Science is inherently atheistic
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
Processes are not excluded from possessing properties, including atheistic ones.
Crucially, adjectives are not constrained to humans:
See Fokker–Planck equations for simple non‐Markovian systems, including "retarded kernels".
I gotta agree with your second item. "RETARDED KERNELS" absolutely can be applied to some humans born with medical, and even mental in at least one case I know of, challenges.
There is nothing in anything you have citified that proves the Fokker–Planck equation is atheistic. Science is descriptive not prescriptive. All science is doing in this case is describing the time evolution of the probability density function of the velocity of a particle under the influence of drag forces and random forces, PLEASE DEMONSTRATE HOW THIS IS NOT BELIEVING IN A GOD OR GODS/
1. Science demonstrably rejects unfalsifiable things, such as deities. Before those particles were empirically observed, Science accepted or enabled the exploration of particle theories, as for example, they were falsifiable. [Alternatively, unfalsifiable things fall in the regime of Pseudoscience]
2. Side-note: Science can be prescriptive.
Still proselytizing. And with the same bullshit. When are you going to find new sources?
What am I, an atheist, supposedly proselytizing?
When is the last time you invented something?
You are proselytizing your religion of "the coming of the new god AI." You have turned your bullshit into a religion. You come here spewing preposterous claims like all the other Religious Absolutists and cannot prove those claims.
I say I do not believe your crap about your deity.
Onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit non ei qui negat.
I invent new things all the time. That is all I do.
Any citations, of the scientific work you invent?
Boy that last sentence of mine you quoted didn't just do a 747. Hell, its out there further than Voyager...
And you have yet to answer my question as to whether you know what this means:
I already know "No non-English posts" but I have already said I will give the translation as soon as YOU answer the question Mr. Brown.
Science can't "believe" in anything.
So sciences can't be an atheist.
Science is just a process, so it is neutral.
Hmm. I didn't know processes could be "agnostic".