Science never cherry-picks facts to establish claims?

Nonsense. When information about climate change evolves (during the 70's we were headed into an ice age), the message is...we have new information. Thus it has been the same with SARS, AIDS, the Avian flu...Science has been wrong about many things, and always back peddled through out it's history. Those who believe one theory or another have been proven wrong, but instead of admitting that science is not infallible, they play games with semantics and reason by denying that EVERYONE, no matter our belief can be guilty of picking what we like and discarding the rest. Well in defense of the religious, just because people may interpret the Bible wrong doesn't make the book wrong. That's flawed logic. Feel me? Probably not. Oh well.

Source: Agnostic, who dislikes the hypocrisy.

brother_manuel: I don't even know what the latter half of your answer means. I never said that science hasn't done great things for humanity. I KNOW evolution is a fact, but I don't disparage others who believe the Bible by saying the Bible is inconsistent.

They sure do a lot of cherry picking...science comes from the human mind which is not perfect. But scientists and atheist always tend to believe whatever the 'current science' says as the truth. A few years down the road when that 'truth' changes, they start believing in another 'truth'. Even though they cant prove many theories like the theory of evolution and big bang, they keep demanding proof for the Bible

But instead the Bible is unchanging Word of God, saying the same truth yesterday, today and forever.

And yet, somehow, we can communicate in real-time with people all over the world.

Can you give me an example of where something other than science told us that science was wrong?

then why do scientists dis agree? hummmm

But science allows for the possibility of being wrong.
That's the difference. New data brings new theories.
Science doesn't claim to be infallible.

Edit: Christians believe the bible is the infallible word of god. They don't allow that other religions (Islam, Judaism, etc) are true. The same can be said for each religious persuasion.
Scientists are not like religious factions. You don't have physicist trying to change the mind of the chemical engineer or prove him wrong. Each discipline is in search of more understanding of its own field.

Very true, on both accounts.

So much BS and ignorance in one question...(shiver)...so much.

Edit: What do you mean that it makes no sense? Since the religious claim the positive, the burden of proof is on them.

Uhhh.... we ARE headed into an ice age.

...I don't know of anyone who has ever suggested that science was infallible...

...For that matter, I'm not aware of anyone that suggests that the Bible is wrong because of the way any given group interprets it. I am aware of people that suggest the Bible is wrong because the way it came about, starting with folk-tails rather than divine transcription.

I see your point.

However, I think the criticism lies mostly in those who tout God/Jesus as God/the Bible as fact, when in fact no proof exists AT ALL.

Science has been wrong, and will continue to be wrong. It's through this trial and error that we arrive at the truth. However, most scientists will surely agree that science is not infallible.

"Source: Agnostic, who dislikes the hypocrisy." lol more like: Agnostic who dosn't understand the scientific use of the term theory

you are confusing science with the polticial application of scientific findings--they are two very different things.

Hello. I just stopped by to tell you that being proven and wrong and discarding a theory is not the same as "cherry-picking"

Oh NO!... are you saying that Al Gore might be wrong... Oh God my world is crashing around me... The end is near... if we can not trust Al who can we trust... he would never "cherry pick"... would he?... oh my who am I to trust now...

I've always had the understanding Science comes up with a hypothesis, then goes through rigorous testing to prove the hypothesis wrong.


Now, if only theists would do their best to prove their hypothesis wrong as well.

and atheists have nothing to prove wrong because we already have no evidence that one exists, and can't come up with any.

Refreshing point of view. Yes, science is wrong all the time. And yes, people will constantly say they stopped believing in God because of science, or because of inconsistency in the Bible blah blah blah. You're right, they have just put their faith in science.

Ugh...so much ignorance about science in this one little post...

i don't really understand the point of this question or even the question itself.

first of all, in what way exactly was science wrong about SARS, AIDS and avian flu?

second, i don't think i agree with your assertion science changing over time is cherry picking. cherry picking is when you take one single fact or a few facts and put them forth as conclusive evidence while ignoring any contradictory evidence. any scientific ideas go through a long and arduous peer-review process that would not allow this type of academic dishonesty.

i think the fact that science changes is one its greatest strengths- it grows along with our understanding of the universe, unlike dogmatic religious ideas.

Good science doesn't 'cherry-pick facts'.
That is not to say this doesn't happen, it does, but then it is no longer a valid result.
And historically speaking, science has ALWAYS been wrong. It's saving grace is that it admits it. This is something religion does not. No one says Steven Hawkings is infallible, but Catholicism insists that the Pope is.
See the difference?
Science is not something you believe in, it is not something you put faith in. It is our best guess at the truth, that's all.
And you're right about the Bible, bad interpretation doesn't make it wrong. I question the validity of the entire book, not the interpretations done from it. You can argue what it means until you're blue in the face, but you're still not addressing the fault, which is it was written by men, edited by men, and gets used by men, without any shred of evidence about it's divine inspiration.

Hello, we have been headed into and ice age since the last ice age ended.. it's the cycle. Now about SARS AIDS etc you are confusing what science said with what the media said. Don't confuse the two, EVER or you will look foolish. I don't know a single person who doesn't admit science is fallible, but I know alot of people who refuse to admit that their religion is fallible. As for the religious, they won't admit that anything could ever possibly in a trillion years prove their book wrong. Every scientist in fact tries to prove their science wrong.. thats the point. Science strives to prove itself wrong, all the time, thats how we weed out fact from fiction.

You said "Well in defense of the religious, just because people may interpret the Bible wrong doesn't make the book wrong. "

I say.. Well in defence of the scientist, just because people may get some scientific studies wrong, doesn't make the whole of science wrong!