Are you religious? Yes/No and Why

[Blademaster]

You can take anything people do or have done in the past and call it science, but that won't make it science.

Science.

2. systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation.

4. systematized knowledge in general.

5. knowledge, as of facts or principles; knowledge gained by systematic study.

6. a particular branch of knowledge

Holy shit on a hot dog roll! Learning shit and then organizing and applying it is science! You got an exact date of origin for when THAT started to happen?

Here's a hint: I'm pretty sure it was more than 1499 years ago.

Making tools isn't science,

So engineering isn't science, metallurgy isn't science, smithing isn't science, programming a computer isn't science, building a fucking spaceship isn't science...

and ancient mathematics were closer to philosophy than to what they are now. And I'm talking about the times of Ancient Greece, Egypt, etc. Before that people used numbers to count, but that was all there was to it. And therewas a time when even numbers hadn't been invented, so I don't see where you're going with your "Dawn of the *verse" argument.

I know this is Misc. and not Mt. Moon, but I am honestly getting a headache from STUPIDITY.

First off, philosophical or evidential, math is still a science, and even ancient mathematic principles are still in use today. Pi? Euclidean geometry? Pythagorean theory? Do we still use this stuff? Yes. Is it science now? Yes. Was it science then? According to that handy little 'dictionary' thingy, yes it is.

Second, nobody 'invented' numbers. They've always existed. There's a difference between a number and a numeral.

And third, you just admitted the point I've been trying to prove: Ancient Greece, Egypt, and such used math in a systematic, scientific manner. Prior to 1,500 years ago. A time when, according to you, science did not exist.

What's the point you're trying to make?

See

Which is fine with me.

Just keep it to yourself. I get annoyed when I'm preached to by a person with absolutely no way to back up their claim and thus no way to argue against it without going in circles for several hundred posts.

And yes, I heard you the first time. I could easily ignore the topic. But this is a public forum, where all opinions and viewpoints are welcome, and thus are all open to criticism if they sound idiotic. And we all know that when it comes to idiocy, I have a LOT to say.

That sounds funny coming from you. Who's the one who doesn't back up his claims, here and in most other discussions?

Considering I'm the one here with a dictionary and an established knowledge of some basic scientific history, I'm going to assume the 'his' in this instance is you.

Now if you'll excuse me, I need some Ibuprofen.