Actually the more I thought about it, the more apparent the accuracy became. Realize that the exact same critique that you just gave would have been (and no doubt has been) given in defense of Christianity throughout the past 2000 years. The Greeks no doubt felt that they were far beyond the level of civility of the Israelites and thus their analysis of truth would seem far more significant to them than any old 1000 year old Jewish traditional views. Each generation believes that it sees in a more advanced manner than the last, especially when thousands of years have passed. The Catholic knows that extremely well educated, honest, and respectable people inhabit the Vatican so the thought of them being wrong isn’t that easy to accept. In very early Christian days, the Jewish Pharisees appeared similar to the Jews.
But in reality, in every case and perhaps especially today, we each have to take someone else’s word that they are being honest, careful, and thoughtful when it is reported that "they have discovered that…".
Science is good about advertising that “we aren’t always right”. But unfortunately they also demonstrate a history of face-saving techniques, obfuscating, and out and out lying at times for sake of “the cause”. Unfortunately the cause of Science has now become identical to that of a religion “Scientism”, no difference whatsoever.
Personally, I have nothing against the religions and wouldn’t have against Science either if it actual did what it advertises rather than attempt political ploys so as to gain popularity. The manipulation of the population has become extreme and you don’t really have to be a psychologist to see a lot of it, but as a psychologist, I can tell you that you do not see 1/10th of what is there. Science makes manipulation of everything easier, including people.
Oh really? Have you personally seen any of them yourself? Think of all the people who absolutely know that Jesus or Moses or whoever did this or that based entirely on the story being told afterward by those who wish to cause belief rather than ensure absolute truth. But now think about what happens when the very notion of any absolute truth is regraded as irrelevant. Why not tell a spun story to exaggerate the events? Why be deeply critical of your findings when they already seem to show what you want them to show? “We DO have to fight to save the people from those OTHER religious people, you know.”
How long did it take someone to figure out that in the Michelson-Morley experiment the objects doing the measuring and the distance being assumed to be fixed, actually were not fixed at all? Has anyone even yet woken up to the fact that what Maxwell was proposing as aether might not actually have the same properties as air and water because it isn’t made up of tinier particles causing the same propagation effects that Morley was trying to measure? And since when was logic reversed to say, that because our experiment didn’t prove aether, we have disproven it?
Very many well publicized experiments today are showcased and distorted merely for politics due to what they allude to, not what they actually said. The Quantum Magi live entirely on public misunderstanding of quantum mechanics. Apparent consistency of the speed of light led to the ASSUMPTION that there is no absolute frame, “because we can get close enough to what we experience by denying it”. But for how long? What is good enough science for today becomes a bad and misleading joke tomorrow.
But the real problem isn’t that they push far beyond their real knowledge, but rather that they end up depending on the support of faithful followers. If you admit to being a religion, that is fine, but Science?? That is deep trouble; a religion in disguise needing ALL of the same deceptions so as to maintain the faith and illusion that "our scientists [whom most never really meet] really have it all figured out. No need to listen to anyone else!" Yet when asked to explain a simple paradox problem, they give nothing but political debate tactics typical of highschool cliques.
Look on Wiki concerning the Twin Clocks paradox. What you will see is the mention of how all of those who have argued against were debunked. Exactly how is not mentioned of course, “Take our word. Have faith.” Then compare Ed3’s analysis of that paradox in this forum.
So yeah, I really do see not only that Science has become no more than a religion, but it has become a technologically advanced religion far more capable of ensuring its proselytizing and is in full swing. It is demonstrated on every forum on the Internet. And it is supported by those who believe that there are no absolute truths anyway, “so emm… why not fudge a little?”
Today people say “Science has shown…” in the exact same demeanor as they used to say, “God revealed to me…”. Not one ounce of difference.