Science Higgs Boson found?

[opticle]

hehe well one can dream. I have a deal with my mum that while she's alive I will not leave the country. I'll honor that unless the offer's so attractive that I'm forced to kill her ;-)

Wuh ?

 

[TdC]

eh?

 

[dysfunction]

Heh

 

[Job]

All gone very quiet down at Cern, has someone found a switch in the wrong position?

 

[Cadelin]

All gone very quiet down at Cern, has someone found a switch in the wrong position?

I see reading isn't your strong point:

We finished taking the data on the 18th June and its been rather busy since. Our analysis which will come out at the end of July are a lot more advanced and will clarify lots more.

 

[Scouse]

Oi Cadelin !

What's all this fail going on at Cern then? I hope there's been a popular protest amongst the CERN workers...

Sounds like Cern's been duped into giving a big rubber-stamped legitimacy to the religionists view that science is useless without god.

Dr Gary Wilton, the Archbishop of Canterbury's representative in Brussels, said that the Higgs particle "raised lots of questions [about the origins of the Universe] that scientists alone can't answer". "They need to explore them with theologians and philosophers

Why can't science answer them? It simply hasn't yet. And why oh why do they "need" to explore them with sky-fairy worshippers? Is it because they're doing a fantastic job without them and the theologians have found themselves irrelevant - and "want back in"?

I think so.

John Lennox from Oxford University, has been an outspoken critic of atheist scientists in the past...Most recently he took issue with Prof Stephen Hawking's assertion that God did not create the Universe...he said that he was certain that Prof Hawking was wrong..: "When Hawking argues...that it was only necessary for 'the blue touch paper' to be lit to 'set the universe going', the question must be: where did this blue touch paper come from? And who lit it, if not God?"

Certain, are you? Have you got evidence Mr Cunt? No? But either way - there we go again! We don't understand exactly how it started so it MUST be god, eh?

How about this question: What blue-touch paper created God? Where did God come from? And don't say "he's always been there" - because it's meaningless.


It's a crying fucking shame that CERN has reached out with an olive branch to these dangerous fruitcakes - they're already getting their "there's no universe without god" message out but now they're doing it with legitimacy at the heart of our biggest symbol of science.

 

[old.Tohtori]

God, unknown, same difference. What was that quote about higher tech seeming like magic? Same applies to god(s). As demonstrated by the stargate documentary that ran for a long time.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Wasn't disagreeing with you Scouse, calm your panties

Science and religion should be kept seperate, as should state and church and even science and state.

Hell, science in general should be a world thing, not a country thing.

 

[Raven]

Science and state most certainly shouldn't be kept separate.

 

[Scouse]

Science and state most certainly shouldn't be kept separate.

Agree. State would be much better through a close integration with science.

 

[caLLous]

Religion should be kept separate from everything. Science and state (y'know, the *real* things), shouldn't.

 

[Tom]

Religious people are funny.

"The Universe can't be eternal, someone had to create it."

"Ok, so who created God?"

"God is eternal, nobody created him!"

"So if you can accept the premise that something can be eternal, why on earth does it have to be God and not the Universe?"

"...."

 

[Raven]

BECAUSE A BOOK SAID SO FFS!1!1221

Crazy people
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01n8ls6/Conspiracy_Road_Trip_Creationism/
Made my piss boil watching that at times.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Crazy is fine, everyone has crazy things in their graymatter, but like TdC 's mother told him when he was a young one "Keep it in your pants".

 

[opticle]

Provided they're not hurting anyone and forcing their opinions on others they can think what they like.

Their circular arguments piss me off though. It's that clever clause about "faith" that allows them to essentially smile and ignore/not contribute to any kind of rational discussion.

Either way, we don't fucking know for sure. You can't say either God does or doesn't exist for certain. You can have an opinion about them if you like, and you can have faith that he does if you really want and you're worried he'll smite you if you don't.

 

[DaGaffer]

Provided they're not hurting anyone and forcing their opinions on others they can think what they like.

Their circular arguments piss me off though. It's that clever clause about "faith" that allows them to essentially smile and ignore/not contribute to any kind of rational discussion.

Either way, we don't fucking know for sure. You can't say either God does or doesn't exist for certain. You can have an opinion about them if you like, and you can have faith that he does if you really want and you're worried he'll smite you if you don't.

You don't have to be certain, you just have to be confident that the probability is sufficiently low. Now, can I refute the idea that "God" kick started the Big Bang? No, but its incredibly improbable that such a "God" takes a direct interest in the doings of one minor planet in nondescript galaxy, because if he set the wheels in motion he also set up the physical rules which he can't break without breaking the universe. Which means to all intents and purposes, even if there was a God, he's irrelevant to us.

 

[opticle]

Regardless, people are still entitled to believe whatever they like. Like I said, you can have an opinion - and you can be confident about that opinion if you like. You still don't know for sure (World is flat ? Sun orbits the Earth ? Earth is centre of the Universe ? )

I never understand why atheists can get so aggressive about it - it can be just as bad as the religious folk at times.

Baffles us agnostics no end

 

[Tom]

I never understand why atheists can get so aggressive about it - it can be just as bad as the religious folk at times.

I don't believe I've ever seen atheists rioting for the protection of their beliefs.

 

[opticle]

I don't believe I've ever seen atheists rioting for the protection of their beliefs.

I meant in debate / forum terms, but if we're talking about that kinda thing then yep you're right.

 

[Scouse]

I meant in debate / forum terms.

I'm 100% in agreement with Tom, and I'd add that in terms of debating, atheists have the added bonus of arguing from a standpoint of reason and evidence, rather than faith.

Evidence gives "the unbelievers" confidence that they're very probably right - rather than the belief that they are, 100% - and history shows that the anti-religious argument is worth fighting for.

 

[opticle]

Fair enough - all I'm saying is that I think the two points of view can quite happily co-exist if people aren't cunts about it

Not every religious person I know talks about "the unbelievers" and wants to go crucify people, some just like making cake.

 

[Scouse]

Not every religious person I know talks about "the unbelievers" and wants to go crucify people, some just like making cake.

True. But they are all enablers of a despicable system that results in stuff like this and their views must be fought wherever they continue to darken the human condition.

IMO

 

[Jupitus]

Folks - you are taking this thread way offline... enough thanks.

 

[Wij]

So should planning regulations be relaxed temporarily to boost the construction industry?