Is Science our New God?

[deposition]

Originally Posted by chardish

Science has created an obsession with "proof" though - secular people think that just because they can't get scientific proof of God that he doesn't exist.

people have always been obsessed with proof, but they have never had the technology to proove certain things. now that we do, we have found out many things that we have prooven that contrast the bible, and more and more people are rejecting it.

[fusi0n]

Originally Posted by chardish

Science has created an obsession with "proof" though - secular people think that just because they can't get scientific proof of God that he doesn't exist.

people have always been obsessed with proof, but they have never had the technology to proove certain things. now that we do, we have found out many things that we have prooven that contrast the bible, and more and more people are rejecting it.

[Anonymous]

hmmm.... in all my life i have never heard a christian say that another religion is"wrong".... welll MAYBE satanism... but thats a strech .

chardish..... most of the athists really don't know what the hell they are talking about. Most of them chose the title because thier friends do, and that it sounds cool.
They live to much in the physical world, and don't really realise that "god" is a abstract being. Its like your mind...or your brain... your mind. You can't explain your mind, because it is also abstract. You can't explain the little voice in your head that is you.

also... name one thing that science contadictes itself.... hmmm... off the top of my head...

Can Science explain the modius strip? Its is a 3-d object with 2 perfectly different sides, and yet it has only one plain. Meaning... i place my pen down on it... i can write on both sides of the paper without lifting my pen once. the contridiction is that if there are 2 surfaces then my pen should not be able to do that.

also... you said that inaging, the cells stop producing as fast as before.... but why? It couldn't be the lack of mineral... because you could pump all the nessisary minerals u need into your body and still age.

Also gravity isn't as simple as that. If what you say is true.... then in space i could take a bowling ball and a grain of sand and the grian of sand would then the sand revolve around the bowling ball, and yet it does not. odd that its selective don't u think?

wierd that 2 posts are alike to...madness i say madness!

[Jam930]

Originally Posted by Anonymous

hmmm.... in all my life i have never heard a christian say that another religion is"wrong".... welll MAYBE satanism... but thats a strech .

...have you ever left your computer? pretty much every branch of christianity claims other branches to be false.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

chardish..... most of the athists really don't know what the hell they are talking about. Most of them chose the title because thier friends do, and that it sounds cool.
They live to much in the physical world, and don't really realise that "god" is a abstract being. Its like your mind...or your brain... your mind. You can't explain your mind, because it is also abstract. You can't explain the little voice in your head that is you.

what the hell are you talking about? sounds cool? when u dont believe something, it just means you dont believe it. it doesnt mean you're trying to be cool.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

also... name one thing that science contadictes itself.... hmmm... off the top of my head...

Can Science explain the modius strip? Its is a 3-d object with 2 perfectly different sides, and yet it has only one plain. Meaning... i place my pen down on it... i can write on both sides of the paper without lifting my pen once. the contridiction is that if there are 2 surfaces then my pen should not be able to do that.

the thing is...there isn't 2 sides. there is only one and it goes around on itself, and you just explained that.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

also... you said that inaging, the cells stop producing as fast as before.... but why? It couldn't be the lack of mineral... because you could pump all the nessisary minerals u need into your body and still age.

age = b/c of time. screw minerals. things wear down through exposure.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Also gravity isn't as simple as that. If what you say is true.... then in space i could take a bowling ball and a grain of sand and the grian of sand would then the sand revolve around the bowling ball, and yet it does not. odd that its selective don't u think?

neither has enough mass. and things dont just revolve, genius. when u jump, do u start revolving around the earth until u come back down? no u go directly right back to it. shortest distance between 2 points is a striaght line. the reasons things orbit eachother in space is because they have enough velocity to not be simply sucked in. plus the mass of a star a light-year away would have more of an effect.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

wierd that 2 posts are alike to...madness i say madness!

...i rest my case.
=P

[Anonymous]

hjmmm.... for some reason my post wasn't logged in... wierd.... anyway...

thanks all the rude comments... that was really needed. i am posting to help explain my ideas....and you have no right to be rude to something that wasn't derected to u.

ok... now that u have my full attecation i shall explain to the flaws in what u say.

Where to start... hmmm lets start with the mobius strip. There are to completely different sides smart guy. Do u even know what a mobius strip is? If u did u wouldknow what i am talking about.... but sences its become clear to me that you don't know what it is... i shall explain.

A mobius strip is a piece of paper... a "strip" if u will...with one twist in it. You tape the 2 oppiset sides together an you have your mobius strip.

There are two sperate sides, the inner side and the outerside; and yet there is only 1 plane for the 2 sides, where there should be 2 planes to the 2 sides.

Your age answer was that of a 5 year olds answer. "Well um.... just cause....er...EXPOSURE...um...yeah...thats it....". That is basicly what u convaded to me. Your lack of explaination shows your lack of knowledge of the subject at hand. Exposure means absolutly nothing to me.... exposure to what.... air? elements? people? You basicly felt that i was wrong and you came up with a general answer to make yourself feel smart. It was so gerenal that you couldn't possibly be wrong, cause exposure means everything.

Next time i would like a more educated answers, for you just displayed an 9th level of intelligence and masked it with big words to sound convincing..wait there were no big words, your making statements without facts.

Let me ask you this....Why don't things just revolve? The reason WE don't move is because are already effected by the pressure of our atmosphere bearing down on us. But that is NOT true for a "0 gravity" enviroment, because they is no gravity to influence the out come.

The shortest distance between 2 points is a straight line...... wtf... why on EARTH did u put that in there? i would like to know what purpose that had in that paragraph. That was just an ignorent statement, and furthers your loss of credibility with that idioticly placed statement. Though it is true... it has no place in your post what so ever. Learn to use theroms in the correct places.

Also, i would like to ask where the planets got that velocity, and how the planets come to reolve around it?

What do u mean sucked in... sucked into what? orbit? the other planet?

And how would a star a light year away have any sort of effect?

Do u have any idea how fast light travels.... it takes 8 minutes for light to hit us from the sun. A light year away sun would have no effect... even pluto is not a light year away.

the only thing u rest your case on is that you have no clue what you are talking about.

[Anonymous]

hjmmm.... for some reason my post wasn't logged in... wierd.... anyway...

thanks all the rude comments... that was really needed. i am posting to help explain my ideas....and you have no right to be rude to something that wasn't derected to u.

ok... now that u have my full attecation i shall explain to the flaws in what u say.

Where to start... hmmm lets start with the mobius strip. There are to completely different sides smart guy. Do u even know what a mobius strip is? If u did u wouldknow what i am talking about.... but sences its become clear to me that you don't know what it is... i shall explain.

A mobius strip is a piece of paper... a "strip" if u will...with one twist in it. You tape the 2 oppiset sides together an you have your mobius strip.

There are two sperate sides, the inner side and the outerside; and yet there is only 1 plane for the 2 sides, where there should be 2 planes to the 2 sides.

Your age answer was that of a 5 year olds answer. "Well um.... just cause....er...EXPOSURE...um...yeah...thats it....". That is basicly what u convaded to me. Your lack of explaination shows your lack of knowledge of the subject at hand. Exposure means absolutly nothing to me.... exposure to what.... air? elements? people? You basicly felt that i was wrong and you came up with a general answer to make yourself feel smart. It was so gerenal that you couldn't possibly be wrong, cause exposure means everything.

Next time i would like a more educated answers, for you just displayed an 9th level of intelligence and masked it with big words to sound convincing..wait there were no big words, your making statements without facts.

Let me ask you this....Why don't things just revolve? The reason WE don't move is because are already effected by the pressure of our atmosphere bearing down on us. But that is NOT true for a "0 gravity" enviroment, because they is no gravity to influence the out come.

The shortest distance between 2 points is a straight line...... wtf... why on EARTH did u put that in there? i would like to know what purpose that had in that paragraph. That was just an ignorent statement, and furthers your loss of credibility with that idioticly placed statement. Though it is true... it has no place in your post what so ever. Learn to use theroms in the correct places.

Also, i would like to ask where the planets got that velocity, and how the planets come to reolve around it?

What do u mean sucked in... sucked into what? orbit? the other planet?

And how would a star a light year away have any sort of effect?

Do u have any idea how fast light travels.... it takes 8 minutes for light to hit us from the sun. A light year away sun would have no effect... even pluto is not a light year away.

the only thing u rest your case on is that you have no clue what you are talking about.

[VxDx]

Originally Posted by Anonymous

chardish..... most of the athists really don't know what the hell they are talking about. Most of them chose the title because thier friends do, and that it sounds cool.
They live to much in the physical world, and don't really realise that "god" is a abstract being.

first off, that is an ignorant generalization, and secondly do you realize that you say that atheists are wrong because they "live too much in the real world", when the real world is the only world that anyone has experience with? You say that the atheists are the ones who do not understand and yet you are the one who makes gross assumptions in regards to god and how he exists. I'd challenge you to find me one piece of concrete evidence regarding the existance of god. granted, that is not a disproof of god, which is why I am not atheist, but it sure is interesting that you claim that atheists don't know " what the hell they are talking about" and yet you are the one who believes in something that cannot be proven true, and defend your beliefs on the basis that you believe it.

also... name one thing that science contadictes itself.... hmmm... off the top of my head...

Can Science explain the modius strip? Its is a 3-d object with 2 perfectly different sides, and yet it has only one plain. Meaning... i place my pen down on it... i can write on both sides of the paper without lifting my pen once. the contridiction is that if there are 2 surfaces then my pen should not be able to do that.

it's a möbius strip. just becuase you dont understand it doesn't mean that it proves that science contradicts itself. in order to turn a two sided piece of paper into a möbius strip you have to give it a half twist and connect it. it's at that junction that you mistake ignorance with contradiction. when your pen leaves one end and touches the other, it switches which side it is writing on. you're trying to apply euclidean geometry to a situation where it doesn't exist.

[VxDx]

Originally Posted by Anonymous

That is basicly what u convaded to me.

...masked it with big words to sound convincing

maybe you should learn to properly use those "big words" before you make some crazy accusations.

Let me ask you this....Why don't things just revolve? The reason WE don't move is because are already effected by the pressure of our atmosphere bearing down on us. But that is NOT true for a "0 gravity" enviroment, because they is no gravity to influence the out come.

pressure has nothing to do with not moving (with respect to where you jumped from) when you jump. nothing at all.

Learn to use theroms in the correct places.

yeah, theorums, like the ones you use to support all your claims...

And how would a star a light year away have any sort of effect?

the only thing u rest your case on is that you have no clue what you are talking about.

her point was that is doesn't have an effect ace. learn to read.

also, to quote you...

thanks all the rude comments... that was really needed

hypocrisy at it's finest.

[SohCahToa]

ok ok... let us be mature about this. There is no need to flame each other, because this will go on forever. I did not mean to start a fight, and i was wrong for faning the flames with my unprofessional comments. I would like to apologise to jam, it was not place right to mock your opinions on my postes.

I would like to move on from that and dicuss this without name calling and anger, and talk about theorys like adults.

I will admit that i am wrong about the athist thing.... man... wtf was i thinking when i put that there. My statement was based upon the people, that are like that, that are around me. Most of them don't really know why they are, they just say "because he don't". Realise that statement is on a personal basis, and therefore will be wrong for the general crowd.

"pressure of our atmosphere bearing down on us" was another word for gravity. And that statement was for the question "do u start revolving around the earth until u come back down?" and i was giving the reason why we don't move when we jump.

[VxDx]

it's not gravity either, it's angular momentum.

[aleco]

Originally Posted by deposition

people have always been obsessed with proof, but they have never had the technology to proove certain things. now that we do, we have found out many things that we have prooven that contrast the bible, and more and more people are rejecting it.

Originally Posted by DracIV

The big difference between religion and science is this: in religion, you cannot question your greaters or the basic truths given to you; in science, you SHOULD question your greaters and the basic truths to prove their truth, for that is what the entirety of science is (questioning the world around your to find out the truth).

If some martyr had 12 followers make up a bunch of mumbo-jumbo and stick it on the end of a previous religious book, few if any of the people who believed it would examine it closely and look for falseness, but would instead follow it blindly.

If someone came up with a new theory for the universe, everyone (even those who believed it) would examine it closely and look for falseness, and until everyone had proven (as far as any are able to tell) that it is true, then it is still considered an educated guess.

What things have disproved the Bible? What things have been false?
I am one who doesn't take things like that lightly. I have never found anything wrong.

Guess what? NOTHING CAN BE PROVEN! We can't be sure of anything. Anything at all.

Chardish, congrats on being one of the few people who is right.

The big mistake that most of the atheists here are making is claiming that every single belief system is to be equally trusted. They think that some "martyr with 12 followers" constitutes a religion that is on equal ground with religions such as Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, and Islam.

A mistake made by Jamie is the point that all of the different branches of Christianity claim the others are wrong. This is simple ignorance. If 2 branches of Christianity agree on 95% and disagree on the 5%, that doesn't mean they both think the other is "wrong." The Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches, for example, have only a grocery list of disagreements - most of their differences have to do with church hierarchy.

Third, you'll notice that every religion does not say every other religion is "wrong." Christians and Jews, for example, share most of their beliefs in common!

Don't make it out that there's this massive war of belief among the faithful.

Edit: Triple-post, ouch, sorry.

[DracIV]

Okay, it's painful to read some of this, people. Much of it is wrong.

First of all, SohCahToa (name based off math; odd that you question math), science does not say there are no consequences. If you are greedy or steal or murder, you will suffer consequences in this life. You will go to jail, you will be hated, etc. We have morals and ethics that keep people honorable in this life. Few if any people don't commit crimes because they are religious, they do it because we as a race feel it is wrong.

Second topic, most of the science mentioned is flawed or incomplete.
The body dies because, over time, the caps on the end of our DNA wear away after millions of replications, our bodies suffer wear and tear (arthritis, etc.), certain functions run out of non-renewable supplies (ovaries), our hormones are no longer told to do their jobs (important), and the efficiency of our bodies begins to decrease.
The next error is gravity; gravity is caused by mass, not speed. Without gravity, the spinning of the Earth would throw us off, not keep us on. Gravity has been explained and is moderately well understood. We even have the math to explain and predict it perfectly!
Next, the ozone layer exists. We know it exists because it is right there. We can touch it, we can see it, we even know exactly what it consists of. You can't say it doesn't exist.
Next on the list, the number system itself cannot be wrong. Specific things might be, but irrational numbers aren't. In certain cases, you just flat out cannot split up a number like 7 into 9 equal portions. It just doesn't fit. Pi is the ratio of the circumference to the diameter of a circle. It isn't that hard to understand. It may not fit nicely, but you can't refute it. If the higher stuff confuses you, look at our number system on the simple level. We use base 10 counting. That has absolutely no effect on how many apples are there. The number system can only refer to our way of counting. No matter what, counting is still counting and it can't be wrong. Just count your toes. Are you sure you don't have 72?
Guest, you haven't been to Church recently have you? According to the Bible, there is only one God and everyone else is an idiot for believing in junk. Isn't the equivalent in the 10 Commandments? Also, the stuff about science being unable to explain our minds or the mobius strip is wrong. Math (which you have classified under science) explains very nicely what the mobius strip is. Science can explain why our minds exist and mostly how they work, even though we are still exploring why our minds work how they do and how they exist.
Again Guest, sorry for this rude comment, but you sound like an absolute moron. EVERYTHING has gravity. "0 Gravity Environment" refers to only microgravity. Also, the atmosphere does the equivalent of nothing to us. The only effect it has is friction, which isn't related to gravity. The reason things revolve is that they have enough speed to literally constantly fall past the edge the thing that is holding them in, but not enough speed to escape from their orbit. Also, gravity is either instantaneous or constant, we don't know which because of the conservation of mass. Gravity from stars 50,000,000 lightyears away affect us, just in a very miniscule amount. The point was that the star, even when that far away, would have more of an effect (due to mass) on the two objects than either would have on each other. I don't think you understood anything Jam said. When she said sucked in, she meant into the gravity well of the other object. When she mentioned exposure wearing down your body, it isn't a "cover all answer." She meant that the wear and tear of living, from running to fighting to blood pumping wears down your body slowly. Or in other words, exposure to everything (simplified as just exposure). Oh yeah, and you spelled theorem, basically, conveyed, explanation, general, because, environment, outcome, ignorant, idiotically, athiests, contradicts and revolve wrong. And a little tiny comment: You are so hypocritical that it is painful. We have no right to be rude you say? Then why is every post you make aimed at repeatedly saying the other person is an idiot, a moron, a fool, a liar, and a dimwit? Cease your nonsense! (I hope this doesn't double post)

[DracIV]

Aleco, a quick reply: things in the bible can be proven. We now know as a near-fact that most stories in the Bible are not literal. They are moral stories that were often older myths that were written down by the priests. Example: Noah's Ark.

Chardish: Chistianity, Judaeism, and the (?)Islamic religion all believe in the same god, but they branch off later in history. I'm not sure if it is the Islamic religion that shares the same god, but I know that one major religion from that region of the world does. Anyway, those grouped religions are somewhat exempt because they believe in the seed and disagree on the later outcomes or worship methods. To be more accurate, all monotheistic religions say that those who believe in other gods are wrong and all polytheistic religions believe that the monotheistic ones are wrong. And besides, everyone knows Knishkuggle is the One True God! (j/k)

[VxDx]

It comes down to this. religious folk believe based on ideas that can be neither proven or disproven. the very nature of religion makes it impossible to disprove (a survival tactic that supporters have come up with IMO) and to this date has not been proven nor has any evidence been shown that would even suggest a large probability of truth. people who do not believe are of the opinion that there should be some reason to believe in something, something concrete.

there is absolutely no point in debating whether god exists or not. neither side will win, neither side will convert anybody (plus, what would be the point?) the only time I'll interject anything religious into the discussion is when someone tries to prove religion or attack non-believers (a disclaimer before anyone calls me a hypocrite.

re: math and time's essential non-existance.
math is a system. that is all. irrational numbers exist because our system does not take into account every special case. our system is base 10 because our bodies have 10 digits.
time exists insofar as there is a physical effect that it is defined by. if time didn't exist, then what prompted those who first realized time to make a specific idea to define what "time" is. that time is continuous and not discrete says nothing of it's existance or non-existance.

[fusi0n]

Originally Posted by aleco

Chardish, congrats on being one of the few people who is right.

thanks for the useless opinion, ass.

[aleco]

Originally Posted by DracIV

Aleco, a quick reply: things in the bible can be proven. We now know as a near-fact that most stories in the Bible are not literal. They are moral stories that were often older myths that were written down by the priests. Example: Noah's Ark.

Whoa, that's a new one.
Tell me how we know this as a near-fact?

Originally Posted by fusi0n

thanks for the useless opinion, ass.

You are quite welcome.

[Thingy]

Does anyone see the irony that Chardish compared Christianity to "a martyr with 12 followers?"

Many people believe BECAUSE of logic.
If all religion is wrong, and you believe, then you die and thats it.
If your religion is right, and you believe, you get to go to heaven.
If your religion is wrong, and you dont believe, you still die.
If your religion is right, and you dont believe, you are in serious trouble.

So: If you believe, one of two things will happen, dead or heaven.
If you dont, one of two things will happen, dead or hell.

What do you think most people will choose?

I really dont know what my point is, I just disagreed with both sides. lol

[DracIV]

To follow my example of Noah's Arc: we know there was no worldwide flood. There would have been evidence worldwide (duh) in the dirt layers. There is not. There isn't even enough water on our entire planet to even get close to a worldwide flood. You'd need literally solid water pouring in from every single direction at a huge speed to flood the Earth like that. No one could survive it, even if it was possible. We also know that nearly every society has a flood story of some sort that follows that same path. Archaeologists have been able to trace it back to a Sumerian flood story that was totally possible. It involved a mayor of a city who built a large raft boat to clear up his debts by making a major goods transportation, but before it launched a freak storm occured in the dry season that caused a major flood and washed his whole family on the raft down into the Red Sea. They later arrived at an island where they headed back on a major journey of hundreds of miles to home. However, the debtors all needed money after the flood because of damages and he had lost all he had, so he was forced to leave or face death. They went back to the island (we can know which one it is, but I forgot) and set up a kingdom that became a major trading port and was immensely rich. They lived in a tropical paradise trading haven for the last of their years. Since the freak storm was a once in 800 years kind of thing, it was most definately noteworthy and since he was a king of a very rich kingdom his tale in particular was recorded. The story was passed on through the different societies through communication and later recorded by the Jewish priests they *think* as a moral story about what happens when you piss off God. The physical evidence and written story has been found for all this, and later stories even referenced it by name for many centuries before the original was forgotten. Beat that.