Moon landing

(1/3) > >>

Tweefo (May 02, 2008, 18:20:04 PM):
Had a discussion with a Christian the other day about the wonders of the world. I was saying that it was our technology that took us to the moon whereas religion could only dream about it. First thing he said was: where is the proof of the moon landing? He then went on to name all the "inconsistencies" - the flag blowing and so on. Ironic thing is this is a Christian who believe in his faith without proof but needs proof for this? Guess if you want to believe in something you will and people will pay you for telling them what they want to hear.
Mefiante (May 02, 2008, 18:36:50 PM):
Here’s some good medicine against bad Moon tomfoolery, though it probably won’t do much good. Perhaps you should suggest to this person that to say the Moon landing was faked is far less plausible than that Jesus’ crucifixion and resurrection were faked. ;)

'Luthon64
bluegray (May 02, 2008, 22:37:25 PM):
Guess if you want to believe in something you will and people will pay you for telling them what they want to hear.
I agree.
It is probably the same reason people who believe in homeopathy will also tend to believe in crystal healing and similar unproven therapies. Or why belief in a conspiracy to blow up the twin towers often includes any number of other conspiracies by the government against the public.
Noncritical thinking lends itself to belief in anything you might want to be true. And if you don't require proper evidence, or if you can't properly use the tools of critical thinking to distinguish bad ideas from good ones, you have no reason not to believe want you want to be true. Most of the ideas we discuss on this forum comes down to this.
I was saying that it was our technology that took us to the moon whereas religion could only dream about it.
As an aside, although the moon landing proves that the scientific principles involved are accurate enough to pull off going to the moon and back successfully, I don't think it says anything about whether religion is useful or not. Usefulness should not be a criteria for an idea being right or wrong. I have no problem with religion as an idea, where I have a problem with it is where it tries to impose itself where it does not belong, or where it stands in the way of critical thinking and understanding of the world around us. But that is another topic for another day ;)
Dr. Nancy Malik (July 14, 2008, 06:05:02 AM):
Guess if you want to believe in something you will and people will pay you for telling them what they want to hear.
I agree.
It is probably the same reason people who believe in homeopathy will also tend to believe in crystal healing and similar unproven therapies. Or why belief in a conspiracy to blow up the twin towers often includes any number of other conspiracies by the government against the public.
Noncritical thinking lends itself to belief in anything you might want to be true. And if you don't require proper evidence, or if you can't properly use the tools of critical thinking to distinguish bad ideas from good ones, you have no reason not to believe want you want to be true. Most of the ideas we discuss on this forum comes down to this.
I was saying that it was our technology that took us to the moon whereas religion could only dream about it.
As an aside, although the moon landing proves that the scientific principles involved are accurate enough to pull off going to the moon and back successfully, I don't think it says anything about whether religion is useful or not. Usefulness should not be a criteria for an idea being right or wrong. I have no problem with religion as an idea, where I have a problem with it is where it tries to impose itself where it does not belong, or where it stands in the way of critical thinking and understanding of the world around us. But that is another topic for another day ;)
Homeopathy has nothing to do with crystal healing.
Mefiante (July 14, 2008, 09:37:39 AM):
Homeopathy has nothing to do with crystal healing.
Not directly perhaps, but they are both equally suffused with unsupported hocus-pocus. That’s why people who believe in one of them usually also believe in the other. In other words, believers in one kind of nonsense are prone to other kinds also. That was bluegray V’s point, which you seem to have missed.

'Luthon64

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Skeptic Forum Board Index

Non-mobile version of page