Topic: Is science a religion? - page 41. (Read 47434 times)

Anyone who wants to see what the field of science really is, sincerely, with a questioning mind, Youtube search on "Dr. Don Patton" and watch some of his videos. Yes, they can be long. But they are interesting, and Dr. Patton does a very good job of explaining things at a level that almost anyone can understand.

Essentially, the thing that Dr. Patton shows over and over is how great men of science - many of them atheists - in their honest moments, state or write, that much of the basics of science is simply, arbitrarily decided upon ideas, and not really science at all.

Scientists themselves know that the idea of a 13 or 14 billion year old universe is completely guesswork. The people who don't know this are the average everyday common people who have been lied to by politics and the media, and who have naively accepted the lies because they don't suspect that anyone, especially scientists, would lie to them like this.

Dr. Patton shows the books and the quotes by scientists that express that some of the greatest foundations of modern science are "things" that scientist have arbitrarily decided were true, when in reality, there is no way that they could be true.

Now, let me say that politics and the media, including some of the scientists, are attacking Dr. Patton one way or another because he is revealing the truth about them. You can listen to them and their attacks, or you can listen to the points that Dr. Patton makes.

The points prove themselves out. They prove themselves to be true so that it wouldn't matter who brought up the points, Dr. Patton or anybody else. Listen to the points before you judge.

You forget one little strategic area in this kind of thinking. False gods are not God.

Nobody knows all the attributes of God. Nobody knows if God drives a Cadillac or a Mercedes or a Rolls. Nobody knows if He wears rings on His fingers or not. We don't know the kind of house He lives in... flat roof or gabled roof, or maybe no roof at all.

The point? Everybody who worships God has some mistaken ideas about Him. Everybody who doesn't worship God and yet worships, worships an idol that is not God. Nobody knows who is who for sure. All we know is that God exists, and one either worships Him or one doesn't.

Here's the big point for you. All atheists worship. They worship one or more idols. The idols they worship are themselves. Why? Because they are setting themselves up as being greater than the real God, Who has been scientifically proven to exist, by stating that He doesn't exist.

What this essentially means is, there are no atheists. Those who claim that the are atheists with an outwardly sincere heart, are really, simply ignoring the fact that they are setting themselves up as gods.

Science is based sometime on happy (or horrible) random accidents, or on someone's intuition. Some go through a lifetime of mockery to be proved right, or long time after their passing.
Science is not pure or right. Science is alive. Things we took for granted for centuries disappear from our collective mind after each breakthrough, becoming the new truth, the new belief.

Although most scientists won't admit they believe in a superior being, they will be the first to admit they need to have an unshakeable faith in themselves. That faith is the engine that makes them push and push and push.
Before the first strike of chalk on a blackboard one needs that light in their brain and believe in its unfathomably deep wisdom.


Is the science settled?

https://www.skepticalscience.com/settled-science.htm

If you think religion to be a mental disease, then only that mental illness paved path for the facts that you term as science.

And so, as I explained, by a similar use of "definition" you are almost completely atheist. Your use of word definitions makes that a possible conclusion.

So, no --- no more discussion required. I hope the atheists welcome you into their ranks with open arms and ignore the teeny one god you do believe in for the many many more you don't.

Religion makes people follow the right track of life. That's for the true religion. And for science, it is religion of atheists, I think so?

Is all that what we were discussing? I didn't realize that we were discussing that. Since I didn't realize it then, maybe we still aren't discussing the same thing.

I think one of the things we are discussing is how you attribute thoughts and ideas to me that are not mine. You make them up and say that such is what I think. Since you do this on a regular basis, you have a religion of deception, and there is no real use even discussing things with you. This doesn't mean that I won't play the discussing game with you, by discussing some things, but you seem to intentionally distort the things that we are discussing.


Anyone who wants to see that atheism is religion need only look at how adamantly atheists express the things that they believe... or the things that they believe that they don't believe. Where does one look for all this adamant expressing? Google searches on "atheism."

The next thing to do is look up all the definitions of "religion" in all the dictionaries that are available. When one does this, it becomes very evident that atheism is a form of religion.


Okay. Now you have it, point blank. Is any more discussion necessary? No! All that is necessary is research. Have at it.

You're changing the subject again. We were discussing your attempt to dilute the meaning of the word "religion" until it just means "something you feel strongly about", based on one definition of "religion", and ignoring all others. To you, "religion" has nothing to do with gods or supernatural.

I gave an example of how generalising definitions leads to ridiculous results by showing how you could (by one definitions of atheism) be considered to be essentially an atheist.

Then I asked you to explain how you could consider every interesting activity to be a "religion".

You addressed none of this in your reply, but instead attempted to change the subject. Would you like to try again?

It's still very interesting how I can show that science proves the existence of God, but all you have been able to do for weeks and months, now, is to say that it doesn't... without refuting the things that I show regarding it.

I have no argument to make. I simply state the facts.

Any time that you want to see how every activity everyone does is part of their religion, all you need do is apply each and every activity to the definition of "religion."

Even ignoring how egregiously incorrect the first part of your statement is, the rest still makes no logical sense at all. It's like saying Zebras eat grass therefore religion is a goldfinch".

Either you have no argument to make, or you're being purposely disingenuous.

Now, how about a proper response. How is every interesting activity one does a 'religion'? How are you not essentially an atheist?

My interpretation:

Religion is mental disease, science is based on facts derived from experiments and observations.

Science is based on logic. Science proves God exists... cause and effect, complex universe, universal complexity. Scientists who don't believe that God exists, are high priests of a religion when they express the idea that God doesn't exist. At the same time, they are far less scientist than they think that they are. However...

It is mostly the media and politics that stretch the questions of science into truths when they are not truths. Thus, the media and politics are way more religious leaders than people understand.

Since science has proven that God exists, this make atheism possibly the greatest religion of all.

I hope this proves that the definition of "religion" fits atheism in almost all of its various ways.

Nope...


Science is based on logic...religion isn't that logic imho

Science as a religion is false attempt of not so wise people.
Those people believe scientific things are completely true, but there is no complete true till you find better truth.

And there is science in religion, off course there is science in all but i think in science it focuses on facts and real things discovered. where in religion dates back to ancient civilization where the only proof is a book.

yes it is true that if we think sientifically then science is a religion.
but if we do everything in our approach scientifcally then definetly science is a religion.
otherwise i don't think science is a religion.
it is totally a field that need to be explore.

Well, that *is* interesting. From that website, a definition of atheism is:


This is exactly the attitude of a monotheist to all other gods. Therefore -- if you take just that single definition of atheism --  monotheists are almost completely atheist.

I hope this clearly illustrates the illogic in attempting to stretch a definition from a particular case to any use at all.

How would you possible know that?
If God is omnipotent it could create more Gods with equal power.

Ahh but of course, you was just blindly speculating and wrongly presenting it as fact. AGAIN.

Dictionary.com attempts to show the definitions without excluding any part of them. Dictionary.com is not the only place that has the definitions that they use. So, check them out - http://www.dictionary.com/.