“Where are you facts? You need to do better research before tossing this nonsense out in the real world.”
This — and the accusation of “somethingphonic” — seem to be the primary retorts of the progressive liberal in conversation. Ironically, the two arguments actually argue against one another. Either evolution is correct, progress means the survival of the species, and therefore all the “sexual deviants” should be thrown out of the race, or Christians and those who believe the race to the sexual bottom is harmful have no facts, and therefore should be thrown out of the race. Either one is true, or the other from the progressive perspective.
So when these two foundational arguments of the progressive liberal order bounce into one another, the question must be: which one will win? Will the progressive give up science to their neopagan crusade (all sex, all the time, all over the place, no matter the cost)? Or will they give up their neopagan crusade to their belief in evolution and scientism?
The answer seems to be forthcoming.
Now, some physicists and philosophers think it is time to reconsider the notion of falsifiability. Could a theory that provides an elegant and accurate account of the world around us—even if its predictions can’t be tested by today’s experiments, or tomorrow’s—still “count” as science? As theory pulls further and further ahead of the capabilities of experiment, physicists are taking this question seriously. “We are in various ways hitting the limits of what will ever be testable, unless we have misunderstood some essential point about the nature of reality,” says theoretical cosmologist George Ellis. “We have now seen all the visible universe (i.e back to the visual horizon) and only gravitational waves remain to test further; and we are approaching the limits of what particle colliders it will ever be feasible to build, for economic and technical reasons.”
When a theory cannot be tested, but it so elegant that it cannot be false, then falsifiability must go. So the gold standard of science must fall to what we want to believe, no matter whether or not it is true.
Repeatability, a second leg that supports the scientific method, is also being staged for a fall, it seems. If experiments can’t be replicated? No problem. Just wait, and eventually the papers that can’t be replicated will be “weeded out.” In the meantime, don’t look at all the people who die, or who’s lives are ruined. Remember, if the theory is elegant enough it doesn’t need to be tested.
Science has been a useful tool for the progressive left, but when science bumps up against the new age beliefs of liberal progressivism, science loses. Remember that the next time someone says, “conservatives and Christians are anti-science…” Only Christianity and Judaism can support science in its fullest meaning and practice.