Wrong.
Science is not a religion. You say that theories are acknowledged by scientists to not be facts?
Well that's the very difference between theories and theorems... But only few theories remain. Most science aspects have been proven right now.
Could you give an example of a scientific theory that is not proven? Cause the only ones I see are... Well no scientist "believe in them" they just find those theories interesting and we think it MIGHT be the answer but that's all.
I agree with you that science is not religion. So you are wrong with your "wrong," because I didn't say that science is religion.
Belief in science theory as fact is religious belief.
Looks like you didn't say that the first time.
If science theories had been proven, they would be science laws. The fact that they remain theories shows that they have not been proven.
Most of them are laws yeah... Do you have an example of what is called a theory and not a law?
People who believe unproven things to be fact, have religion going for themselves.
Science theories are not religion. Only the people who believe that they are factual when it is not known, are the people who have a religion going for themselves in the science theories.
Nobody says that...
I don't understand what you're saying...
I had been accused of saying that science is religion. I was using the statement
Science theories are not religion to show that I understand that not even science theory is religion.
Look at it this way. Imagine that a sculptor makes a little statue. He carves it out of stone, or maybe even wood. It is a nice little statue. Is it religion? Of course not.
If people start to worship the little statue, they have a religion regarding the little statue. The statue itself is not religion. Yet, the worshipers have a religion regarding the statue.
In a similar way, science and science theory are not religion. But if people "worship" science theory by calling it truth when it is not known to be truth, they are starting into their own religion regarding the science theory involved. And their religion is exceptionally religious if they KNOW that the theory has not been proven to be fact, but they treat it as fact anyway.
Big bang, relativity, evolution, and black hole theories are not known to be factual. They are not laws.
Big bang is not known to be something that could exist. But if it were know to be possible, it still would not be known to have been the way the universe came about.
Relativity still has strong opposition in other things. It is not known to be fact.
Evolution should have been dropped as theory long ago. The whole thing is just stories, most of which do not fit what has happened. But if the stories fit, there are other things that fit as well, making evolution something that should not even be considered theory.
Black holes exist. Black hole theory tries to explain them. So far, nobody knows if the theory fits what is actually happening in a black hole. Black holes are fact. Black hole theory is not known to be fact.
People who know that theories are not necessarily factual, but believe them to be factual, must be betting in the lottery a lot. For them, science theory is like a religion. If they are adamant "believers," the theories are a religion for them.
to drizzle all over that gigantic tossed word salad....