Seneca Rock Pics II

Here is another shot of the Upper Blackwater Falls, the family, driving, The Dolly Sods summit, Seneca Caverns and Smokehole Caverns.

Seneca Rock Pics I

These particular shots include Seneca Rocks from a distance, Upper and Lower Blackwater Falls, and the Potomac River.

Scientific Belief & Faith in a God: part III

I support Science. I believe in Physics. I enjoy logic. However. This does not prevent me from recognizing that certain theories, not scientifically sound or proven, can be, and are, relevant to non-science types. Proof exists within limited systems. Defined systems. Everything that seeks to expand on the current body of evidence is utter conjecture, baseless save for probability. Proof is yet to be proven. This essentially takes all the hardcore theoretical science and dumps it in the same turd bin as mysticism.

Science seeks to disprove itself. Correct? Because proof is there to be questioned. Yet we have people stating that Science embodies "confidence." If proof was worth anything, we would be done. Science achieved, progression complete. Proof, like God, is an illusion. Make no mistake, "Proof" is a "God."This resonates with me up to a point. I think my personal hang ups kick in at the juncture that science ends and all other disciplines begin. I will explain why. Science is very efficient at gathering, evaluating, and defining things until they become accepted "knowns" at which point, they are even further refined. Yet there remains a disconnect between the known and unknown. There are certain anomalies, abnormalities, call them cosmic eccentricities that science is incapable of explaining based on the current body of knowledge and approach that is represented by the "known." Rather than expanding the boundaries through which it operates, and incorporating new and unorthodox methods of measuring and quantifying into the system, science seeks to dismiss that which it cannot explain.

Do I believe in the supernatural? No. Do I believe in God? No. Yet, it still seems offensive to me that because science is unable to disprove these things, it feels it has a right to universally dismiss them.

Scientific Belief & Faith in a God: part II

Further analysis, rants, and thoughts.

The inherent weakness in both disciplines, Science and Religion, is that they embolden their respective adherents with so much confidence that they feel comfortable in making statements like "Nope. Wrong." Those two words alone are more telling of one's position than anything else one could possibly say. It shows a rigid, closed approach. Understand here that I am on the side of science. I have already accepted certain "facts" regarding the universe long ago. I am laboring to not say "Nope. Wrong." I am trying to give weight to both sides of the spectrum, as is only fair. To debate semantics is always a lose / lose endeavor, so I won't.

The Scientific faith I speak of is in relation to things we have no way of proving, yet we still are willing to entertain the notion of probability. Megaverse, Microverse, Multiverse ... so on and so forth. Without faith in the existence of the unknown, we would grow complacent, believing we knew all their was to know. There would be no drive to prove or disprove anything. But such is not the case, we believe there is more to this reality than we currently understand. Believing is not always seeing.

Just to be argumentative though, I will throw this out there. Much of what we once thought to be true, we have had to modify, or change completely. So what causes the contemporary body of knowledge to be immune to this? Lets imagine for example that someday, we discover a completely different dimension, and in the process of learning to define this new state of being, we are forced to reassess our definition and understanding of things like thermodynamics and nuclear processes. My point is that nothing is a given, and confidence is fleeting. Empirical evidence is like an expansive mathematical equation that at the very end, as we bring it all together to arrive at our answer, and bask in the accumulated knowledge of it all, proves to be flawed. It always has, it always will.

It is really humorous how the scientist bashes the cleric, while the cleric scorns the scholar, meanwhile the scholar ridicules the scientist. What does it all mean? Nothing. One extreme flexing on another. Science, Religion & Philosophy are equally irrelevant in this world which so many think, believe even, that they can explain and/or understand. Some people don't like to think about that, it is outrageous! Why? Because no one, anywhere, wants to think of themselves being equally relevant with others. Everyone thinks their personal credo, their way of thinking is the end all be all, and I do not exclude myself from this disease.