To all those who don't believe in God....

[swords]

Early scholars and scientists were predominantly religeous people, so that might be true. But it could equally be said that since correlation does not imply causation, they existed in a culture where belief was the norm. Their studies of god's creation (supposed I have to add as a disclaimer) may have been driven by their own curiosity instead of some divine mandate. Maybe it was, but I doubt they were trying to prove god through science, just explain the world around them which they believe was created by god anyway.

 

[Chronictank]

I said the collective we... which is the general consensus, which is the most popular idea at the time.

Yes but it wasn't the general concensus at all
Just because its well published doesnt make it necessarily true is what i was getting at

Science and religion are also by no means mutually exclusive 100% the time (which people like to believe)
They very fact "religious" texts were used as a basis for a theorem for something as simple as whether the fact the earth is spherical is testement to that

Personally i think science will ultimately intersect, but that would be dragging this thread off on a tangent and has already been discussed fairly thoroughly

(refering ot the post above, being lazy and not quoting)

The scary thing is that science has become a "religion" upon itself in the respect that people blindly follow it without any critical thinking, as you say this is just as damaging a mindset as one of a religious zelot

 

[old.Tohtori]

Early scholars and scientists were predominantly religeous people, so that might be true. But it could equally be said that since correlation does not imply causation, they existed in a culture where belief was the norm. Their studies of god's creation (supposed I have to add as a disclaimer) may have been driven by their own curiosity instead of some divine mandate. Maybe it was, but I doubt they were trying to prove god through science, just explain the world around them which they believe was created by god anyway.

Ah but there's the thing, this world around us now, wouldn't be as it is(from a human perspective) without religion. Every piece of the puzzle adds up, and as such, we have to acknowledge that religion also has gotten us where we are and as such...science wouldn't be as it is without religion.

 

[swords]

So why the big hoo har about science vs religion these days? Honestly! It's like we're all cylons or something! (hehe).
Science is just a method, you can be religious and scientific and non-religious and scientific. Scientific method may have appeared even if there were not any religion to come before it, we don't know.

 

[swords]

Yes but it wasn't the general concensus at all
Just because its well published doesnt make it necessarily true is what i was getting at

Science and religion are also by no means mutually exclusive 100% the time (which people like to believe)
They very fact "religious" texts were used as a basis for a theorem for something as simple as whether the fact the earth is spherical is testement to that

Personally i think science will ultimately intersect, but that would be dragging this thread off on a tangent and has already been discussed fairly thoroughly

(refering ot the post above, being lazy and not quoting)

The scary thing is that science has become a "religion" upon itself in the respect that people blindly follow it without any critical thinking, as you say this is just as damaging a mindset as one of a religious zelot

You say it has become like a religion, I disagree. I say there has always been a component of charlatains and blinkered-thinkers who cling to their ideas (their beliefs) and refuse to accept evidence to the contrary. I say thats a minority and the turnover rate of scientests keeps this a minority (since evidence is king in science, you can't shove contradicting evidence under a carpet and hope it goes away).

 

[Chronictank]

You say it has become like a religion, I disagree. I say there has always been a component of charlatains and blinkered-thinkers who cling to their ideas (their beliefs) and refuse to accept evidence to the contrary. I say thats a minority and the turnover rate of scientests keeps this a minority (since evidence is king in science, you can't shove contradicting evidence under a carpet and hope it goes away).

Surely comments like this

If you seriously are stupid enough not to believe in evolution then you should just be killed and help the human race.

contradict that, this coming from someone who believes in science (not a scientist)

While science itself may not be the problem (as it is a very broad and all encompasing thing), factions within it do hold rather radical theories.
You can tailor an experiment to get whatever results you want;
For example the debate about how much water you should drink or whether mobile phones are bad for you have studies on either side of the fence neither of which are conclusive

This is before we even go into grey areas like quantum physics, almost entirely made of guess work and logical thinking

 

[old.Tohtori]

So why the big hoo har about science vs religion these days? Honestly! It's like we're all cylons or something! (hehe)

I don't understand it myself either.

I'm not against science, even if (well) i am religious to the "max".

I guess it comes down to "no i'm right!"'ism.

 

[swords]

Pointing to one idiot on a forum and pinning that onto the majority of scientists without any evidence isn't very scientific now

I am a scientist and I work in a building full of the buggers, I'd say it's more of an open atmosphere here. In my lab group alone is a christian, a muslim an agnostic two athiests and one Jedi. I can't be certain, you might be right! Usually though people like that tend to be quite outspoken.

 

[swords]

I don't understand it myself either.

I'm not against science, even if (well) i am religious to the "max".

I guess it comes down to "no i'm right!"'ism.

If everyone thought like us I wonder how advanced we would be by now

 

[Chronictank]

expanded a bit,
But i am not talking about scientists, a scientist doesnt necessarily follow science like a religion
In fact most scientists are the complete opposite, they are taught/learn to think critically opposed to taking things as fact and following them in blind faith and inflexible ot other opinions

 

[Iceforge]

What would be REALLY cool, is that if some day they develop a better microscope and notice that an atom, is actually constructed by smaller "atoms" and those atoms are mechanical

Can't help to mention that atoms ARE built up by smaller components and we already know this.

Atoms are built up by Protons, Neutrons and Electrons.

Now, I don't know the english word all of this, so it might be a bit inaccurate, but the princip is the same:

Protons and Neutrons weight basicly the same, which is, iirc, 1000 times more than Electrons.

That is because Protons and Neutrons are built up by a positron (not certain for correct term, basicly a positive electron) and electrons, about 1000 in total, where the Neutrons got 500 of each (neutral) and the Protons got 1 more proton than electrons, making them positive with the same force as a electron is negative.

Positrons and Electrons is further built up by Quarks.

Now, Quantum Physhics (sp?) tells us that Quarks is are built up by small vibrations from the 11th dimension.

Which, odd as it may seem, are subject to changes by pure observations which testing has showed (now it gets creepy) where measured behaviour by electrons fired through.. argh, damn, can't remember name of the instrument, but basicly they fire it out, like cannonballs out of a canon.
The fire them at at plate with a hole in it and then notice the pattern left on a map like thing afterwards. When not observed, it gets 1 result, while if you observe it with just a camera, the result becomes different. Results are, however, consistent.

But all that is mindnumbingly complicated.

Oh, and just for the Evolutionary Theory debate, I just want to remind people there is the "fact" of Evolution and the Theory of Evolution.
Just like there is the fact of Gravity and the Theory of Gravity.
Fact of Gravity is that objects fall down when you let go of them (whoever claim that is false is kinda messed up)
The Theory of Gravity explains WHY it falls down.
Fact of Evolution, is that we evolved from other species and all lifeforms currently in existance developed from previous ancestors.
The Theory of Evolution is just an explaination of HOW that happened, not that it happened, as it is quite clear when looking through the fossile record which is quite filed with evidence.

EDIT: Oh, just to add, the fact of Gravity and fact of Evolution, as I call them, can still be wrong. Who knows, tomorrow someone drops something and it stays in the air, defying gravity, you can't prove that won't happen.... also, interstellar aliens could come by every few hundred thousand years, kill every species on the planet and replacing them with slightly more complex one and make sure to leave no evidence for their interference for future species to find. But bar something extreme like that which would demand extreme evidence, it seems unlikely anyone is going to prove the facts of those wrong

 

[swords]

Well they are a special breed which creep along the edges of uncertainty shouting their mantras of I am right you are wrong!
Eventually they get disproven or proven and then move onto another thing.
If you are a critical thinker you learn to take their bleating with a pinch of salt.

You forgot the gluon plasma holding the quarks together...

 

[Chronictank]

Particle Accelerator ,
tbh we may end the creation debate soon with the huuuuuuge one they are building
In a fraction of time they will produce so much data that one super computer is not enough to process it so they will have hundreds of scientists watching the data as well as a GRID style system to process it

 

[old.Tohtori]

If everyone thought like us I wonder how advanced we would be by now

Hell, the funny thing is, i'm scared of where we'd be if they did

As an example:

Imagine hitler and such, with any of our brains.

 

[swords]

Super-hilter? Crikey! Thank goodness for the status quo.
YouTube - Status Quo: rocking all over the world
[youtubevid]_fKlORAIYkk[/youtubevid]

 

[kiliarien]

I could post forever on this topic, but this is more of a giggle.

Disclaimer here: I don't work for a book company or anything, just wanted to make people aware of it, so don't erase the post please!

Buy it, it's a nice read

 

[Olgaline]

Well to be honest, if i got it right, there's a fair point.

Anyone claiming with 100% dedication and "certainty" how we got here, is a bit silly.

oh I'm not really debating that "not gonna get into my personal views this time"

was more reacting to this

People here saying "evolution must be true" are just as idiotic as the guy with the banana.

right after this

If god did exist then surely he would of given everyone a brain..
These video's are therefore clearly proof that god in fact doesn't exist.

I fully get what he's saying, it was just abit funny is all. not that they contradict, but in all this "trench digging vs" tendancies we've got going on this specific subject ect.

personally I've stopped posting anything with any religiouse reference or sub reference to it all together as I know already what it will turn into on this forum, so tbh just cba

 

[Golena]

was more reacting to this

right after this

The first thing you quoted there was me being serious.

The second was obviously me taking the piss.

 

[DocWolfe]

Then i can tell you to f*ck right off.

Because i don't believe evolution is the only single affecting factor in this whole thing.

It's just a theory anyway, so you wanting to kill everyone who isn't thinking like the "great DocWolfe", well, it's numbnuts bullsh*t. Stupidest thing i've heard in a long LONG while.

Well I'll admit I am pretty great... religions have been killing non-believers for a long time... I just feel its about time we started repaying the favour.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Well I'll admit I am pretty great... religions have been killing non-believers for a long time... I just feel its about time we started repaying the favour.

SOME religions.

Have to point it out.

 

[Chronictank]

religions have been killing non-believers for a long time... I just feel its about time we started repaying the favour.

pot kettle black...

 

[swords]

Well I'll admit I am pretty great... religions have been killing non-believers for a long time... I just feel its about time we started repaying the favour.

Some people think like that, so making a joke about it is poor taste. Then again some of the most thought provocative jokes are the most tasteless so *shrug*

 

[Iceforge]

Well, in all fairness, religion has never killed anybody, religious people has killed other people due to their specific dogma they built on their religion.
But there has also been dogma's built upon atheism*cough* Stalin *cough* that has lead to massive atrocities, so no real point in playing the blame game..

Althrough, I must admit the more time I spend on forums (other then this one) having to explain again and again to fundamentalists why the eye is not Irreducible Complex, or the difference between abiogenesis/big bang theory and Evolutionary Theory and how they are not connected, except both following the same Scientific Method that ID proponents refuse to follow as their ideas wouldn't survive 2 minuts of critical thinking and go read about the amazingly stupid things fundamentalists belive on fstdt.com (Fundie's Say The Darnest Thing), the more I start to think that Stalin's biggest mistake was that he didn't finish the job...

but when that starts seeming reasonable, thats the time one takes a small break from argueing with such people

 

[kiliarien]

Think it should be pointed out that often religion is used as an excuse to kill, rather than because of it. Hatemongers need something to blame it on.

 

[swords]

People kill for power, control and dominance.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Actually, people don't kill for power and such, or for religion, but they get other people to kill for them.

Those they do, rarely know why they are even fighting.

 

[Bugz]

Actually, people don't kill for power and such, or for religion, but they get other people to kill for them.

Those they do, rarely know why they are even fighting.

Ofcourse people kill for power and for religion.

People kill with their own hands and they get others to kill for them.

In most cases - they know why they are fighting, it's just something others of us find hard to comprehend.

You do say some silly things Seel.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Ofcourse people kill for power and for religion.

People kill with their own hands and they get others to kill for them.

In most cases - they know why they are fighting, it's just something others of us find hard to comprehend.

You do say some silly things Seel.

Well completely missed the point but, ofcourse I'm in the wrong there.

You're such a brat at times Bugz.

Never said people don't kill because of religion, but that those who are in power don't need to kill. Bush, Osama, Hitler, etc.

 

[Lamp]

Killing under the shroud of religion ? Never

*Cough* Al Quaeda *cough*

 

[Bugz]

Well completely missed the point but, ofcourse I'm in the wrong there.

You're such a brat at times Bugz.

What is the point then? Or is this where you somehow twist your wording to change the meaning?

You said:

Those they do, rarely know why they are even fighting.

How are you so sure they do not know why they are fighting? Examples? Al Qaeida (sp?) fight for a reason. Hitler fought for a reason. It was all for a reason.

Actually, people don't kill for power and such, or for religion, but they get other people to kill for them.

Hitler fought for power.
Stalin etc. to an extent fought for power.
Dictators fight for power.
Al Qaieda fight for religion.
Many radicals fight for religion etc.

Did they get other people to kill for them? No - they initiated the killings themselves.

The fact of the matter is Seel - you are either chatting crap or you suck at putting across what you mean because what you said there is not true.