RE: Are Science and Religion incompatible? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

WhoreMods -> RE: Are Science and Religion incompatible? (1/7/2017 9:28:31 AM)

Well, what do you expect from people who've been claiming since the '50s that no transitional fossils have ever been discovered?
I have no idea what the flying fuck they think archeoptrex and zeuglodon are if not fossil evidence of transitional species.



WickedsDesire -> RE: Are Science and Religion incompatible? (1/7/2017 10:15:23 AM)

Now, R1 Tesla was a genius - there have been so few - well that i can name. Not sure i could name 5. i always remember an episode of the Simpsons where they gave the buffoon Edison credit for Tesla and other peoples work.

Another curious anomaly is when people cite religion v science is that’s it’s always the bible/king james – good name that mind you.

Incidentally dark matter does not exist - and these are words I wont be eating...as ive said that on many forums x epochs.

I can neither prove nor disprove god(s) but I can say the same about pixies. And the bible refers to gods ffs arghhhhhh idiots (not you lot)...ah wait I am a fan of the olde testament as i usually say...bit of non fiction embedded in their methinks




Kirata -> RE: Are Science and Religion incompatible? (1/7/2017 10:46:42 AM)


~ FR ~

One doesn't have to be a Creationist to doubt the notion that pure random chance is at the bottom of everything. The fatal weakness of the Creationist position is a Creator who is separate from his creation, a sort of "Cosmic Craftsman". Neither religion in general, nor the Bible in particular, are required to intuit the operation of an intelligence within Nature.

We do not find obvious evidence of life or mind in so-called inert matter . . . but if the scientific point of view is correct, we shall ultimately find them, at least in rudimentary form, all through the universe. ~J. B. S. Haldane

The laws of physics leave a place for mind in the description of every molecule . . . In other words, mind is already inherent in every electron, and the processes of human consciousness differ only in degree and not in kind. ~Freeman Dyson

That which we experience as mind . . . will in a natural way ultimately reach the level of the wavefunction and of the ‘dance’ of the particles. There is no unbridgeable gap or barrier between any of these levels. ~David Bohm

K.



WhoreMods -> RE: Are Science and Religion incompatible? (1/7/2017 11:07:53 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata
One doesn't have to be a Creationist to doubt the notion that pure random chance is at the bottom of everything. The fatal weakness of the Creationist position is a Creator who is separate from his creation, a sort of "Cosmic Craftsman". Neither religion in general, nor the Bible in particular, are required to intuit the operation of an intelligence within Nature.

No, just complete stupidity on the part of the designer when you look at what a shoddy half baked mess most of nature is in practice.
You honestly think that a creative intelligence who designed this world for our benefit would have come up with the scabies mite or bilharzia?



Kirata -> RE: Are Science and Religion incompatible? (1/7/2017 11:26:40 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

One doesn't have to be a Creationist to doubt the notion that pure random chance is at the bottom of everything. The fatal weakness of the Creationist position is a Creator who is separate from his creation, a sort of "Cosmic Craftsman". Neither religion in general, nor the Bible in particular, are required to intuit the operation of an intelligence within Nature.

No, just complete stupidity on the part of the designer when you look at what a shoddy half baked mess most of nature is in practice.
You honestly think that a creative intelligence who designed this world for our benefit would have come up with the scabies mite or bilharzia?

Hey bozo, stop trimming quotes to fashion straw men.

K.



WhoreMods -> RE: Are Science and Religion incompatible? (1/7/2017 11:29:02 AM)

So exactly how does it benefit God's chosen creation for him to have fashioned parasites that prey on us exclusively?
In what way does possessing an appendix and wisdom teeth do us any good, and why do we have them if our design was planned rather than arising through a process of elimination and specialisation arising from blind chance?
If the human eye is proof of God's favour, why do so many of the world's population need to use corrective lenses to make it work?



Kirata -> RE: Are Science and Religion incompatible? (1/7/2017 11:36:29 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

So exactly how does it benefit God's chosen creation for him to have fashioned parasites that prey on us exclusively?
In what way does possessing an appendix and wisdom teeth do us any good, and why do we have them if our design was planned rather than arising through a process of elimination and specialisation arising from blind chance?
If the human eye is proof of God's favour, why do so many of the world's population need to use corrective lenses to make it work?

Oh ferfucksake, where did I say anything about "God" or a "designer"? If you're going to insist on refusing your meds, at least try to ignore what your lamp-socket tells you. It isn't your friend.

K.




WhoreMods -> RE: Are Science and Religion incompatible? (1/7/2017 11:40:31 AM)

If it wasn't random, then there was a designer. Who are you proposing in that role who wasn't God?



Kirata -> RE: Are Science and Religion incompatible? (1/7/2017 11:47:45 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

If it wasn't random, then there was a designer. Who are you proposing in that role who wasn't God?

Where did I say anything to suggest that there was either "a" (singular) designer, or even a "designer" per se? And where did I say there was no randomness at all?

I warned you about that lamp-socket.

K.




WhoreMods -> RE: Are Science and Religion incompatible? (1/7/2017 11:55:57 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata
One doesn't have to be a Creationist to doubt the notion that pure random chance is at the bottom of everything.

You did here. Trying to wuss out of that statement with a load of sub-Lovelock Gaia blather doesn't alter the fact that you started by saying that, you'll find.



Kirata -> RE: Are Science and Religion incompatible? (1/7/2017 12:02:50 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

One doesn't have to be a Creationist to doubt the notion that pure random chance is at the bottom of everything.

You did here. Trying to wuss out of that statement with a load of sub-Lovelock Gaia blather doesn't alter the fact that you started by saying that, you'll find.

Yeah, no. And the scientists I quoted have no commitment to the Gaia hypothesis. Your lamp-socket is a fucking idiot, and so are you for listening to it.

K.



bounty44 -> RE: Are Science and Religion incompatible? (1/7/2017 12:18:00 PM)

just quickly jumping in to say to whoremods, not specific to all the conversation youre presently having with kirata, but to part of it---the answers to your questions about parasites and the need for corrective vision and any other thing of that sort is caught up in "the fall of man."

if you use that phrase in an internet search, you will find plenty to read.



WhoreMods -> RE: Are Science and Religion incompatible? (1/7/2017 12:18:59 PM)

Really? And there was me thinking trying to co-opt them from a few out of context quotations was a level of idiocy I can't aspire to.



WhoreMods -> RE: Are Science and Religion incompatible? (1/7/2017 12:20:30 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

just quickly jumping in to say to whoremods, not specific to all the conversation youre presently having with kirata, but to part of it---the answers to your questions about parasites and the need for corrective vision and any other thing of that sort is caught up in "the fall of man."

if you use that phrase in an internet search, you will find plenty to read.


No parasites in the garden of Eden, which nobody can point to on a map, then.
Riiiight.



vincentML -> RE: Are Science and Religion incompatible? (1/7/2017 12:28:49 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: WickedsDesire

Now, R1 Tesla was a genius - there have been so few - well that i can name. Not sure i could name 5. i always remember an episode of the Simpsons where they gave the buffoon Edison credit for Tesla and other peoples work.

Another curious anomaly is when people cite religion v science is that’s it’s always the bible/king james – good name that mind you.

Incidentally dark matter does not exist - and these are words I wont be eating...as ive said that on many forums x epochs.

I can neither prove nor disprove god(s) but I can say the same about pixies. And the bible refers to gods ffs arghhhhhh idiots (not you lot)...ah wait I am a fan of the olde testament as i usually say...bit of non fiction embedded in their methinks



You may be correct about Dark Matter. It is an hypothesis proposed to explain the surprisingly and unexpectedly huge gravitational fields observed around some galaxy groups. Maybe "dark matter" will be identified as large numbers of small black holes "sprinkled" throughout the affected galaxy groups? Or maybe very Yuge pixies?



bounty44 -> RE: Are Science and Religion incompatible? (1/7/2017 12:38:18 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods


quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

just quickly jumping in to say to whoremods, not specific to all the conversation youre presently having with kirata, but to part of it---the answers to your questions about parasites and the need for corrective vision and any other thing of that sort is caught up in "the fall of man."

if you use that phrase in an internet search, you will find plenty to read.


No parasites in the garden of Eden, which nobody can point to on a map, then.
Riiiight.


you can read a little about the garden of eden here: http://www.icr.org/article/where-was-garden-eden-located/

or I would suggest to you that you might want god to exist in some personal idealized form as opposed to how he and the Christian story, are presented in scripture.






ReMakeYou -> RE: Are Science and Religion incompatible? (1/7/2017 1:00:59 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


~ FR ~

One doesn't have to be a Creationist to doubt the notion that pure random chance is at the bottom of everything. The fatal weakness of the Creationist position is a Creator who is separate from his creation, a sort of "Cosmic Craftsman". Neither religion in general, nor the Bible in particular, are required to intuit the operation of an intelligence within Nature.



Flowery quotes aside, the idea that there's a guiding cosmic intelligence that isn't necessarily the god of the bible still runs into one major flaw. When you stop grounding your ideas in the bible, you have no idea what the guiding cosmic intelligence might be. It could be cthulhu just as easily as it could be a wellspring of benevolence and harmony. The only rough guess we can be remotely comfortable with comes from looking at how tiny the earth is on the cosmic scale, and the relatively short amount of geological time that humans have been around for.

I guess in practice, I don't see much difference between "there's nothing out there that can care" and "if there is something out there, we're too small to be worth caring about".




vincentML -> RE: Are Science and Religion incompatible? (1/7/2017 1:52:41 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


~ FR ~

The laws of physics leave a place for mind in the description of every molecule . . . In other words, mind is already inherent in every electron, and the processes of human consciousness differ only in degree and not in kind. ~Freeman Dyson




From the Wiki biography on Dyson:

Here is a brief summary of my thinking. The universe shows evidence of the operations of mind on three levels. The first level is elementary physical processes, as we see them when we study atoms in the laboratory. The second level is our direct human experience of our own consciousness. The third level is the universe as a whole. Atoms in the laboratory are weird stuff, behaving like active agents rather than inert substances. They make unpredictable choices between alternative possibilities according to the laws of quantum mechanics. It appears that mind, as manifested by the capacity to make choices, is to some extent inherent in every atom. The universe as a whole is also weird, with laws of nature that make it hospitable to the growth of mind. I do not make any clear distinction between mind and God. God is what mind becomes when it has passed beyond the scale of our comprehension.

In order to make choices there needs be an awareness of possibilities and maybe speculation about consequences. What evidence is there that atoms have awareness?



tamaka -> RE: Are Science and Religion incompatible? (1/7/2017 2:20:27 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44


quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods


quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

just quickly jumping in to say to whoremods, not specific to all the conversation youre presently having with kirata, but to part of it---the answers to your questions about parasites and the need for corrective vision and any other thing of that sort is caught up in "the fall of man."

if you use that phrase in an internet search, you will find plenty to read.


No parasites in the garden of Eden, which nobody can point to on a map, then.
Riiiight.


you can read a little about the garden of eden here: http://www.icr.org/article/where-was-garden-eden-located/

or I would suggest to you that you might want god to exist in some personal idealized form as opposed to how he and the Christian story, are presented in scripture.






God in the Box... all religions have that problem... including Christianity



Kirata -> RE: Are Science and Religion incompatible? (1/8/2017 10:10:19 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

From the Wiki biography on Dyson:

I do not make any clear distinction between mind and God. God is what mind becomes when it has passed beyond the scale of our comprehension.

It is widely accepted that both the constants of our Universe and the development of living organisms within it depend on a chain of improbabilities so astronomically unlikely that the chances of them all occurring even in ~14 billion years is vanishingly small. One explanatory proposal is the many worlds hypothesis. Given an infinite number of Universes, one like ours with us in it is not so surprising. An alternative explanatory proposal is something operative in our Universe that changes the probabilities. To my thinking, parsimony favors the latter. But while some might like to go there, extrapolations to "God" were nowhere in my post.

K.




Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875