I’m a Scientist. This is What I’ll Fight For.
Jonathan Foley

I am not against science, but scientists tend to be a little misguided in understanding the truth, and what they understand is true is simply based upon human perception, which drastically limits the realm of possibilities of things beyond our limited human perception. While religion uses words like faith, science uses words like theory and hypothesis. When a religious belief is debunked, it’s myth, when scientific fact is debunked, its simply evolution of the truth. What we do know today about faith and science. Both are built on the notion to seek out answers to the unexplainable. As for earth and environmental science, while arguments, data and logic are compelling, enough for me to believe, there is little real definitive proof that humans will influence the changing climate, as climate cycles existed well before man existed. Now it’s not to say we shouldn’t be conscious about it, but not a single scientist will “guarantee” that a cut in human CO2 emission will have any real affect on perceived climate change. That would be a violation of scientific principle, as there is no precedent for it. So in reality, scientists, based upon information they can see, have faith that if we change our behavior, we can save the planet and our future. Something many hear weekly on Sundays. At the end of the day, science has no more evidence of that the entire universe was created by an invisible dot, than the idea of an evolved life form that can transcend time, space and human perception, that can manipulate matter. Heck, they may even find out that dark matter has collective intelligence, only if they had faith to think beyond their limitations.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.