I see no problem with the discussion so far.
Why do you?

All About Circuits is primarily that. If you want to discuss science vs religion there are other avenues for doing that.
Going, 3... 2... 1...

 

No attempt was made to 'disprove' how life began. And yet it is considered a scientific theory. Is that not the very definition of dogmatic?

A scientific theory is not a law, and even scientific laws are subject to review, refutation, modification and rejection.

All that exist in the case of abiogenesis are competing theories and lots of tests have been made to both support and refute them. Interpreting the results is a lot easier said than done because it hinges critically on what the make-up of the Earth's oceans and atmosphere were like and that is a very difficult thing to determine, especially since it changed radically and repeatedly over the course of most of the planet's history. The results of most of those tests are in the form of, "IF/WHEN this was true about then environment, then such-and-such probably could have happened while such-and-such-else probably could not have happened."

It always stuck me as pretty compelling that in just a few days, the first such experiment was able to produce over twenty amino acids (though at the time they were only able to detect five to ten given the tools available at the time). That's a few days in a volume well under one cubic meter. Just imagine what a lab experiment lasting four billion years working with the volume of the oceans and atmosphere could produce!

 

All religion does is re-enforce Human Tribalism, which will probably be with man until his final demise.
We have no greater example than what is occurring in the middle east today.

MOD NOTE: And we will NOT be talking about THIS here. Keep the discussion firmly in bounds, or it will end abruptly.

 

No attempt was made to 'disprove' how life began. And yet it is considered a scientific theory. Is that not the very definition of dogmatic?

Because there is no accepted theory! All current hypotheses have been found lacking.

Science does have one dogmatic rule: Nothing happens because of magic or any other illusory forces that cannot be characterized, quantified, measured, predicted etc, i.e. cannot be studied by science.

 

Because there is no accepted theory! All current hypotheses have been found lacking.

Science does have one dogmatic rule: Nothing happens because of magic or any other illusory forces that cannot be characterized, quantified, measured, predicted etc, i.e. cannot be studied by science.

Even this is not really dogma, but more of an axiom and, like all systems based on axioms, it is subject to being rejected if the axiom is proven false. In this instance, it means that if someone were ever able to demonstrate that "magic" existed (for whatever definition of "magic" is relevant), then science WOULD be expanded to accommodate it. Because it IS an accepted axiom of science, however, the burden of proof is going to be very high.

 

All About Circuits is primarily that. If you want to discuss science vs religion there are other avenues for doing that.
Going, 3... 2... 1...

Well obviously your are the dictator for determining that, so you can do whatever you want.

 

My current definition of "supernatural magic" is work without energy, space or time constraints. Something that can never be understand or mastered though scientific observation because it's a superpower (in Marvel comic theory, a type of religion IMO) granted from a supernatural or mysterious force that is beyond the realm of science.

 

Going... Going... Gone.