Topic: Is science a religion? - page 14. (Read 47459 times)
There is always an answer to everything. You will get the answer if you seek it and seeking through religion or science are okay as long as you believe that you are doing right in the society. It shouldn't be just making yourself feel better, it's making something that world could benefit in a right way.
I think not, everything is clear, the religion had the Scripture that guides our lives. don't overdo it in science because it is the work of human, not God.
Religion is faith, and science is the result of reason. Theology is the science of religion. It seems to me that in the future religion is doomed to disappearance, because people will be able to announce everything with the help of science.
Seems to me that believing science theory to be fact is an act of faith. So, right within science is religion. It's not the destruction of religion we are seeing. It is simply change from one religion to another.
And if that is the case, I bet Science does not hide the truth of child molesters working within the system of that religion. I believe that Science proves the presence of pedophiles whereas your religion hides them.
Science is attempting to cure cancer, your religion does nothing.
Science seeks answers for the unexplained, your religion attempts to hide it behind faith.
I know which I prefer.
What? Do you think that there aren't any scientist child molesters? The only way that could be true is if there were only a tiny handful of scientists who were to old to be interested in molestation.
The medical hides the cure for cancer, and promotes chemo, surgery, and radiation... which things destroy the person more than the cancer.
Science theory believed as though it were science fact is an attempt at hiding the truth.
You prefer your science religion, right? Well, it suits you.
Thanks for helping me to bring these facts out into the open again, along with the fact of your deceptiveness.
Never said there was not scientists who have molested children. I have not once made that claim.
I find it extremely disappointing that you have preached about wanting to save everyone from your version of hell, yet you try to defend your religion's practice of covering up child molesters by dismissing it. Are you a child molester?
Do you have proof that the medical profession hides the cure for cancer?
Run From the Cure - The Rick Simpson Story (Full)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmYNLNF7NBw
The Rick Simpson Story:
Healing Cancer with Cannabis (more at cureyourowncancer.org)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zD2U4eDBu8A
You are a confused little man..... please stop before you hurt yourself.
Look at where that leaves you. You can't even show any step-by-step rebuttal to the proof that God exists:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10718395
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.16803380.
Yet you maintain your silly faith in your religion in the face of your inability to refute the proof. You must be a flat earth person. You have density rather than gravity in your life, right?
The step by step rebuttal of your links has been performed. Your only argument is to use BADecker principle number 1 which says you should ignore a point of reference because it doesn't suit your ideals. I suggest you try again.
That is awesome that it had a positive result for Rick Simpson. Good on him.
Why didn't you mention the cancer victims who have undergone radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy and survived? Is that because you don't want to acknowledge the results?
Regarding child molesters...... there is proof of church cover ups https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_sexual_abuse_cases
What proof do you have of scientific "groups" and their cover ups of molestation?
Religions and church organisations have covered up the molestation of children for years..... your defence of that is sickening.
I hope you never have to experience something like this personally.
i think no science is not a religion,because science is study the living and the universe,while religion is based on the belief,the belief that there is a higher power that has created everything.One thing is science being a religion is because they believe in the fact of evolution.
Religion is faith, and science is the result of reason. Theology is the science of religion. It seems to me that in the future religion is doomed to disappearance, because people will be able to announce everything with the help of science.
Seems to me that believing science theory to be fact is an act of faith. So, right within science is religion. It's not the destruction of religion we are seeing. It is simply change from one religion to another.
And if that is the case, I bet Science does not hide the truth of child molesters working within the system of that religion. I believe that Science proves the presence of pedophiles whereas your religion hides them.
Science is attempting to cure cancer, your religion does nothing.
Science seeks answers for the unexplained, your religion attempts to hide it behind faith.
I know which I prefer.
What? Do you think that there aren't any scientist child molesters? The only way that could be true is if there were only a tiny handful of scientists who were to old to be interested in molestation.
The medical hides the cure for cancer, and promotes chemo, surgery, and radiation... which things destroy the person more than the cancer.
Science theory believed as though it were science fact is an attempt at hiding the truth.
You prefer your science religion, right? Well, it suits you.
Thanks for helping me to bring these facts out into the open again, along with the fact of your deceptiveness.
Never said there was not scientists who have molested children. I have not once made that claim.
I find it extremely disappointing that you have preached about wanting to save everyone from your version of hell, yet you try to defend your religion's practice of covering up child molesters by dismissing it. Are you a child molester?
Do you have proof that the medical profession hides the cure for cancer?
Run From the Cure - The Rick Simpson Story (Full)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmYNLNF7NBw
The Rick Simpson Story:
Healing Cancer with Cannabis (more at cureyourowncancer.org)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zD2U4eDBu8A
You are a confused little man..... please stop before you hurt yourself.
Look at where that leaves you. You can't even show any step-by-step rebuttal to the proof that God exists:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10718395
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.16803380.
Yet you maintain your silly faith in your religion in the face of your inability to refute the proof. You must be a flat earth person. You have density rather than gravity in your life, right?
Religion is faith, and science is the result of reason. Theology is the science of religion. It seems to me that in the future religion is doomed to disappearance, because people will be able to announce everything with the help of science.
Seems to me that believing science theory to be fact is an act of faith. So, right within science is religion. It's not the destruction of religion we are seeing. It is simply change from one religion to another.
And if that is the case, I bet Science does not hide the truth of child molesters working within the system of that religion. I believe that Science proves the presence of pedophiles whereas your religion hides them.
Science is attempting to cure cancer, your religion does nothing.
Science seeks answers for the unexplained, your religion attempts to hide it behind faith.
I know which I prefer.
What? Do you think that there aren't any scientist child molesters? The only way that could be true is if there were only a tiny handful of scientists who were to old to be interested in molestation.
The medical hides the cure for cancer, and promotes chemo, surgery, and radiation... which things destroy the person more than the cancer.
Science theory believed as though it were science fact is an attempt at hiding the truth.
You prefer your science religion, right? Well, it suits you.
Thanks for helping me to bring these facts out into the open again, along with the fact of your deceptiveness.
Never said there was not scientists who have molested children. I have not once made that claim.
I find it extremely disappointing that you have preached about wanting to save everyone from your version of hell, yet you try to defend your religion's practice of covering up child molesters by dismissing it. Are you a child molester?
Do you have proof that the medical profession hides the cure for cancer?
You are a confused little man..... please stop before you hurt yourself.
No - Absolutely not.
Science must adhere to the nonreligious principals of re-examination, testing, demand for evidence and repletion of a single outcome.
(2,500 different religions, 3,700 different god groups, a clear correlation between place of birth and prominent religion... that's definitely not single)
In a nut shell:
Scientific method is NOT religious as it must reject the concept of belief, of faith, in order to avoid bias.
It should serve no purpose but knowledge.
Science is objective, science is open to challenge and change, science has no dogma.
You don't use the word "believe" with regards to scientific results.
If you "believe" in science, you are doing it wrong.
Scientific research, and conclusion are to be learned and understood.
Not believed.
Scientific method begins with observation, not conclusion.
If you use "god" as part of an assertion, that - for example - is already reaching a conclusion before researching.
So - No.
There is also no way to compare or reconcile between science and religion as the former is methodological and requires testing, examination, peer review, repeating results;
and the latter is...well... wishful thinking, faith.
The 2 do not mix, and have nothing to do with each other.
Science and religion are generally two different things, and between them there is a very large abyss. Lately, religion is trying to keep up with science, because humanity is becoming more educated, so that in order not to set people against themselves, the church decided to go this way. But science is an exact thing and does not give concessions.Science must adhere to the nonreligious principals of re-examination, testing, demand for evidence and repletion of a single outcome.
(2,500 different religions, 3,700 different god groups, a clear correlation between place of birth and prominent religion... that's definitely not single)
In a nut shell:
Scientific method is NOT religious as it must reject the concept of belief, of faith, in order to avoid bias.
It should serve no purpose but knowledge.
Science is objective, science is open to challenge and change, science has no dogma.
You don't use the word "believe" with regards to scientific results.
If you "believe" in science, you are doing it wrong.
Scientific research, and conclusion are to be learned and understood.
Not believed.
Scientific method begins with observation, not conclusion.
If you use "god" as part of an assertion, that - for example - is already reaching a conclusion before researching.
So - No.
There is also no way to compare or reconcile between science and religion as the former is methodological and requires testing, examination, peer review, repeating results;
and the latter is...well... wishful thinking, faith.
The 2 do not mix, and have nothing to do with each other.
Religion is NOT trying to keep up with science. Religion is as it always has been, except for the following little detail.
Science has grown by leaps and bounds. People who like science, wish that it would grow even farther. So they project the things they want to see in science, as though science has already proven those things, when science has not proven them. This is the way that people have made science an addition to religion.
Religious people are like people with a Down Syndrome. Everybody knows they are retarded but nobody dares to say it out laud.
One day, religions will be regarded as mental disorders. Maybe even treated with genetic treatments early on, at conception or shortly thereafter.
Just think of how retarded all the people are who talk against religion, but don't know that they are part of their own religion when doing so.
Once again you belittle a group of individuals who suffer a cognitive disorder by saying because they don't believe your beliefs, they are less than you.
Once again you attempt to lift yourself above others by bringing others down.
You are a pitiful human being BADecker, I hope you are able to find peace sometime in your life and accept others and their differences as your equals.
Once again you attempt to belittle me to take the focus off the way others belittle themselves.
When you do this, you belittle yourself even more.
I sure hope you wake up before it is too late for you.
How do I belittle you BADecker? I merely stated a fact. One which can be proved through your unintelligent attempt to claim that anyone who has a cognitive deficit is less than others.
Your brazen comment of trying to turn this onto others shows your lack of remorse for others. This makes you a pitiful human being.
I hope you do not live your life the way you are on this forum. You need saving from yourself.
No - Absolutely not.
Science must adhere to the nonreligious principals of re-examination, testing, demand for evidence and repletion of a single outcome.
(2,500 different religions, 3,700 different god groups, a clear correlation between place of birth and prominent religion... that's definitely not single)
In a nut shell:
Scientific method is NOT religious as it must reject the concept of belief, of faith, in order to avoid bias.
It should serve no purpose but knowledge.
Science is objective, science is open to challenge and change, science has no dogma.
You don't use the word "believe" with regards to scientific results.
If you "believe" in science, you are doing it wrong.
Scientific research, and conclusion are to be learned and understood.
Not believed.
Scientific method begins with observation, not conclusion.
If you use "god" as part of an assertion, that - for example - is already reaching a conclusion before researching.
So - No.
There is also no way to compare or reconcile between science and religion as the former is methodological and requires testing, examination, peer review, repeating results;
and the latter is...well... wishful thinking, faith.
The 2 do not mix, and have nothing to do with each other.
Science and religion are generally two different things, and between them there is a very large abyss. Lately, religion is trying to keep up with science, because humanity is becoming more educated, so that in order not to set people against themselves, the church decided to go this way. But science is an exact thing and does not give concessions.Science must adhere to the nonreligious principals of re-examination, testing, demand for evidence and repletion of a single outcome.
(2,500 different religions, 3,700 different god groups, a clear correlation between place of birth and prominent religion... that's definitely not single)
In a nut shell:
Scientific method is NOT religious as it must reject the concept of belief, of faith, in order to avoid bias.
It should serve no purpose but knowledge.
Science is objective, science is open to challenge and change, science has no dogma.
You don't use the word "believe" with regards to scientific results.
If you "believe" in science, you are doing it wrong.
Scientific research, and conclusion are to be learned and understood.
Not believed.
Scientific method begins with observation, not conclusion.
If you use "god" as part of an assertion, that - for example - is already reaching a conclusion before researching.
So - No.
There is also no way to compare or reconcile between science and religion as the former is methodological and requires testing, examination, peer review, repeating results;
and the latter is...well... wishful thinking, faith.
The 2 do not mix, and have nothing to do with each other.
Religion is NOT trying to keep up with science. Religion is as it always has been, except for the following little detail.
Science has grown by leaps and bounds. People who like science, wish that it would grow even farther. So they project the things they want to see in science, as though science has already proven those things, when science has not proven them. This is the way that people have made science an addition to religion.
Religious people are like people with a Down Syndrome. Everybody knows they are retarded but nobody dares to say it out laud.
One day, religions will be regarded as mental disorders. Maybe even treated with genetic treatments early on, at conception or shortly thereafter.
science not religion, but a belief, look like the same of religion without prophet story
For some people it is. It depends on how you perceive religion to be. Science has a very huge following because it centers on the logical and proof and i think people who believe in science can consider it to be their religion.
science not religion, but a belief, look like the same of religion without prophet story
Every religion is built on deception of the people. Science does not confirm any religious tenet. I think generally it is foolish to look for any scientific proof of religion. Religious people are just stupid and believe in fairy tales.
I agree. Mostly it is the religious atheists who suggest that there isn't any God when they don't know that there isn't any God.
But it is also the religious scientist that believe that a science theory is factual when they don't know that the science theory is factual.
Not all religions state that they are religions.
Every religion is built on deception of the people. Science does not confirm any religious tenet. I think generally it is foolish to look for any scientific proof of religion. Religious people are just stupid and believe in fairy tales.
Religion is faith, and science is the result of reason. Theology is the science of religion. It seems to me that in the future religion is doomed to disappearance, because people will be able to announce everything with the help of science.
When science theory (which is not known to be fact) is believed to be fact by the masses, science theory has become a religion for the masses.
Religion is faith, and science is the result of reason. Theology is the science of religion. It seems to me that in the future religion is doomed to disappearance, because people will be able to announce everything with the help of science.
Seems to me that believing science theory to be fact is an act of faith. So, right within science is religion. It's not the destruction of religion we are seeing. It is simply change from one religion to another.
And if that is the case, I bet Science does not hide the truth of child molesters working within the system of that religion. I believe that Science proves the presence of pedophiles whereas your religion hides them.
Science is attempting to cure cancer, your religion does nothing.
Science seeks answers for the unexplained, your religion attempts to hide it behind faith.
I know which I prefer.
What? Do you think that there aren't any scientist child molesters? The only way that could be true is if there were only a tiny handful of scientists who were to old to be interested in molestation.
The medical hides the cure for cancer, and promotes chemo, surgery, and radiation... which things destroy the person more than the cancer.
Science theory believed as though it were science fact is an attempt at hiding the truth.
You prefer your science religion, right? Well, it suits you.
Thanks for helping me to bring these facts out into the open again, along with the fact of your deceptiveness.
No - Absolutely not.
Science must adhere to the nonreligious principals of re-examination, testing, demand for evidence and repletion of a single outcome.
(2,500 different religions, 3,700 different god groups, a clear correlation between place of birth and prominent religion... that's definitely not single)
In a nut shell:
Scientific method is NOT religious as it must reject the concept of belief, of faith, in order to avoid bias.
It should serve no purpose but knowledge.
Science is objective, science is open to challenge and change, science has no dogma.
You don't use the word "believe" with regards to scientific results.
If you "believe" in science, you are doing it wrong.
Scientific research, and conclusion are to be learned and understood.
Not believed.
Scientific method begins with observation, not conclusion.
If you use "god" as part of an assertion, that - for example - is already reaching a conclusion before researching.
So - No.
There is also no way to compare or reconcile between science and religion as the former is methodological and requires testing, examination, peer review, repeating results;
and the latter is...well... wishful thinking, faith.
The 2 do not mix, and have nothing to do with each other.
Science and religion are generally two different things, and between them there is a very large abyss. Lately, religion is trying to keep up with science, because humanity is becoming more educated, so that in order not to set people against themselves, the church decided to go this way. But science is an exact thing and does not give concessions.Science must adhere to the nonreligious principals of re-examination, testing, demand for evidence and repletion of a single outcome.
(2,500 different religions, 3,700 different god groups, a clear correlation between place of birth and prominent religion... that's definitely not single)
In a nut shell:
Scientific method is NOT religious as it must reject the concept of belief, of faith, in order to avoid bias.
It should serve no purpose but knowledge.
Science is objective, science is open to challenge and change, science has no dogma.
You don't use the word "believe" with regards to scientific results.
If you "believe" in science, you are doing it wrong.
Scientific research, and conclusion are to be learned and understood.
Not believed.
Scientific method begins with observation, not conclusion.
If you use "god" as part of an assertion, that - for example - is already reaching a conclusion before researching.
So - No.
There is also no way to compare or reconcile between science and religion as the former is methodological and requires testing, examination, peer review, repeating results;
and the latter is...well... wishful thinking, faith.
The 2 do not mix, and have nothing to do with each other.
Religion is NOT trying to keep up with science. Religion is as it always has been, except for the following little detail.
Science has grown by leaps and bounds. People who like science, wish that it would grow even farther. So they project the things they want to see in science, as though science has already proven those things, when science has not proven them. This is the way that people have made science an addition to religion.
Religious people are like people with a Down Syndrome. Everybody knows they are retarded but nobody dares to say it out laud.
One day, religions will be regarded as mental disorders. Maybe even treated with genetic treatments early on, at conception or shortly thereafter.
Just think of how retarded all the people are who talk against religion, but don't know that they are part of their own religion when doing so.
Once again you belittle a group of individuals who suffer a cognitive disorder by saying because they don't believe your beliefs, they are less than you.
Once again you attempt to lift yourself above others by bringing others down.
You are a pitiful human being BADecker, I hope you are able to find peace sometime in your life and accept others and their differences as your equals.
Once again you attempt to belittle me to take the focus off the way others belittle themselves.
When you do this, you belittle yourself even more.
I sure hope you wake up before it is too late for you.
No - Absolutely not.
Science must adhere to the nonreligious principals of re-examination, testing, demand for evidence and repletion of a single outcome.
(2,500 different religions, 3,700 different god groups, a clear correlation between place of birth and prominent religion... that's definitely not single)
In a nut shell:
Scientific method is NOT religious as it must reject the concept of belief, of faith, in order to avoid bias.
It should serve no purpose but knowledge.
Science is objective, science is open to challenge and change, science has no dogma.
You don't use the word "believe" with regards to scientific results.
If you "believe" in science, you are doing it wrong.
Scientific research, and conclusion are to be learned and understood.
Not believed.
Scientific method begins with observation, not conclusion.
If you use "god" as part of an assertion, that - for example - is already reaching a conclusion before researching.
So - No.
There is also no way to compare or reconcile between science and religion as the former is methodological and requires testing, examination, peer review, repeating results;
and the latter is...well... wishful thinking, faith.
The 2 do not mix, and have nothing to do with each other.
Science and religion are generally two different things, and between them there is a very large abyss. Lately, religion is trying to keep up with science, because humanity is becoming more educated, so that in order not to set people against themselves, the church decided to go this way. But science is an exact thing and does not give concessions.Science must adhere to the nonreligious principals of re-examination, testing, demand for evidence and repletion of a single outcome.
(2,500 different religions, 3,700 different god groups, a clear correlation between place of birth and prominent religion... that's definitely not single)
In a nut shell:
Scientific method is NOT religious as it must reject the concept of belief, of faith, in order to avoid bias.
It should serve no purpose but knowledge.
Science is objective, science is open to challenge and change, science has no dogma.
You don't use the word "believe" with regards to scientific results.
If you "believe" in science, you are doing it wrong.
Scientific research, and conclusion are to be learned and understood.
Not believed.
Scientific method begins with observation, not conclusion.
If you use "god" as part of an assertion, that - for example - is already reaching a conclusion before researching.
So - No.
There is also no way to compare or reconcile between science and religion as the former is methodological and requires testing, examination, peer review, repeating results;
and the latter is...well... wishful thinking, faith.
The 2 do not mix, and have nothing to do with each other.
Religion is NOT trying to keep up with science. Religion is as it always has been, except for the following little detail.
Science has grown by leaps and bounds. People who like science, wish that it would grow even farther. So they project the things they want to see in science, as though science has already proven those things, when science has not proven them. This is the way that people have made science an addition to religion.
Religious people are like people with a Down Syndrome. Everybody knows they are retarded but nobody dares to say it out laud.
One day, religions will be regarded as mental disorders. Maybe even treated with genetic treatments early on, at conception or shortly thereafter.
Just think of how retarded all the people are who talk against religion, but don't know that they are part of their own religion when doing so.
Once again you belittle a group of individuals who suffer a cognitive disorder by saying because they don't believe your beliefs, they are less than you.
Once again you attempt to lift yourself above others by bringing others down.
You are a pitiful human being BADecker, I hope you are able to find peace sometime in your life and accept others and their differences as your equals.
Religion is faith, and science is the result of reason. Theology is the science of religion. It seems to me that in the future religion is doomed to disappearance, because people will be able to announce everything with the help of science.
Seems to me that believing science theory to be fact is an act of faith. So, right within science is religion. It's not the destruction of religion we are seeing. It is simply change from one religion to another.
And if that is the case, I bet Science does not hide the truth of child molesters working within the system of that religion. I believe that Science proves the presence of pedophiles whereas your religion hides them.
Science is attempting to cure cancer, your religion does nothing.
Science seeks answers for the unexplained, your religion attempts to hide it behind faith.
I know which I prefer.
Religion is faith, and science is the result of reason. Theology is the science of religion. It seems to me that in the future religion is doomed to disappearance, because people will be able to announce everything with the help of science.
Seems to me that believing science theory to be fact is an act of faith. So, right within science is religion. It's not the destruction of religion we are seeing. It is simply change from one religion to another.
Jump to: