Why do millennials question religion but not science?

File: IMG_6066.jpg (153KB, 1252x1252px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 1252x1252px

>>128073386

Science is based in facts.

this is the most retarded post i have ever seen on 4chan. kys. saged.

Because science questions itself while religion states it is the truth and anyone that questions it is considered a blasphemer.

File: 1481677968400.jpg (10KB, 171x176px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 171x176px

>>128073522

Science is their religion

>>128073386
covfefe

>>128073867
The notion that people have that you must believe whatever scientists say because they're scientists is curiously close to being religion.

>>128073386
Drugged up with chemicals from food, and (((Hollywood))).

Nobody asks questions when you say its science. Most people cannot show that

N^0 = 1


Where n is a number.

File: 1493341162465.jpg (105KB, 710x960px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 710x960px

>>128073522
>>128073543
>>128073867
Science is objective, scientists are not.

Anybody who reveres Bill Nye the Butt Stuff Guy, Neil the Grassy Bison, or Richard Hawkins is probably the least scientific person in the room and is only trying to convince themselves that they are smart/clever by parroting entry-level science tidbits.

Stop posting Soe and millennials in the same post you faggot. I'm tired of this shit.

File: 1496179021764.jpg (367KB, 621x1000px) Image search: [Google]

367KB, 621x1000px

>>128073386
Because they don't even know shit about science.

>>128073522
This post is literally circular reasoning, tho.

>>128073386
answer is simple OP - > "Because 'science' is their religion"

>>128073386
because (((science))) is their new religion

>>128073386
>not science
They think sex is no longer biological and whatever is in your head is reality.

File: 1494704407534.png (89KB, 1267x455px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 1267x455px

>>128073522
This

>>128073386

>implying millenials question Islam in any shape or form

File: railgun phone charger.jpg (149KB, 685x1084px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 685x1084px

>>128073522
Science is the seeking of facts.

It should not be used to supplement religion like a lot of people do. Nor should religion supplement lack of understanding of science.

Because millennials have a religion sanctioned by the (((elites))) called worshipping diversity. The most programmed generation ever.

t. woke millennial

File: neat.gif (1MB, 708x421px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 708x421px

>>128074703
damn look at dat flag

>>128074037
Science and religion are not equal. They're not even close to the same thing. One is theorized and tested and scrutinized and questioned and constantly improved upon and requires the consensus of other scientists who can repeat and verify results in order to be valid; the other is a feel.

>>128074122
The notion isn't that you MUST believe them (until it gets political). The reason people are generally inclined to trust them is because chances are the person who has spent their entire career studying a particular field and conducting research will know more than someone who hasn't. That doesn't mean they're infallible since science regularly challenges itself and changes.

>>128075820
>until it gets political
The intrusion of politics (and money) upon science is widespread.

>>128074122
This isn't the case. Nobody blindly accepts science. It's scrutinized constantly. Science isn't a faith; it only seems that way to you because you neglect to teach yourself anything about it.

>>128073386
What is science? Why do idiots just use one word to describe multiple concepts and allow constant miscommunication?

Questioning science can take different forms depending on what you're questioning. Are you questioning the methodology, the discipline of scientists in adhering to their principles, or the body of scientific knowledge which is subject to change?

Also, people are starting to conflate scientism with science so that might become a 4th defintiion.

"science" is not questioned, but scientific research is questioned all the time.

For example, there are new studies showing that methane emission may be balancing out global warming instead of worsening it. Meaning we can now adjust our models for better accuracy.

>>128073386
>>128073522
Science is ALWAYS questioning itself. That's literally the scientific method. Go to any conference in a scientific field and see how researchers are treated by their peers when they present findings. They're literally torn apart. Religion is what is based in "facts" and refuses to adjust with new information provided.

>>128073386
You apparently never took a science class...

>>128075117
It literally isn't. Explain yourself.

>>128076082
Unfortunately yes, but you could also argue that it's present in religion as well. What doesn't change is how the average person can conduct their own research and tests to verify published scientific results where as religion cannot be put under the same scrutiny.

>>128075165
false equivalent

>>128073386
It's merely about where one put's one's faith.

>>128076285
He's probably coming from a Jordan Peterson angle where you question the presuppositions of what constitutes facts.

Why are Millenials so fucking against religions but also believe that vaccines are bad, that GMOs are dangerous and that organic is ANY good?

Why do they also believe in shitty pseudoscience shit like chakras and karma? (which is literally cultural appropriation, ironically).

>>128073386
never has there been a generation more deserving of the gas

>>128073867
>Because science questions itself while religion states it is the truth and anyone that questions it is considered a blasphemer.
So, exactly like science then.
>Nobody blindly accepts science. It's scrutinized constantly.
If we're talking about the general population, this is plainly wrong. Lots of people blindly accept science.

>>128073386
(((science))) is a religion. They don't question religion, they just question other religions. It's no different than a Christian making fun of those crazy pagans.

>>128073386
Because of the incorrect presumption that metaphysical claims are not scrutinized, developed, or advanced over time. Also the erroneous positivism that is implicit to suggest science can provide all meaningful answers to all things--which it cannot. David Berlinskin (a Jew who seems quite decent to me) has written quite extensively about this in The Devil's Delusion.

>>128073386
And here we thought Anonymous killed (((Scientology))).

Nope, stronger than ever Xenu.

>>128073386
>89 genders
>""""science""""

Wew lad

>>128073522
>this post proves either /pol/ is contrarian and is now LARPing as fedoras or anon is a redditor

>>128073522
Scientists are human. They make mistakes. And they can be bought. These are facts.

>>128076599
You're nearly retarded, aren't you?

>>128076360
What is? He didn't define science but when someone uses science the way he did, it implies they mean scientism. Scientism and religion aren't bad comparisons at all.

You can't compare the scientific method, or the body of scientific knowledge to religion, but then you wouldn't assume someone else was trying to do something so inane would you?

>>128073386
Science is the new religion.

>>128073386
millennials are a victim of the golden age of behavioral/psychological manipulation. absolutely nothing they believe is a result of personally developed thought processes.

>>128073522
(((Facts)))

>>128076836
Yes, your post makes you look much smarter than me.

What to question?
Something based on logic and evidence or something based on superstition with no evidence?

>>128073867
>anyone that questions it is considered a blasphemer
unless you question climate science, in which case you are a science denier

>>128076613
they don't question it because the scientific method os made to question itself. it's literally based on someone suspecting that there is something wrong with a theory and creating a better explanation based.

Using global warming as an example, if you think there's some factor that makes the human CO2 emission not change global climate you're free to explain how that works.

>>128074122
scientist are the new priest class

So many non-STEM uneducated retarded Christfaggots ITT

>>128074866
>Anybody who reveres Bill Nye the Butt Stuff Guy, Neil the Grassy Bison, or Richard Hawkins

probably get their news from the Daily Show

>>128077145
Wasn't intended to. This isn't a contest, anon. You compared two opposites, stated exactly as opposites, and claimed them to be equals because you were too offended to use actual reason.

>>128074037
More precisely, the treat science as a religion

None of them do 'science' and take it all on faith

Their handlers know this and feed them a steady diet of 'science'

>too many studies to read
>no one is doing the verification to see if you get repeatable results
>too much sloppy science due to above

>>128077339
Nah, we're all highly educated super geniuses.

The world has survived millennia with religion, but science already has the world under thread of nuclear annihilation.

The average person can be excused for their suspicion of people who wish to constantly overturn social order with facts that will change in a decade. Ever heard of the Lindy Effect, STEM grad?

>>128077693
>two opposites

God damn this is embarrassing. It's hard to imagine a worse display of binary thinking.

>>128073386
They don't question religion, they just hate Christianity. Ask them what they find wrong with Hinduism, Buddhism, or especially Islam, and it'll all come back to Christianity somehow.

>>128077693
I'm not really sure why you think that. He said "religion states it is the truth and anyone that questions it is a blasphemer." This is exactly what science does when it is spread to the general population. people don't do the experiments themselves, they trust scientists to tell them what is right and wrong. This is very similar to trusting priests or the bible to tell you what is right or wrong. Do you see this? I'm sure you can think of some instances where people accept science blindly. Use your mind and you will see that it's not as ridiculous as you think.

>>128076884
You're assuming that everyone who advocates science is into "scientism", whatever the fuck that is - probably an assumption that anyone who has made a conscious decision to choose science over religion is deluded, which is exactly what someone offended by the notion that there is no god, after devoting their lives to "him", would feel.

>>128073386
>By understanding the basic laws of physics, I can jerry rig a pulley system that allows me move my engine block so I can do appropriate maintenance on my car without overpaying too much for it
>Praying to God to maintain my car for me however (far as I can see) seems to do nothing

>>128077176
Learn about it before discounting it.

>>128073522
The scientific method is a useful tool but "Science" is just a bullshit authority. No one has the time to read some study behind a paywall and replicate it themselves so they just put blind faith into it.

>>128073386
Science makes sense and isn't about dogma. If a scientific idea is shown to be wrong, and a better explanation comes around, then science will eventually adopt the better explanation.

Religion just holds on to the same ideas forever and then when a more reasonable explanation comes along they burn someone at the stake.

File: bill-nye-dolph-lundgren.jpg (116KB, 900x707px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 900x707px

>>128073522

He isn't a scientist.

File: Galileo-Galilei-Quotes-3-1024x422.jpg (70KB, 1024x422px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 1024x422px

>>128073867
>climate change is settled
>because majority

That doesn't sound like science questioning itself to me.

At one point the earth being the center of the universe was a settled science and only one guy was saying that the sun was the center. So the church went ahead and forced him to publicly recant his position and tossed his ass under house arrest.
And then Bill Nye goes on tv saying we should probably be able to imprison or take people's kids away for not believing in climate change. And no one batted an eye.

>The matter was investigated by the Roman Inquisition in 1615, which concluded that heliocentrism was "foolish and absurd in philosophy, and formally heretical since it explicitly contradicts in many places the sense of Holy Scripture

>>128077902
Then explain it to me, anon. Challenge accepted. Explain why they aren't opposites in a manner that doesn't require a certain level of ambiguous "faith" to accept.

>>128073386
Because science is their region.

File: he was drago.jpg (100KB, 450x338px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 450x338px

>>128078337
I liked the part where Rocky Beat Soviet Science with Phili tenacity.

>>128077224
They don't question it because they're believers. The general population aren't scientists. They're not studying charts or taking core samples or coming up with a new hypothesis. They're listening to whatever mouthpiece the media chose to represent "science" as a whole. These mouthpieces barely pretend to question anything. They throw around the words "fact" and "proof" like they had the ear of God. That God isn't real science. It's politics. And believers of "science" can't tell the difference.

>>128078128
Everything in your post is wrong.

>You're assuming that everyone who advocates science is into "scientism"

Wrong, and a very stupid thing for you to think

>whatever the fuck that is - probably

This is not how intelligent people think so you're most likely too stupid to be worth serious consideration.

>choose science over religion

More binary thinking and signals severe historic illiteracy.

>>128078463
They can be compartmentalized and one doesn't necessarily interfere with the proper function of the other. It's rank stupidity to take up this less than basic bitch 'they are opposites' crap.

They're not yet to the point where they realize that science comes from the internal criticism and reparation of the church to make society what it is today. The whole scientific method is built off of shit tests philosophers would give theories to test their resilience. The church in later years believed if a part of the religion can't stand up to science then it can't be formally enforced. A catholic priest came up with the big bang theory by the way, because the giant hole in a Science Only approach is what happened before the big bang theory? Dunno? Well then this is the only theory. Interpret it as being in a simulation or manifestation of the divine but you have to acknowledge the gaps in our knowledge and the idea that we cannot know what we don't know.

File: 1492730272921.gif (2MB, 325x244px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 325x244px

>>128073867

File: malanga.gif (4MB, 891x658px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 891x658px

>>128078226
You're literally the same as a muslim, you fucking demagogue cocksucker.

>Just go to a mosque, read the quran, live with muslims then you can discount it

>>128078098
difference is the bible and the people who wrote it and the people who preach it have thousands of years of experience observing human behavior they draw from. these are things you just cant understand in one lifetime so you have to have faith in what they say or else end up an old person warning young people against mistakes you made in your life as they laugh you off.
science in this sense is incredibly shortsighted and very often wrong in its assertions of moral or intergenerational subjects

>>128073386
Science is the art of questioning. What they believe is science, is actually religion.

Because they only *pretend* to have read Nietzsche.

>>128073386
send them some IQ statistics to test your hypothesis

>>128073386
Bump. Now let me see /pol/ answer. (Gotta clear that horse face and pile of naked feminists from my mind.)

>>128078557
You didn't state a single fact. Every single thing you said was based purely on speculation and presumably projection. It is provable with data that climate change is happening.

That's how science works. You are now burdened with providing some evidence to back ANY of your claims or you are hereby deemed a certifiable retard.

>>128073386
Science is the act of questioning ffs

>>128079433
>It is provable with data that climate change is happening

Okay then send us the data.

>>128078098
The difference is that independent scientists test and retest each other's work to maintain validity. In many cases, the results of such research become our daily-used items and products at home. The only things religion ever produces is feelings. It doesn't matter if every religious official in history got together and agreed that heaven exists; there's no way to prove it. If the average joe blindly believes some bit of science without verification, that's his fault. Science provides references that can be reproduced. Religion does not. Furthermore, all scientists compete with one another; they're not interested in collusion to change anything. Truth and knowledge are the only motivations, and if one scientist can discredit another by proving him wrong, that usually helps his career, so he will. The main problem with this equivalency is that the assumption exists that both want to have followers and gain power, but that only applies to religion. If climate change (for EXAMPLE; I'm not looking to change the subject) could be objectively disproven, they would do it.

>>128076836
Time to get some knowledge a dropping.

You believe that religion if unchanging.

Please refer to Vatican, Vatican II, any other religious council, the Protestant Reformation, the eleven-hundred forms of Islam that might kill you, and Hinduism. Religion changes just as much (and as fast) as science.

On another note, science it the search for truth, not fact. Fact can be manipulated to fit a narrator's bias. Science seeks to eliminate the bias.

They are not polar opposites. Nor should either attempt to negate the other. In fact, the Catholic Church is one of the largest employers of scientists in the world.

So fuck off you stupid fucking piece of shit.

And God bless.

>>128075390
Such a horrible point. Is your point of view usually this bad? It can't be. Because, that Level 2 Misaka 10032 phone charger is exceptional, Anon-Anon says with hope the this Anon73386 will believe in Jesus and be saved.

File: giphy.gif (3MB, 300x266px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 300x266px

>>128078451
What a retarded comment. Comparing the Catholic church when they hindered Galileo's facts and Bill Nye telling some people there wrong?

Evolution is accepted by nearly all scientists, The Big Bang theory is accepted by nearly all scientists, Global Warming is accepted by nearly all scientists.

If you have evidence on the contrary then present them, if your evidence is flawed or you are just talking straight out of your ass like you are then noone is going to listen to you, which is a good thing.

>>128079730
na man. religion has observed patterns in human/social behavior that span over thousands of years. keep in mind that the religious class were typically the most educated and literate throughout all of history, so their observations could be passed down throughout generations, and that negative social trends could be catastrophic to their fragile societies so they had a very vested interest in assuring their society did the right thing.

in a way religion is the highest form of science in that its had the largest span of observation of human behavior and society, to the point which modern science hates it simply because it is utterly incapable of comprehending the depth of its knowledge with its methodology

>>128078722
Explain it to me then, anon. Use your superior intellect to convince me of something that I haven't already considered, and do it in a way that doesn't involve me taking anything on faith. Explain to me what I'm leaving out. Take into consideration that my conclusions exist because I've considered every facet I've ever been faced with. Give me a new one. Don't assume I'm unintelligent, though. You did that with this post and responded in kind. You're wrong, though. Just try not to be all offended this time.

File: 1496159203088m.jpg (100KB, 691x1024px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 691x1024px

Science is something they think they can hold over heads, thus proving their superiority over us.
>They blindly follow because once in, if they disagree they become the targets of their peers for apostasy.
Science is the new religion, because you cant refute it, you cant argue against it, or you deserved to be locked up or killed.
>Sound like early religions doesnt it??

>>128079730
>the only things religion ever produces is feelings
>[In science] Truth and knowledge are the only motivations
You obviously don't know anything about religion or science.

>>128076633
>>128080758
This. Modern science has a naturalistic philosophy, most people have drunk too much kool aid to see it.

>>128073867
There are scientific theories that are considered unquestionable, people who do are ridiculed and shunned from the scientific community. Awful lot like religion huh.

>>128078978
But, they are opposites. Science constantly affects religion, but not the other way around, but in the minds of the ignorant. One is based in the imagination and can't be proven. The other is based in logic and reason, and can.

>>128073386
>1 post by this id
This bot makes the exact same formulaic millennial thread every day, fucking 3 letter agencies need to get out.

>>128079433
Other scientists have also proven that climate change is not happening. So which one will you trust?

>>128079250
Science - based upon reality.
Any religion = feel.
Not the same thing.

>>128081437
The gay ones..

File: IMG_2322.jpg (67KB, 640x647px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 640x647px

>>128073386
(((WHO))) could be behind this

>>128079510
Unless it has anything to do with racial differences, IQ, explaining to people why wealth distribution and money won't solve all or any of their problems, that sugar is bad for you and fats are not, that there are more polar bears now than the last 15 years, that the ice caps haven't melted yet....

File: 1454442064601.jpg (180KB, 1451x816px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 1451x816px

>>128073386
A 10 year old could spot the contradictions and baseless assertions found in religious scripture and doctrine, it's all really obvious. There's a reason why the powers that be so desperately silence and punish anyone that questions their dogmatic power structure

On the other hand, the average person isn't a master in any scientific trade and therefor their "questioning" of science doesn't mean shit, as they do not comprehend the topic at hand. Most of the time when people question science, it's based on a gut feeling or because it contradicts with one of their personal beliefs or another scientific study or theory that they'd rather prefer to be the correct one

>>128073386
>tfw replying to a bot thread

>>128081032
>You obviously don't know anything about religion or science.
Teach me then, anon. Tell me where I'm wrong.

>>128081230
The difference is that science isn't mystical. All the work is available to be scrutinized.

>>128082116
That's true, I am not religious, but you can't argue that a lot of people don't blindly believe in whatever scientists agree on. Therefore, they treat science just like a religion.

>>128081347
I think you're foolish to think that religion is just feelings. Religion (or Christianity, since that's probably what you're picturing) defines objective truth. Modern culture has delegated it as such because it gets in the way of a lot of the things that they claim to be "logic and reason".

You have a very dualistic view of science and religion, which shouldn't be there. Science doesn't have to be completely isolated from religion and the opposite applies as well.

In the science realm, surely you can't think that there isn't an agenda being pushed as well.

>>128082532
That's the fault of the believer. Some people will believe anything they're told. Are we discussing science or gullibility? They aren't the same thing.

>>128074703
That's math, not science.
Math is just a language to describe science.
Exponents are the amount of x number multiplied or divided by 1. If you take 1 and do nothing to it you get 1.
If you have a 1$ bank loan with 5% yearly interest then if you pay it immediately you pay 1$. in other words 1.05^0=1.
It allows math to be logically consistent and serves it's practical purpose.
Same reason 0!=1. Because that's what serves the practical purpose of what it's meant to represent.

>>128073386
egos
scientists are smart
pop science tells millennials they're smart for unquestioningly believing science

>>128083104
From the OP:
>Why do millennials question religion but not science?

This is what we are discussing.

File: hY3GRTU.gif (729KB, 350x194px) Image search: [Google]

729KB, 350x194px

Mac said it best.

File: OvLfwsL.jpg (48KB, 490x278px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 490x278px

>>128083484

>>128082745
You use the word "objective" very liberally.

The main argument I see in this thread is that people sometimes blindly believe in science, but that doesn't compare science to religion; it only illustrates that people are too lazy to verify sources, which is /pol/ in a nutshell.

The reason I personally separate science from religion is that they're completely incompatible. Stephen King differs from an encyclopedia because they're inherently different, even though they're both words.

Typically, when science is claimed to have an agenda, it's because the overwhelming results conflict with an established belief. Beliefs don't equal facts, though.

We aren't going to advance as a civilization with prayer.

Do you really want to stay like the Middle East forever?

>>128083425
That's not an answer. If you feel that we should be discussing the validity of one concept over the other, that's what I've been doing. If you feel that we should be discussing why millennials haven't all reached the same conclusions as previous generations without exploring the validity of the two sides, I believe you've missed the point.

>>128084241
This is an excellent point.

>>128083845
I'll refute you on that. How is it not objective?Why are they incompatible? they weren't in the past.

>>128084241
How are technological advancements incompatible with religion?

>>128073386
They've replaced one with the other.

>>128084287
The point is why do most people have more faith in science than religion when for all they know either one could be the right answer. People are not going out testing new scientific findings for themselves before they decide to believe it or not. They see an article, maybe read it or more likely just the headline, and then they believe it. How is that any different than opening up the bible and believing everything it says? There are millions of priests who will tell you it's the truth, why believe the scientists and not the priests?

>>128073386
Both are constantly being challenged. Religion just doesn't hold up as well. Science is ever-changing and adaptable if new discoveries change what we know

File: climate.jpg (155KB, 780x577px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 780x577px

The science is settled goy give me grants and pay your fines and taxes

>>128084241
More than half the country of America , which let me remind you is the strongest fucking country on Earth, believe in religion. So eat shit you fedora faggot

>>128084749
Considering the standards of religion is just "something someone believes because they feel it's right", supposition, no decent evidence required.
Compared to science which is "something based on empirical observation or derived through good logic from something that was".

One has a much higher standard than the other so obviously it should be given priority when they conflict.
Not to be confused with "pseudoscience" which is like religion or "wordplay" which is what lefties use to say there are 58 genders.

>>128084978
>>128084896

Yeah but the relationship they have to it is like the congregation not knowing latin. It doesn't mean anything to them beyond the symbols (like Science guy etc) that surround the magic.

It is like the Canadian Obamaleaf with their endless graphs.