Religion

[Sardauker-Kirov]

They can't proof god, But they cant also turn down the belief of the Religious people. You know what my Christian grandmother said?

"Science is just a Snake, That cant burrow inside the existence of god "

God can never be proofed by Science.   :P

Besides Acriku, Why arent you complaining about the other guy's that are using "violence" threads Above.

And what do you mean with going two ways? Explain yourself Atreides Logo :P

[nemafakei]

SD-Kirov: It is far easier to prove the existence of a thing than to disprove it. This is well known.

Mathematically, we are tending towards not being able to prove god... We are also tending towards being able to explain everything by science. That doesn't mean that there will necessarily come a point when we can explain absolutely everything (This is technically impossible acc. to Quantum theory) BUT it means that there is almost definitely no god.

"Science is just a Snake, That cant burrow inside the existence of god "

I agree completely.

Science is knowledge. Science is TRUTH. And truth undermines belief in god. Therefore god does not exist.

[nampigai]

In my opinion science isn't neceseraly the truth, I believe that something can't be explained I don't say that god made adam and eve I believe in the evulotion. Still I also believe that there's alot more to life than we can ever explain, than science can explain.

Sometimes science can't give you the answer, atleast that's how I see it. We have to just believe sometimes and not demand a scientific evidence on everything.

[gryphon]

Nema, strange point of vieuw from your side.

It's not easier to prove the existence of a thing, it is easier to contradict things. ?

And your asumption that their comes a time that we will be able to explain absolutely everything is an assumption, nothing more. Like I described earlier, you put your fait in science. But it still is fait and you can't say that we WILL be able to exlain everything some day.

[ What if there is no "real truth", no world unkooked by our own experianc and vision ? Than what is it you say we will be able to explain ? ]

And Mathematically we will never be able to prove God. God isn't a mathemathical enthety. So how whould mathematics be able to explain something that reathes outsides it's field ?

And how can quantum mechanics deny the existance of a God ?

The prsent science can't give us the prove of the existens of [ a ] God. But this doesn't include that science tells us that God CAN'T exist.

It's logica.

if "A" them "B"

"not A"

But this doesn't mean "not B"

[nemafakei]

What? Science is, by definition, a search for the truth.

"Sometimes science can't give you the answer"

True. However, it may be able to give you the answer in 10 years time. It may give you the wrong answer today, and the right one tomorrow. Assuming we survive, you'll eventually get your answer.

Claiming that something is false is easy enough. Proving it is another matter - you have to 'look' in every place to do it - ie science would have to explain everything. That isn' going to happen. We can, however, use logic: disproving by contradiction.

Gryphon... god may not be mathematical... but he can be disproved by mathematical/logical means. Otherwise, you may as well say 1=2.

[nampigai]

I don't buy it Nema science is in my opinion not the answer of every thing if there's a god or even spirits how would you explain those scientically.

Also how do you explain things like instincts in animals and humans, I believe that somethings will be forever unexplained by science.

[gryphon]

Science is the search for empirical nowledge. Not the truth itself. Science can't be the truth it tries to explain. Than what is it explaining ?

[ It would ending up explaining itself ;D ]

So science is the search for truth, not truth itself.

Adn you can't say that you eventulally get your answer.

If that could be, than why ? [ or howcome ? ]

[nemafakei]

"there's a god or even spirits how would you explain those scientically"

- They don't exist

- If they did, they could be explained scientifically - that's what science is all about.

"So science is the search for truth, not truth itself"

Ok, mentally replace science with 'the product of science' wherever you deem fit.

"instincts in animals and humans"

Chemicals exuded (ppb or smaller), subconscious analysis of sensed data... I'm not a biologist, but I know these at least.

You will get your answer because, (remember we're assuming) science continues, someone or some people will work it out logically with use of data which may not  yet be acquired

[gryphon]

Let's say for a moment that your are right Nema. And science is the "ultimate knoledge".

Then we know that our brain has a limit to what it can understand. Evry brain is unique in this and has his own limits. But still this limit exists and therefor you can [ scientifically ] say that we won't be able to have all the answers. And we can't comprehend evrything.

So science disproves your point in this case, and logic dictates that if an exeption can be found, The rule isn't a valuable logic assesment and therefor not a valid rule.

:)

[gryphon]

My point being. You have fait in science just as fait in a God. You can't prove eatcher or both.

And although the fait or believe in science is "easyer" to accept doesn't mean it's right. As you mentioned it's correct now, but what about tomorrow. But then science isn't correct because it can always be more correct.

Science is the collective believe in ecertani rules that happen to be correct in "real" life.

[nemafakei]

While humans *at the moment* have a set limit, who is to say we will not, in the future use collective understanding and our brains improve and we understand also via machine...

[gryphon]

You are basing a theory on an assumption, not on real facts. So you are now doing the same as most religions do.

You have the fait that this will happen.

But as you probbebly know. You can't prove you're right by refering to possible knowledge that we might get in the future.

Your fait is in science, just as some others put theirs in religion [ Theological religions ], but it's still the same. You have FAIT in something that you can't prove.

[ btw. you've ignored the fact that logic dictates that if an exeption . .. . etc..  so your "defence" isn't scientiffically correct. And you are explaining science not with science but with fait. But explenation is above. :) ]

[gryphon]

Collectieve understanding ? What ?!

You know that you can't simply ad different levels of intelligence to eatchother. It's not something you can "put together". That should mean that you can simply ad one persones IQ to the others. So you and me in a room whould mean we have an IQ of 200, when we are seperate we have an IQ of 100 eatch ?

Please Nema, specially you should know that this isn't science.

[ordos45]

Conservative grandma?  Anyhow what nice personal attacks I am seeing here.

[ragnarok_blade]

Besides if in the beginning of the Universe has no Living Organic and non living Organic. How could live exist then?

[gryphon]

No, not that Dr. Dino guy again ;D

[ragnarok_blade]

No, not that Dr. Dino guy again ;D

The site just gives rebuttals to Dr. Dino, proving his idiocy. He hasn't disproven evolution, nor have any other creationists. I don't expect them to do so legitimately either.

[gryphon]

Didn't mean it in a negative way. Just that he appears again here. That's all. :)

[Acriku]

gryphon, our minds are forever changing, expanding our limit of understanding. So, if the rate of figuring out is slower than the rate of expansion, we could theoretically find out everything.

Think about this: when the Nomadic tribes, after the Ice age, were admiring about the bird, they would never have thought that one day we could fly. It's impossible to them! But look now, we are flying. WE aren't actually flying, but the crafts we use we sit in are. That's bending the rules. Ain't it grand?

And of course there are assumptions! Without them, how could science function? And for all you anti-science people, just remember the "assumptions" made by scientists save people's lives everyday.

[gryphon]

That's not the "knowledge limit" I was refering to. Our brains have a certain stop to what they can comprehend. And this is not the same as the "imagination" part you are describing.

More like [ so not acaxtly but as an example ] we will never be able to see the 8 dimension direcly with our own cences. This is simply not possible for us. And so our brain also has a limit to what it can "comprehend".

The "imaginary" part you mentiond is correct. We can't predict what we can do / imagine in 100 years from now. We just have now idea about that.

Assumptions made by religious people save lives evry day es well. :)

Acriku, you mayby noticed what I was trying to do [ not say but do ]. For all the others.

To start with, saying God doesn't exist because of the fact that science can't prove it's existans isn't a valid patern of resoning.

And second, all [ most people axually, not all ] people that say [ in the name of science ] that God doesn't exist and can't possible exist. And that you can't rely on a religion based uppon fait to be real have a serious flaw in their way of reasoning. Because the verry science they "uphold" is based upon alsmost the same assumptions as religion is. They can't prove their point aswell, and that's the point by with they judge the "other" science [ religion in this case ]. So they are also judging their own scientiffic fait at the same time.

So if people are capable of saying "of course there are assumptions !". How can they only apply those assumptions upon the [ empirical, phisical and mathematicall ] science and not upon religion ? You should apply them on both. Else you create an unfair possition for both thing to be judged by.

:)

[Sardauker-Kirov]

Nah, I supose Science is both Spiritual and Real existant, Heck yeah. They can proof the Super natural things with a Lousy computer. *Falls over laughing*

One thing is sure, Science is Power and Make's the understanding of things alot easier. But i mentiond this a hundred time. Science cant prove all, And because it cant be  proven doesnt mean it doesnt exist.

And a note about Spirits, There are millions of story's and proof about them. Maybe you dont watch the books of Super Natural event's. Even Detectives said the Picture's wasnt messed or alterd.

[gryphon]

Exactly !

"science can't prove all. And because it can't be proven doesn't mean it doesn't exists."

Same with religious fait.

:)

[Sardauker-Kirov]

*Sticks out his tongue to the Science fanatics Japanese style*  :P (Esp nema and Acriku)

0_o  ^_^

Damn. I wonder how those White coats would react. If we suddenly get our ass kicked by a Race. That uses Ki or Magic power's to whoop the human race.

They would probably make a excuse... Ummmm .. ermmmm.. No they arent using magic ..... They... using..... yeah yeah DNA. They are using DNA to create those powers.

[gryphon]

Don't judge them to quick. I've met a lot of scientist from small to big. And the realy "good" ones where all aware of this. You learn this in the years that you follow the specialisation classes on your scientific field.

[Acriku]

Oh boy the fun I would have if I had moderator powers!

First off, stop the attacks Kirov, you are only making an idiot of yourself.

Second, the evolution of ourselves can also let us look into other dimensions, why could it not? Evolution doesn't go back without direct interference, so it can only go forward. And how do religious people save lives by religion? Through Christ? Please! Proof dude! And if religion "somehow" does save lives, do you the ratio of that to science? 1/23948235235!

The scientific assumptions are things like 2 does in fact = 2. That the tongue is in fact an organ. The plane above our heads is in fact up. That's like saying in religion, the Bible was written by humans. That the Bible does speak the words of God. That Jesus was alive. Etc.

And the spiritual "occurences" could be explained by science, just like other mystical mysteries have been solved, such as the crying statue of Mary. The turning of water into blood. Just because everyone cries bird doesn't mean it isn't Superman.