Science vs Religion Statement I Want to Make

For the sake of trying to make this thread slightly less stupid, I'm going to present the following...while there is great debate over science and religion, science has the most difficulty with the following three things:

1. Creation

2. Consciousness

3. Morality

Until these three things can be solved, intelligent design can never be ruled out.
 
But how do you know that the majority or even minority of that science is watertight, I wouldn't be so inclined to say that over 50% won't be proven incorrect in the near future. Who knows, our entire theory of the atomic particle could be wrong, gravity may not even exist and the Human Genome project may have been completely incorrect.
 
It seems like science is slowly overtaking religion. A few thousand years ago, people believed 100% that the Sun revolved around the earth and the earth was only a few thousand years old because the bible said so. We all know now that this is not true. Who knows whether the big bang theory is truly correct, but regardless i believe that one day the creation of the universe will be known, and ill bet it didn't take place in 7 days with a wave of a hand.
 
thats pretty much how i look at it but also i believe that since time is an increment pretty only pertaining to how you see it, i think that 7 days in gods eyes could of been billion and trillions of years to us pretty much supporting the big bang theory
 
Oh yeah. Big bang. Bull shit. You know, fuck physics, fuck science.... how bout fuck physics some more. Fuck gravity. We're the center of the universe right? That's what the majority, if not everyone believed for thousands of years.

Evolution? Fake? For sure. Humans appeared what, 5000 years ago? Oh wait.... not that long ago...

Silly thing eh. If only we could see evolution happen before our own eyes. Oh wait, we have! Yeast under a microscope. They reproduce every second. Instead of watching our own species evolve, with one generation lasting 80 years, we can watch species who reproduce and die every second evolve.

It's happened, it's proven.

6 billion people.... 6 billion thoughts a second. I better not think anything nasty of anyone or do anything bad and sinnnfuuuullll. God might pick up my one thought out of the 599 999 999 999 other ones.

I'm sorry if I'm offending you. I just get really annoyed. All the parts of religion about love, treating each other nicely. That's super cool. I'm cool with that.

BUT you have to understand! Open your eyes. Religion was truly created for the sole purpose of being able to control mass majorities of citizens in the middle ages. Don't do anything bad! You'll burn in hell foooorrrevvveerrrr!!!!!

Heard of the term "church and state." They were combined together for a reason.

Religion was also a simple approach to explain the natural way of things without having any scientific proof or fact involved.

Are you aware of how much money churches make? It's a business. A great business. People get loaded from the profit of this business.

Humans are no different then any other mammal or animal on the face of the planet. We just happen to be intelligent, and we just happen to be the only species on the face of the earth with the ability to change the environment around ourselves to make it habitable. Every other animal assimilates to the environment around itself.

This is just scratching the surface of religion. You could talk about tariffs (i think it is, not sure), back in the day it was paying to rid yourself of your sins.

Witches, idea brought around to demoralize women, who used to be respected and considered greater then men. This did a huge tole on the rights for females untill what, 50-40 years ago?

But anyways, hope i didnt piss anyone off. Argue back, defend. Just dont get angry and shit. That's annoying. Peace.

 
....the Bible was written thousands and thousands of years ago...are you gonna trust their ideas, or are you gonna trust the brand new ideas that are continuously being proven with more and more evidence each coming day?

I'll go with science here buddy.
 
Yeasts short generation time makes it a key model species, but it hasnt proven that evolution occurs. To my knowledge, the closest anyone has come to actually breeding a population into two separate species (Eg, they can no longer mate with one and other to produce viable offspring), is an example of some algae two labs collected at the same time and experimented on for 50 some odd years. When they tested to see if their respective controls were the same, they found that their lines had diverged due to slightly different environmental conditions - namely, somewhere along the line, one of their lines slightly modified the toxin it used to out compete other algae. But, its a shaky proof even at that, since nobody's been able to breed the lines, as one just kinda kills the other.

And heres news to you buddy - Science is a business too, and the shit that goes on in some labs could kill the entire human population if there was an outbreak.

And both beavers and elephants deliberately change their environment to better suit them, we're only special in that we've become smart enough to change our environment on a global "lets fuck over the entire world!" way.

And just like religion, science had some wacky dark spots as well. Leeches and humors for example.

Sure, you can knock religion and say it has generally fucked over the world. So has any institution. Its completely wrong to think any one way of thinking can provide all the answers. Religion is a method to control the masses - so is government, media, the internet, and good parenting. Face it, its not that the underlying message of anything here is going to end the world, its just the wacko's on both sides of the fence that go crazy and try to start shit.
 
It is a difference between horizontal and verticle gene differentiation, as far as bacterial species differentiation.

Bacteria do not breed. They are a-sexual. They can, however, take up and eliminate DNA. Mutations also change things, but most significant, and observed changes have occured due to genetic transfer of certain abilities, like photorespiration, luminescence, and many metabolic abilities.

talk too me about genetic evolution, its kinda my gig.
 
All of you are in som wat narrow minded. this subject is all wrong, you cant talk about science vs religion or religion vs other religion. I must say that i belive in science but im also interested in how ppl with various religions think. I cant say that science has all the answers but religion has a lot of gaps too.
 
of course science cant follow morality, its something religion made up!

i remember reading an article somewhere ill try to find it. but in africa rangers are starting to notice that a specific species of monkeys is now starting to use weapons to kill their prey (like sticks and throwing rocks). thats evolution right there.
 
I recommend for everyone to reference themselves to a series of debates between Dinesh D'Souza and Christopher Hitchens. One such debate can be found here:

http://www.tkc.edu/debate/

It's a bit more informative and simulating than some of these posts that members try to pass off as an intelligent discussion.
 
i would be so much happier if i could just be stupid and believe in a religion but im too smart for that i guess but its so much more painful not believing in heaven and shit. So im gonna have to live with that pain for the rest of my life, and it will go away when i die but seriously i wish heaven was real
 
One theory is that the universe has always existed, but this was "proven wrong" by the big bang theory. The traditional veiw of this theory was that all of the planets and galaxies have always existed as they do today, this part of the theory was proven wrong.

I beleive that the univrse has always existed as an infinitely small ball of matter that is constantly expanding at an excellerating rate. To give you an idea of the kind of expantion that I am talking about imagine this; the expansion of the universe can be graphed by the base equation r=e^t where r is the radius of the universe, and t is time. the point (0,1), or in other words the y-intercept, would represent the time of the big bang.

If you can conceptualize what I am talking about, it is a logical (but unproven) answer to what the universe was like before the big bang. In order for you to understand why my theory makes sense, you need to know a few basic facts about astrology. These facts have been proven, and I am not going to dispute them with you. Planets in then universe are moving away from each other at an accelerating rate. You might say that this does not make sense, because gravity should be pulling planets together and decelerating the expansion. This is true, so in order to account for this acceleration there must be an outside force pulling on our universe. Sientists call the force the Dark Force (similar to Dark Matter). Nobody knows what causes the force, but many presume it to be other universes, or "parrallel universes".

So yeah, thats pretty much my theory of everything, and the reason that I am not religious. I hope that I've helped at least one person with that :P
 
that, alone, is why some people are still religious. Something can't exist forever in many people's minds without having a starting point.
 
actually, that's why I'm still religious. I certainly don't take the bible literally. I take it as a fictionally-based guide to what the religion is about and a recommendation on what values are part of the religion. I choose to understand the 7 days of creation as a more literary yet less literal explanation of evolution,where days, in the creator's sense, is not a current days length.

You can take religion any way you want it. I'm definitely not a good Christian, though I choose to interpret it in a way that makes sense to me and I enjoy the community and familial sense of it.
 
I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that if the universe had a starting point that would imply that it was simply created out of nothing. The only explanition of this to me would be a higher power. So the opposite is true to me. If you could prove to me that the universe had a starting point, that would probably turn me to religion.
 
yup, I know exactly what you mean. I, on the other hand, feel that nothing can exist without a starting point and if somebody can prove to me that there truly is no beginning, then that'd sway me from religion. I totally respect and understand your opinion, I'm just on the other side of it.
 
and yes, I know what you're saying about how if it was created from nothing, then the 'creator' wouldn't have been around either. I don't see God as a human or anything, but a force that's beyond explanation. Silly as it may seem, it's working for me.
 
i think so too. there just havent been any reasonable theories to prove how everything started.
 
Lets go.

For one, Prokaryotic evolution is a lot different than the evolution that drives speciation in Eukaryotes. Sure, we see prokaryotes and even some basic forms of eukarotes (yeast) evolve and change their genetic structure to better fit their environment. We can see natural selection here, and there have even been cases of observed natural selection in larger species, as exemplified on various islands that undergo catastrophic environmental change.

However, this only at best lends support to the theory. It doesnt prove that species can differentiate, and actually kinda hurts the idea. The time it would take for two species to emerge out of one common ancestor given different environments and selectors is rather large, considering the average advantageous mutation rate of DNA. In fact, for evolution to work, we would need what are called 'hopeful monsters' - one small mutation that changes the creature immensely, yet is both advantageous enough for it to succeed and breed, and that it retains enough of its original characteristics and DNA to be able to breed with its former species.

Heres the quick of it - we have lots of evidence to support evolution. We've seen and observed Natural Selection at work, and we've seen how random mutations can allow a few lucky individuals to outcompete their buddies (most evident in our new hospital bred bacterial diseases). However, we've (to my knowledge, I havent searched pubmed this month) never seen actual speciation occur. This is a vital part of the theory, and to actually confirm that this happens, you'd need 200 years and a fuckload of flies. And even then, the argument can be made that you're forcing evolution, and that life responds differently in an actual real world environment (eg, instead of dealing with shitty environmental conditions, the species may just pick up and move away).

Evolution is still just a theory. However, so is Gravity. I'd say I'm 95% sure that evolution has solely been responsible for the diversity of lifeforms we see today. The other 5% = shit we havent yet discovered, alien life seeding our planet, etc.

And no matter what, the Earth is not under 10,000 years old, nor was it created in 7 days. Not unless the laws of physics have dramatically reversed themselves before human history.
 
I think you're a intelligent and good person for standing by your own beliefs, not someone else's. + Karma (haha).
 
I see where you are coming from now. When I think of god, I imagine that he is not constricted by the laws of physics. What I mean by that is god can travel through time and space effortlessly, and exists in all dimensions. To me, in order to call something "god" it has to be able to completely break the laws of physics. Or in other words, if you can logically explain the existence of it, then it isn't god.

If a god as you think of him exists (one which is at least somewhat bound by the laws of physics) I don't think that I would call him God, but rather a super-advanced being.
 
haha, this reminds me of 2 guys arguing about whose religion is right in the airport. they were getting way too into it

kind of like now. you can't change the way the other person thinks

just let them think what they want and ignore them if they want an argument because no one will ever win this.
 
This is the most retarded and ignorant idea i've heard in a long time. You're saying that creationism is the most plausible idea out there for the creation of the universe? There are many words to describe you're logic, but the best fitting would be RETARDED! Just because the big bang is a farfetched theory doesn't make it acceptable for anyone to choose to be an idiot and believe in fucking creationism. I'm religious, and I go to church on sundays, but I'm here to say that CREATIONISM IS FUCKING BULLSHIT.
 
many, scientists are religious, especially back in the day. Even now many/most scientists are religious. I can recall reading a statistic that was something like 65% of biologists were christian in 2001.
 
Basically science attempts to tell you about how the world is by systematically learning more about it through verifiable methods.

Religion tells you about how the world is by.....telling you thats the way it is and explaining that if you disagree you'll probably burn for eternity. Then when they've been proven wrong on a particular point they adjust slightly in order to not look like crazys.
 
... that really has nothing to do with the statement. Just because some scientists are religious doesnt lend credence to the idea that the two seperate dogma's will eventually mesh.
 
Yea I'm not sure exactly what point you were trying to make there, but if that is a study of American biologists, since 83% of Americans are Christian, 17% of Americans are non-Christian, while 35% of biologists are non-Christian.

So basically a biologist is twice as likely to be a non-Christian.

Is that what you are trying to say?
 
I'm saying that for some people these two ideas have already meshed. You cant be a religious scientist with believing in both science and religion...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top