outhouse
Atheistically
Laughable.
There is nothing at all to study. The text book on creation is EMPTY it would have blank pages as you don't have any evidence at all, nothing.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Is Science Better Than Religion?
- Thread starter Mycroft
- Start date
Laughable.
There is nothing at all to study. The text book on creation is EMPTY it would have blank pages as you don't have any evidence at all, nothing.
Unfortunately, they are very scientific terms. They correspond to possible responses on what is usually referred to as Likert-type response data.
Depends upon the question. If the question is one that can be empirically investigated, than religion offers nothing and the sciences offer the best method.
Are you a scientist? What research experience do you have?
Actually, research in the cognitive sciences (particularly those that have been conducted or used by marketing researchers) are far more effective than "religion" for generating responses such as aid. Second, we have no current system, but multiple systems.
Religion as we understand it didn't exist until a few centuries ago, no religion can do better than good marketing (which is what most religious groups rely on), and charity works only through non-religious information transfer.
outhouse
Atheistically
The only reason your alive today is because of science.
Without the CDC you would be dead.
Your religion only tries to comfort those that stand next to the dead in this case. It does not prevent death from disease or accident.
JayJayDee
Avid JW Bible Student
Simply reading the Bible does not guarantee an understanding of it. Taking into consideration the times and sensibilities of the people living in those times helps us to understand many things that, taken with today's sensibilities, make little sense. The teachings of Jesus Christ show us the way we should worship now. They are still relevant 2,000 years later.
The Creator does not require us to believe in him in order to fulfil his purpose in connection with his creation. All will go ahead, with us or without us. If you don't want what he is offering, he will not force anyone to obey him or even believe in him. It is our choice. But all choices have consequences. Humans want choices without consequences. Sorry, it doesn't work like that.
JayJayDee
Avid JW Bible Student
outhouse, it would take up so little space if you just addressed your response in one post. Can you not provide your answers in a more succinct fashion? Most of these addressed nothing.....you were just whining.
LOL....being a "theist" doesn't make you a Christian. Being a pope doesn't make you one either.
No true Christian will put aside the word of God to take the word of man. Man's words and thoughts are not infallible. Educated guesses are not facts, no matter how convincing they make it sound.
It is reality only to those who have been convinced that it is true. There is no "reality"...it is all created by assumptions being accepted as fact. There are no facts. Facts are not based on assumptions...they are proved by evidence and experimentation. It is a huge leap from the small changes of adaptation to macro-evolution, but they make it sound like It's nothing.
Peer review in evolution is a joke. The review is done by fellow "believers". That is like getting one denomination of Christendom to peer review their shared beliefs in the trinity.
No matter how much they support one another's argument, they can't make the Bible say there is a trinity. It does not come from the Bible...it comes from outside sources. Yet look at how many swear that it is established Biblical fact. Weight of numbers has never meant much to God. His people have always been in a minority. We will never compromise.
You can believe whatever you like but when science claims that evolution is established fact...they are not being honest. A theory is not a fact....it is what someone "believes" to be true. Interpretation of the evidence can be skewed by the belief of the scientists. If they all want it to be true, (which they do) then they will find ways to present it in a very convincing fashion. In that, you have no advantage over Christendom.
LOL....being a "theist" doesn't make you a Christian. Being a pope doesn't make you one either.
No true Christian will put aside the word of God to take the word of man. Man's words and thoughts are not infallible. Educated guesses are not facts, no matter how convincing they make it sound.
Science is not anti god
It is reality only to those who have been convinced that it is true. There is no "reality"...it is all created by assumptions being accepted as fact. There are no facts. Facts are not based on assumptions...they are proved by evidence and experimentation. It is a huge leap from the small changes of adaptation to macro-evolution, but they make it sound like It's nothing.
Peer review in evolution is a joke. The review is done by fellow "believers". That is like getting one denomination of Christendom to peer review their shared beliefs in the trinity.
No matter how much they support one another's argument, they can't make the Bible say there is a trinity. It does not come from the Bible...it comes from outside sources. Yet look at how many swear that it is established Biblical fact. Weight of numbers has never meant much to God. His people have always been in a minority. We will never compromise. You can believe whatever you like but when science claims that evolution is established fact...they are not being honest. A theory is not a fact....it is what someone "believes" to be true. Interpretation of the evidence can be skewed by the belief of the scientists. If they all want it to be true, (which they do) then they will find ways to present it in a very convincing fashion. In that, you have no advantage over Christendom.
Ben Dhyan
Veteran Member
Yes...this is something that the moderators should be alerted to...it must be from the atheist activists handbook...I note mestemia does it also....
JayJayDee
Avid JW Bible Student
I am not American. Your CDC is your problem. If you knew the truth about your health system, (and indeed the whole "health" industry world wide) you might not be so quick to sing its praises.
Now this is simply ignorant. Science does not prevent death or accidents either. Are you aware that all those breakthrough's in disease control and prevention are announced through the media, but then bureaurocracy makes them unavailable for decades....if you ever hear about them again. There are lots of carrots on sticks but apparently hardly anyone ever gets to eat them.
If it wasn't for stupid humans polluting the daylights out of the planet (by implementing their various branches of science) in their efforts to make profits......and employing mass farming methods, growing nutrient-deficient produce in mineral deficient, biologically dead soil, and artifcially feeding livestock food that they would never normally eat......and pumping them full of hormones to fatten them up quickly for market, we would all be a lot healthier. Healthier people would have a lot more natural immunity to disease.
The organic food industry is also profit driven...so how can we win? Unless you have lots of money, they have you over a barrel. Science has even messed with plant seeds so that they do not produce "according to their kind". That is a violation of nature...purely profit driven.
The fast food industry also has a lot to answer for. Obesity and it's related heart disease is killing more people than anything else. How is your CDC addressing that?
If there were not so many people taking various medications to help them cope with life and illness, their gut might just operate more efficiently to boost their natural immune response to disease.
Anti-biotic resistant strains of bacteria are the result of science run amok. They have created monsters that cannot be destroyed by anything. And the place we pick up these bacteria are even more scary for those who have to go to hospital for any reason.
It's a bit like the nuclear power industry....we have enough free energy from the sun to power the whole world...no pollution and an inexhaustible supply.....but nuclear power produces waste that is deadly and cannot be destroyed. How clever is science then? Is it just a co-incidence that nuclear weapons can be manufactured from the end product? Do you know how much are stockpiled in the world? Yep, we have so much to thank science for. It seems as if there is way more evil than good in its many applications.
Last edited:
outhouse
Atheistically
It is not about you or Christians. It is about religious fanaticism and fundamentalism that stops academic growth in many.
outhouse
Atheistically
Ridiculous.
Many Scientific advancements were put forward to save lives. When you go to a hospital, it is science that save you NOT YOUR MYTHOLOGY.
outhouse
Atheistically
outhouse
Atheistically
JayJayDee
Avid JW Bible Student
All these multiple posts outhouse...why??? Do you have ADD? Can you not address these points in one post?
Actually what you post is unsubstantiated rhetoric. Whining about what Inpost is hardly an intelligent response.
That's why no one is dying from disease or preventable illness on this planet. ?????
What diseases are being stopped that aren't replaced by some thing else? Lifestyle disease is causing more deaths in your country than anything else....how does your CDC propose to fix that?
Actually what you post is unsubstantiated rhetoric. Whining about what Inpost is hardly an intelligent response.
That's why no one is dying from disease or preventable illness on this planet.
?????What diseases are being stopped that aren't replaced by some thing else? Lifestyle disease is causing more deaths in your country than anything else....how does your CDC propose to fix that?
outhouse
Atheistically
You have to make a point for me to address one.
You have no brought forward anything academic yet. Once you do I would be glad to address it.
You quote mine, you provide only opinion, and your opinion is not credible.
Please post something academic.
I also will not reply in full to dishonesty of any kind.
outhouse
Atheistically
You know your not allowed to Proselytize your faith. Thus you are required to substantiate ones claims in a debate thread.
There is no debating evolution, it is fact. So what we see is people of all kinds screwing these facts up. That's when people with more knowledge step in and debate those errors.
I can see if one keeps making errors, and making biased apologetic statements without credible sources, they will get called on it, over and over again.
Rick O'Shez
Irishman bouncing off walls
Ben Dhyan
Veteran Member
We've been over this time and time again....religious doctrine is full of allegory, metaphor, parable, etc., as no mortal can ever see the transcendent realms. It is a mystical journey from the perspective of mortals, but real nevertheless.
If you insist that all religious teachings and understanding must be amenable to the scientific method in order to be taken seriously, then that is ridiculous and no debate can take place. What is more, if you insist on this position and reply to every religious post with..."unsubstantiated rhetoric", etc....then that to my understanding would run counter to the very spirit of the Science and Religion Forum and make a mockery of it.
It is the Science and Religion Forum after all...
Bunyip
pro scapegoat
Religious teachings do not need to be amenable to the scientific method - but scientific claims made by the religious do.
Ben Dhyan
Veteran Member
Of course,,,,that's how science works....
Bunyip
pro scapegoat
No, that is how honesty works.
Ben Dhyan
Veteran Member
Hold on...you made a statement that implied scientific claims by religious people should amenable to the scientific method...yes?
I replied that yes, that's the way science works...yes?
And now you contradict your first post and instead imply it is honesty, and not scientific claims that should be amenable to the scientific method, because that's the way honesty works?