Einstein was not exactly witless He claimed atoms were the little-ist But when he did a bit of split-iness He frightened everybody sh!tless
Whether Einstein is wrong or not in the end it's mankind or physics which will triumph. Thing is unlike religion, science is always changing and doesn't put it's blind faith in an idol or a presumed genius like Einstein.
**** me you are thick. I said in this instance Einstein MAY be proved wrong. Fairly fundamental. Scientists do not know everything unless you think the world is still flat. Fukin diddy. Try thinking instead of blindly accepting like a religous zealot.
i suppose there are 'good' and 'bad' examples everywhere. exceptions to the rule if you like IMO generally religion and science have 'got along' and the likes of Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler, Newton, Boyle, and so on were religious yet able to explore. thats not to say everything was/is smooth, there are fundamentalists on both sides. generally they keep each other 'honest' imo
i think the problem with religion is that it changes too often or is changed to 'fit' by those who believe they are in charge of it when taken to its origins, religion encourages science/debate to use a crude example, science accepts its in the nature of man procreate/have sex. so does religion it was greed that lead to the notion of celibacy
Einstein is a ****ing genius regardless of the outcome. Anyone can be smart, but he was smart, wise, and have a ****ing cool afro almost! the guy's a ****in legend, don't let the ****ers in CERN tell ya otherwise
I did not imply that at all. You blind acceptance is cave-like though. Sometimes people get things wrong. What is your issue with that? I am all for science and developmment but to go through life blinkered like yourself is the same as blindly following religion.
And? The Earth used to be flat remember. Leeches was a cure for practically every disease at one point.
Just off the top of my head I do know Galileo spent the last third of his life under house arrest because he dared to claim the earth revolved around the sun, and that was his punishment only after he recanted this opinion.
by the catholic church, despite beig a roman catholic himself and was a 'favourite of the pope a pope who felt let down and was ridiculed by galileo's book 'Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems' this doesnt change what I say regarding religion in its true origins the catholic church also advocates celibacy for its priests but it was an add on ensuring inheritence and wealth, this being my point
most religions started as underground movements and some of the experiments including digging up the dead, which i think is still against the law
my understanding is that it was away of ensuring that the wealth of the priests was passed on to the church there is no biblical arguement for celibacy I will of course stand corrected if not so
You used Galileo as one of your examples of science and religion getting along, TFWNN. Clearly a bad example, at best. As you claim to accept evolution, aren't you a follower of science?
