Science IS religion

[dad]

Wow ok. Maybe I’ve been asleep for 47 years. When exactly did science declare an official position of “how life got here”"

It permeates the education system, movies, books documentaries etc etc. While not specifying exactly, they matter of factly say it did. You know the pond/vent/comet/etc stories. Then there is the big bang where they claim the universe came from etc.

What does scientists “adhere to beliefs” mean? What would that look like? I believe dogs are more fun than cats, but if I woke up 1 day and wanted to adopt a cat- I’d just go get a cat.

That means they use the present world and nature/laws to model the past.

And WITH is a science prophet??

Science prophesies plenty such as how the universe and sun will go dark one day etc.

 

[dad]

Who is the ol deceiver? Many claim it’s satan but I just double checked the KJV, NIV & Living Bible and they all say serpent

Same punk.

 

[dad]

I have a ? about the flood. Wiki says according to the Bible it would’ve been ~2349 BCE. The Tower of Babel happened 100 yrs later with a workforce of 30,000. The pyramids were built 350 yrs after & the population at that time was 27 million. This is said to be a biological impossibility for 8 (?) ppl to accomplish after the flood. Any thoughts, ideas or theories?

Yes, reproduction was better in the former nature. Faster.

 

[dad]

I have no need to say anything about science. I’ve made no claims about science and it has nothing to do with my atheism.

The topic is how origin science is belief based or basically a religion. You should try to show it to be more here if you disagree.

If the Big Bang, Abiogenesis & Evolution was all disproved today, it wouldn’t change my beliefs one bit.

Those who hold the beliefs of science would be affected. If you are distancing yourself from those beliefs, fine.

 

[dad]

I think you could have your questions about the Big Bang, Abiogenesis & Evolution explained to you. If it’s facts or evidence you’re seeking, I think that would be a great place to start.

I have no questions on those fables. I have heard the basis and rational. Total religious twaddle.

 

[dad]

There was a clear point there. He was asking you how you would test the Bible.

I would test it by doing what it says. If any man obey the things He says, he will know, the bible says. I would test it by fulfilled prophesy. I would test it by the impact on history and people's lives. I would test it by prayer and seeing if it worked. etc. Science cannot test the bible or God.

 

[ratiocinator]

I would test it by doing what it says. If any man obey the things He says, he will know, the bible says. I would test it by fulfilled prophesy. I would test it by the impact on history and people's lives. I would test it by prayer and seeing if it worked. etc.

By all these tests, it fails. Fulfilled prophecy is a joke and all the rest is subjective and the people who say they have used these tests successfully disagree with each other.

 

[JChnsc19]

Sorry you believed the nonsense they lectured to you.

I said i had read a lot about it & watched lectures but I never said what topics specifically and I never said I believed it. I think you either assume a lot or you’re baiting me. I read to page 20 of this thread. I’ve seen your responses and many ppl trying to explain things to you. I was addressing those issues because they seem to be what you’re focusing on. Wether I agree with them or not is irrelevant, this is your thread, not mine.

 

[JChnsc19]

The topic is how origin science is belief based or basically a religion. You should try to show it to be more here if you disagree.


Those who hold the beliefs of science would be affected. If you are distancing yourself from those beliefs, fine.

This is your thread. YOU are the one who keeps asking all these questions then ignoring people when they answer you. I’ve made no claims about science. I was responding to this origin science thing you keep talking about. I’m not distancing myself from anything.

 

[JChnsc19]

I have no questions on those fables. I have heard the basis and rational. Total religious twaddle.

Wasn’t that my response to your “show us a test then.” My point was if you wanted to see a test or experiment about “origin science”, that maybe a professional could best answer the “show us a test then” command.

 

[JChnsc19]

Same punk.

Are you calling me a punk? Or Satan? Cause genesis never IDs the serpent as Satan. And I was wondering if you go to the Dr.? If you were in a car wreck & broke your back, would you refuse medical care? Do you look at weather forecasts? Do you take your pets to a vet? Do you avoid jumping off skyscrapers because of that pesky gravity thing? Do you believe the warnings about hazardous chemicals or do you drink bleach & gasoline? Do you avoid standing out under the summer sun for hours on end without sunscreen? Do you avoid mixing ammonia & bleach while cleaning? You said the ol deceiver inspired science- do you reject all the findings & recommendations brought about by research because the ol deceiver inspired it?

 

[JChnsc19]

I would test it by doing what it says. If any man obey the things He says, he will know, the bible says. I would test it by fulfilled prophesy. I would test it by the impact on history and people's lives. I would test it by prayer and seeing if it worked. etc. Science cannot test the bible or God.

Did you test it by doing Mark 16:18? Numbers 5:11-31? Or did you find the firmament?

 

[wellwisher]

Statistical arguments, used for Evolution, make use of "a whims of the Gods" approach to science. If you need anything to happen, the gods of random can make it happen to fill in the blanks. Faith is the belief in things not seen. Faith is part of evolutionary science; belief in things not seen, or else the whim of the gods approach would not be needed so you can pretend to see. That is why when challenge to run an experiment there is a pause since their gods may not show up.

In the late 1950's, as observational technology improved, it was observed that proteins fold with exact folding. This was unexpected, since the then prevailing theory in biology was based on the average folding of protein due to random thermal fluctuations in water. This theory had been around for decades and was based on statistical arguments. Exact folding was not a term used in statistics, since it implied probability of 1.0; sure thing = logical.

Although the biological sciences should have advanced its approach upward toward reason, due to this evidence, here we are 60 years later and statistical arguments for life are still being used. This continued obsolete approach has turned the sciences of the origins of life, into a type of whims of the gods religion. There is no need to reason properly since the gods will provide.

In practical terms, the absolute approach was retained because the biological industries were expanding in the 1950's, and they needed lots of skilled able bodies to man the factories. The statistical approach was more conducive to a larger labor force, since reasoning was newer and harder than a generic procedure, and therefore could place limits on the scale of the work force. Science is beholden to government and business, so money talked and science walked, instead of ran.

The reason proteins fold with each folds is because protein fold to minimize the free energy of the water; solvent, in which there are dissolved. This minimal free energy sweet spot, results in a unique exact folding arrangement that is always the same; exact folds. Lifeforms or the physical forms by which biology catalogs all types of life, is based on how water folds and then integrates all the proteins, that make up each life form to minimize the free energy of the water.

Genetics is important since it provides the raw materials for the water-protein construction process. But the water-protein construction is what creates the final life forms, which are cataloged by science, and then used as the basis for what we call evolution. Even the fossils are artifacts of the water-protein construction processes. There is currently too much emphasis on the DNA, based on the whims of the gods; jackpots assumption. Logic sees this differently, since the dominant water-protein construction, that defines all levels of form, sets both the macro and micro stages for how the DNA is used to further minimize the free energy in water.

As an analogy, all computer manufacturing companies such as Dell, Apple, Microsoft to name a few, buy similar processors from Intel, as well as similar components from common manufacturers. These parts are the genes on the DNA. Although each company buys similar parts, each company constructs these in their own style, which gives them market share at various quality and price points. These final forms help to decide what is needed to advance; feedback to Intel. Apple has Intel make avery specific set of processors which are optimized to its software needs. Water can act like a binary switch to reflect and feedforward the dynamics information flow from the organics.

 

[dad]

By all these tests, it fails. Fulfilled prophecy is a joke and all the rest is subjective and the people who say they have used these tests successfully disagree with each other.

I disagree with your assessment of the Almighty.

 

[dad]

I said i had read a lot about it & watched lectures but I never said what topics specifically and I never said I believed it. I think you either assume a lot or you’re baiting me. I read to page 20 of this thread. I’ve seen your responses and many ppl trying to explain things to you. I was addressing those issues because they seem to be what you’re focusing on. Wether I agree with them or not is irrelevant, this is your thread, not mine.

Fine, admit ignorance. That is OK.

 

[dad]

Wasn’t that my response to your “show us a test then.” My point was if you wanted to see a test or experiment about “origin science”, that maybe a professional could best answer the “show us a test then” command.

Well I guess I thought people posting were knowledgeable about the beliefs they were defending. I have debated with scientists, astro wizs, evo/bio hotshots and etc etc etc. I know what they can say. Most specialize in a small area, and can't defend even that.

 

[dad]

This is your thread. YOU are the one who keeps asking all these questions then ignoring people when they answer you. I’ve made no claims about science. I was responding to this origin science thing you keep talking about. I’m not distancing myself from anything.

Great, so origin sciences deal in origins, such as where life, man, the world and etc originated. The observation here is that these are belief based, making them basically religious fables. Feel free to weigh in one way or the other...or not.

 

[dad]

Are you calling me a punk? Or Satan?

The serpent, the deceiver, the destroyer Satan..etc etc. Various names for the punk.

Cause genesis never IDs the serpent as Satan.

The bible does though.

And I was wondering if you go to the Dr.? If you were in a car wreck & broke your back, would you refuse medical care? Do you look at weather forecasts? Do you take your pets to a vet? Do you avoid jumping off skyscrapers because of that pesky gravity thing? Do you believe the warnings about hazardous chemicals or do you drink bleach & gasoline? Do you avoid standing out under the summer sun for hours on end without sunscreen? Do you avoid mixing ammonia & bleach while cleaning? You said the ol deceiver inspired science- do you reject all the findings & recommendations brought about by research because the ol deceiver inspired it?

Yes, I use actual science and would be burned up in a nuclear explosion like other folks. I never have or will use anything from origin science fables though! No relation.

 

[dad]

Did you test it by doing Mark 16:18? Numbers 5:11-31? Or did you find the firmament?

When we see it is true, then we can be certain even the things we do not yet see are also valid.

 

[JChnsc19]

The serpent, the deceiver, the destroyer Satan..etc etc. Various names for the punk.
The bible does though.

Yes, I use actual science and would be burned up in a nuclear explosion like other folks. I never have or will use anything from origin science fables though! No relation.

What is the chapter & verse where it specifically names the serpent in the original sin story as satan?