No, I just think we’re missing a lot. The evidence we can gather is from a very teeny tiny section of the “universe-spanning crime scene.” It reminds me of The Expanse, they find something they don’t understand and they compare it to monkeys playing with a microwave:
“Push a button, a light comes on inside, so it’s a light. Push a different button and stick your hand inside, it burns you, so it’s a weapon. Learn to open and close the door, it’s a place to hide things. Never grasping what it actually did, and maybe not even having the framework necessary to figure it out. No monkey ever reheated a frozen burrito.”
Like yeah, astronomers/cosmologists/astrophysicists are smart compared to the average human, but the average human is smart compared to a chimp. Are we even capable of putting the pieces together that we’re getting?
Are we even capable of putting the pieces together that we’re getting?
Yes, absolutely, and more progress is made as more new evidence is found. The thing is, until that happens, scientists are perfectly comfortable with the gaps, and saying “I don’t know”, instead of filling those gaps with an evil sky wizard.
And yet we still have museums filled with dinosaurs without feathers, and there are people that preach the big bang theory as fact. Shit, we still have people thinking the earth is flat. So, some scientists might be OK saying they don’t know, but humanity as a whole will take any idea, theory or not, and run with it. So, sorry, but yeah, some scientists are filling the gaps with evil sky wizards ;)
we still have museums filled with dinosaurs without feathers
Because we’re still making discoveries and trying to nail down* the details of dino feathers. Feathers rarely fossilize, so it’s a really difficult thing to study.
there are people that preach the big bang theory as fact
Scientists present the big bang theory as fact because of the vast body of evidence that supports it. Just like germ theory, or evolution.
Shit, we still have people thinking the earth is flat.
Contrary to what the evidence shows, so idk what this has to do with anything.
We’re getting off track though. You originally made a claim basically saying that we don’t know enough to say God didn’t create the universe. I’m just trying to point out that that’s not how critical/scientific thinking works. You don’t invent an untestable conclusion and then say “well nothing disproves this yet, so it’s possible”. Not being able to disprove something says nothing about it’s possibility, and not having evidence of something is neither proof, nor disproof, but simply a gap in knowledge. We should be comfortable leaving those gaps empty until we find solid, evidence-based explanations that fill them. We shouldn’t prematurely fill them with untestable claims.
I completely agree. Unfortunately, we don’t do that. We fill the gaps. That’s what we did with the dinosaurs, with everything. Where we don’t have proof, we have theories. They are not fact. But presented as such by way too many people. I’m simply comparing the two and saying how ridiculous it is to say ANYTHING is “VERY unlikely” or “very likely” when all we really have is theory. It’s just… Incredibly ignorant with the little amount of info we have. So to go one way and fill the gaps while claiming we don’t, but go the other and guffaw because there isn’t evidence, is hilarious.
Edit: it’s just, that’s literally how we’ve ALWAYS done it, historically. Humanity was taught that earth was center of the solar system and that it was flat. Until we learned better. We thought washing hands between operating on patients was crazy, until it wasn’t. Tryna say scientists don’t fill gaps, where you livin
Based on this sentence, I don’t think you understand how science works, which might be why we’re still talking past each other.
Also it seems like you’re still hung up on what humanity has done historically, but that’s not relevant at all to what I’m talking about. I’m speaking in a pragmatic sense, about what we should do, not what we have done.
But we also have zero solid evidence that a God did do it. Making and believing such an enormous claim without evidence is absolutely bananas
I agree, just like it’d be insane to claim we know anything else about our creation without evidence
Do you think the astronomers/cosmologists/astrophysicists piecing together the origins of the universe are doing so without evidence?
No, I just think we’re missing a lot. The evidence we can gather is from a very teeny tiny section of the “universe-spanning crime scene.” It reminds me of The Expanse, they find something they don’t understand and they compare it to monkeys playing with a microwave:
“Push a button, a light comes on inside, so it’s a light. Push a different button and stick your hand inside, it burns you, so it’s a weapon. Learn to open and close the door, it’s a place to hide things. Never grasping what it actually did, and maybe not even having the framework necessary to figure it out. No monkey ever reheated a frozen burrito.”
Like yeah, astronomers/cosmologists/astrophysicists are smart compared to the average human, but the average human is smart compared to a chimp. Are we even capable of putting the pieces together that we’re getting?
Yes, absolutely, and more progress is made as more new evidence is found. The thing is, until that happens, scientists are perfectly comfortable with the gaps, and saying “I don’t know”, instead of filling those gaps with an evil sky wizard.
And yet we still have museums filled with dinosaurs without feathers, and there are people that preach the big bang theory as fact. Shit, we still have people thinking the earth is flat. So, some scientists might be OK saying they don’t know, but humanity as a whole will take any idea, theory or not, and run with it. So, sorry, but yeah, some scientists are filling the gaps with evil sky wizards ;)
Because we’re still making discoveries and trying to nail down* the details of dino feathers. Feathers rarely fossilize, so it’s a really difficult thing to study.
Scientists present the big bang theory as fact because of the vast body of evidence that supports it. Just like germ theory, or evolution.
Contrary to what the evidence shows, so idk what this has to do with anything.
We’re getting off track though. You originally made a claim basically saying that we don’t know enough to say God didn’t create the universe. I’m just trying to point out that that’s not how critical/scientific thinking works. You don’t invent an untestable conclusion and then say “well nothing disproves this yet, so it’s possible”. Not being able to disprove something says nothing about it’s possibility, and not having evidence of something is neither proof, nor disproof, but simply a gap in knowledge. We should be comfortable leaving those gaps empty until we find solid, evidence-based explanations that fill them. We shouldn’t prematurely fill them with untestable claims.
I completely agree. Unfortunately, we don’t do that. We fill the gaps. That’s what we did with the dinosaurs, with everything. Where we don’t have proof, we have theories. They are not fact. But presented as such by way too many people. I’m simply comparing the two and saying how ridiculous it is to say ANYTHING is “VERY unlikely” or “very likely” when all we really have is theory. It’s just… Incredibly ignorant with the little amount of info we have. So to go one way and fill the gaps while claiming we don’t, but go the other and guffaw because there isn’t evidence, is hilarious.
Edit: it’s just, that’s literally how we’ve ALWAYS done it, historically. Humanity was taught that earth was center of the solar system and that it was flat. Until we learned better. We thought washing hands between operating on patients was crazy, until it wasn’t. Tryna say scientists don’t fill gaps, where you livin
Based on this sentence, I don’t think you understand how science works, which might be why we’re still talking past each other.
Also it seems like you’re still hung up on what humanity has done historically, but that’s not relevant at all to what I’m talking about. I’m speaking in a pragmatic sense, about what we should do, not what we have done.