That's a hypothetical conclusion that has never been proven is all of history.

It's arrogance that makes you think that everything you know today won't change 1,000 years from now.  Scientists discover new things and disprove old theories all the time.

It only took a few decades to prove Global Cooling and Global Warming were alarmist junk science.  Those "scientific facts" would not have been "exactly the same in 1,000 years."

You like to cling to what is known and pushed as science, but you don't embrace the key, fundamental tenet that makes up what science represents:  That we are to question everything and view results with skepticism, not as some immutable fact that can never be altered.

Funny how the same people screaming "SCIENCE!" think gender and sex are merely social constructs, even though they have been viewed as a scientific fact since recorded history.  Yet, nothing we know today will change 1,000 years from now?

Just like religion, popular scientific knowledge evolves over time.  Saying science won't change in 10 more centuries ignores the enormous changes that occurred in just the last 80 years.

In 1889, Charles H. Duell was the Commissioner of US patent office. He is widely quoted as having stated that the patent office would soon shrink in size, and eventually close, because, “Everything that can be invented has been invented.”

Shortsighted arrogance & ignorance.

No matter the path science leads to the same universal facts and truths.   The path there might look different but the end result is the same.   It's also repeatable.  Two people can find the same fact.   You can experiment to prove it,  it's not reliant on blind faith.   

No matter the path science leads to the same universal facts and truths.   The path there might look different but the end result is the same.   It's also repeatable.  Two people can find the same fact.   You can experiment to prove it,  it's not reliant on blind faith.

Christianity has been around for over 2,000 years.  Like science, it has also evolved and been changed with the times.  But the underlying, universal truths that comprise the religion remain the same.

Two people can search for the answers to life's philosophical questions and find the same conclusions.  You can apply these principles to actual real world situations and prove they work with repeatable results.  Many principles are captured in simple terms, like "you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar," or "you can't see the forest for the trees."  Not to be taken literally, but to teach truths about the human condition.  These truths haven't changed much over centuries.

I see no difference in the 2 processes, other than YOU have faith in one hypothetical premise, and not the other.

Christianity has been around for over 2,000 years.  Like science, it has also evolved and been changed with the times.  But the underlying, universal truths that comprise the religion remain the same.

Two people can search for the answers to life's philosophical questions and find the same conclusions.  You can apply these principles to actual real world situations and prove they work with repeatable results.  Many principles are captured in simple terms, like "you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar," or "you can't see the forest for the trees."  Not to be taken literally, but to teach truths about the human condition.  These truths haven't changed much over centuries.

I see no difference in the 2 processes, other than YOU have faith in one hypothetical premise, and not the other.

It has evolved over time like science that is true.   But would "god" allow that?   I thought it was perfect from the beginning.  Religion was used for morality.  It still is.   But it still is stuck in the past.  As if science was based on flat earth.  With today's technology we can disprove many of religions teachings.  Religion can't do the same.   

It has evolved over time like science that is true.   But would "god" allow that?   I thought it was perfect from the beginning.  Religion was used for morality.  It still is.   But it still is stuck in the past.  As if science was based on flat earth.  With today's technology we can disprove many of religions teachings.  Religion can't do the same.

Once again, you resort to hypothetical straw arguments nobody else is posting.

"I thought it was perfect from the beginning."  That comment perfectly parallels your argument that "science won't change if it's lost for 1,000 years".

Science is perfect.

Religion changes.

LOL!

i'm missing where "consensus" falls in this process...

I still laugh every time Moron says 'proven by science',  3.7 apparently didn't include any STEM.

Keep drinking that bong water buddy.

i'm missing where "consensus" falls in this process...

And "Never changes, not even after 1,000 years without it."

i'm missing where "consensus" falls in this process...

That's when a bunch of people come up with the same conclusion.   Then it becomes a repeatable fact.   

That's when a bunch of people come up with the same conclusion.   Then it becomes a repeatable fact.

Just like the consensus that the Earth is flat?

Gotcha.

That's when a bunch of people come up with the same conclusion.   Then it becomes a repeatable fact.

swooooooooosh

Just like the consensus that the Earth is flat?

Gotcha.

Then people disproved it and it changed.  A new concensus was formed. Science improves over time. 

Then people disproved it and it changed.  A new concensus was formed. Science improves over time.

But, you said science would endure for 1,000 years if rediscovered.  That means it can't change.

You can't even stick with your own BS.

But, you said science would endure for 1,000 years if rediscovered.  That means it can't change.

You can't even stick with your own BS.

We call that goal post moving.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

But, you said science would endure for 1,000 years if rediscovered.  That means it can't change.

You can't even stick with your own BS.

Not even close.   It might follow the same path. Them thinking its flat then disproven etc.  In the end the correct answer will be found.  Unlike religion.

Not even close.   It might follow the same path. Them thinking its flat then disproven etc.  In the end the correct answer will be found.  Unlike religion.

Total BS.

100% hypothetical mumbo-jumbo that can't be proven.

Sounds like your science is a lot like religion.

We call that goal post moving.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Can we even find the goalpost?

Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk

This IS the goal post!

Take that, science!