Gathering and Explaining Scientific Data Is Truly Limited

As creationists, we believe God being very advanced, designed a Universe which has a high degree of fine tuning, precise complexity, highly advanced engineering, well behind what man can conceptualize. Even with one the greatest success stories in science “Newtonian Gravity” proved it also had some weakness.

Since this is the case, we believe science will never become an obsolete practice even though we know who created the Universe. So from time to time, it must be pointed out it’s limitations from what fallible man with his bias attempts to explain from an observation.

In the medical field, the Functional MRI has been subject to a major flaw. The very powerful tool is based on the increase in blood flow to the local vasculature that accompanies neural activity in the brain. The advantage using this tool means the patient doesn’t have to be injected with radioactive isotopes and requires much less time to scan.

However, the disadvantage of using the Functional MRI has been neuroscientists themselves. Nature had an article called; Brain imaging skewed which suggested that half of the neuroimaging studies published in prestige journals in 2008 were flawed because of bias, and could result in obtaining the wrong conclusions. This is not intentional bias like we see in evolution, for example.

Hubble’s photo known as the Eagle Nebula’s “pillars of creation” which scientists explained as stars eroding the pillars with blasts of radiation.  Pretty straightforward right? Nope. After further review of the photo, a new proposal has come out and was reported not long ago in…

“The origin of the majestic “pillars of creation,” one of the most familiar and colorful scenes in space, is a bit of a mystery. Now researchers say it might have started from gaseous clumps pushed into shadowed areas by radiation from nearby stars.

Such clumps of gas creep toward darker regions of gas and dust and create dense knots, according to new simulations. The shadows around the knots then screen out the intense ultraviolet radiation that might interfere with further gas formation, the model indicates.”

What many scientists lack today (not all)  is humility which is not surprising considering many of them do not believe in God. They also shouldn’t put themselves above other scholars in different areas but must be reminded their mere conceptualization of various phenomena is fallible. Science is not to be worshipped!


One thought on “Gathering and Explaining Scientific Data Is Truly Limited

  1. And you call yourself humble ?

    You say you ‘know’ who created the Universe.

    Now that is arrogant, especially if you do not bother to back this up with any evidence at all. You just ‘know’. Good argument.

    You know what humility is ? Your boldfaced quote ends with the words “the model indicates”. Now that is humble. They have a model, and it indicates things. And they are happy to thrown away the old model as well.

    Are you ?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s