2012 Conspiracies..

smarteyeball said:

Not quite true, some have progressed from caves.

Haha, indeed

The sad fact is there are answers to everything - but mankind will never be privy to all.

bigmck,

...If all of those places are like the moon, just a barren rock, there will not be anything. Until exploration has gone to the far reaches of space, one does not know what is there....

You are right in that it couldn't be physically proven whether life exist elsewhere, until man had looked under every rock in the universe, and even in science fiction, no writer has ever imagined that as a possibility. Therefore, it must be comforting to those of a scientific persuasion to hold doggedly to this tenet of their faith, because they feel that they could never be proven wrong, regardless of the millenia they took to spend the trillions of taxpayer dollars. And of course, they can't...by any normal means of measure.

Some believe that the churches were created as a means of public mind control, to keep people docile while hoarding their tithes, but at most, they only took 10% of a person's earnings. The pockets of science is a bottomless pit...or perhaps I should say abyss.

seekermeister said:

Therefore, it must be comforting to those of a scientific persuasion to hold doggedly to this tenet of their faith, because they feel that they could never be proven wrong, regardless of the millennia they took to spend the trillions of taxpayer dollars. And of course, they can't...by any normal means of measure.

Science is indeed a faith unto itself and some do find it comforting for that is what consoles them. Just as the idea of God comforts others. The parallels between religious dogma and scientific dogma do share similar qualities - both provide a 'personal satisfactory answer' that attempts to satiate inherent human curiosity.

However at least certain aspects to science endeavour to keep an open mind and recognize dead ends when they see it.

As for wasting money, 'science' and 'religion' are pretty equal in squandering it through a plethora of means.

X amount of dollars of taxpayer money being 'wasted' on research is not really that different to X amount of taxpayer dollars going towards teaching 'enforced' alternatives to science. ie Creationism.

seekermeister said:

I don't see the comparison

Look harder.

because being taught Creationism in school comes far short of indoctrination, it only provides an insight into an alternative mindset, which each student is free to either accept or reject. Even if rejected, it still provides one with an insight that will broaden his horizons.

Yes. Hopefully the horizon broadening lands on the side of logic.

As far as the cost, it in no way compares to that of scientific endeavours.

Think bigger, think globally, include the preceding millennia and current times - You'll find that Religion in all it's forms has had more money spent on it's endevaours compared to scientific research.

That is not to say that there is no return on the investment, because there have been discoveries that potentially are to our benefit

More than potentially. Much, much more.

However, there is little about this that is of a humane nature

No. Science is big business. So too is Religion. Industry machinations born from both are just by-products.

The fundamental core that spurs these endeavours are very much inspired by human nature. There is nothing little about it.

Despite restrictions, I managed to.

As for changing viewpoint, no - you've no chance. Just as I knew from the get go that I had no hope in changing yours.

Still fun to debate regardless