thraashman
Lifer
- Apr 10, 2000
- 11,112
- 1,587
- 126
I agree somewhat with Thraashman that this can be about anti-science, but the OP is a well-known, anti-religious a**hat and these threads invariably turn into focusing on religion within 5-7 opening posts.
Atheism is empty, void, and based on nothing. In order for it to have a voice, it has to stand on the shoulders of religious people.
These threads are evidence of that.
DominionSeraph
Diamond Member
- Jul 22, 2009
- 8,386
- 32
- 91
It stands on reality, and we laugh at those who stand on nothing but empty words.
"My car won't start. My Holey Babble tells me it's because of the demons! Let me call a Holey man!"
"No, you're battery's just dead. Let me give you a jump."
"DON'T TELL ME WHAT IT IS! It's DEMONS!"
"Uh, no, your car doesn't have the available energy to start the combustion process. You need a jump."
"Whatever. Oh good, my priest is here!"
"Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum."
"Didn't work, eh? Here, I'm gonna give you a jump."
"MY CAR STARTED! PRAISE JEEEEESUS!"
Last edited:
DominionSeraph
Diamond Member
- Jul 22, 2009
- 8,386
- 32
- 91
alzan
Diamond Member
- May 21, 2003
- 3,860
- 2
- 0
The personal attacks leveled by Klinghofer and the Discovery Institute amount to a child throwing a temper tantrum.
What exactly is being discovered by DI that offers an alternate hypothesis that explains both the existence of the universe and the life forms on this planet? Words in a book or the number of people who believe those words are not a hypothesis or scientific theory.
Atreus21
Lifer
- Aug 21, 2007
- 12,001
- 571
- 126
Fanatical religious people are responsible for huge contributions to scientific knowledge.
Fanatical religious people are responsible for huge contributions to education.
hal2kilo
Lifer
- Feb 24, 2009
- 26,558
- 12,658
- 136
theeedude
Lifer
- Feb 5, 2006
- 35,787
- 6,198
- 126
Yes, when they do something other than religion, religious people contribute to society too. :thumbsup:
Uh...science.
You guys don't get it, do you?
I know atheists want to lay an absolute claim to science, as if science somehow disproves God thus validating their atheism.
You keep trying to dichotomize science and religion, and you're going to have 50 percent or more of our future denying evolution based on the myth that faith is "anti-science", and thus opposed or indifferent to science.
I'm clearly a religious person, so I can speak to this first-hand: Religion brings people comfort and hope, and for the sake of this discussion, lets skip the debate over whether that's true or not, OK?
My point is this: people aren't going to give up their religion; their basis of hope, if you constantly reinforce this idea that a good scientists cannot believe in God and have strong faith. What they're going to do is ignore the science, and science will lose. I mean, look at the reaction now? They're attacking science.
These same people will become parents, and they're going to pass their religion down to their kids, and if we continue to ostracize people of faith for the rest of the world, we're going to keep getting similar reactions from parents (for example, when they stop letting their kids watch "Cosmos"), and kids will grow up wallowing in the same level of ignorance you preach against.
Stop forcing people to choose between their faith (which they hold dearly) and science, as if the two cannot co-exist. People will not abandon their belief in God if they feel that have to in order to appreciate science.
You're not doing yourself any favors.
hal2kilo
Lifer
- Feb 24, 2009
- 26,558
- 12,658
- 136
Religion bashes itself... see how christianity can't get out of its own way? You are calling someone's priest an idiot because of his view an a very imperfect word of god, because the priest interprets the bible differently than you do.
Rob, it was a creationist who started the butt hurt. Science has no issue with religion, it is just that what science uncovers doesn't jive with what is in your religious hand book. Which brings us to the next quote...
I've said similar to him in the past, but for all his disbelief in science he, like many millions of other believers, will use science at every opportunity to extend his time here on earth and not go to eternal paradise with the most incredible being in the universe he worships. It doesn't add up.
DominionSeraph
Diamond Member
- Jul 22, 2009
- 8,386
- 32
- 91
Science doesn't disprove gods. Science considers gods outside of the realm of knowability.
Humans have this problem in that they do not infinitely question. If they have something that appears to be an answer, they'll stop at that and question no further. It doesn't matter if the explanation works in all cases as long as they can segment along some line and thus call the case "closed". Supernaturalism lives here.
The supernatural can always be rationalized with an infinite series of ad hoc explanations. If you are willing to make infinite excuses the supernatural can ALWAYS apply. So fiction cannot be differentiated from reality. Science shorts this problem to ground by denying the mystical and the supernatural. If the explanation is beyond the human ability to disprove, find something else that can be tested. This allows human knowledge to progress because instead of getting stuck on false "unknowable"s it looks beyond.
"My door won't open. It must be because the demons don't accept my offering of metal"
Does science consider your demons' existence to be useful? Well, can they be tested? No? Then no, all that matters is what we can prove to exist. Your key exists. The pins of your lock exist:
We don't go off on self-serving tangents hypothesizing that the demons aren't accepting your metal because of "Teh Gays," but instead we now have an actual basis for troubleshooting and a basis for the advancement of human knowledge.
You don't get to this:
From this:
Last edited:
Well, I didn't say it did.
My above post doesn't matter much, as Tyson summed it up here:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...ople-dont-try-to-use-the-bible-as-a-textbook/
DominionSeraph
Diamond Member
- Jul 22, 2009
- 8,386
- 32
- 91
But note the natural/supernatural divide. In order for a religious person qualify as a scientist they must deny the supernatural along the line of study. You cannot say your Holy Book's words trump what the Universe reveals and be a scientist.
Trouble in the Middle East? Must be because of Discord!
Last edited:
alzan
Diamond Member
- May 21, 2003
- 3,860
- 2
- 0
No kidding. Scientists who can temporarily remove their biases in order to do their job. Who'da thunk?
Ahh...still with the segregationist attitude, I see.
No, they simply leave the supernatural at home. Nice try, though. You don't have to "deny" that you drive a Chevy if you build Ford cars.
Where did I say you can? I simply shared a quote from a scientist basically welcoming men of faith and showing tolerance.
DominionSeraph
Diamond Member
- Jul 22, 2009
- 8,386
- 32
- 91
It is segregated. Methodological naturalism != supernaturalism.
That's a denial, moron. "It doesn't exist here."
Last edited:
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter