3 ms·
Your researchers look a lot like ancient priests to me and it is acceptable to find excessive religious believers funny, so I think it is this the case. Do you
by owebmaster 9y ago
Your researchers look a lot like ancient priests to me and it is acceptable to find excessive religious believers funny, so I think it is this the case. Do you believe our current science would be something more than shamanism compared to Science (or another new religion) in the year of 3017?
- aplummer 9y agoThat is completely different because religion is not based on testable and provable increments increases in knowledge, rather superstition and guesswork. You clearly do not understand the scientific method. You'll notice that rockets successfully manage to get to the moon, vaccines successfully save millions of lives. Obviously you are a fundamentalist with a point to prove so I'll stop arguing.
- owebmaster 9y ago> That is completely different because religion is not based on testable and provable increments increases in knowledge, rather superstition and guesswork. You clearly do not understand the scientific method. This is prejudice against others faith, religion AND science. Alchemy was the science back then and the base of current chemistry but is religious work, that also increases people's knowledge. I could explain the same with Buddhism and how its knowledge could save billions of lives, but I'm not a religious guy (much less fundamentalist). Just skeptical.
- tnzn 9y agoExcept alchemy didn't get man to the moon, for example.
- owebmaster 9y agoCan you prove it with real research? :)