out of curiosity, what's the most embarrasing scientific theory (generally accepted) that eventually proved to be wrong?:crystal:
i am not sure, i dunno alot about history. the main thing now (my dad is obsessed with this) is health stuff. nobody seems to know what is good for you, and they reverse it every few years.
Yep. It seems that if you actually abide by every 'health' suggestion that you read, you would starve trying to dodge every possible malady induced by certain foods. Conversley, you would also eat an inummerable [sic] amount of foods that are said to aid in the prevention of cancer 25+ years down the line. My advice: Eat what tastes good and get plenty of exercise. Hard to go wrong with that.
"Proof is arriving at a logical conclusion, based on the available evidence. Notice that this has absolutely nothing to do with being right or wrong." Scientific Proof "Every single theory there is in science has been proven. If there was no evidence – no proof – to back up an idea, scientists would not accept it. The evidence convinces us that the theory is a good explanation of what is happening. If theories don't agree with the evidence, and sometimes we find that they don't, then scientists will be trying to create a better explanation that does. But they won't abandon the current one, even if they know it is flawed, until they have managed to think up a better explanation that agrees with the evidence."
dude, whats up with the onion stealing my ideas? http://www.theonion.com/news/index.php?issue=4133&n=2 "Traditional scientists admit that they cannot explain how gravitation is supposed to work," Carson said. "What the gravity-agenda scientists need to realize is that 'gravity waves' and 'gravitons' are just secular words for 'God can do whatever He wants. Some evangelical physicists propose that Intelligent Falling provides an elegant solution to the central problem of modern physics......"Anti-falling physicists have been theorizing for decades about the 'electromagnetic force,' the 'weak nuclear force,' the 'strong nuclear force,' and so-called 'force of gravity,'" Burdett said. "And they tilt their findings toward trying to unite them into one force. But readers of the Bible have already known for millennia what this one, unified force is: His name is Jesus." haha.
I mean, I just can't understand how F = (g*M1*m2)/s^2 in itself fundamentally contradicts the existence of God. I think Martin is simply dumbstruck by the idea that there are many scientists who also are Christians.
why would you need to understand that? who said that? i am guessing nobody and you are talking nonsense again. i guess i am supposed to be impressed you know this formula and you had to mention it somehow.
