Science IS religion

[Subduction Zone]

Absurdly false. No one needs to explain how Jesus fed over twenty thousand people wit a few loves and fishes. Science certainly has no clue, might as well ask cave men! There is no reason to doubt the supernatural supply of God recorded in Scripture. Just because you have no idea how He does things, does not mean nothing was done!

Manna came from heaven. Where God had the crow pick up the bread in this case we do not know. That just shows how limited science is.

Heaven has plenty of whatever is needed! Also, if God used earthly bakers for the bread, then all we need to do is ask how far a crow flies!?

You sit there armchair guessing and doubting with zero basis in knowledge or fact. You thought that had any value whatsoever??

dad, you need evidence that the myths of the Bible are true. Without any they are reasonably deemed to be false.

 

[dad]

No you believe in fables and fiction. We know evolution happens because it occurs from adapting and evolving. It happens and is actual science.

The observed adaptations are a drop in the ocean compared to the unending plethora of evolution they claim was responsible fr life on earth. Just because we do get some slow evolving today, does not mean that it was evolution that was responsible for all creatures! Evolving was a gift from God, built into life on earth, and from the evidences it actually happened at a very great speed in the former nature! That does not mean that it was not created kinds that evolved! Your fable is baseless.

 

[dad]

That is wrong as well. Genetics alone proves beyond a reasonable doubt that we are related to other animals. The same evidence that allows people to say "You are not the father!!" tells us that you are related to other apes.

False. Sharing components does not mean related by birth.

 

[Subduction Zone]

False. Sharing components does not mean related by birth.

You asked for evidence and it is evidence. This only tells us that the concept is beyond you. You can claim that two plus two does not equal four until the cows come home. But without any evidence no one will believe you. You really should learn what is and what is not evidence.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The observed adaptations are a drop in the ocean compared to the unending plethora of evolution they claim was responsible fr life on earth. Just because we do get some slow evolving today, does not mean that it was evolution that was responsible for all creatures! Evolving was a gift from God, built into life on earth, and from the evidences it actually happened at a very great speed in the former nature! That does not mean that it was not created kinds that evolved! Your fable is baseless.

Still believing a myth without any reliable evidence tells us that you are not reasoning rationally.

 

[dad]

You asked for evidence .

Evidence that different creatures share common things is evidence that some things are used in more than just one creature. If you claim that shared genetic material must be due to birth/common ancestors, show the proof.

 

[dad]

Still believing a myth without any reliable evidence tells us that you are not reasoning rationally.

Your belief is that modern evolving represents a process that is responsible for all life on earth. My belief is that God given evolving abilities are part of how we were created. You have posted no scientific evidence for your belief.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Evidence that different creatures share common things is evidence that some things are used in more than just one creature. If you claim that shared genetic material must be due to birth/common ancestors, show the proof.

Wrong. You just demonstrated that you did not understand the quote on scientific evidence that I posted earlier.

This is why you need to learn what is and what is not evidence.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Your belief is that modern evolving represents a process that is responsible for all life on earth. My belief is that God given evolving abilities are part of how we were created. You have posted no scientific evidence for your belief.

No, you have mere belief. I have knowledge. You claim that your God lies, though you do not understand how you claim that.

And I have posted evidence. You simply do not understand the concept and appear to be afraid to learn.

 

[Truly Enlightened]

Ghost tests?
Since origins so called (pseudo) science is false, they have made up many stories, correct.
The problem is that actual science is lumped together with origins religious nonsense, so that truth must be separated from fiction.

Most science today is laced with belief based pseudo science. Any ability to differentiate fact from fiction in science today must come from without your religion! That religion is what you call science.

My point was, that any science that does not use the scientific method of inquiry, is a pseudoscience. Using pseudoscience you can prove or disprove anything you want. Pseudoscience is NOT based on any verifiable evidence, empirical observations, objectivity, experiments, or falsifiability. It is based only on our subjective and social beliefs, our creative imagination, our psychological needs, our ignorance, and our blind faith. Therefore, the supernatural, ghosts, dragons, miracles, Gods, Adam and Eve, Heaven and Hell, can easily be tested to achieve whatever results you want. Of course, this is not real science, because true science do not have "God tools" to use. It must rely on physical tools to analyse our physical world. Maybe you can produce/demonstrate just one example of anything paranormal or supernatural? There's a million dollars in it if you can. So far NO ONE has claimed this prize. What are some examples that, "science today is laced with belief based pseudo science."? Just one example will do.

Although many people need to lump science into the same category as religion, both are worlds apart. Science produces knowledge, practicality, security, insight, stability, and balance. Religion produces beliefs, elitism, intolerance, insecurity, ignorance, and doubt. Science couldn't care less about the underlying science of anyone's personal beliefs. Science does not care about personal superstitions, myths, fairy tales, or make-believe stories. It doesn't care about any belief-based creation/origin stories and other myths. Science only cares about what it can explain/demonstrate, through observation, measurement, empirical facts and data, and logical intuition(deductive and inductive reasoning).

I realize that you have no choice, but to falsely equivocate science with pseudoscience, or science as just another religion. These incongruent conflations are necessary to maintain any semblance of credibility. Otherwise, all that is left, are adults trying to defend a belief that "God did it all" , and that life will still exist after we are dead. The evidence is even more absurd for these claims. The evidence is simply that they both true, because they can't be disproven. One believer told me that we should teach creation myths as science in our science classrooms, until we can prove that it isn't true. Of course they were all against teaching all creation myths in our science classrooms. Why do you think this is? I thought the basic principles of science(empiricism, rationalism, and skepticism), was to present what we DO know with some certainty, and not what we DON'T know at all.

Is this what you are noted for? Making empty personal claims, without any evidence to back them up? Are you just another religious indoctrinate, just too old to change, and just too ignorant to care? Let me ask. Do you BELIEVE that a spiritual God, and everlasting life exists? Or, do you KNOW that a spiritual God, and everlasting life exists?

 

[dad]

Wrong. You just demonstrated that you did not understand the quote on scientific evidence that I posted earlier.

This is why you need to learn what is and what is not evidence.

You mention beliefs and yell that it is evidence. Gong!

 

[dad]

... I have knowledge. .

You talk knowledge and walk religion.

 

[Truly Enlightened]

Absurdly false. No one needs to explain how Jesus fed over twenty thousand people wit a few loves and fishes. Science certainly has no clue, might as well ask cave men! There is no reason to doubt the supernatural supply of God recorded in Scripture. Just because you have no idea how He does things, does not mean nothing was done!

Manna came from heaven. Where God had the crow pick up the bread in this case we do not know. That just shows how limited science is.

Heaven has plenty of whatever is needed! Also, if God used earthly bakers for the bread, then all we need to do is ask how far a crow flies!?

You sit there armchair guessing and doubting with zero basis in knowledge or fact. You thought that had any value whatsoever??

This sounds like the magical stories you would tell children before bed. What makes your claims more relevant than any scientific claim? Why do you feel MORE confident in the truth of your mystical claims, because science can't explain them? Why do you think that the convergence of objective, verifiable evidence, facts and data, from all related multidisciplinary fields of study, all support the principles of the Theory of Evolution. Do you think that the thousands of scientists working in these disciplines, are all wrong, and you are right? Or is this just an example of blind, and close-minded ignorance? We have more evidence of certainty for Evolution, than we do for Gravity. Do you think the study of Gravity is pseudoscience? Do you really believe this nonsense literally, or are you speaking metaphorically?

Unless you are a God, you don't have a clue about the nature of God. You don't have a clue if heaven or hell exists. You don't have a clue if anything written in scripture is true, or false. You also can't provide any examples of the difference between a "God thing", and a natural thing. Just one nonsense claim after another.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Evidence that different creatures share common things is evidence that some things are used in more than just one creature. If you claim that shared genetic material must be due to birth/common ancestors, show the proof.

Name one process that produces organisms with shared genetic material.

 

[dad]

My point was, that any science that does not use the scientific method of inquiry, is a pseudoscience.

Get down to earth here.

Name some scientific inquiry that tells us what laws and nature existed on earth long long ago?

You either produce or remain reduced to religion.

Using pseudoscience you can prove or disprove anything you want. Pseudoscience is NOT based on any verifiable evidence, empirical observations, objectivity, experiments, or falsifiability.

Neither is the same nature in the past your religion uses and pretends is science.

Therefore, the supernatural, ghosts, dragons, miracles, Gods, Adam and Eve, Heaven and Hell, can easily be tested to achieve whatever results you want.

No. You are dreaming Adam cannot be tested. That is a poor diversion to distract from the fact your so called science has no test for it's origins claims and beliefs.

true science ..... must rely on physical tools to analyse our physical world.

And you have shown us none to analyze the nature in Noah's day.


Work on that.

Maybe you can produce/demonstrate just one example of anything paranormal or supernatural?

All history attests to the spiritual. Millions of people daily have supernatural experiences. You think they are supposed to hunt down deliberate skeptics with proof?

There's a million dollars in it if you can. So far NO ONE has claimed this prize. What are some examples that, "science today is laced with belief based pseudo science."? Just one example will do.

The belief that nature was the same in the far past on earth. Prove it or cough up the cash.

Although many people need to lump science into the same category as religion, both are worlds apart. Science produces knowledge, practicality, security, insight, stability, and balance.

Origin science produced nothing and never will. It is religion.

Religion produces beliefs, elitism, intolerance, insecurity, ignorance, and doubt.

Origin sciences do the same. They try to replace faith in God and creation.

Science couldn't care less about the underlying science of anyone's personal beliefs.

Nor I of theirs.

Science only cares about what it can explain/demonstrate, through observation, measurement, empirical facts and data, and logical intuition(deductive and inductive reasoning).

Great so where are the observations for time being the same in the far universe as here? Ha. Big blabber, no reality.

Otherwise, all that is left, are adults trying to defend a belief that "God did it all" , and that life will still exist after we are dead.

Nothing to do with your fail to support your own religion/so called science.

One believer told me that we should teach creation myths as science in our science classrooms, until we can prove that it isn't true

That would be forever then as you cannot prove creation is not true.

. Of course they were all against teaching all creation myths in our science classrooms. Why do you think this is?

Demon possession/influence. Your religion has a god also, know it or not.

I thought the basic principles of science(empiricism, rationalism, and skepticism), was to present what we DO know with some certainty, and not what we DON'T know at all.

The basic principle of origin science pseudo sciences is to present fables as scientific fact.

Let me ask. Do you BELIEVE that a spiritual God, and everlasting life exists? Or, do you KNOW that a spiritual God, and everlasting life exists?

Science doesn't know. Don't worry about OTHER beliefs! Defend your own here! Try to show it is more than just belief.

 

[dad]

Name one process that produces organisms with shared genetic material.

I don't have to because the processes we now see exist and happen in THIS present nature! NO relation to the days of Adam or Noah unless you can prove a same nature also existed THEN. Ha

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I don't have to because the processes we now see exist and happen in THIS present nature! NO relation to the days of Adam or Noah unless you can prove a same nature also existed THEN. Ha

That's your best argument? A random assertion that biology worked in an entirely different (in fact, contradictory) way in the past for NO reason whatsoever?

Back in reality, the answer is reproduction.

Reproduction is the only process by which genetic material is copied and altered, so it stands to reason that two organisms that share a large amount of genetic material share a similar ancestry. There is literally no rational reason to think anything other than this is the case. The only other possible explanation is that life arose multiple times and for no reason whatsoever and defying all known laws of chemistry and all mathematical improbability these individually arising populations happened to have precisely identical genetic material.

So, tell me, which is more likely of the following two options:

All life shares genetic material because we share common ancestry through reproduction.

OR

Populations of organisms spontaneously form out of nowhere that, entirely by coincidence, happen to have almost the exact same genetic code as previous or existing populations despite sharing no commonality whatsoever and this process happened millions of times except it stopped happening at an arbitrary point and nobody has ever observed it occurring or found any evidence of it ever happening ever.

Those are your two options. Pick one.

 

[Truly Enlightened]

Get down to earth here.

Name some scientific inquiry that tells us what laws and nature existed on earth long long ago?

You either produce or remain reduced to religion.
Neither is the same nature in the past your religion uses and pretends is science.
No. You are dreaming Adam cannot be tested. That is a poor diversion to distract from the fact your so called science has no test for it's origins claims and beliefs.
And you have shown us none to analyze the nature in Noah's day.


Work on that.




All history attests to the spiritual. Millions of people daily have supernatural experiences. You think they are supposed to hunt down deliberate skeptics with proof?



The belief that nature was the same in the far past on earth. Prove it or cough up the cash.



Origin science produced nothing and never will. It is religion.

Origin sciences do the same. They try to replace faith in God and creation.

Nor I of theirs.
Great so where are the observations for time being the same in the far universe as here? Ha. Big blabber, no reality.


Nothing to do with your fail to support your own religion/so called science.

That would be forever then as you cannot prove creation is not true.

Demon possession/influence. Your religion has a god also, know it or not.

The basic principle of origin science pseudo sciences is to present fables as scientific fact.



Science doesn't know. Don't worry about OTHER beliefs! Defend your own here! Try to show it is more than just belief.

Is it obstinance, ignorance, cognitive dissonance, or just confirmation bias, that produces this lack of common sense. I also think that it is you that should spend less time, inside the conceptual world that you have created for yourself. It is affecting your logic and reasoning skills. Most rational thinkers realize that the natural laws in nature, were here long before humans or any other lifeform existed on this planet. Do you really think that all the natural phenomena that we see today, did not occur in the past, simply because we could not explain them? Since science could not have changed these natural phenomena, it is only logical that these same phenomena would still exist today. Or, do you think Gravity, Electromagnetism, Laws of Thermodynamics, The Chaos Theory, Laws of Motion, and Quantum Mechanics, only exist in modern times? And did not exist in the same form in the past? This is retarded logic. However, there are 5 laws of human nature. Two of these laws may be applicable here. The first is called the, "Peter Principle". This states that in any group or organisation “people reach the level of their own incompetence". The second is called the, "Law of Triviality". This states that "the amount of time an organisation or person spends discussing an issue, is inversely proportional to its importance and value".

All history attests to the spiritual. Millions of people daily have supernatural experiences. You think they are supposed to hunt down deliberate skeptics with proof?

That is the point. There is only experiences, there is no proof. There is no objective certainty. There is no objective evidence. Nothing. If millions die in wars, there is objective evidence that death exists in wars. If millions of people experience ghost sightings, then where is the objective evidence that ghost exist? Nothing. Science requires objective evidence, linking both cause and effect. Pseudoscience only allows for subjective experiences and fallacious logic. Like the logic you're peddling. I'm sure that you know that our senses can be fooled, and our cognition influenced. So subjective experiences of perception, is not particularly verifiable, testable, dependable, or trustworthy. This is the reason why science, above all, must remain objective. Every time science does test for claims of the supernatural, the paranormal experiences, NDE's. miracles, power of prayer, psychic's prophecies, or spirits, the conclusions are no evidence, false, or inconclusive.

So, are you so arrogant and confused, that you are calling science inept, because they don't agree with your worldview of reality. Wow. Having your own personal evidence, is not the same evidence that science uses. But, in pseudoscience, this evidence is acceptable. You hide behind the fact that since no one was an eyewitness to the beginning of the Universe, or the beginning of life, that your explanation that "God did it", can't be falsified. But the objective evidence will just keep mounting, until you become just another curiosity of what once was. You can't even understand, why you credit your God, and not one of the thousands of other Gods? You make the claim that science is religion, yet your life depends on science everyday, and not on religion. Religion may be the only science for the ignorant, but luckily not for the inquisitive. The more you try to force-fit your oxymoronic labels onto science, the more you expose your hatred, ignorance, and other personal issues you have with science. You can't even understand what the default position is for any extraordinary claims, or the burden of proof. Clearly, you are not interested the pursuant of truth, or any independent investigation. You already have the answers explaining your purpose in life. That is, because a man-written, man-compiled, man-contracted, man-edited, and man-plagiarized, 2700 year old Greek/Hebrew foreign book tells you so. If todays science were back there then, there might not be a Bible today. Except in children's bookstores.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You mention beliefs and yell that it is evidence. Gong!

Oh my, dad is announcing that he lost by gonging himself again.

dad, I can explain to you what is and what is not evidence. Why are you afraid to learn? That you will not discuss the topic is very telling to the lurkers that you so often address. If any of them give you any credibility at all they have to wonder why you are afraid to discuss a concept.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You talk knowledge and walk religion.

This is massive projection and a bit of a personal attack.

Tell me, why are you afraid to even discuss the topic of evidence? The guilty run when no one is chasing them.