The four horseman of the apocalypse, now

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

Quote[/b] ]Science is pretty much guesswork. Reasonable seeming educated guesswork informed by observation. Who has seen the truth ,who has heard it or touched it? All we appear to have is our body to sense and our mind to interpret. Even our bodies are perceived and interpreted.

1) Wrong

2) Wrong

3) wrong

4) wrong.

Seriously, I don't think you understand science at all.

[Major Fubar 0]

So, it basically comes down to what I posted 7 pages ago:

...let's just leave it as those that want to believe will, and those that don't, won't

[IsthatyouJohnWayne 0]

i seriously dont think you can explain what you mean. Scientific knowledge is derived from observation and

experimentation (and is not absolute). Science is both the systematization of such knowledge and the means by which the information is collected. This amounts to reasonable guesswork. If the outcome of an experiment is certain then there is no point in performing it in terms of increasing understanding. But if there is uncertainty as to the outcome of an experiment then it is necessary to test the hypothesis in question for scientifically valid support. So knowledge is expanded by testing guesses against what is observed. It is a guess in that it is a prediction with less scientific basis than that necessary for it to a scientifically supportable assumption.

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

So how do you manage to think that science is just guesswork, when you just admitted that its basically experimentation to establish the facts? You are not making sense.

It's not a guess, its a hypothesis - an idea which appears to fit the facts and is testable. A guess is just a random idea with nothing to back it up. You're switching terms round left and right here; first you dignify the nonsense that is religion by denoting it 'hypothesis,' then you denigrate true hypotheses.

Quote[/b] ]let's just leave it as those that want to believe will, and those that don't, won't

Wrong. Everybody would like to believe that there is some benevolent force looking out for us, that we don't just fade away when we die, etc; but some people are intelectually honest enough to realise that thats just wishful thinking.

[IsthatyouJohnWayne 0]

What is apparent is not the same as the truth . The truth is in itself. Without absolute knowledge of a particular phenomena how can you arrive at the truth of that phenomena? Science is a process of moving towards the truth but it always relies on is what is observable and there is no proof that what is observable constitutes the entirety of what is. You yourself have suggested that science will not be able to answer all questions before the end of the big crunch. There is no proof that people will even ask all the questions that may be answerable. How is it possible therefore for us to arrive at the objective truth or even know we have arrived when we do? Truth from a human perspective is necessarily subective because the human perspective is subjective. You believe in truths, you dont know them in an absolute sense.

I added to 'guess' the phase -reasonable seeming, educated (by observation of apparent phenomena)- and thats what science is as of today: lots of reasonable seeming educated guesses.

[Tex -USMC- 0]

You're missing one thing, JohnWayne: science is the pursuit of your 'truth'. It is ever evolving, and willing to accept that earlier assumptions were wrong.

Religion, on the other hand, claims right off that it *is* the 'truth', and will brook no discussion on the matter.

Clearly we are having to choose between two solutions which are inadequate in some way, but in that case I'll take science, even if we never actually do figure out the 'truth'

[denoir 0]

Any information transfer is done through people. The difference between religion and science is that science demands repeatability. What person A claims, person B must be able to reproduce it, otherwise the claim is dismissed. Regardless if it is the "final truth" or not, science is capable to communicating a universal view of the world. Something that's common and can be verified by anybody, regardless of their initial beliefs and theories.

Religion is also transfered on a person to person basis. The word "faith" should not refer to beliefs in a higher power, but trust in the person who told you about that higher power.

I assume no religious persons here talk to God directly. So you have to rely on what some Moses dude once told another dude that told another dude that told another dude that wrote it down. "Faith" is believing that first the Moses dude was correct in his interpretation of events and that those that told his story did not distort it. Also it requires of you to cast away the requirement of validation through repeatability.

Science does not claim to have the complete and ultimat truth (if there even is such a thing). It does provide models that are valid within a certain framework and that can be validated within that framework through direct measurements. Not even that is always true. In quantum mechanics, you can't make a measurement without affect the thing you want to measure. So the phenomena and the measurement are merged.

Religion requires you to without any validation or measurement to believe what the religious leaders say goes. And these are pretty fantastic claims tha they expect people to believe.

[Tamme 0]

Science and religion do not rule each other out.

Science answers to the question: How?

Religion answers to the question:Who?

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

Science and religion do not rule each other out.

Science answers to the question: How?

Religion answers to the question:Who?

religions answers no questions at all.

[FSPilot 0]

religions answers no questions at all.

Which religion are yout alking about? My religion answers plenty questions.

"How was the world created?" - God created it

"Is there an afterlife?" - Yes

"Is there a good place and a bad place?" - Yes, heaven and hell

"Will I go to hell?" - Unless you have Jesus as your savior

"How will the world end?" - Detailed in revelations

I could go on but I need to go buy some stuff.

[Tex -USMC- 0]

Science and religion do not rule each other out.

Science answers to the question: How?

Religion answers to the question:Who?

religions answers no questions at all.

It does, it just doesn't answer them in a way satisfactory to you. As FS pointed out, the answers are fairly straight forward, which is (in my opinion) a very attractive aspect of religion. All you need to accept these answers is faith, which some have the capacity for, and others don't. You and I don't, others do. Pretty simple. And depending on how you interpret faith , this can translate to a rather entertaining commentary on the credulity of humanity in general.

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

Quote[/b] ]

religions answers no questions at all.

Which religion are yout alking about?  My religion answers plenty questions.

Not without raising more questions than it solves, and not by answering those questions in a meaningful/ userful way.

"How was the world created?" - God created it

Who created god?  Why?  Why did god create the world?  Which god?  Why that god and not another god?

"Is there an afterlife?" - Yes

Why?  Who gets to go?  What is this place like?  Where is it?  

"Is there a good place and a bad place?" - Yes, heaven and hell

"Will I go to hell?" - Unless you have Jesus as your savior

So if I lead a completely sin free, blameless life, but it was on some isolated island and I never heard of Jesus (and never had that 'opportunity') -I'd go to hell?  forever?  You think this a good ethos?  

Millions of people who follow the same religion as you disagree on these points, who is right?  They all have the same amount of evidence on their side (ie none).  matter of fact, all religions claim the others are wrong, how can you tell which is right?  Most people simply go with the religion they were brought up with.  How in Zeus's butthole can that possibly be a guide to whats right?

"How will the world end?" - Detailed in revelations

very very very ambiguously, not enough to be an answer.

I could go on but I need to go buy some stuff.

You'd just get more wrong as time goes on.

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

@ Aug. 02 2003,20:17)]

Science and religion do not rule each other out.

Science answers to the question: How?

Religion answers to the question:Who?

religions answers no questions at all.

It does, it just doesn't answer them in a way satisfactory to you. As FS pointed out, the answers are fairly straight forward, which is (in my opinion) a very attractive aspect of religion. All you need to accept these answers is faith, which some have the capacity for, and others don't. You and I don't, others do.

Pretty simple. And depending on how you interpret faith , this can translate to a rather entertaining commentary on the credulity of humanity in general.

Those are *not* answers. Replying to a question with 5 more questions is not an answer.

Name 1 answer any religion has that is (a) demonstrably correct and (b) not open to interpretation (read- can mean anything you want it to)

[Tex -USMC- 0]

@ Aug. 02 2003,20:17)]

Science and religion do not rule each other out.

Science answers to the question: How?

Religion answers to the question:Who?

religions answers no questions at all.

It does, it just doesn't answer them in a way satisfactory to you. As FS pointed out, the answers are fairly straight forward, which is (in my opinion) a very attractive aspect of religion. All you need to accept these answers is faith, which some have the capacity for, and others don't. You and I don't, others do.

Pretty simple. And depending on how you interpret faith , this can translate to a rather entertaining commentary on the credulity of humanity in general.

Those are *not* answers.  Replying to a question with 5 more questions is not an answer.

Name 1 answer any religion has that is (a) demonstrably correct and (b) not open to interpretation (read- can mean anything you want it to)

Hey now, that's not fair. You said answers, not *right* answers or *final* answers. I said religion does answer questions, I never said they were good answers.

[Tamme 0]

Quote[/b] ]

"How was the world created?" - God created it

Who created god?  Why?  Why did god create the world?  Which god?  Why that god and not another god?

These are just stupid questions. It's as stupid as asking: Where did that 'Big Bang' that created the universe come from? How the hell could we know why God did these things? Ask Big G himself when you die.

Quote[/b] ]

"Is there an afterlife?" - Yes

Quote[/b] ]Why?

Why is there life in the first place?

Quote[/b] ]Who gets to go?

Check the bible

Quote[/b] ]What is this place like?

Check the bible

Quote[/b] ]Where is it?

Do you think that humans would understand even if God spent years trying to explain something like that to us?

 

Quote[/b] ]

"Is there a good place and a bad place?" - Yes, heaven and hell

"Will I go to hell?" - Unless you have Jesus as your savior

So if I lead a completely sin free, blameless life, but it was on some isolated island and I never heard of Jesus (and never had that 'opportunity') -I'd go to hell?  forever?  You think this a good ethos?

Do you think God is a retard or something? Of course he understand if you never had the chance to believe in Jesus or God, but if you say: "I don't believe in God and Jesus it's bullshit" That's when you're going to hell.

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

God doesn't exist and the bible is made up fairy stories. Sources for these 'answers'?

[Placebo 29]

God doesn't exist and the bible is made up fairy stories.

Sources for these 'answers'?

[Gollum1 0]

if I lead a completely sin free, blameless life, but it was on some isolated island and I never heard of Jesus (and never had that 'opportunity') -I'd go to hell?  forever?  You think this a good ethos?

Well?  This is one the main reasons I don´t think that the Christian god is a good god (if he existed, and if he was a "he"...SEXISM)

[sanctuary 19]

So the whole conclusion of this is

-people who have faith will continue to have faith, they dont care of atheists arguments

-people who doesnt have faith will continue to not have faith , they dont care of believers arguments

?

I am surprised that this actually pointless discussion is not closed yet.

If there is a point behind all of this that allow this thread to not being closed as it allow a discussion , i will be curious to hear it.

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

God doesn't exist and the bible is made up fairy stories.

Sources for these 'answers'?

There is no evidence for any gods and the events in the bible simply did not happen.  Historical records and archaeological digs concur.

*edit*

I appreciate your point, but the fact it that I'm not the one making the assertion, religion is. They say 'this this and this happened, because we say so' and I'm saying 'evidence- without evidence your claim has no merit'

[Tamme 0]

Jesus did live. It has been proven. I don't have any proof for the other things in the bible, but that's the idea, God isn't going to prove this stuff to you, you have to have faith.

Personally I'm in the middle. I used to think that it's just stupid bullshit and that believers are lunatics and idiots, but confirmation classes changed my attitude. I learned to understand believers and to think these things from an other perspective, but I'm not sure if I believe in God myself.

Oh, and don't mix hypocrits with believers

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

Show me this proof. Liar.

;)

[Placebo 29]

Show me this proof.  Liar.

;)

Quote[/b] ]§1)No Flaming

Abusive comments, personal attacks and name calling are not allowed either on the board or through PM's.

Please refrain from such things as calling people liars, whether there's a wink after it or not.

[Tamme 0]

Show me this proof.  Liar.

;)

I've been searching my ass off, but all I can find is these "JESUS IS YOUR SAVIOUR" pages. Someone who knows stuff help me!

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

Is it insulting if its true? I didn't mean to be offensive- there simply is no such proof that he is talking about, so he is making it up.

Point taken though.