Politics, God and Religion vs. Science


Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 12241 - 12260 of total 22817 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>

Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
Mar 3, 2013 - 01:46am PT
How do you square reincarnation with human population growth?

Do viruses and bacteria reincarnate?

At what point up the hierarchy of life does reincarnation kick in?

Mar 3, 2013 - 01:48am PT
Human being and animal are two different.

You Google too much and observe too little.

Where you ever see a dog write a book for one simple example.

Bruce try and quiet your mind a little ......

Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
Mar 3, 2013 - 01:51am PT
Dolphins and whales have had brains bigger than ours for millions of years longer. They may not write books, but they definitely tell tales.

Gotta love these humans aren't animals folks. But of course you aren't a fundamentalist. Just where on dogmatic spectrum does one avoid the label?
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
Mar 3, 2013 - 02:01am PT
Where you ever see a dog write a book for one simple example.

Jan - are you following this? Wasn't it you who suggested I should be lauding werner for his dogged pursuit of the truth?

Well you got me there Werner. We know now at least that Fido did not in fact write the bible.

Mar 3, 2013 - 02:02am PT
Anyone who accepts the body as the "self" is an animal .......

Mountain climber
Okinawa, Japan
Mar 3, 2013 - 02:50am PT
Do viruses and bacteria reincarnate?
At what point up the hierarchy of life does reincarnation kick in?

Supposedly only sentient beings reincarnate, but defining that is tricky.

As for bacteria and viruses, I used to chuckle in Kathmandu at my Sherpa friends who wouldn't kill a bug but boiled to death multitudes of bacteria and viruses. Their philosophy was that if they didn't see it, they didn't worry about it.

This usually provoked a discussion about invisible germs versus invisible gods and ghosts. Touche.
Every good belief system has its logical limits.
Dr. F.

Big Wall climber
Topic Author's Reply - Mar 3, 2013 - 10:39am PT
Anyone who accepts the body as the "self" is an animal .......

Once again, Werner claims, only he knows how the universe works

I call my body "self", I am a animal??
What the hell does that mean, I guess it's the same as where you point when you say "me"

complete lunacy

Human being and animal are two different.

I have been arguing this debate since I was 14
They are the same
We are animal.... the end
Dr. F.

Big Wall climber
Topic Author's Reply - Mar 3, 2013 - 10:52am PT
Credit: Dr. F.

Social climber
An Oil Field
Mar 3, 2013 - 12:50pm PT

Are there a finite number of souls? The population has exploded over the last 200 years.


Mar 3, 2013 - 01:23pm PT
The soul is not material.

There are infinite number of souls.

Bacteria, virus are all are individual souls within their respective bodies.

The soul can transmigrate from body to different body after death according to it's consciousness.

The lower species move up.

Once human form is reached one can go higher or fall back down into the lower species according to ones develop consciousness in this life.

Dr F .... has a complete poor fund of knowledge of the soul and consciousness.

Thus Dr F remains as an animal in a human body.

Thus he remains as the "Terrible Scientist" .......
Dr. F.

Big Wall climber
Topic Author's Reply - Mar 3, 2013 - 02:50pm PT
Credit: Dr. F.
Yes Werner
I am an Animal

Social climber
An Oil Field
Mar 3, 2013 - 02:54pm PT
OK Werner, but I heard you say that humans are different from animals just a few posts back.

There are eastern religions that will not eat meat. I think that the logic is, that that cow may indeed be a person's soul.

Aside from that, I also prefer the eastern religions to the western ones. They don't seem to be so dogmatic and downright hostile. Buddhism requires no belief at all. It seems to me to be a way of living rightly, and from my readings of it, it's moral basis is very kind and pure in a way. I can't say the same for Scientologists who go around suing people who talk bad of them.

As for scientists being political, or having power, that usually isn't the case other than who runs a lab. We don't see them in politics very much.

Taking only the U.S. as an example, religion has always been deeply involved in politics. God is mentioned all of the time, and our elected representatives pray before opening each session.

Then they do nothing good.

Science isn't very good at political control. People who USE science can be good at it, though.

The Christian Right, which has exploded in the past thirty years and become downright hostile to science, has no problem with science if it gives them a better way to kill people. As I have said before, I had a real problem with my classmates who went into the defense industry. Pat Robertson uses science all of the time in his business empire, while at the same time dismissing it science when it is necessary. This is not a consistent moral view.

Our diplomacy, and most diplomacy in the past, has been enforced at the point of a gun. Why else would we have ten Nimitz Class aircraft carriers? Those suckers are designed by engineers, not scientists. That is the way it is with science. If it has an application, the engineers get their hands on it and build drones that kill. To be sure, these defense companies do hire pure scientists, and I don't like it.

The moral implications aside, our military spending is a waste of money.

So, you can call me a scientist, but that isn't what I do for a fair amount of my time. I live my life like most people do. I have my own set of morals and principles that I learned from others and have tweaked a little.

As for my comparing Scientology to Zen, and pissing Largo off, he had it coming for two years. He says that they aren't in the same ballpark, but all he has to do is explain why. I don't care how good his writing is (excellent) or how good or famous of a climber he is, he still has to communicate his ideas clearly and be able to defend them. That's all there is to it.

Do I think that they are comparable? I dunno. Like he said, I have no experience in them, much like he said. On the other hand, he loves to shred neuroscience and science in general, using the word "Scientism," which pisses me off to be honest.

I wasn't the one constantly yacking about Hilbert Space to make a point. I had never even heard of Hilbert Space, and when I looked it up and read about it, I could tell that it was waaaaaay beyond me.

That is a big boo boo. And yeah, I spent an hour or two watching the videos on the Scientologists website, and the whole thing sounds like bunk. There are errors of fact. When a way of life is built on errors of fact, man, you are almost beyond help. Scientology seems like a racket. For all I know it will convert the world eventually. I hope not.
Don Paul

Big Wall climber
Colombia, South America
Mar 3, 2013 - 03:12pm PT
There's some yoga place around here, a chain with lots of yoga centers, that was using hidden cameras on the new recruits. They're lying on their mats with their eyes closed, the guru guy is telling them to drift off into another dimension, meanwhile the other guy behind the scenes is watching them on camera, scanning their faces. Anyone who looks like they really are drifting off into another dimension, they make a special effort, tell them they have natural ability, should be a yoga instructor, and next thing you know they donate their house to the yoga center. It's a true story and was a scandal a few years ago, I don't remember the name.


Social climber
An Oil Field
Mar 3, 2013 - 03:13pm PT
The above stuff is nothing to me. The thing that I have to deal with on a regular basis is fracking, evolution, and creationism.

I go to these websites on occasion and it just blows my mind. I mentioned above that errors in fact must be resolved by any person.

The Intelligent Design or Creationists use downright falsehoods and pass it off as science. In that sense, it is as dangerous as scientology.

It is willful ignorance, and I have no tolerance for willful ignorance. These topics are things that I know a lot about, and the false explanations are pitiful. It is like holding your hands over your ears and screaming "Wha wha wha wha!!" over and over.

This is a good one:


It has infected our political system and our education system.

This infection is based on errors of fact and willful ignorance. It is null. Anyone who falls for this is lost.

It would all go much easier if they would just admit that God was far more clever than what was explained in Genesis. The Universe is sooo much more interesting and complicated.

Social climber
An Oil Field
Mar 3, 2013 - 03:23pm PT

There are hucksters everywhere. From what I know about Yoga, meaning best friends who practice it, it is quite healthy.

Con artists are everywhere, even in science. Science is structured to find them, though.

It is difficult to be a con artist in math, physics, or the hard (quantitative) sciences.

It is easier in the soft sciences such as psychology and sociology. That doesn't mean that the "soft sciences" are wrong.

Just look at the last election. Since your average American isn't very critical, they are fairly easy to decieve. The study of how humans react is now very refined and of great value. Politics and many businesses run on those sciences. They are very powerful. They may be the most powerful and useful sciences when it comes to everyday life.

During W's first primary race, he was up against John McCain.

Bush had a secret weapon, Karl Rove. He was an incarnation of Lee Atwater during Bush 1's campaigns.

South Carolina was the key state. Just before the primary there, the W campaign ran "push polls."

The push poll went like this. They had people manning the phones, perhaps robo calls, and they said,

"Would you vote for McCain if you knew that he had fathered a black child?"

(McCain had an adopted child from Bangladesh, who was dark skinned)

Wiki mentions it on their Push Poll page, which everyone of you should read:


Perhaps the most famous use of push polls is in the 2000 United States Republican Party primaries, when it was alleged that George W. Bush's campaign used push polling to torpedo the campaign of Senator John McCain. Voters in South Carolina reportedly were asked "Would you be more likely or less likely to vote for John McCain for president if you knew he had fathered an illegitimate black child?" The poll's allegation had no substance, but was heard by thousands of primary voters.[5] McCain and his wife had in fact adopted a Bengali girl. Bush had previously used push polls in his 1994 bid for Texas Governor against incumbent Ann Richards. Callers asked voters "whether they would be more or less likely to vote for Governor Richards if they knew that lesbians dominated on her staff."[6]

In the 2008 general election, Jewish voters in Florida and Pittsburgh were targeted by a push poll attempting to disparage Barack Obama by linking him with the Palestinian Liberation Organization. The Jewish Council for Education & Research, an organization that has endorsed Obama, denounced the push-poll as misinformation and lies.[7][8]

Political consultant Lee Atwater was also well known for using push-polling among his aggressive campaign tactics (though he repented in later life when terminally ill).[citation needed] The main advantage of push polls is that they are an effective way of maligning an opponent ("pushing" voters towards a predetermined point of view) while avoiding direct responsibility for the distorted or false information used in the push poll. They are risky for this same reason: if credible evidence emerges that the polls were directly ordered by a campaign or candidate, it could do serious damage to that campaign. Push polls are also relatively expensive, having a far higher cost per voter than radio or television commercials. Thus, push polls are most used in elections with fewer voters, such as party primaries, or in close elections where a relatively small change in votes can mean victory or defeat.

I say it all of the time. Racism is alive and well in the south.

Social climber
An Oil Field
Mar 3, 2013 - 03:28pm PT
If you want to understand modern political campaigns, which run these idiotic ads all of the time, it is because Americans do not know how to think critically.

The guy may not have invented it, but he damn sure perfected it:

Lee Atwater

Please read the wiki page about him and all will become clear.


Now, every campaing needs a Lee Atwater. At least the bastard apologized on his deathbed.

America right now is on a wicked race to be the dumbest.

Mar 3, 2013 - 04:28pm PT
You guys are asking a social scientist what societal outcomes has to do with belief?

I like that. Well said, Jan. Along those lines, but in more general terms:

Emergence Theory

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Mar 3, 2013 - 08:09pm PT
Every resultant is either a sum or a difference of the co-operant forces; their sum, when their directions are the same -- their difference, when their directions are contrary. Further, every resultant is clearly traceable in its components, because these are homogeneous and commensurable. It is otherwise with emergents, when, instead of adding measurable motion to measurable motion, or things of one kind to other individuals of their kind, there is a co-operation of things of unlike kinds. The emergent is unlike its components insofar as these are incommensurable, and it cannot be reduced to their sum or their difference. (Lewes 1875, p. 412) (Blitz 1992)

Of course a reductionist can never cotton to the idea that anything is ever more than it's component parts, being that in this view, any emergence was produced entirely by said parts - or in it's most extreme distortion, the parts ARE the emergent function (map = territory). the son IS the father, and so on.


Social climber
Wolf City, Wyoming
Mar 3, 2013 - 08:23pm PT
Bertrand Russell weighs in on (the lack of) God.


Dr. F.

Big Wall climber
Topic Author's Reply - Mar 3, 2013 - 08:30pm PT
I haven't heard about Hilbert Space either,
and my intuition tells me I don't need to.

I'm with Base on this subject, I don't need to know everything, I would rather specialise on some subjects, and have a comfortable grasp on the rest (of what's available)

I may never understand Dark Matter, and apparently I'm in good company
Messages 12241 - 12260 of total 22817 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks

Try a free sample topo!

SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews