Quote (AEtheric @ Jun 9 2013 12:09pm)

You have not stated one reason why you are right and I am wrong except for bullshit answers. Science is not simply believing in natural laws. It also deals with theories and hypotheses which can be wrong, and must be infallible in order to continue in scientific discourse. However, some people have faith in science so much that they believe that they can accept everything in it with no scruples otherwise.  Apparently you are in this camp with the rest of them.

Quote (Lifebane99 @ Jun 8 2013 08:48pm)

This is not anywhere close to true.

Quote (AEtheric @ 9 Jun 2013 02:19)

I agree, but this doesn't mean that everyone doesn't cling to more absolute beliefs in the face of adversity. I believe that is a horse that has been dead and beaten for quite a long time. If we used another study for a control with the same methods, most likely, we would receive the same results, except one of them would use religious faith instead of faith in science. If you want, I could probably pull up some studies with religion to see if they behave in a similar manner. It doesn't matter how religious the people were in the control group, as they didnt' have one, and if it is shown through other, non-identical studies, that they turn to their faith in the face of adversity, would you still have something against this study?

Quote (brmv @ Jun 8 2013 08:56pm)

my comments were directed against the way this study was conducted
whatever other studies you would be able to link would have to stay on their own merits
so to answer the bolded:

yes because other studies cannot justify the poor quality of this study

Quote (AEtheric @ 9 Jun 2013 03:01)

Nit-picking.

Quote (brmv @ Jun 8 2013 11:07pm)

it's not nitpicking, it is an issue of comprehension
while you might be able to prove an assumption with a correct prove but that does not make another yet wrong prove correct
the assumption for the wrong prove may be correct but the prove is still wrong

Quote (Voyaging @ Jun 8 2013 09:14pm)

wat

Quote (Voyaging @ 9 Jun 2013 03:14)

wat

Quote (AEtheric @ 9 Jun 2013 03:18)

I second this.

Quote (AEtheric @ Jun 8 2013 05:53pm)

Should those who are atheists or those "I fucking love science" *bleep*, or both, be considered as having faith in science? It appears there are many fictitious constructions within science, but yet they still have faith in it, betraying their own common sense and the scientific method over a faith-filled scientific democracy among the mainstream? This article itself shows that these science *bleep*  pray to their gods of Einstein and Michio Kaku in order to relieve stress just like theists pray to their god(s). I wonder when people will WAKE UP SHEEPLE and understand that science isn't infallible, like most of these *bleep*  do.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/06/08/atheists-use-science-like-believers-use-faith-in-times-of-stress-says-study/