leftists, fully put their trust in anything the ((media)), says, because "They're never wrong, Hurr." And assail religion, whilst never questioning their own faith in science, even a little bit.

If our current understanding of reality were fundamentally flawed then technology we base off of that understanding simply wouldn't function at all. Since technology based on current knowledge does function, it is safe to assume that humanity is sound in what it does know, just that there's a whole hell of a lot more to learn.

>it could be fundamentally in error.

People who don't play pretend science test things, and look for ways something could be wrong or how else it might actually work. Sometimes you're wrong and that's true of everyone.

This is true, the church has always meant to be the 'body of Christ', i.e. it's people - Never it's place of worship.

it IS fundamentally in error. This is why millenials are so cucked. Previous generations had healthy skepticism for "scientific findings".
Nowadays the kids are just following whatever spin on "science" the Jews want.
>Millenials are JEWS

You are fucking right. Ten points, to you sir. Now go run over some muslims.

(((science))) is also philosophical materialism and nihilism being proven by it

A pretty successful brainwashing at an early age does that to you.

But then again, worldy knowledge disguises itself as "angel of the light".

No... just no. Science is just an abstract concept; I have a question, I form a hypothesis, I test it, and then I analyze the results. Sure, there's usually more to it than just that, but there's no way that "modern science [...] could be fundamentally in error".

Science isn't a set of beliefs like religion is, it's actually just a convenient label for the barebones process of testing how reality works.

But they don't have the tell tale signs of a kike my friend. Where is the absurdly long nose? Or the gaze filled with impossible amounts of malice? Or the spirit cooking? These are all essential aspects, in being a kike my friend.

you're a millennial - why can't you answer this yourself?

>that smug, patronizing look they always make

I just want to throw a chair at their face when they do that.

>Science isn't a set of beliefs like religion is

Except for when people start treating it like it is.

How can one creature be so soulless, and vile? How exactly is this possible, no living being looks like they do. There is nothing in their eyes, just twisted malice towards everything that isn't them.

Calling the sky the sea doesn't turn the sky into the sea. When leftards or cuckservatives or anyone really tries to do science with their political slant, when they fudge numbers or cherry pick samples or invent data they are no longer doing science. They're lying with a veneer of credibility. People either follow the scientific method, and are doing science, or they don't follow the scientific method, and aren't doing science.

The funny thing is my friend, they are purposely giving up their spot in the gene pool. Hopefully the cuck gene will be eradicated in a few generations.

That's individual theories you're talking about, not science.

Liberals told them their ideas were correct. Some science and serves as a replacement for religion. They're mediocre at best. It's best to question everything.

>Hurr duh hurr you don't like HIV to spread more quickly b/c some degenerate has a poo fetish? So bigoted!

*some science and all socialism

Obviously we have a sound grasp on the science of our immediate area...I guess I kind of meant it is entirely possible that one day CERN will smash the atom that contains our Universe into another atom containing someone elses Universe at 99.999% the speed of light and stuff gets weird. Perception is a weird thing.

David Hume

because you can prove science?

Science made smartphones, ya dingus.

Good observation- they must be nu-kikes then. They seem to have adopted the belief system, yet not adopted the entire demeanor and behaviors.
Currently they do have the patronizing gaze, soon it will become the malicious gaze.
Currently they try to shrink their noses, soon their trend will be the long, beaked nose of the typical jew.
Currently they decorate their instagram, soon they will use their bodily fluids for wall decoration.
It is all a few "scientific findings" away, when "aversion to large, long noses" is a "trait of racists and white people", and
"This brave artist used her menstrual fluids to create a beautiful painting, now displayed in the MoMA." and
"Swedist scientists discover that a gaze full of malice is the best way to shut down racist bigots, 280% more effective than a patronizing, smug facial expression."

I agree, though my point still stands. If CERN were to find some new piece of evidence like that, then that would mean that one or more theories would have to be modified or thrown out.

However, the scientific process would still be just as valid then as it is now.

Individual theories =/= science