The New "Religion Vs Science" Thread

to all who miss understand I am mad insane that huge swaths of rock on the west coast

Of the Hudson River made of trap rock ...DIABASE ... are not legal to climb ...
GO ON Diabase

Then why are you a zombie.

Everyone comes from the same place ......

faith, believing something for no good reason

We don't fully understand the good reasons why humans developed the belief forming processes that we have,

you can make up the rest

You will have to pry this thread from my cold dead hands to make me nuke it.

you can make up the rest

Donini: "Faith," believing something for no good reason, . . .

I have been listening to prarie home companion since I was a child, but really grew to appreciate his storytelling when I started travelling in the early 90's. What a good show all around. Everyone I know now hates it haha.

Jgill: Anemic thread.

a failed campaign to prevent stem cell research, to name a few.

How many scientist-atheists have worked on weapons of mass destruction

Medical researchers found a way around the religiously motivated campaign to ban stem cell availability for research by procuring them from abroad. Still, the resultant cruelty of such a campaign - by throwing up barriers to helping millions of azheimer sufferers, paralytics, and a host of others afflicted with a broad range of maladies, cannot be underestimated.

Most everything would be cured by now...

around the religiously motivated campaign to ban stem cell availability for research by procuring them from abroad. Still, the resultant cruelty of such a campaign - by throwing up barriers to helping millions of azheimer sufferers, paralytics, and a host of others afflicted with a broad range of maladies, cannot be underestimated.

Both the religious and non-religious can and do kill their fellow human beings. Given that the vast majority of Americans are religious, one can factually state that those Americans who kill others are also religious.

In a move that could be aimed at healing a rift between science and religion, Pope Francis has said that evolution and the Big Bang are consistent with the notion of a creator. And according to the pontiff, believers should not view God as "a magician, with a magic wand."

Francis made the remarks at an assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, billed as meeting to discuss "Evolving Concepts of Nature."

I studied Jesus extensively as a believer (8 years of Catholic school)

And I wonder how many of you 'see the actual Jesus' - whatever that might be, given the spurious nature of the sources upon which his life and works are based:

Perhaps you were looking in the wrong place or that you were not seeking the actual Jesus, but merely studying stories of his life from a source that has only a historical connection to him.

Tvash: I studied Jesus extensively as a believer (8 years of Catholic school) . . . .

DMT: "You're doing it wrong!"

One view cannot reveal The All.

Maybe that's what was so crucial in Jesus's timing? He saw that the world (the spiritual world) was moving in to many directions. So His pronouncement that "I am the only way", is the ONLY way you need..

Everyday you are preaching.

You are as bad and worst then what you are against.

Total fool ......

scrubbing bubbles
Oct 24, 2014 - 09:40pm PT
Supertopo has made this issue quite easy to understand:

Scientists are civilized and highly intelligent....while all religious people are ignorant, savage, and often toothless, inbred morons who practice incest with their daughters

if I see one of those suckers creeping up on me I'll probably run the other way.

It made two unsuccessful bids for my face during that time.

Doesn't anyone find this exciting?

I just don't see why people can't ever so slightly alter their faith to allow for what we see in nature. Objective evidence.

In the old days they could interplanetary travel just by mantra sound vibration.

when we reduce down to particles all the stuff that seems real to our senses, stuff we can actually see and weight and so forth (with instrumentation, granted), said stuff "has no physical extent."

As we have seen over and over, A) science and discjursive thought is reductionistic, and B) when we reduce down to particles all the stuff that seems real to our senses, stuff we can actually see and weight and so forth (with instrumentation, granted), said stuff "has no physical extent."

“Matter” can refer to atoms, the basic building blocks of what we think of as “material”: tables, air, rocks, skin, orange juice — and by extension, to the particles out of which atoms are made, including electrons and the protons and neutrons that make up the nucleus of an atom.
◾OR it can refer to what are sometimes called the elementary “matter particles” of nature: electrons, muons, taus, the three types of neutrinos, the six types of quarks — all of the types of particles which are not the force particles (the photon, gluons, graviton and the W and Z particles.) Read here about the known apparently-elementary particles of nature. [The Higgs particle, by the way, doesn't neatly fit into the classification of particles as matter particles and force particles, which was somewhat artificial to start with; I have a whole section about this classification below.]
◾OR it can refer to classes of particles that are found out there, in the wider universe, and that on average move much more slowly than the speed of light.

the map is not the territory.

Though realism may be a tempting viewpoint

Jingy: Magician Penn Jillette outlines his atheist version of The Ten Commandments in his new book.

Base 104: Near the death of the old science vs. religion thread, . . . .

The point is that science should not be considered special, as dominant over any other means of awareness.

The gross materialists can only barely quantify the inferior gross material energies and what to speak of even coming close to the superior energies.

WBraun

climber

Nov 14, 2014 - 07:37am PT
The gross materialists can only barely quantify the inferior gross material energies and what to speak of even coming close to the superior energies.

The gross material scientists can not understand the superior energies with their gross material senses
and what to speak their inferior limited instruments created by manipulating the gross physical elements.

The puffed up material atheistic lab coats are always in poor fund of knowledge of the Superior energies which they know exist but are always out of their reach .......

crankster

Trad climber

Nov 14, 2014 - 09:58am PT
The gross materialists can only barely quantify the inferior gross material energies and what to speak of even coming close to the superior energies.
?????


Translation from Weiner to English needed.
Translation from Weiner to English needed.
Credit: crankster


?????

“In the history of human thought science has often come out of superstition.
Astronomy came out of astrology.
Chemistry came out of alchemy.
What will come out of economics?”
Bernard Lewis

So now you're espousing rape and pillage as heroic manly virtues? Does this mean we should get reinvolved in the middle east or is that only for past times? What about dueling? Better than praying?

It's not surprising to me that Nordic peoples are typically anti-Christian in the broadest sense.

And how does this correspond to the present day pacifism of the Nordic countries?

Once an idea is seeded, it may be rejected at first to be considered later, or just lie there sewing the tiniest bit of doubt which may or may not come to anything, but there's no removing it.

Tvash: Debating belief is precisely how change happens.

cintune

climber
The Utility Muffin Research Kitchen

Nov 16, 2014 - 05:21pm PT
And how does this correspond to the present day pacifism of the Nordic countries?

It's a pretty common idea there that they managed to get rid of their hooligans by sending them all out a-viking, leaving behind the more reasonable, subdued and introverted types to carry on.