Should not belief be based on evidence? Popular does not imply true. Consensus does not imply correct. Official does not imply veritable.Durzan wrote: ↑Wed Dec 06, 2017 2:26 pmHey, um... guys. I hate to be the voice of reason here, but please take off your tinfoil hats. Putting your belief in pseudo science is not a good thing to be doing. Most of the time, the works seem to make more sense than mainstream science, but upon closer examination you would find that certain things do not add up with current observations. IE. they fall flat and don't work.
Best to stick with main stream science, even if it does at times seem a bit wonky. To put it another way: I believe in main stream science... in so far as it is translated correctly. For the most part it works well in its intended purpose.
I just accept that God knows what he is doing, and that just because something in science seems to contradict something akin to God's nature, doesnt mean that it actually does.
Where money, politics, and pride supplant truth is where people and practices become corrupted. Hence, the corruption in numerous aspects of the mainstream of the world, including the institution of science, which includes honest as well as pseudo science, the latter largely comprising unverifiable theories that are taught as truth.
All are entitled to their own opinions and rationale. If you determine that it's "Best to stick with main stream science," then you may do so. But unless you offer compelling reasons for your opinion, seeking to go about dissuading people from an opinion contrary to yours, to interrupt their rejoicings, is unlikely to effect much.
Paradigm shifts tend to be prefaced by serious reflection by the open-minded. But some detractors seem unwilling to sufficiently suspend their disbelief so as to acquire adequate understanding. Instead, some succumb to the natural man, such as in rushing to judgment and committing fallacies, especially ad hominem, against those who do not believe according to their own will and pleasure, as well as to their differing belief.
LDS advocates of EU theory might agree with the comparison that mainstream cosmology is to apostate Christianity as plasma cosmology is to the Restoration. But that religious doctrines potentially correlate with scientific principles is less seen as evidence for the veracity of such principles than as icing on the cake of the paradigm.