Songs Of Praise

[Croesy Blue]

Isn’t that the point with science, you observe and adjust based on what you see. Rather than just stick with what somebody else has previously written down? It moves on.

Yeah exactly there has been a weird trend recently (I think since Covid) of referring to the science as if it’s some kind of deity. And lisvaneblue seems to be making exactly the same mistake.

We don’t know everything there is to know from a scientific point of view but we are learning more all the time.

Also the body being ridiculously resilient at times isn’t proof of a god.

[lisvaneblue]

Yeah exactly there has been a weird trend recently (I think since Covid) of referring to the science as if it’s some kind of deity. And lisvaneblue seems to be making exactly the same mistake.

We don’t know everything there is to know from a scientific point of view but we are learning more all the time.

Also the body being ridiculously resilient at times isn’t proof of a god.

I don't think science is a deity. Point I was making to Sludge is that science evolves. In his posts he keeps referring to science and scientists in the way you mention. He endlessly goes on about facts and that is exactly what I was giving in in my response.

[Croesy Blue]

I dunno, but it seems as though some of the most “tolerant” posters on this message board are only “tolerant” to those that agree with their views.

They also seem to hunt in packs like a bunch of school cyber bully’s and their toadies.

It genuinely makes me sad that a civil debate is hard to have, particularly when you are put on the back foot from the start.
Nuance doesn’t matter anymore l guess, you are just simply pigeon holed.

I’m very tolerant of religious people, just having a bit of fun in this thread.

I also don’t think it is good to be “tolerant” of all views, why tolerate someone’s views if they’re backwards or harmful to others?

I also don’t get what pointing out that there have been bad atheists achieves. It’s a complete misnomer.

[Taunton Blue Genie]

Science means knowledge

Additional data and information increases our knowledge in due course. No-one owns science and the greatest minds around the world contribute to the knowledge of mankind and no-one can set in stone that pool of knowledge at a certain juncture.

Religion is the exact opposite. In a week when I have been inoculated against a global pandemic and have every reason to believe that the Mars landing took place I am asked to believe in a talking snake and that people living thousands of years ago and in primitive environments had all the answers.

[lisvaneblue]

Science means knowledge

Additional data and information increases our knowledge in due course. No-one owns science and the greatest minds around the world contribute to the knowledge of mankind and no-one can set in stone that pool of knowledge at a certain juncture.

Religion is the exact opposite. In a week when I have been inoculated against a global pandemic and have every reason to believe that the Mars landing took place I am asked to believe in a talking snake and that people living thousands of years ago and in primitive environments had all the answers.

Just to add to your pool of scientific knowledge. I hope you were vaccinated not inoculated.

[Tuerto]

Just to add to your pool of scientific knowledge. I hope you were vaccinated not inoculated.

Same thing?

[Taunton Blue Genie]

Just to add to your pool of scientific knowledge. I hope you were vaccinated not inoculated.

inoculate
/ɪˈnɒkjʊleɪt/
verb
treat with a vaccine to produce immunity against a disease; vaccinate.
"he inoculated his tenants against smallpox"

[lisvaneblue]

inoculate
/ɪˈnɒkjʊleɪt/
verb
treat with a vaccine to produce immunity against a disease; vaccinate.
"he inoculated his tenants against smallpox"

There is an important scientific difference. I'll leave it to you to look it up the detail. Smallpox 'jab' being called an inoculation is largely correct.

[Taunton Blue Genie]

There is an important scientific difference. I'll leave it to you to look it up the detail. Smallpox 'jab' being called an inoculation is largely correct.

I'll look it up in due course and thanks for educating me.
Feeling very rough with flu-like symptoms at the mo and still in bed.

[cyril evans awaydays]

Science means knowledge

Additional data and information increases our knowledge in due course. No-one owns science and the greatest minds around the world contribute to the knowledge of mankind and no-one can set in stone that pool of knowledge at a certain juncture.

Religion is the exact opposite. In a week when I have been inoculated against a global pandemic and have every reason to believe that the Mars landing took place I am asked to believe in a talking snake and that people living thousands of years ago and in primitive environments had all the answers.

Thought we had exhausted the Rees-Mogg discussion.

[Heisenberg]

Thought we had exhausted the Rees-Mogg discussion.

[Croesy Blue]

Inoculation is the act of introducing a vaccine into a person's body. It can be used in other contexts, such as when a culture is inoculated with body fluids (such as from a nasal swab) to test for the presence of a bacterium or virus.

Vaccination is the process of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce immunity to a specific disease. Vaccines are usually administered through needle injections but can also be administered by mouth or sprayed into a nostril.2

Waiting for someone to explain the difference here

[Taunton Blue Genie]

Waiting for someone to explain the difference here

Just found this

"Although inoculation and vaccination are sometimes used interchangeably, one is ultimately an act and the other is the process that spurs immunity. By definition:

Inoculation is the act of introducing a vaccine into a person's body. It can be used in other contexts, such as when a culture is inoculated with body fluids (such as from a nasal swab) to test for the presence of a bacterium or virus.

Vaccination is the process of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce immunity to a specific disease. Vaccines are usually administered through needle injections but can also be administered by mouth or sprayed into a nostril"

[lisvaneblue]

K

Waiting for someone to explain the difference here

It stems from smallpox back in the 1700s. Inoculation was achieved by injecting a small amount of smallpox to get the body to react and develop immunity. I think back then people were scratched with rather the needles we know today. Jenner discovered that using weaker or attenuated cowpox into someone the body developed immunity for smallpox. The Latin word for cow is vacca.....so says it all really

Today vaccines use attenuated, or modified viruses, just as Jenner discovered, to get an immune response from the body

[Taunton Blue Genie]

K

It stems from smallpox back in the 1700s. Inoculation was achieved by injecting a small amount of smallpox to get the body to react and develop immunity. Jenner discovered that using weaker or attenuated cowpox into someone the body developed immunity for smallpox. The Latin word for cow is vacca.....so says it all really

Gotcha....or have I?

[lisvaneblue]

Gotcha....or have I?

Have another look at my post as I added a few sentences for clarification

[Croesy Blue]

I don't think science is a deity. Point I was making to Sludge is that science evolves. In his posts he keeps referring to science and scientists in the way you mention. He endlessly goes on about facts and that is exactly what I was giving in in my response.

It evolves but there is proof for every bit of it.

[lisvaneblue]

[QUOTE=Croesy Blue;5170040]It evolves but there is proof for every bit of it.[/QUOTE

Progress in biological science is frequently made without proof. Having evidence to suggest X or Y is the way it works. So there is not proof for every bit of it.

[Wash DC Blue]

Waiting for someone to explain the difference here

Dr John Campbell explains the difference 30 seconds into this video when discussing human trials.

https://youtu.be/Qr6Tn5DU_Sw

[Taunton Blue Genie]

Dr John Campbell explains the difference 30 seconds into this video when discussing human trials.

https://youtu.be/Qr6Tn5DU_Sw

Excellent, thanks. Something to put on the 'What I have learned this week' thread

[lisvaneblue]

Dr John Campbell explains the difference 30 seconds into this video when discussing human trials.

https://youtu.be/Qr6Tn5DU_Sw

I think that's what I was saying, but he's using the latest human challenge study as a very good example.

[Wash DC Blue]

Excellent, thanks. Something to put on the 'What I have learned this week' thread

No worries 👍

[Croesy Blue]

Dr John Campbell explains the difference 30 seconds into this video when discussing human trials.

https://youtu.be/Qr6Tn5DU_Sw

[Croesy Blue]

[QUOTE=lisvaneblue;5170065]

It evolves but there is proof for every bit of it.[/QUOTE

Progress in biological science is frequently made without proof. Having evidence to suggest X or Y is the way it works. So there is not proof for every bit of it.

It’s made using evidence backed hypotheses, you cannot seriously compare this to the belief in a god.

[lisvaneblue]

[QUOTE=Croesy Blue;5170111]

It’s made using evidence backed hypotheses, you cannot seriously compare this to the belief in a god.

I wasn't I was just saying that your comments about proof at each stage is wrong