[geocentrism] Re: The Case Against Science
- From: Regner Trampedach <art@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 09:56:56 +1100
Ooh - that's wonderful.
- Regner
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Quoting Bernie Brauer <bbrauer777@xxxxxxxxx>:
> Regner,
>
> But the Roman Church Church has been infiltrated by zionist
> Crypto-Jews who introduced pedophiles into the system
> with the goal of advancing their destruction of the RCC.
> So zionism should be abolished not the RCC.
> Pedophilia is right out of the Pharisee's Talmud Playbook.
>
> The University Science Depatments and the whole world-wide
> science establishment has also been usurped by the zionists
> who introduced heliocentricity into the system with
> the goal of advancing their destruction of the GCC
> ( Geocentric Cosmology Concept ).
>
> Bernie
>
> Regner Trampedach <art@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Considering the number of priests who have taken a liking to their
> choir-boys, I believe the catholic church should be abolished.
> On a more serious note; the cases of science fraud were caught
> within the scientific community, by the scientific process of peer-
> review and by peer researchers trying to reproduce those fraudulent
> results - and failing. This shows that the system works, despite
> peoples failings.
>
> Regner Trampedach
>
>
> P.S. How many wars have been fought in the name of science?...
> Science and religion are equally misused and abused.
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> -
>
>
> Quoting Bernie Brauer :
>
> > http://www.voxday.net/archive/2007/030507.html
> >
> > The case against science
> > March 5, 2007 Science, we are repeatedly informed by scientists, possesses
> > a unique claim on truth due to its self-correcting nature. And this is
> > certainly true in theory, although it is not difficult to demonstrate that
> > scientific history is littered with a long list of honest mistakes,
> > not-so-honest mistakes and outright lies.
> > And this merely refers to the cases of which we know, scientific frauds
> > that have been caught and exposed. But even if we politely avert our eyes
> > from this well-chronicled inability of scientists to live up to their
> > scientific ideals - a nicety seldom granted to religious idealists - there
> is
> > real cause to doubt the continued benefit of science to modern society, or
> > even its right to a respectable place within it.
> > For the common belief in the beneficial nature of science rests on an
> > underlying assumption that knowledge of all truth is desirable in all
> > circumstances. But this is far from settled, as intellectuals from Plato
> to
> > Daniel C. Dennett have frankly expressed their doubts on this score. Even
> > lesser thinkers who have witnessed a child losing its innocent illusions or
> a
> > family torn apart by the exposure of a long-hidden secret might well share
> > this skepticism.
> > For if all knowledge is inherently good, then it is a moral imperative to
> > scientifically determine the relative intelligence of Asians and Zulus
> once
> > and for all. But is everyone really comfortable with the possibility of
> > determining that men are, in scientific fact, intellectually superior to
> > women? Or vice-versa? The cowardice of scientists regarding such
> > controversial subjects, their nominal dedication to absolute scientific
> truth
> > nothwithstanding, is powerful evidence of their lack of faith in the
> inherent
> > beneficence of science.
> > Moreover, for a group of individuals claiming a right to act as a secular
> > priesthood on Man's behalf, scientists demonstrate an aversion for
> personal
> > responsibility that would shame a child. Consider how the same militant
> > atheists who claim that religious individuals are somehow responsible for
> the
> > past actions of other religious individuals who do not even happen to
> share
> > their beliefs simultaneously assert that scientists are not responsible
> for
> > their personal actions even when those actions provide the means of mass
> > murder or the motivation for embarking upon mass slaughter.
> > If "religion" is to be held culpable for the Inquisitions and the jihads,
> > "science" is certainly no less culpable for the historical ravages of
> > scientific socialism, the gassings of World War I, the National Socialist
> > Holocaust, the fire-bombings of Tokyo and Dresden and the American
> abortion
> > atrocity, to say nothing of the possibility of nuclear devastation as well
> as
> > the inconvenient perils of global warming.
> > I have previously demonstrated that religion does not cause war. But even
> > if it did, the number of Americans killed by medical science in the last
> ten
> > years far exceeds the total number of Americans killed by war in U.S.
> > history. If medical science can justly claim to have saved many lives, it
> > must also take responsibility for the estimated 783,000 annual iatrogenic
> > deaths it now causes every year.
> > Furthermore, the benefits of science are hugely exaggerated. Most of the
> > advances in human technology are a function of the wealth produced by
> > capitalism and human liberty, as may be seen in the retarded technological
> > development in countries with no shortage of education and scientists, but
> > handicapped by anti-capitalist, anti-libertarian ideology. Most inventors
> are
> > not scientists and most scientists are not inventors; whereas Oppenheimer
> and
> > Einstein gave us the nuclear bomb, Steve Wozniak gave us the personal
> > computer and Al Gore gave us the Internet. It's worth noting that the
> > inventors of what is considered to be the most significant invention of
> the
> > century, the silicon chip, were not scientists but electrical engineers.
> > Science advocates may argue that while scientists may not do much
> > inventing, inventions are merely a practical application of the principles
> > discovered by scientists. And while this is true in many cases, it is
> false
> > in even more. From vulcanized rubber to the microwave oven, accidents
> > combined with fortuitous observations by non-scientists have accounted for
> a
> > surprising number of advances in human knowledge, advances to which the
> > scientific method of hypothesis and experimentation may claim no credit.
> > Sciencists (those who believe in science as a basis for dictating human
> > behavior, as opposed to scientists, who merely engage in the method), like
> to
> > posit that Man has evolved to a point where he is ready to move beyond
> > religion. A more interesting and arguably more urgent question is whether
> > science, having produced some genuinely positive results as well as some
> > truly nightmarish evils, has outlived its usefulness to Mankind.
> > Man has survived millennia of religious faith, but if the prophets of
> > over-population and global warming are correct, he may not survive a mere
> two
> > centuries of science.
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
Other related posts:
