आप किस राजनीतिक विचारधारा से सबसे अधिक जुड़ाव रखते हैं?
It is a religion in the sense that it takes, on faith, the notion that human beings are electrified…
Fairh isn’t a thing in science, proof is, and if there’s enough satisfactory proof, then that tends to convince people to believe a theory. The Big Bang has the most physical and tangible proof of any theory of the universe, and as such, is considered the most likely option, therefore, what’s most likely is what’s taught. The “missionaries” are normally what you call teachers, you know, the people who already live and work around the school being taught at. You say it like teachers just walk up to random religious groups then start reading scientific textbooks, when the direct opposite is far more common. High ranking “churchmen” are scientists who’ve helped them formulate and refine useful and reliable theories, such as thaf of evolution, general relativity, the creation of nuclear weapons, or rocket science. These guys aren’t “churchmen”, they’re just important people, same way as a president or a notable character in a show. Rejection of the common narrative without any real proof that’s capable of taking down current theories tends to lead to merely being discredited. Settled science being rejected leads to losing your license, because that information is obviously false. Skeptics aren’t the problem, disinformers are. Scientists are allowed to disagree on climate change, they just need proof in their side. Scientists that fake their credentials, fail to cite sources, and use bad methods of getting a result are often the ones kicked out, the same way as an unruly worker.
इस बहस का उत्तर देने वाले पहले व्यक्ति बनें।