How reliable is science? (Assumption 3/7) (The limitations of science)

by Balance_Maintained @, U.S.A., Sunday, April 15, 2012, 16:54 (4603 days ago) @ xeno6696

I am not saying you are incorrect in any of your arguments, but aren't scientist guilty of using the same assumptions? They ASSUME that the rate is constant. They assume that they know all of the factors that could influence decay rates. This is a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

--
What is the purpose of living? How about, 'to reduce needless suffering. It seems to me to be a worthy purpose.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum