We got a badass here. . cm the panel , tit week, we debated global waiitt. i., t, i, j.?. 1' isti. atar. e. ioo The good thing about is that it' s true whether
Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu

We got a badass here

cm the panel , tit week, we debated global waiitt. i., t, i, j.?. 1' isti. atar. e. ioo
The good thing about is that it' s
true whether er not ''rif?.. y believe in it,
...
+2631
Views: 73031
Favorited: 195
Submitted: 01/26/2013
Share On Facebook
Add to favorites E-mail to friend submit to reddit
Share image on facebook Share on StumbleUpon Share on Tumblr Share on Pinterest Share on Google Plus E-mail to friend

Comments(454):

[ 454 comments ]

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.
#19 - xxxsonic fanxxx (01/26/2013) [+] (13 replies)
i am very shy on the internet, because i'm a lil pussy, so i keep anonymous. (I still dont care is you thumb me down, so please shut up about it). but read my post before you act.. or just ignore it.

i am scientist (meteorologist). i studied in the best institution for meteorology and physics in europe. global warming is my main topic. so stop arguing with me. scientifically the global warming is undeniable, but whats going on in media is a political issue and NOT a scientifical.

Neil DeGrasse is in my opinion completely wrong. He missed the important fact, that science should question things and try to prove them wring. this is how science work. if we wouldnt question science, we would still believe aristoteles. To question things imply that you dont believe them. doesnt matter if you are scientist or not. This ignorance he is showing is the same the church uses. "it is true, stop thinking about it, because we proved it". i am sorry for everyone here who doesnt fall for this. Neil DeGrasse evolved to a entertainer and lost his credibility to science.
#156 - englman (01/26/2013) [+] (22 replies)
Something I wrote on FJ a while back, it's relevant so I'm going to paste it here.   
   
"Science doesn't try to disprove God or Religion. People futilely attempt to do this and use Science as the tool. Then Science ends up getting blamed, when the true culprit is the person. The relationships between War and Religion tend to share a similar problem. "All wars are started be some Religion! They should all be abolished!". This may appear correct at first glance, but it's deeper than that. Ignorance (intolerance, nonacceptance, and many other words fall under this type of "Ignorance") is what actually causes most, if not all, War. To put it simply, "You don't hold my opinion on _______, so I'm going to kill you."    
   
Back to the main point though. Science and Religion are both tools with distinct 'properties' that can be used differently. Science is more concrete, while Religion is more interpretive. This allows for some flexibility, because you can use them together in many different ways. Without making this a 7 page paper, though, I'll just give one example that I believe clears up what I mean.    
   
Love is essentially just a series of Biochemical interactions between two people, with a dash of Psychology/Sociology.    
Does knowing that make love any less 'magical' or 'special' though?    
   
One Scientist might say "Yes, this is how it works and it shows our interactions to be nothing more than complex Chemistry."    
   
The second Scientist might say "No, understanding how it works doesn't make it any less valid. Our concept of love still exists, but now we know how it works."    
   
Now, which one is correct?    
Big finish... It's ultimately a matter of opinion."
Something I wrote on FJ a while back, it's relevant so I'm going to paste it here.

"Science doesn't try to disprove God or Religion. People futilely attempt to do this and use Science as the tool. Then Science ends up getting blamed, when the true culprit is the person. The relationships between War and Religion tend to share a similar problem. "All wars are started be some Religion! They should all be abolished!". This may appear correct at first glance, but it's deeper than that. Ignorance (intolerance, nonacceptance, and many other words fall under this type of "Ignorance") is what actually causes most, if not all, War. To put it simply, "You don't hold my opinion on _______, so I'm going to kill you."

Back to the main point though. Science and Religion are both tools with distinct 'properties' that can be used differently. Science is more concrete, while Religion is more interpretive. This allows for some flexibility, because you can use them together in many different ways. Without making this a 7 page paper, though, I'll just give one example that I believe clears up what I mean.

Love is essentially just a series of Biochemical interactions between two people, with a dash of Psychology/Sociology.
Does knowing that make love any less 'magical' or 'special' though?

One Scientist might say "Yes, this is how it works and it shows our interactions to be nothing more than complex Chemistry."

The second Scientist might say "No, understanding how it works doesn't make it any less valid. Our concept of love still exists, but now we know how it works."

Now, which one is correct?
Big finish... It's ultimately a matter of opinion."
#3 - xxxsonic fanxxx (01/26/2013) [+] (8 replies)
False. Science is not always correct.
User avatar #4 to #3 - deltoraquest (01/26/2013) [-]
but science is still trying to prove itself right or wrong
#2 - lempersy (01/26/2013) [+] (6 replies)
I'm making this my profile picture.
#93 - thewellhungarian (01/26/2013) [-]
MFW I see the comments section.
MFW I see the comments section.
#89 - mandasawsum (01/26/2013) [+] (2 replies)
Me and my roommate at VMI taking a picture with the man himself
User avatar #108 to #89 - nucularwar (01/26/2013) [-]
I bet he gets sick of that
-57
#21 - niralius has deleted their comment [+] (10 replies)
#22 to #21 - xxxsonic fanxxx (01/26/2013) [-]
**** , you're an idiot.
#235 - avatarsarefornoobs (01/26/2013) [+] (1 reply)
Its a repost, its a 						*********					 starter, its old, its not funny, and I'm cranky today and this post did not help.
Its a repost, its a ********* starter, its old, its not funny, and I'm cranky today and this post did not help.
User avatar #317 - pikapoo (01/27/2013) [+] (6 replies)
WHY DO PEOPLE FEEL THE NEED TO EXPRESS THEIR SCIENTIFIC BELIEFS IN THE COMMENTS OF FUNNYJUNK

#323 to #317 - xxxsonic fanxxx (01/27/2013) [-]
Because there are so many ******* retards who claim science to be untrue because it conflicts with their ********** views on life.
#176 - whitebuddha (01/26/2013) [+] (2 replies)
Why'd somebody have to post this on a SATURDAY?!?! Now nobody on Funnyjunk is going to go outside because there's a ******* religion vs. science post.
#359 - kingcubjr (01/27/2013) [-]
MFW the comments
MFW the comments
#236 - mytrakytra (01/26/2013) [+] (5 replies)
This image has expired
Why can't science just be an explanation of the Bible?

If you believe in God or not do you think he would just make **** happen with no explanation whatsoever?

Why can't we just accept this and have everyone happy?
#195 - jsrf (01/26/2013) [-]
#140 - tacblack (01/26/2013) [+] (23 replies)
"Theories" are actually equivalent to a hypothesis which as a 						****					 ton of evidence. Gravity is a theory. There's the cell theory and of course the evolutionary theory. Though the evolutionary theory may be true it doesn't disprove god. Of course you can't prove that god exists either.    
   
This is why the whole issue comes down to "faith." You can choose to have faith or not. As long as people who have faith don't try to force others to believe that they're right, then we can live harmoniously. The same applies to people who don't have faith. We shouldn't be trying to convince anybody of anything. Let people believe what they want.
"Theories" are actually equivalent to a hypothesis which as a **** ton of evidence. Gravity is a theory. There's the cell theory and of course the evolutionary theory. Though the evolutionary theory may be true it doesn't disprove god. Of course you can't prove that god exists either.

This is why the whole issue comes down to "faith." You can choose to have faith or not. As long as people who have faith don't try to force others to believe that they're right, then we can live harmoniously. The same applies to people who don't have faith. We shouldn't be trying to convince anybody of anything. Let people believe what they want.
#38 - emazegenociide (01/26/2013) [+] (24 replies)
Proving science with science is no better than proving religion with religion
Proving science with science is no better than proving religion with religion
User avatar #39 to #38 - arziben ONLINE (01/26/2013) [-]
actually it is better since you use things called facts
#226 - yutakenusername (01/26/2013) [-]
MFW people think that evolution in its entirety is men evolving from apes.
[ 454 comments ]
Leave a comment
 Friends (0)