Religious facts are proven by science. 
Not every facts were proven. There are lots of exceptions which can't never be proven by the science.
Topic: Is science a religion? - page 32. (Read 47434 times)
Not every facts were proven. There are lots of exceptions which can't never be proven by the science.
Religious facts are proven by science.
Not every facts were proven. There are lots of exceptions which can't never be proven by the science.
There is lots of science theory that can never be proven by science... like Big Bang Theory.
Religious facts are proven by science.
Not every facts were proven. There are lots of exceptions which can't never be proven by the science.
Some of science is religion. All you need to do is read the science facts here https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14706492, to see one of the parts of science that is religion.
when hillary becomes president conservatism and family values will be banned and opinion criminals like you will go to jail. then my feelings will never get hurt again. that's why I vote for hillary clinton. I you try to hurt my feelings I will post an atheist meme jpg. Hillary is the next president
Some of science is religion. All you need to do is read the science facts here https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14706492, to see one of the parts of science that is religion.
Religious facts are proven by science.
Some scientific facts are shown in the various religions.
science is not religion. science is a field of science that studies the science
Science theory when believed as truth is religion in those who believe it.
Religious facts are proven by science.
science is not religion. science is a field of science that studies the science
Scientism, which says there is only knowledge through science, is a religion in the sense that one has to take on faith the majority of modern science's premises. Who has personally performed all the experiments leading scientists to believe atoms exist? Modern scientists put a great deal of trust in authorities. Arguments from authority are the weakest form of argument, yet I'd say >95% of modern science is based on arguments from authority.
BD, why do you insist on personifying the universe?
Quote from: BADecker
Don't know what you mean. That I know of, I haven't treated the universe as a person. Is that what you mean?
If god is everything and evrywhere then the universe and god are one and the same, your reference to god and the scriptures acknowledges the unproven concept of a father and son, a father in whose image man was created ......etc. In reality there is no evidence of such so.
The Bible is a record of witnesses. The witness accounts were based on the power in the miracles that were done by God and those to whom God gave power. That is why faith is important. The miracles would be proof, except the people on whom the miracles were done have passed on. So, you can't see the miracles themselves.
It is far more spectacular and mysterious then anything human? Also you keep referring people back to texts that were applicable to societies living in the stone age.
While i can accept there are some universal truths they preached, they are also filled with tribalism and dogma.
Moreover most of the formal religions Judaeo Christian and Muslim are allegories of more interesting ancient ideas that were based on real philosophy and science. An example:- The Egyptians supposedly worshiped the sun, but scratch a bit deeper and you realize the Sun god was a cover story for the illiterate masses who likely couldn't comprehend that an obelisk was a sundial that not only worked out the time of day but could be used to chart the seasons etc.
So as time passed and societies grew, allegories evolved to incorporate various tribal cultural aspirations and morals codes. Today we live in a globally connected community that is divided by idiots who cant think for themselves or are being brainwashed by parasites who hide behind shields of religion.
We need move past dogma and to take a very critical look at all aspects of our different cultures, celebrate that which is appropriate and worthy (for which there is a lot) and abandon that which retarded.
Yes science does not have all the answers it does not address the metaphysical, it can only attempt explain that which can be measured the metaphysical cannot be measured. Our consciousness, our emotions and the questions of where we have come from and will go to will never be fully understood by science. The universe is far more enchanting then simple measurements.
Here is the conundrum, mathematics is a supernatural metaphysical language that science uses to describe the physical universe.
Ultimately both science and religions face the same paradoxical question of how nothing makes itself and everything?
While almost all agree intelligent design permeates the universe, none can explain how this came to pass? If it is by the hand of a creator then how then did that creator create itself?
To me, the most objective conclusion is that we are living parts of a living universe. There is no need to personify the whole or insert some imaginary benevolent deity existing outside the universe.
Everything in the universe is interconnected but also uniquely occupies time and space. Like the universe our conciseness is self evolving,
it does so with an emotional processor that is driven by inputs from our environment though our five senescence.
Our self awareness affords us the ability to develop our own operating system biased by our environment. Like mater and energy our consciousness most likely can be transformed and does not expire. The Universe is ALIVE! Grow with it!
Quote from: BADecker
But you don't know this. And it will take a long time for science to figure it out, or that it is not true. By that time your great-great-grandchildren will be long dead and gone... probably to Hell if they follow in your footsteps.
This is such a passive aggressive statement "probably to Hell if they follow in your footsteps", Religions feel insulted when others don't respect the fantasies they hold sacred, but feel entitled to insult others with threats of eternal damnation etc. I call that bigotry.
Perhaps. But in the light of natural and the scientific proofs for the existence of God, and in the miraculous existence of the Bible, contradicting God and the Bible is something that will take a lot more capability than anybody or group of people have.
BD, why do you insist on personifying the universe?
It is far more spectacular and mysterious then anything human? Also you keep referring people back to texts that were applicable to societies living in the stone age.
While i can accept there are some universal truths they preached, they are also filled with tribalism and dogma.
Moreover most of the formal religions Judaeo Christian and Muslim are allegories of more interesting ancient ideas that were based on real philosophy and science. An example:- The Egyptians supposedly worshiped the sun, but scratch a bit deeper and you realize the Sun god was a cover story for the illiterate masses who likely couldn't comprehend that an obelisk was a sundial that not only worked out the time of day but could be used to chart the seasons etc.
So as time passed and societies grew, allegories evolved to incorporate various tribal cultural aspirations and morals codes. Today we live in a globally connected community that is divided by idiots who cant think for themselves or are being brainwashed by parasites who hide behind shields of religion.
We need move past dogma and to take a very critical look at all aspects of our different cultures, celebrate that which is appropriate and worthy (for which there is a lot) and abandon that which retarded.
Yes science does not have all the answers it does not address the metaphysical, it can only attempt explain that which can be measured the metaphysical cannot be measured. Our consciousness, our emotions and the questions of where we have come from and will go to will never be fully understood by science. The universe is far more enchanting then simple measurements.
Here is the conundrum, mathematics is a supernatural metaphysical language that science uses to describe the physical universe.
Ultimately both science and religions face the same paradoxical question of how nothing makes itself and everything?
While almost all agree intelligent design permeates the universe, none can explain how this came to pass? If it is by the hand of a creator then how then did that creator create itself?
To me, the most objective conclusion is that we are living parts of a living universe. There is no need to personify the whole or insert some imaginary benevolent deity existing outside the universe.
Everything in the universe is interconnected but also uniquely occupies time and space. Like the universe our conciseness is self evolving,
it does so with an emotional processor that is driven by inputs from our environment though our five senescence.
Our self awareness affords us the ability to develop our own operating system biased by our environment. Like mater and energy our consciousness most likely can be transformed and does not expire. The Universe is ALIVE! Grow with it!
Quote from: BADecker
But you don't know this. And it will take a long time for science to figure it out, or that it is not true. By that time your great-great-grandchildren will be long dead and gone... probably to Hell if they follow in your footsteps.
This is such a passive aggressive statement "probably to Hell if they follow in your footsteps", Religions feel insulted when others don't respect the fantasies they hold sacred, but feel entitled to insult others with threats of eternal damnation etc. I call that bigotry.
i do not think that science is a religion because science is always a subject or field that need to b explored. but science has its limitation and its rules but religion has also its rules but not like science and its also has limitation different from science. but in religion you have to believe in some aspects that have no explation we just have to admit them. but science wants every thing to explore.
Big Bang is so flawed and lacking that the whole universe would be mush if it had happened according to BB theory.
Do you have anything other than rhetoric to back up this statement? Or is it just something you made up? Or something someone else made up but that you believed because you continue to give your critical faculties a holiday?
You have something to back up the statement. It is called the universe, especially universal complexity. Big Bang doesn't account for the universal complexity that exists, even though it might say that it does.
Those words are no proof. They're just your opinion. You have no solid evidence for any of your firmly held beliefs.
Well, not opinion. Rather, belief that the proof is proof.
BD, why do you insist on personifying the universe?
Don't know what you mean. That I know of, I haven't treated the universe as a person. Is that what you mean?It is far more spectacular and mysterious then anything human? Also you keep referring people back to texts that were applicable to societies living in the stone age.
That we know of, people always had a head, arms, legs, hands feet, and a torso. And they always reproduced the same way that they do now. Since people are the same as they always were - except that nowadays they are not as intelligent because of entropy - why shouldn't age-old texts apply now as they did back then?While i can accept there are some universal truths they preached, they are also filled with tribalism and dogma.
Regarding Christianity, the dogma that you speak about had to do with living within the governmental authorities of that day. The moral stuff hasn't changed at all.Moreover most of the formal religions Judaeo Christian and Muslim are allegories of more interesting ancient ideas that were based on real philosophy and science. An example:- The Egyptians supposedly worshiped the sun, but scratch a bit deeper and you realize the Sun god was a cover story for the illiterate masses who likely couldn't comprehend that an obelisk was a sundial that not only worked out the time of day but could be used to chart the seasons etc.
Again, people have lost some of their thinking ability and intelligence due to the ever-present, ever-increasing entropy. The only thing that makes you think that earlier peoples were more ignorant than we are today is, entropy has reduced your thinking ability.So as time passed and societies grew, allegories evolved to incorporate various tribal cultural aspirations and morals codes. Today we live in a globally connected community that is divided by idiots who cant think for themselves or are being brainwashed by parasites who hide behind shields of religion.
And one of the greatest false religious qualities of today is that people need less religion and less dogma than they did in the past. The truth is, because of the widespread idiocy - which you alluded to above - people need the dogma embedded and entrenched into them more strongly than ever.We need move past dogma and to take a very critical look at all aspects of our different cultures, celebrate that which is appropriate and worthy (for which there is a lot) and abandon that which retarded.
Right!Start by taking a look at the history of the making of the Bible. Once you see it in detail, you will know that the Bible is an impossible to exist book... except for the fact that it does exist. This shows you that there is power behind it. That power is God.
Yes science does not have all the answers it does not address the metaphysical, it can only attempt explain that which can be measured the metaphysical cannot be measured. Our consciousness, our emotions and the questions of where we have come from and will go to will never be fully understood by science. The universe is far more enchanting then simple measurements.
Here is the conundrum, mathematics is a supernatural metaphysical language that science uses to describe the physical universe.
Ultimately both science and religions face the same paradoxical question of how nothing makes itself and everything?
While almost all agree intelligent design permeates the universe, none can explain how this came to pass? If it is by the hand of a creator then how then did that creator create itself?
To me, the most objective conclusion is that we are living parts of a living universe. There is no need to personify the whole or insert some imaginary benevolent deity existing outside the universe.
Go ahead and believe your science fiction story. It's just another religion.Everything in the universe is interconnected but also uniquely occupies time and space. Like the universe our conciseness is self evolving,
it does so with an emotional processor that is driven by inputs from our environment though our five senescence.
Most of the stimuli doesn't come through the 5 senses. Most of it comes through simple cause and effect movement of electrons, protons, atoms and molecules in our brain. All of this has been pre-programmed by God at the Beginning.Why did you use the word "senescence" in conjunction with the number 5? It almost doesn't make any sense at all.
Our self awareness affords us the ability to develop our own operating system biased by our environment. Like mater and energy our consciousness most likely can be transformed and does not expire. The Universe is ALIVE! Grow with it!
But you don't know this. And it will take a long time for science to figure it out, or that it is not true. By that time your great-great-grandchildren will be long dead and gone... probably to Hell if they follow in your footsteps.
i do not think that science is a religion because science is always a subject or field that need to b explored. but science has its limitation and its rules but religion has also its rules but not like science and its also has limitation different from science. but in religion you have to believe in some aspects that have no explation we just have to admit them. but science wants every thing to explore.
Big Bang is so flawed and lacking that the whole universe would be mush if it had happened according to BB theory.
Do you have anything other than rhetoric to back up this statement? Or is it just something you made up? Or something someone else made up but that you believed because you continue to give your critical faculties a holiday?
You have something to back up the statement. It is called the universe, especially universal complexity. Big Bang doesn't account for the universal complexity that exists, even though it might say that it does.
Those words are no proof. They're just your opinion. You have no solid evidence for any of your firmly held beliefs.
BD, why do you insist on personifying the universe? It is far more spectacular and mysterious then anything human? Also you keep referring people back to texts that were applicable to societies living in the stone age. While i can accept there are some universal truths they preached, they are also filled with tribalism and dogma. Moreover most of the formal religions Judaeo Christian and Muslim are allegories of more interesting ancient ideas that were based on real philosophy and science. An example:- The Egyptians supposedly worshiped the sun, but scratch a bit deeper and you realize the Sun god was a cover story for the illiterate masses who likely couldn't comprehend that an obelisk was a sundial that not only worked out the time of day but could be used to chart the seasons etc. So as time passed and societies grew, allegories evolved to incorporate various tribal cultural aspirations and morals codes. Today we live in a globally connected community that is divided by idiots who cant think for themselves or are being brainwashed by parasites who hide behind shields of religion. We need move past dogma and to take a very critical look at all aspects of our different cultures, celebrate that which is appropriate and worthy (for which there is a lot) and abandon that which retarded.
Yes science does not have all the answers it does not address the metaphysical, it can only attempt explain that which can be measured the metaphysical cannot be measured. Our consciousness, our emotions and the questions of where we have come from and will go to will never be fully understood by science. The universe is far more enchanting then simple measurements.
Here is the conundrum, mathematics is a supernatural metaphysical language that science uses to describe the physical universe.
Ultimately both science and religions face the same paradoxical question of how nothing makes itself and everything?
While almost all agree intelligent design permeates the universe, none can explain how this came to pass? If it is by the hand of a creator then how then did that creator create itself?
To me, the most objective conclusion is that we are living parts of a living universe. There is no need to personify the whole or insert some imaginary benevolent deity existing outside the universe.
Everything in the universe is interconnected but also uniquely occupies time and space. Like the universe our conciseness is self evolving, it does so with an emotional processor that is driven by inputs from our environment though our fivesenescence senses. Our self awareness affords us the ability to develop our own operating system biased by our environment. Like mater and energy our consciousness most likely can be transformed and does not expire. The Universe is ALIVE! Grow with it!
Yes science does not have all the answers it does not address the metaphysical, it can only attempt explain that which can be measured the metaphysical cannot be measured. Our consciousness, our emotions and the questions of where we have come from and will go to will never be fully understood by science. The universe is far more enchanting then simple measurements.
Here is the conundrum, mathematics is a supernatural metaphysical language that science uses to describe the physical universe.
Ultimately both science and religions face the same paradoxical question of how nothing makes itself and everything?
While almost all agree intelligent design permeates the universe, none can explain how this came to pass? If it is by the hand of a creator then how then did that creator create itself?
To me, the most objective conclusion is that we are living parts of a living universe. There is no need to personify the whole or insert some imaginary benevolent deity existing outside the universe.
Everything in the universe is interconnected but also uniquely occupies time and space. Like the universe our conciseness is self evolving, it does so with an emotional processor that is driven by inputs from our environment though our five
While many in main stream science claim to be atheist and believe in the Big Bang and the eventual Deep Freeze due to entropy. Is it not curious to consider that the very underpinnings of this belief is based on mathematics, was it too created in the big bang? if so how was it constructed? one digit at a time?
I think not it has always been there and will always remain its an eternal masterpiece that permeates every conceivable facet or reality yet in its self it is purely abstract. Without it nothing would exist, but it in itself it is nonexistent and existent at the same time. It is the language of the living universe. Its permutations are infinite, yet it did not grow, it has always been complete and eternal.
I think not it has always been there and will always remain its an eternal masterpiece that permeates every conceivable facet or reality yet in its self it is purely abstract. Without it nothing would exist, but it in itself it is nonexistent and existent at the same time. It is the language of the living universe. Its permutations are infinite, yet it did not grow, it has always been complete and eternal.
science is absolutely not a religion .. science is helping humanity to survive on earth and discover the unknown facts about the universe.. science is just a tool for finding the truth not a religion for sure.
Science isn't helping humanity in the ways you suggest. Why not? Because of the complexity of the universe.
We need a religion that has God Who tells us the major points about the universe in His Bible. Science will never do it for two reasons:
1. The universe is so extremely complex that it will take a hundred thousand years just to figure out what the basic points are;
2. During that time, as is being done today, scientists will focus on believing as truth, things that they have placed into what they call science (theories). Because of this, they will always mislead themselves and other people.
In the two reasons, above, part of why the first will take so long is because of the second.
Don't be so naive - except if you want to be, that is. Scientists are out to screw everybody just as much as everyone else is. Part of the screw job has to do with keeping themselves looking innocent in the eyes of as many people as they can.
While many in main stream science claim to be atheist and believe in the Big Bang and the eventual Deep Freeze due to entropy. Is it not curious to consider that the very underpinnings of this belief is based on mathematics, was it too created in the big bang? if so how was it constructed? one digit at a time?
I think not it has always been there and will always remain its an eternal masterpiece that permeates every conceivable facet or reality yet in its self it is purely abstract. Without it nothing would exist, but it in itself it is nonexistent and existent at the same time. It is the language of the living universe. Its permutations are infinite, yet it did not grow, it has always been complete and eternal.
I think not it has always been there and will always remain its an eternal masterpiece that permeates every conceivable facet or reality yet in its self it is purely abstract. Without it nothing would exist, but it in itself it is nonexistent and existent at the same time. It is the language of the living universe. Its permutations are infinite, yet it did not grow, it has always been complete and eternal.
science is absolutely not a religion .. science is helping humanity to survive on earth and discover the unknown facts about the universe.. science is just a tool for finding the truth not a religion for sure.
i do not think that science is a religion because science is always a subject or field that need to b explored. but science has its limitation and its rules but religion has also its rules but not like science and its also has limitation different from science. but in religion you have to believe in some aspects that have no explation we just have to admit them. but science wants every thing to explore.
Big Bang is so flawed and lacking that the whole universe would be mush if it had happened according to BB theory.
Do you have anything other than rhetoric to back up this statement? Or is it just something you made up? Or something someone else made up but that you believed because you continue to give your critical faculties a holiday?
You have something to back up the statement. It is called the universe, especially universal complexity. Big Bang doesn't account for the universal complexity that exists, even though it might say that it does.
i do not think that science is a religion because science is always a subject or field that need to b explored. but science has its limitation and its rules but religion has also its rules but not like science and its also has limitation different from science. but in religion you have to believe in some aspects that have no explation we just have to admit them. but science wants every thing to explore.
Big Bang is so flawed and lacking that the whole universe would be mush if it had happened according to BB theory.
Do you have anything other than rhetoric to back up this statement? Or is it just something you made up? Or something someone else made up but that you believed because you continue to give your critical faculties a holiday?
Jump to: