|
The anthropic principle doesn't really proove anything either way.
I think that's the point. There's nothing wrong with belief - we all do it (even those of us who are scientifically inclined)
What I object to is people trying to pas off pseudo-science as 'proof' that their belief is the correct one.
All we can do is highlight the flawed conclusions, point out what 'proof' actually means, and try to explain (in calm, reasonable tones, while backing carefully away) that in arguing, we're not trying to debunk your beliefs, just your methods for backing them up.
Believe away - I know I do. But don't try to prop up your ideas with flawed science and silly (numbered) assertions. It makes the person doing it look like they're riddled with doubt and are desperately trying to find anything that looks as though it might support their world view. In short, in the language of belief, trying to proove something 'scientifically' normally has the effect of making it less believable to others, not more so.
|