Oh I am sorry my friend, to you and Sukerkin, I apologise, I am being illustrative only here, there is nothing too much wrong with my health, I apologise. I am sorry that I am as usual not particularly clear in my analogy or my language and but it is purely to illustrate I promise, Jenna
... As to your point, yes, you can of course reduce scientific uncertainty to mathematical concepts such as probability, especially since the human machine is such a complex agglomeration of interconnected and complex systems, however my point here is simply to counter the argument that was made that the religious faithful (read fundamentalist) sections of society can extend and impose their worldviews onto the lives of non believers. Science holds a great sway over our existences, in many cases rightly so, and but in other cases it is to the detriment of life itself. If, as a layperson, I have it shown to me that the weight of scientific evidence is against me in the case of my own health, then more often than not, I will take that as fact, whether I want to believe it or not. The trust I put in my consultant and the faith I have in his medical science naturally tempers my view even, as is often the case, where he tells me I will die and I take him at his word, and by some destructive placebo effect, bring about a quickening of my own death. What I would hope is that there would be place for both systems of measurement: science and belief. However, I appreciate that for many on both sides of the fence, it is unfortunately a black and white issue with no shades of grey.
