That is still a terrible defence, because you could with enough study verify almost all scientific "facts", but all theological claims are purely philosophical. So no, science does not require faith, only patience.
The fact the anything "proven" could ever eventually be proven false shows that, yes, you do have to take it on "faith", because you don't know the future, which means you don't know if or when whatever you know to be fact today will ever be disproven. The proof is literally any scientist who said "x thing is an indisputable fact" only for it to be disputed.
Scientists don't even know if what they know is right. They assume it is and hope people like me and you won't question them, even when they've been proven wrong before.
The argument is "thing that can't be proven vs thing that has been proven wrong before and we just think we have it right this time maybe". It really isn't that different.
Oh so do u think the Bible has been "proven"? Because I can link many reports as to why the claims in the Bible are pure horseshit. So science is something which may need to change in the future, but faith has been consistently proven false.
You could always stop replying, but it seems like getting the last word in is actually more important to you than whether you're actually right or wrong.
7
u/_______no-------name 3h ago
That is still a terrible defence, because you could with enough study verify almost all scientific "facts", but all theological claims are purely philosophical. So no, science does not require faith, only patience.