Philosophical Vegan Forum

One argument I have trouble arguing with is the science isn't always right argument. Science isn't always right, so it is to either be ignored or isn't to be trusted. Generally, it's just not to be trusted.

This isn't a strictly atheist problem, but I thought atheists would probably know more about debating it.

Pluto isn't a planet anymore. Scientists can't even keep their story straight!
This food is bad, this food is good, this food is bad, oh wait, it's actually good. They don't even know anything.
You could argue about anything being good or bad because studies go both ways! You can't trust science!

I point out that science is about trying to find the facts, so of course they are going to admit to being wrong when they are wrong. When other scientists find out something that is more accurate than what others found out, they will start saying that the new thing is right because they found out something new.
Because science is about finding out the truth, it would be silly of them to ignore anything that doesn't go along with what they thought before.

But then, well, you can't believe everything science says then.

As for the food one, I point out that that's more from the media, But my boyfriend says that can't be true for every food they've talked about.

These people act like since science isn't always right, then it's like religion. You can believe in whatever you want regarding science, but it's not a fact just because science says so. You're believing science based on faith.

I don't really mind it if it's just random people thinking this, but it really bothers me that my boyfriend does because science is important to me.

I was wondering what your thoughts were on this,

RanOverByATrain wrote: Pluto isn't a planet anymore. Scientists can't even keep their story straight!

This is more of an issue of what the definition of "planet" is.

RanOverByATrain wrote: This food is bad, this food is good, this food is bad, oh wait, it's actually good. They don't even know anything.

This isn't science, it's yellow journalism. The problem is how journalists report and sensationalize science, exaggerating the claims scientists make to the point the scientists themselves complain about the reporting being dishonest.

RanOverByATrain wrote: You could argue about anything being good or bad because studies go both ways! You can't trust science!

Studies, like on population, deal with probability and correlation. Studies aren't making dramatic claims directly contradicting each other, they're just showing results and discussing probability.

Science doesn't actually change dramatically in terms of consensus the way people think it does.

Newtonian physics is still true and useful within a certain range of velocities and energies, for example, within a margin of error (an important concept in science). Newton was not wrong at the velocities he was dealing with, because he lacked the precision necessary to be wrong.

The experiments done hundreds of years ago and the results they found are just as true today as they ever were.

RanOverByATrain wrote: As for the food one, I point out that that's more from the media, But my boyfriend says that can't be true for every food they've talked about.

That's just a bald assertion. It certainly can be true.

The times when media has reported accurately, they include a bunch of "maybe"s in it, and explain that "more research is needed", and don't directly contradict earlier accurate reports.

People who want to assert science as unreliable just want to substantiate dogma and personal bias, which is far less reliable.

RanOverByATrain wrote: I don't really mind it if it's just random people thinking this, but it really bothers me that my boyfriend does because science is important to me.

I was wondering what your thoughts were on this,

I would not be in a relationship with somebody like that. There are men who love and respect science, and take critical thinking and rationality seriously. This rift between you will only grow; you won't learn to respect him more for his anti-scientific dogma, it will just get increasingly irritating.
If you can't convince him, then better to pull the band-aid off quickly.