Should there be harmony between science and religion?

[Altfish]

Okay.
I'm not aware that all theories can be replicated. Most can't.
If that were true, many things would not baffle scientists.
For example, the matter-antimatter asymmetry problem.
Then there are others.
Can scientists recreate the big bang?
The theory of evolution. Let's see that replicated.

Replication doesn't mean we have to have another Big Bang
Evolution and The Big Bang can be replicated.
The evidence for the Big Bang is the way stars and galaxies and moving away from each other. That can be tested and the results replicated.
Evolution can be tested by fossils, DNA, ring species, etc. Scientists have gone looking for missing fossils and following evolutionary theory and geological layers they found Tiktaalik

 

[nPeace]

Replication doesn't mean we have to have another Big Bang
Evolution and The Big Bang can be replicated.
The evidence for the Big Bang is the way stars and galaxies and moving away from each other. That can be tested and the results replicated.
Evolution can be tested by fossils, DNA, ring species, etc. Scientists have gone looking for missing fossils and following evolutionary theory and geological layers they found Tiktaalik

Please explain replication.

 

[Altfish]

Please explain replication.

Do the experiments/observations again.
Remember if one of the experiments finds contrary results (after it has been checked for error) you can disprove the theory and maybe win a Nobel Prize for yourself

 

[nPeace]

Do the experiments/observations again.
Remember if one of the experiments finds contrary results (after it has been checked for error) you can disprove the theory and maybe win a Nobel Prize for yourself

You have not explained replication of evolution or Big Bang.
You are explaining replicating experiments.
So the experiment is to test a hypothesis?
So how is the hypothesis tested?
By using a presumed hypothesis, and if the evidence inferred for the experiment of the second hypothesis matches the first hypothesis, that's replication?

You have carried out an experiment.
If you do it again, you replicate the experiment.

 

[Altfish]

You have not explained replication of evolution or Big Bang.
You are explaining replicating experiments.
So the experiment is to test a hypothesis?
So how is the hypothesis tested?
By using a presumed hypothesis, and if the evidence inferred for the experiment of the second hypothesis matches the first hypothesis, that's replication?

You have carried out an experiment.
If you do it again, you replicate the experiment.

If you can't understand Science 101, I give up with you. I am not a teacher.

 

[nPeace]

If you can't understand Science 101, I give up with you. I am not a teacher.

Me too.

 

[viole]

When should science be chosen over religion? If science has one conclusion and religion has another at what point do we accept science over religion? One view is that we should always believe science, even if it contradicts our most cherished religious beliefs. Another perspective is we should never abandon the 'truth' even though science appears to have completely proven our religious belief wrong. For many of us the truth will lie in between. We may believe in a God or gods that have the power to overcome the laws of the natural world.

The Baha'i perspective tends to favour science over religion but there are always exceptions.

God has endowed man with intelligence and reason whereby he is required to determine the verity of questions and propositions. If religious beliefs and opinions are found contrary to the standards of science they are mere superstitions and imaginations; for the antithesis of knowledge is ignorance, and the child of ignorance is superstition. Unquestionably there must be agreement between true religion and science. If a question be found contrary to reason, faith and belief in it are impossible… – Abdu’l-Baha

Religion and Science are inter-twined with each other and cannot be separated. These are the two wings with which humanity must fly. One wing is not enough. Every religion which does not concern itself with science is mere tradition…. Therefore science, education and civilization are most important necessities for the full religious life. – Abdu’l-Baha

So where does the balance lie for you? What would you never give up from your religion and when would you defer to science instead? Are religion and science in harmony or are they fundamentally opposed and contradictory?

Thank you for your comments.

Should there be harmony between science and religion?

No. Or actually I don't care. Science does not really care if religion agrees with it or not. Or if there is harmony. It would not be science otherwise. If we study science we will see immediately that it does not give a royal rip whether it is in harmony with religion or not. The very notion of it is ridiculous.

It appears to me that religion is more obsessed with agreeing with science than the other way round. Obviously. You always need to attach somehow to someone that has evidence when you have none. It is a good selling argument when it comes to decide between two equally valid religious claims (see? my god is scientific hip, while yours is not) when in fact they both share the same evidence and plausibility of Mickey Mouse being the creator of the Universe.

I don't know you, but I hear more religious people trying to convince us that their local god is supported scientifically, while I know no scientist that tries to defend her theory by saying that it is supported by Apollo, Jesus or whatever divinity we might believe in. While the former need justification, the latter do not.

So, it is clear who has the intellectual supremacy here. And who is the one gasping to get some residual intellectual respect, if any, by trying getting in the train of scientific achievement and success.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Dawnofhope]

Should there be harmony between science and religion?

No. Or actually I don't care. Science does not really care if religion agrees with it or not. Or if there is harmony. It would not be science otherwise. If we study science we will see immediately that it does not give a royal rip whether it is in harmony with religion or not. The very notion of it is ridiculous.

It appears to me that religion is more obsessed with agreeing with science than the other way round. Obviously. You always need to attach somehow to someone that has evidence when you have none. It is a good selling argument when it comes to decide between two equally valid religious claims (see? my god is scientific hip, while yours is not) when in fact they both share the same evidence and plausibility of Mickey Mouse being the creator of the Universe.

I don't know you, but I hear more religious people trying to convince us that their local god is supported scientifically, while I know no scientist that tries to defend her theory by saying that it is supported by Apollo, Jesus or whatever divinity we might believe in. While the former need justification, the latter do not.

So, it is clear who has the intellectual supremacy here. And who is the one gasping to get some residual intellectual respect, if any, by trying getting in the train of scientific achievement and success.

Ciao

- viole

It’s not a competition of who’s superior to who, the scientists or the religionists. It’s a philosophical question about reconciling two important aspects of our lives, the spiritual or the material. Religion doesn’t care anymore than science cares. It is people who care and want to make sense of the contradictions and inconsistencies. What you are essentially saying is you personally don’t care.

 

[j1i]

The things you say about "first" are kind of natural
human things to think about.
They do not necessarily make sense, though,
and certainly do not add up to some sort of
evidence for a "god".

You might for example ask, "Who was first
to speak French? Surely there was one person
who...". Or, who had the first Labrador dog?

There was no "first" for those! "First inventor"?
Impossible for there to a first.

ALSO-
A great deal of what science learns about
the nature of things is counterintuitive.

Easy example-people thought heavy things
fall faster than light things. It is obvious!
But it is not true.

Check the word "facile" in your dictionary, they
check your ideas against that.

hi dear
Welcome everyone I miss you
I want to say the same thing on the inverse

The things you say about "natural" are kind of god
human things to think about.
They do not necessarily make sense, though,
and certainly do not add up to some sort of
evidence for a "natural".

please take care
>_<

 

[Audie]

hi dear
Welcome everyone I miss you
I want to say the same thing on the contrary

The things you say about "natural" are kind of god
human things to think about.
They do not necessarily make sense, though,
and certainly do not add up to some sort of
evidence for a "natural".

please take care
>_<

Ok, sorry-ah, but I dont know what you
are talking about.

 

[j1i]

Every thing has a cause. What caused God to begin existing? God is caused by many things. Fear of the unknown future in human mind and suggestions from people who benefit by making people believe in the existence of God (the clerics/priests).

for Absolute wisdom
Humans do the industry for need
God created the creatures and showed His wisdom until they knew that they were minors
Even creatures know that GOD is more wise and he is never worthy of judgment except GOD

 

[j1i]

Ok, sorry-ah, but I dont know what you
are talking about.

sorry I mean
inverse
The things you say about "natural" are kind of god
human things to think about.
They do not necessarily make sense, though,
and certainly do not add up to some sort of
evidence for a "natural".

please take care
>_<

Why do I think it's the nature of what wisdom of it

 

[Audie]

for Absolute wisdom
Humans do the industry for need
God created the creatures and showed His wisdom until they knew that they were minors
Even creatures know that GOD is more wise and he is never worthy of judgment except GOD

Ok, if you wish to make assertions of facts not in
evidence-things you could not possibly know,
go for it, but-

As you have nothing resembling evidence, or logic,
there is nothing to discuss.

 

[j1i]

Ok, if you wish to make assertions of facts not in
evidence-things you could not possibly know,
go for it, but-

As you have nothing resembling evidence, or logic,
there is nothing to discuss.

It’s not a competition of who’s superior to who, the scientists or the religionists. It’s a philosophical question about reconciling two important aspects of our lives, the spiritual or the material. Religion doesn’t care anymore than science cares. It is people who care and want to make sense of the contradictions and inconsistencies. What you are essentially saying is you personally don’t care.

Should there be harmony between science and religion?

- viole

Me too.

Do the experiments/observations again.
Remember if one of the experiments finds contrary results (after it has been checked for error) you can disprove the theory and maybe win a Nobel Prize for yourself

What? That doesnt actually make sense in reality
Why does zero exist?
The Guinness Book is not a science book
Your evidence for god is what?

Every thing has a cause. What caused God to begin existing? God is caused by many things. Fear of the unknown future in human mind and suggestions from people who benefit by making people believe in the existence of God (the clerics/priests).

​

A doctor in biology placed a large cage in front of his pupils in which a male rat in the middle and placed on the edge of the cage a piece of cheese and on the other side a female mouse
The mouse was released and ran to eat the cheese
He re-experimented that he placed a piece of bread and then the mouse did it again and ran to eat the bread
He repeated the experiment several times by changing the type of food and mouse every time he ran the food hand and not the female mouse

The doctor said to his disciples:
We conclude from this experience that the love of food is stronger than the love of the female
Here a student raised his hand saying:
Doctor please re-experiment with a second female may be that female is his wife !!

The doctor said to him:

You are the only one who understands the lesson correctly

Of this story
I see the nature of humans among those who do not want to live a routine life concept because this does not create an atmosphere of excitement and suspense
When we see the universe a mystery this will make human life into permanent thinking and questioning

I mean the nature of man does not like routine things
Since the ancient ancestors believed in the existence of God, this idea has not received widespread demand in the last centuries of the desire of people to change
Now many countries are seeking dominance and want to get the presidency as well as human beings

now

The doctor said to me:

You are the only one who understands the lesson correctly ​

 

[ChristineM]

​

A doctor in biology placed a large cage in front of his pupils in which a male rat in the middle and placed on the edge of the cage a piece of cheese and on the other side a female mouse
The mouse was released and ran to eat the cheese
He re-experimented that he placed a piece of bread and then the mouse did it again and ran to eat the bread
He repeated the experiment several times by changing the type of food and mouse every time he ran the food hand and not the female mouse

The doctor said to his disciples:
We conclude from this experience that the love of food is stronger than the love of the female
Here a student raised his hand saying:
Doctor please re-experiment with a second female may be that female is his wife !!

The doctor said to him:

You are the only one who understands the lesson correctly

Of this story
I see the nature of humans among those who do not want to live a routine life concept because this does not create an atmosphere of excitement and suspense
When we see the universe a mystery this will make human life into permanent thinking and questioning

I mean the nature of man does not like routine things
Since the ancient ancestors believed in the existence of God, this idea has not received widespread demand in the last centuries of the desire of people to change
Now many countries are seeking dominance and want to get the presidency as well as human beings

now

The doctor said to me:

You are the only one who understands the lesson correctly ​

Comparing humans to rats and mice is very entertaining but ultimately has no relevance so i will assume its a straw man because you have no answer to the questions
Why does zero exist?
And
Your evidence for god is what?

 

[j1i]

Comparing humans to rats and mice is very entertaining but ultimately has no relevance so i will assume its a straw man because you have no answer to the questions
Why does zero exist?
And
Your evidence for god is what?

Zero means the end and does not mean the beginning
And because man starts from zero, which starts where the others ended

In the origin of existence there is no zero and who will start from nothingness

You are in the room, free of tools

Do you think this room will create tools from scratch (zero)?

Ask the biggest scientist in all fields

 

[Audie]

​

A doctor in biology placed a large cage in front of his pupils in which a male rat in the middle and placed on the edge of the cage a piece of cheese and on the other side a female mouse
The mouse was released and ran to eat the cheese
He re-experimented that he placed a piece of bread and then the mouse did it again and ran to eat the bread
He repeated the experiment several times by changing the type of food and mouse every time he ran the food hand and not the female mouse

The doctor said to his disciples:
We conclude from this experience that the love of food is stronger than the love of the female
Here a student raised his hand saying:
Doctor please re-experiment with a second female may be that female is his wife !!

The doctor said to him:

You are the only one who understands the lesson correctly

Of this story
I see the nature of humans among those who do not want to live a routine life concept because this does not create an atmosphere of excitement and suspense
When we see the universe a mystery this will make human life into permanent thinking and questioning

I mean the nature of man does not like routine things
Since the ancient ancestors believed in the existence of God, this idea has not received widespread demand in the last centuries of the desire of people to change
Now many countries are seeking dominance and want to get the presidency as well as human beings

now

The doctor said to me:

You are the only one who understands the lesson correctly ​

I understand quite well that those are made up stories.
Do you?

 

[Audie]

Comparing humans to rats and mice is very entertaining but ultimately has no relevance so i will assume its a straw man because you have no answer to the questions
Why does zero exist?
And
Your evidence for god is what?

He was not even doing that, as the story is
entirely apocryphal.

 

[j1i]

I understand quite well that those are made up stories.
Do you?

The story has been modified to simplify my idea

I received it from my friend in watsapp

 

[Audie]

The story has been modified to simplify my idea

I received it from my friend in watsapp

Ah so desu ka, a modified apocryphal story,
even further removed from reality.

Your idea is already simple and understood,
in any case. Seeing where it makes no sense,
and failure to understand it are quite distinct.