What's your Religion?

Exactly. Science has given the world may tangible things, that we know to be true. What has religion done? I can only think of two things. Religion is something people have 'faith' in. And it has caused the majority of the wars in human history.

 

If you don't beleive Science has inconsistencies, then don't beleive it. I could talk about it, but anytime I pinned a subject down, you could refute and call it "progress".

Oh well, let's look at Scientific Law for a moment.

The first law of motion - objects in motion stay in motion, Second law - objects at rest stay at rest. So, by Scientific law, how can nothing, existing at zero degrees kelvin (absence of all energy), suddenly collide, move and create what we know as the Universe?

 

I wonder what the people of Nagasaki and Hiroshima thought of the Science in splitting the Atom. We are on the verge of war right now as Iran wants Nuclear technology. This is progress though I guess.

 

That's not how scientists believe the universe began.

 

Absolute zero is not the absence of all energy. Absolute zero is when the motion of all particles ceases. There is still something called zero-point energy described in quantum mechanics. Additionally, the particles will move once any thermal energy is exchanged (IE: heat). They may also move due to external forces.

What is your point? The atomic bomb is a tangible thing, and it isn't the reason that the war started. Throughout the history of mankind, the majority of human conflicts have been fought over religious beliefs, divine right, or religion was used as justification for something else.

P.S. There is no such thing as degrees Kelvin...the unit is just Kelvin.

 

Regardles of absolute zero and my usage, my point still stands that Science can't always explain things. It is as rediculous not to question it in the same way as the Bible for me.

My point about tangible things was a counter as everyone likes to bring great Scientific discoveries, cures, etc. This was mainly in repsonse to an earlier example where a memeber mentioned DNA testing. I choose to look at all of the "progress" and decide how it really has helped us as a civilization. Personally, I think we would be better off without many discoveries and "advancements".

Aplogies about usage, but you can use zero degreees...just not a correct way to use it.

"Kelvin is typically not expressed in degree(s), just Temperature Kelvin
(e.g., 50 K for 50 kelvin). ***(note2 at bottom, about kelvin vs degree kelvin)"

​

 

How can Science even use the term "began", it can't even prove this is a linear issue. There may have been no beginning, there is no way to say otherwise with the Scientific Method.

 

agnostics and atheists-25%. carpe diem-ags aths need no crutch, no cop out

 

It is because what we have viewed so far of the universe has shown a trend of growth from a relative time that has been regarded as the initial expansion of the universe. I don't see why you expect humans to understand how the universe was started or other celestial events when we as a species have only existed for a microscopically small amount of time and at that been practicing science for an even smaller amount of time. Right now science is in its birth and its truly remarkable how advanced we are. Its a shame you hide behind religion to be ignorant to facts. I cant comprehend how wasting your life by arguing against science is rational or even exciting. Think of everything you could experience in this world without religion blinding you with prejudices or petty grievances because a fictional book tells you that is how to live.

 

First, I do not hide behind religion. I am Agnostic, hate to confuse you with more facts, but I have stated that several times. I do respect those who have different views than myself, particularly those who have conducted themselves like docbrown has. He has been very forth right about his beliefs, he has answered many questions and actually been helpful in explaining his personal faith and beliefs without being combative or argumantative. I find it very interesting. You on the other hand, have shown a fascinating ability to cut and paste pics, maybe you are just not very thoughtful with your beliefs, or perhaps you just don't know how to communicate without resorting to pre-adolecent forum antics or trying to antagonize others.

I would agree with you about Science being in it's infancy, and hope it "evolves" quickly as I think we are regressing currently with it.

 

.

 

Lets look at creation through the concept of baking a cake.

Scientific cake baking process:

1. buy cake mix box and ingredients
2. read directions on box
3. mix ingredients
4. put cake in oven to bake
5. eat cake

Religious cake baking process:

1. ?
2. ?
3. ?
4. ?
5. eat cake

Science attempts to explain how everything. Religion just expects you to accept that it is, and don't question it. Don't learn about or from it. You don't need to know how it works. You won't be told what steps 1-4 were before you eat the cake that was provided to you (or after for that matter, just accept that it is there).

So take the creation of Earth. Science theorizes that a massive explosion sent out energy and matter, and both of those eventually drifted together to form planets/stars/etc. When I can watch fur from my dog come off, and form piles the size of cats under my tables, that seems plausible. It doesn't explain what/who started the explosion, or where the ingredients came from. However, they are still working on it, and it explains more than religion does.

Religion says God created the world in 6 days. On the 3rd day he created plants an animals, and the sun on the 4th day. So how did plants an animals survive without sunlight? And how long were those first 3 days considering the unit of measure (1 day = 1 revolution of the planet) DID NOT EXIST.

Also, how does one make a planet to revolve around a star before the star is actually there? Without the sun in place first, the orbit of the earth would have flung us off into space. Much like spinning a yo-yo around your head and cutting the string.

I tend to believe more in science because I can probably pick up any basic science or math book (let's say HS level as most people probably have been exposed to them, and would be the most commonly taught theories), thumb through the pages, and find theories I can test myself. Either doing the experiments or equations at my kitchen table, or observing them in nature. I can't do anything similar with religion that'll provide feedback to prove it.

 

I agree with your outlook and feel much the same way... I can understand science, and question it and find a possibly logical answer. Nothing about religion is logical, it completely avoids logic.
In fact, docBrown has done a stellar job at proving this point by showing us that any answer to a question about Christianity is that "God intended it to be such and such way", or "because God purposed it to be that way", and the only way it makes sense is if you push the magic "I believe button" and accept that as your answer. He says that God is proving his relevance by allowing time, however, by sitting back and doing nothing to prove his existence and relevance over time he's allowing more and more people to become convince that he isn't really there and never was. It just doesn't make sense no matter which way you put it docBrown, I'm sorry.

 

LOL!!!

hahaha, fucking wikipedia

but the oldest historical recordings we modern humans have discovered, tell a story much further back in time.

global warming is a liberal lie to scare people. The earth has been warming and cooling called "ice ages" for many cycles. poverty is caused from the govt keeping people poor or the people sitting on their asses.

i think the coran is counterfeit. it was written by an arab bandit so its OK to lie, cheat, rob, kill, etc. from / to / do others of a different faith. listen to the translated version of their prayer they say multiple times everyday. there isnt anything religious about that. just submit

its not a religion, but the first history as we know of has a pretty interesting explanation to the whole creation. look up the sumerian tablets.

sounds like the environmentalist liberals date back pretty far, or their views were incorporated into a newer version of the bible

yes, radioactive material is natural, as is oil. both from the earth. well, i guess oil was created from natural occurances with natural material, not exactly from the earth, but u know what i mean

ok, just look at the "fruits" of muslims. need i say more?

I know ALOT of people that think theyre christian or catholic or whatever, but only when its convenient. not very many go as far as to wait till marriage for sex. (and in my opinion, we shouldnt. i guess im a sinner and should be punished) and gays sure dont mind being gay.

the american constitution was an attempt to divide power so "absolute power corrupting absolutely" wouldnt happen, yet there are people trying to destroy it. and u know what? the founding fathers were free masons, not christian!

 

also like ur logic

 

http://sabbathrock.com/tablets.aspx

^^THIS!!^^ check this out!

 

Adam and Eve were not polluting - never said they specifically were but that man in general does not have the best track record of being stewards of the earth.

God has known from the start that man cannot rule, but he is not the one that needed convincing, it is man.

 

I was merely pointing out that just because there are several opinions and everyone thinks the other person is wrong does not make it so.

 

Adam and Eve were immediately sinners. Why wouldn't God just give up?

 

Not offended at all. I never get upset when good questions are asked. Why there is evil is a very good question as is why God has not acted to do away with it. The Bible encourages us to search and ask questions.