Aeelorty
Registered User
You would think more information was better than not. Archaeology is finding more things that don't fit the theories of today all the time. When these things are found what happens if the don't fit the prevailing theory? The science try's to fist discredit the evidence and if the evidence holds out they then discredit the one that found it. How scientific is that.
Finding evidence that contradicts the current theories is what every scientist hopes to find. Why do you think people we so excited about the faster than light neutrino speeds out of Italy a few years ago (it was a error in the experiment in the end)? When we find something that contradicts the current theories the first thing to do is make sure the new information is legitamate. That means that the evidence actually contradicts something already well supported and that the conclusions being drawn from it are accurate, that the data wasn't fabricated or manipulated in some way.
The science try's to fist discredit the evidence and if the evidence holds out they then discredit the one that found it. How scientific is that
This is exactly how scinece works, you try to falsify a hypothesis, make sure it is repeatable and that the conclusions being drawn fit the data. Often there are people who draw conclusions without enough evidence or biased on beleifs that are not scientific.
The reaction to your introduction was a scinetific one, it was discreditied because it lacked merit, which is appropriate because we are discussing a scientific idea. When an idea is introduced into science it is well known that the goal of others will be to discredit it, and if you have done your job correctly that will be hard for them to do. Its like building a wall for defense. You expect people tp try to knock it down and if you built it well then it should hold up for the time being untill someone comes up with a way to break though it. Then once that happens you take your experience and try to build another one untill that gets knocked down.
Now religion does not work on that principle. Can I come in and falsify your beliefs, especially ones that tell you to take them on faith alone? Most people will say no to that. That is why science and religion work differently, in science there is nothing sacred that is not open to questioning. How many churches focus on trying to disprove God so that they can say he might exist, not that he does exist as a matter of face, but that he might possibly exist?