Is science just a new religion ?
-
It was a f'in accident. We're supposed to be weightless.
-
Oh goody, a discussion/argument/debate. :) I am familiar with most of what you said, but here goes.
Dalek Dave wrote:
Matter comes in and out of existance at all times.
Is this fact or our current best understanding of things? Where is this matter coming from? [I doubt this will ever be proven.]Dalek Dave wrote:
merely a quantum possibility that oscillates on a probabity brane (String Theory), and at this micro level there is nothing touchable, merely interactable.
WTH is a quantum possibility? Something either is or isn't. At this micro-level, things cannot be touched because we have humongous fingers. But if it has a microscopic unit of measurement, then it exists.
Dalek Dave wrote:
Even then, it is not really matter as you would understand, but a set of charges and forces, Weak, Strong, Electromagnetic and Gravity.
I've heard of those. I actually took a few physics classes, so I accept those.
Dalek Dave wrote:
But gravity exists across all 11 dimensions, not just the 4 that we easily comprehend. (Brane Theory).
In law, this is hearsay. In religion, heresy. It's just a theory. For all we know, it could be just the ones we know or a million. The universal model is continuously changing based on our observations and what we think best supports what we see or can't see. The proof is not in the pudding.
Dalek Dave wrote:
One we get to the macro level we still cannot touch anything, for most of everything is nothing.
You and I disagree on what nothing is. Nothing is not emptiness IMO. Nothing is
Dalek Dave wrote:
When you handle a ball or a door or a puppy, you are not touching any part of that ball, door or puppy, merely the electromagnetic forces within your body are hitting the field resistance of the ball etc.
True. Otherwise, you have atoms touching and things can move from one body to the next.
Dalek Dave wrote:
As for where big bang came from is pointless as there was no time before big bang. Time was created then. It may not have been the first or only big bang, and there are probably billions of universes, why not, physics abhors a vacuum.
The time before the Big Bang is not pointless. You have no explanation for
You say, several times, 'In My Opinion' but what qualifications do you have to form an opinion? I think you should read some physics primers before I discuss further the points I have raised. Certainly about time, for time is not a constant, but a fluid measure. This is easily provable, for time is a function of mass, and mass is a function of velocity, so before big bang there was neither mass nor velocity, therefore there cannot have been time. (That time is fluid is one of the key cornerstones of Relativity and Satellite Navigation!) The point about science is that it is changing, all the time, because we are constantly learning. I look at religions, Muslim and Judaism are good examples, of where new knowledge is not absorbed. Jews and Muslims do not eat pork. Very wise, when you live in a desert and there is no refridgeration and where disease vectors where unknown or at least poorly understood. So not eating pork is wise. However, science has given us the Freezer and Disinfectant, so where is the problem? Ah, the problem lies in the fact that some old geezer wrote it in a book many centuries ago and the ignorance of religion cannot encompass the fact that humans are too clever by seven eighths!
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave CCC League Table Link CCC Link[^]
-
A catch all answer is a cop-out. The whole point to science is to say, "We don't know something, so we'll try to figure it out." The whole point to religion is to say, "It just is that way." I always find it amusing that religious people always say that if you can prove that you are right, they'll believe you, but will never reciprocate when the question is posed to them.
I wasn't, now I am, then I won't be anymore.
Marcus Kramer wrote:
The whole point to science is to say, "We don't know something, so we'll try to figure it out." The whole point to religion is to say, "It just is that way."
Not quite. Religion is saying that the issue of the creator can never be proven. If so, everyone will stop believing in religion. Just make sure you send me a picture and drop it down in the chute. Way, way down.
-
How about these two for starters... Mark 10:15 (New King James Version) 15 Assuredly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as a little child will by no means enter it." Luke 18:17 (New King James Version) 17 Assuredly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as a little child will by no means enter it." Before you want to play the "That's just the old english translation" game. I have found you parallel translations of Mark 10:15. I don't think there is any question what is being said... New International Version (©1984) I tell you the truth, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it." New Living Translation (©2007) I tell you the truth, anyone who doesn't receive the Kingdom of God like a child will never enter it." English Standard Version (©2001) Truly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it.” New American Standard Bible (©1995) "Truly I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child will not enter it at all." International Standard Version (©2008) I tell you with certainty, whoever doesn't receive the kingdom of God as a little child will never enter it." GOD'S WORD® Translation (©1995) I can guarantee this truth: Whoever doesn't receive the kingdom of God as a little child receives it will never enter it." King James Bible Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein. American King James Version Truly I say to you, Whoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein. American Standard Version Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall in no wise enter therein. Bible in Basic English Truly I say to you, Whoever does not put himself under the kingdom of God like a little child, will not come into it at all. Douay-Rheims Bible Amen I say to you, whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, shall not enter into it. Darby Bible Translation Verily I say to you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, shall in no wise enter into it. English Revised Version Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall in no wise enter therein. Webster's Bible Translation Verily I say to you, Whoever shall not receive the kingdom of God, as a little child,
-
You say, several times, 'In My Opinion' but what qualifications do you have to form an opinion? I think you should read some physics primers before I discuss further the points I have raised. Certainly about time, for time is not a constant, but a fluid measure. This is easily provable, for time is a function of mass, and mass is a function of velocity, so before big bang there was neither mass nor velocity, therefore there cannot have been time. (That time is fluid is one of the key cornerstones of Relativity and Satellite Navigation!) The point about science is that it is changing, all the time, because we are constantly learning. I look at religions, Muslim and Judaism are good examples, of where new knowledge is not absorbed. Jews and Muslims do not eat pork. Very wise, when you live in a desert and there is no refridgeration and where disease vectors where unknown or at least poorly understood. So not eating pork is wise. However, science has given us the Freezer and Disinfectant, so where is the problem? Ah, the problem lies in the fact that some old geezer wrote it in a book many centuries ago and the ignorance of religion cannot encompass the fact that humans are too clever by seven eighths!
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave CCC League Table Link CCC Link[^]
Dalek Dave wrote:
You say, several times, 'In My Opinion' but what qualifications do you have to form an opinion?
The fact that I can read and post does. Are we debating what an opinion is now? Isn't the search for truth just an opinion until it gets discredited down the road. FYI, I have a BS and MS n mathematics and my parents are religious. It took me a while to understand them and why they think the way they do.
Dalek Dave wrote:
Certainly about time, for time is not a constant, but a fluid measure. This is easily provable, for time is a function of mass, and mass is a function of velocity, so before big bang there was neither mass nor velocity, therefore there cannot have been time.
When and how did we get here?
Dalek Dave wrote:
The point about science is that it is changing, all the time, because we are constantly learning.
If a tree falls in the forest and no one's around to hear it, does it make a sound? If science is constantly changing, is it facts, or facts of the day?
Dalek Dave wrote:
So not eating pork is wise. However, science has given us the Freezer and Disinfectant, so where is the problem? Ah, the problem lies in the fact that some old geezer wrote it in a book many centuries ago and the ignorance of religion cannot encompass the fact that humans are too clever by seven eighths!
I agree with you there. That is just an interpretation of some of the aspects of religion. I'm just talking about creation itself. For that, one just needs faith.
-
Pualee wrote:
So... how did gravity come to be?
Your question is irrelevant to the subject at hand. Gravity exists: it can be detected, measured and quantified. We can -- and have -- run experiments that show how the force of gravity varies with distance. The Voyager 1 and Voyager 2 spacecrafts had no guidance system other than a gyroscope and human understanding of gravity, and both arrived at their expected destinations within a 10^-12 degree of precision, the equivalent of hitting a golf ball in Los Angeles and making a hole-in-one in Dubai City... without first touching the ground. What evidence, exactly, do you have that God exists? And for that matter, which god specifically? The Islamic one? The Christian Trinity? Ahura Mazda? Zeus? Shva? Magna Mater? The deified Caesar Augustus? Eris? The Flying Spaghetti Monster?
-
So... How did god come to be? Not knowing an answer is where science and religion differ. Religion claims to "know" that god just always was and is, etc... Science is honest within itself and says. "I'm not sure, but dagnabbit, I'm going to dig deep and try to find out through observation and experimentation"
I wasn't, now I am, then I won't be anymore.
Marcus Kramer wrote:
So... How did god come to be?
Your question is meaningless until we first define "god." And good luck on that.
-
Pualee wrote:
This is your intellect, emotions, physical service, everything about you. You can claim belief without intellect, but it is false.
Really... Is that why the bible tells us that we need to come to him(god) as unquestioning, innocent, ignorant little children?
I wasn't, now I am, then I won't be anymore.
If God is infinite is wisdom, then we can't be anything but that.
-
Marcus Kramer wrote:
So... How did god come to be?
Your question is meaningless until we first define "god." And good luck on that.
Why? Just because one question depends on another doesn't mean it can't be asked. It just won't be answered first, that's all.
-
Pualee wrote:
So... how did gravity come to be?
Your question is irrelevant to the subject at hand. Gravity exists: it can be detected, measured and quantified. We can -- and have -- run experiments that show how the force of gravity varies with distance. The Voyager 1 and Voyager 2 spacecrafts had no guidance system other than a gyroscope and human understanding of gravity, and both arrived at their expected destinations within a 10^-12 degree of precision, the equivalent of hitting a golf ball in Los Angeles and making a hole-in-one in Dubai City... without first touching the ground. What evidence, exactly, do you have that God exists? And for that matter, which god specifically? The Islamic one? The Christian Trinity? Ahura Mazda? Zeus? Shva? Magna Mater? The deified Caesar Augustus? Eris? The Flying Spaghetti Monster?
Gregory.Gadow wrote:
What evidence, exactly, do you have that God exists? And for that matter, which god specifically? The Islamic one? The Christian Trinity? Ahura Mazda? Zeus? Shva? Magna Mater? The deified Caesar Augustus? Eris? The Flying Spaghetti Monster?
All are interpretations of the Creator. By Mennen.
-
Came across a cool site for those long chilllout discussions in the breaks. http://blog.aimonger.com/2010/12/13/is-science-just-a-new-religion/ I know it's not programming but since I get lot's of interesting non related links from the lounge might as well share back :-O . njoy..
-
It was a f'in accident. We're supposed to be weightless.
Gravity is far more important than weight. If the force of gravity changed, even slightly, our universe could not exist in its current form, and neither would we. Either the matter of our bodies would drift apart or crash together. Either way, we could not exist. Gravity is one of those things that is so perfect, it must have been part of an intelligent design, not random probability, and definitely not created from nothingness.
-
Er...No! Religion requires belief and unquestioning loyalty. Science requires proof and nothing else but questions. Asking if science is like religion is like asking 'Why is a mouse when it spins'. Meaningless and a waste of time. Science is the antithesis of religion, science requires intelligence and learning to succeed, religion requires stupidity, fear, surprise, ruthless efficiency, an almost fanatical devotion to the Pope, and nice red uniforms.
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave CCC League Table Link CCC Link[^]
Dalek Dave wrote:
religion requires stupidity
Really? Stupidity? Thanks. And what happened to this[^] where you say you "do not denounce the followers of any religious or spiritual teaching"? Calling people stupid for believing seems to be a denunciation to me; however, I'd welcome an alternative explanation.
-
Dalek Dave wrote:
religion requires stupidity
Really? Stupidity? Thanks. And what happened to this[^] where you say you "do not denounce the followers of any religious or spiritual teaching"? Calling people stupid for believing seems to be a denunciation to me; however, I'd welcome an alternative explanation.
I did not state that those who follow it are all stupid, there have been very intelligent people who have believed in a god. I was attempting to suggest that religion itself if stupid. It is not an access to god, it is a way to power for those who hold the authority. A wise man may do a stupid thing, but a fool knows no better.
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave CCC League Table Link CCC Link[^]
-
How about these two for starters... Mark 10:15 (New King James Version) 15 Assuredly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as a little child will by no means enter it." Luke 18:17 (New King James Version) 17 Assuredly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as a little child will by no means enter it." Before you want to play the "That's just the old english translation" game. I have found you parallel translations of Mark 10:15. I don't think there is any question what is being said... New International Version (©1984) I tell you the truth, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it." New Living Translation (©2007) I tell you the truth, anyone who doesn't receive the Kingdom of God like a child will never enter it." English Standard Version (©2001) Truly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it.” New American Standard Bible (©1995) "Truly I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child will not enter it at all." International Standard Version (©2008) I tell you with certainty, whoever doesn't receive the kingdom of God as a little child will never enter it." GOD'S WORD® Translation (©1995) I can guarantee this truth: Whoever doesn't receive the kingdom of God as a little child receives it will never enter it." King James Bible Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein. American King James Version Truly I say to you, Whoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein. American Standard Version Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall in no wise enter therein. Bible in Basic English Truly I say to you, Whoever does not put himself under the kingdom of God like a little child, will not come into it at all. Douay-Rheims Bible Amen I say to you, whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, shall not enter into it. Darby Bible Translation Verily I say to you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, shall in no wise enter into it. English Revised Version Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall in no wise enter therein. Webster's Bible Translation Verily I say to you, Whoever shall not receive the kingdom of God, as a little child,
I see you found it, but this looks far different from your first interpretation:
Marcus Kramer wrote:
Really... Is that why the bible tells us that we need to come to him(god) as unquestioning, innocent, ignorant little children?
We are to be like children (temporarily) to enter the kingdom. What is good about children? They are innocent, curious, loving, creative, etc. And if you ever had a child, you will know they are full of questions. We are to be like children to begin to understand a new world that we could not contemplate before, but as we grow, we are to leave our childish ways behind. You look at children as negative, but it is really a positive step. We must be children before we can mature. Hewbrews 5:11- 11 We have much to say about this, but it is hard to make it clear to you because you no longer try to understand. 12 In fact, though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you the elementary truths of God’s word all over again. You need milk, not solid food! 13 Anyone who lives on milk, being still an infant, is not acquainted with the teaching about righteousness. 14 But solid food is for the mature, who by constant use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil. The problem with Western culture is that Christianity is so engrained into our daily lives, that we think we know what is says, but do not ever invest ourselves into truly understanding it.
-
Pualee wrote:
So... how did gravity come to be?
Your question is irrelevant to the subject at hand. Gravity exists: it can be detected, measured and quantified. We can -- and have -- run experiments that show how the force of gravity varies with distance. The Voyager 1 and Voyager 2 spacecrafts had no guidance system other than a gyroscope and human understanding of gravity, and both arrived at their expected destinations within a 10^-12 degree of precision, the equivalent of hitting a golf ball in Los Angeles and making a hole-in-one in Dubai City... without first touching the ground. What evidence, exactly, do you have that God exists? And for that matter, which god specifically? The Islamic one? The Christian Trinity? Ahura Mazda? Zeus? Shva? Magna Mater? The deified Caesar Augustus? Eris? The Flying Spaghetti Monster?
-
I did not state that those who follow it are all stupid, there have been very intelligent people who have believed in a god. I was attempting to suggest that religion itself if stupid. It is not an access to god, it is a way to power for those who hold the authority. A wise man may do a stupid thing, but a fool knows no better.
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave CCC League Table Link CCC Link[^]
And yet, by saying that religion is stupid aren't you saying that those who believe are stupid? Because wouldn't it follow that belief in something stupid is an indication of stupidity? I consider myself to be an intelligent man and I am a believer. I acknowledge that you said that "there have been very intelligent people who have believed in a god." I simply have a problem reconciling the entirety of your argument and am having a difficult time expressing why without giving the appearance of being insulting, which would be both inappropriate and unintentional. I suppose I should just shut up! :laugh: I feel sympathy for you (and others who share your lack of belief) and hope that some day you may feel differently. My faith is a great comforter to me in tough times and a wonderful companion (not the best word perhaps, but hopefully it conveys something) in good times.
-
Gravity is far more important than weight. If the force of gravity changed, even slightly, our universe could not exist in its current form, and neither would we. Either the matter of our bodies would drift apart or crash together. Either way, we could not exist. Gravity is one of those things that is so perfect, it must have been part of an intelligent design, not random probability, and definitely not created from nothingness.
What if gravity is what it is and we adapted and evolved to fit it? I'm pretty sure gravity was here first and isn't it different on every planet/moon based on the size of the planet/moon? So I am pretty sure there was no "creator" saying lets make gravity on earth 9.81 m/s2 so these buggers don't implode!
-
I see you found it, but this looks far different from your first interpretation:
Marcus Kramer wrote:
Really... Is that why the bible tells us that we need to come to him(god) as unquestioning, innocent, ignorant little children?
We are to be like children (temporarily) to enter the kingdom. What is good about children? They are innocent, curious, loving, creative, etc. And if you ever had a child, you will know they are full of questions. We are to be like children to begin to understand a new world that we could not contemplate before, but as we grow, we are to leave our childish ways behind. You look at children as negative, but it is really a positive step. We must be children before we can mature. Hewbrews 5:11- 11 We have much to say about this, but it is hard to make it clear to you because you no longer try to understand. 12 In fact, though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you the elementary truths of God’s word all over again. You need milk, not solid food! 13 Anyone who lives on milk, being still an infant, is not acquainted with the teaching about righteousness. 14 But solid food is for the mature, who by constant use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil. The problem with Western culture is that Christianity is so engrained into our daily lives, that we think we know what is says, but do not ever invest ourselves into truly understanding it.
Thanks for enforcing my point...
I wasn't, now I am, then I won't be anymore.
-
What if gravity is what it is and we adapted and evolved to fit it? I'm pretty sure gravity was here first and isn't it different on every planet/moon based on the size of the planet/moon? So I am pretty sure there was no "creator" saying lets make gravity on earth 9.81 m/s2 so these buggers don't implode!