As I urged you when I was going to Macedonia, remain at Ephesus so that you may charge certain persons not to teach any different doctrine, nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies, which promote speculations rather than the stewardship from God that is by faith. The aim of our charge is love that issues from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith. Certain persons, by swerving from these, have wandered away into vain discussion, desiring to be teachers of the law, without understanding either what they are saying or the things about which they make confident assertions.(1 Timothy 1:3-7) ESV
Popular science (SciPop) has a theoretical foundation. We refer to it as the SciPop paradigm. You may see it referred to in places as the DPMS (the dominant paradigm of modern science).
We all have the same evidence. Our choice of paradigm determines what we think it’s evidence of.– Matty’s Razor
Popular Science (SciPop) Axioms
SciPop is defined by a set of axioms. Supposedly, axioms are things that you don’t have to believe, they’re accepted, established or self-evidently true.
Axiom (law): a statement or proposition that is regarded as being 1) established, 2) accepted, or 3) self-evidently true. The law in physics is actually same as axiom in mathematics.– Axiom (law), definition
Unfortunately the axioms of SciPop can only be derived by accepting the paradigm. This is known as inductive reasoning, or circular reasoning.
Inductive reasoning (as opposed to deductive reasoning or abductive reasoning) is reasoning in which the premises are viewed as supplying strong evidence for the truth of the conclusion. While the conclusion of a deductive argument is certain, the truth of the conclusion of an inductive argument is probable, based upon the evidence given.– Inductive Reasoning, definition (Wikipedia)
None of these axioms are established or self-evident, they’re accepted because people want them to be true. Believing the axioms is a choice, they’re leaps of faith, but accepting them is essential in developing the internal logic of the SciPop paradigm. SciPop is what the Bible refers to as science falsely so called.
The Axioms of Mainstream Science (SciPop)
|1||There’s a causal relationship between space-time and gravity||Isaiah 48:13|
|2||Earth orbits the sun||Ecclesiastes 1:5|
|3||Stars are distant suns and galaxies||1 Corinthians 15:40-41|
|4||Nuclear decay has always been constant||Deuteronomy 32:22|
|5||Humanity is a product of of biological evolution||Romans 5:12|
Faith is believing in something that you can’t see, because of evidence.– Faith, definition
An Example of the Error in SciPop
- IF all conflict between the Bible and science lies within the SciPop paradigm,
- THEN it must be possible to identify the cause of this conflict and resolve it.
Practically everyone, including most Christians, are convinced that heliocentricity has triumphed over the geocentric model. What they’re unaware of is that heliocentricity and geocentricity are two frames of reference in the same model. They coexist. We’re on the Earth, therefore our absolute frame of reference is inherently and empirically Geocentrospheric.
Does Earth orbit the sun? Something that’s self evidently true is that the sun rises and sets: we can watch it happen because our frame of reference is Geocentrospheric. In contrast the idea that Earth orbits the sun isn’t self evident it’s theoretical, which means that we have to use our imagination, not our vision, to conceptualize it. That goes against the conventional wisdom but it is what it is. The conventional wisdom is part of the strong delusion.
Heliocentric (sun worship) or Geocentrospheric?
- IF you were on the Sun you’d be observing heliocentricity,
- SINCE you’re not, you’re on the Earth, you’re observing Geocentrosphericity.
We need your financial help but Mattymatica isn’t a religious organization, charity or new age cult.
If you need to belong somewhere, find a local church. If you’d like to help, please consider donating.
2 Replies to “Isolating the Error in Mainstream Science”